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 haven't humans developed a simple and clear signal of romantic interest? The vast majority of animals have some form of mating dance/call/thing; why did humans lose/not have this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6g7575
| 30
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.8
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dio0u89",
"comment_text": [
"So much of human behaviour and communication is cultural/memetic/linguistic rather than instinctual and deterministic, so instead of a single dance/call/song/thing we have thousands and the meaning depends on cultural context.",
"On the other hand, we have all kinds of subtle physiological cues to indicate attraction and arousal. Many of these are conveyed subconsciously, but some people become more skilled at actively identifying them."
],
"score": 27
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dio54gc",
"comment_text": [
"We probably did initially, we could use body language, speech, etc. But due to culture, religion, morality we have begun to suppress the signals over time because humans are very complex and tend to overthink really basic actions, like sex for example.",
"Like if you remove things like culture, religion, morality, etc. then if i wanted to tell a girl that i wanted to reproduce i would go over there and tell her, simple, but people, including myself, don't do that because it is deemed unnatural and wrong."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dio11kg",
"comment_text": [
"Have you ever visited ",
"/r/GirlsMirin",
" ?",
"Just saying.."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dio7x3p",
"comment_text": [
"We totally do. A rather common mating ritual in the animal world involves the females congregating in a relatively open (as in easy to get to, not like lacking a roof) area or space, and the males come in and try to get them to chose him as a mate by some arbitrary display or ritual. Showing their colorful feathers, puffing their chests, building a rad nest, fighting each other, whatever the species considers to be a sign of being a sexy hunk with a dreamy gene pool. Now tell me that doesn't sound familiar. ",
"You see this kind of thing all the time in bars, clubs, prom invitations, you name it. Girls get prettied up in a place with a certain mood, guys go up to them and try to get their number (or prom invitation acceptance or w/e) by some kind of display. Whether its their fancy clothing/car(s), stories about manly feats, flattery, dancing, and so forth.",
"The thing is that we've advanced quite a bit past having to rely on base behavior solely. Not to mention several social constructs (such as religion and specific cultures) frowns upon listening too closely to your instincts. We totally have them, but can easily deviate from them when it's convenient. The gender roles in the ritual can be reversed (though it's still not \"the norm\"), we can do the whole ritual to just bang one time with no intention to reproduce, we can chose a partner based on a more intellectual connection than a base show of superior genes, etc."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diog91e",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah, but there's no hard wired mating dance like many birds (etc) have. All our many dances are culturally informed"
],
"score": 5
}
|
|
ELI5: When someone is called to testify before Congress, does that person have any obligation to answer any of the questions?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6g2ofn
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
I recall the time Martin Skreli was made to testify, but refused to answer a single question by pleading the fifth. So I'm wondering, is there any incentive for someone to answer their questions? What will happen to you if you refuse?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dimzxc5",
"comment_text": [
"In this case it would be Contempt of Congress which carries the same penalty as contempt of court."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dimzdhu",
"comment_text": [
"The 5th admendment prevents the government from forcing you to incriminate yourself. It does not allow you to refuse to answer any question while under oath. If they ask you what the weather was last Tuesday, you legally have to answer. If they ask you something where your answer could be used against you in a criminal trial then you don't. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dimzozu",
"comment_text": [
"What happens if you dont answer? Can they hold you in contempt of court? But it isnt court technically..."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_din0a8w",
"comment_text": [
"Cool, didnt know that. Thanks!"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_din04s2",
"comment_text": [
"Yes, you can be held in contempt of court, even in a Congressional Hearing. ",
"This article",
" describes how that could've occurred with Flynn and his subpoena:",
"If Flynn indeed attempts to assert his right against self-incrimination, the committee can review its assertion to determine its validity but Flynn would not be required to state specifically why he fears incriminating himself. At that point, the committee would have two options regarding how to proceed.",
" ",
"First, the committee could attempt to obtain a court order compelling Flynn to respond to the subpoena and granting him immunity against the use of any materials he produces in a later criminal prosecution.",
" ",
"Second, the committee could reject Flynn’s assertion of the right against self-incrimination and seek to hold him in contempt for his non-compliance with the subpoena."
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: Why are most Jukeboxes missing the "I" on the keyboard?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6g2ewm
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.66
|
I have a novelty wallbox radio in my kitchen, and I notice that that keyboard reads " A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K".
At first I thought I was having a stroke, but I had to except reality: There was no "I".
Why??? I've been googling for an hour and can only come up with ebay listings.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dimzdrq",
"comment_text": [
"I had no luck googling either. The problem being that only the classic models by seeburg seem to omit the I and even then only on the smaller machines.",
"I did have a hunch that ",
"/u/Aelinsaar",
" was on to something so i looked at vending machine buttons. They also often omit the I. Additionally they tend to skip K, M , and O."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dimxphv",
"comment_text": [
"deleted ",
" ",
" "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dimy89e",
"comment_text": [
"http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/5605/8537835_1.jpg?v=8CBBE6BC5638B20"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dinsqlu",
"comment_text": [
"In aviation as well as many parts of the military \"I\" and \"O\" are omitted from alphabetical labels due to how easily they can be confused with \"1\", lower case \"L\", and \"0\" (zero). It seems a little odd to me that a jukebox would do the same, but perhaps the original engineer/designer had a background in which he/she was simply used to doing so as a matter of course and the design was never changed. It wouldn't be the first thing I've run across that was done oddly simply because \"It's always been that way\"."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dinnvaa",
"comment_text": [
"I and O have been traditionally eliminated based on similarity to numeric 1 and 0. I retired from 45 years in the computer business and I recall this being done in programs for many years because the fonts used at the time were easy to mix up. I have not seen this in the last 10 years but I am now retired."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: How and why are there so many pigs on small islands?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6g3lku
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_din6ygl",
"comment_text": [
"The various tribal groups that settled the Pacific Islands took pigs, chickens, taro root, sweet potatoes, and a few other things with them. As such they spread the animals to every island they settled, and some they attempted to settle but have sense been abandoned by man. ",
"This is also how the chicken got to South America. It originated in Asia. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_din7jja",
"comment_text": [
"In a lot of cases, animals used as livestock make their way to islands through shipwrecks or settlement. Out of all of them including humans, pigs are really good at foraging and scavenging to stay alive and maintain a population.",
"\nIt helps that they can swim and are usually pretty good at living in a variety of climates, not to mention that they are omnivorous, so if you drop a bunch of pigs and chickens on an island, if there is not enough food for both groups, the pigs will eat the chickens. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_din8ziq",
"comment_text": [
"that's true they are unpredictable things. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_din8g5w",
"comment_text": [
"Also no natural predictors."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dioab42",
"comment_text": [
"doh."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do most child molesters have that certain "pedophile" look to them?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fzdyx
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.29
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dim8eny",
"comment_text": [
"Confirmation Bias may make it so that all pedophiles appear to have the same look, when in fact it is just more noticeable when they conform to the look you expect. As a result, you forget about those who do not fit this image, as they seem less like pedophiles in your mind. "
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dim9jub",
"comment_text": [
"The answer is that they don't. This is something that you've imagined. Pedophiles can and do like almost anyone. Look up the facts, and you will discover that this the case. There is no question to be answered here. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dim8c9k",
"comment_text": [
"I'm not sure they do. What do they look like to you?"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dim9kn6",
"comment_text": [
"Problem is that this is simply wrong. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dim9oo9",
"comment_text": [
"Zach Galifianakis had a joke about how he looked like a pedophile, and it was worked into his character in The Hangover, who wasn't allowed within 200 feet of a school or a Chuck E Cheese."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: What is a Zero-Hour Contract job?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fwgyy
| 6
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.65
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dilj34h",
"comment_text": [
"An employer hires an employee on an hourly basis. However, the employer is not required to provide a minimum number of hours of work (\"zero-hour\") while the employee is not required to accept any hours of work offered. Basically the employer is in a position where they can offer work to employees who can of their own free will decide to work those offered hours. If there is no work to give the employer doesn't need to pay the employees at all, and if the employees don't feel the need to work when there are hours available that is fine too."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diljr0l",
"comment_text": [
"To add to other replies, it's usually bad for the employee. Although you're not contracted to go in when called, you'll probably find yourself at the bottom of the call list if you refuse more than occasionally so get fewer hours than others."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dilj8lm",
"comment_text": [
"It basically means you have an agreement to work at a certain place, but the boss doesn't have to provide any minimum amount of hours (you could very well work 0 hours if there is no work available), but on the flip side, as an employee you are also do not have many obligations. Naturally, if you have accepted a certain schedule, you are expected to show up, but if your boss calls you out of nowhere and says 'yo, someone got ill, can you cover a shift', you have zero obligation to go in. These kind of jobs generally also aren't the sort of jobs you have to give two weeks notice for if you want to quit."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dilj6tu",
"comment_text": [
"If I were on a contract like that, could I request to work at any time, or do I need to wait for the employer to contact me?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diljbqm",
"comment_text": [
"You have to wait for the employer to contact you. Naturally, if you go 'hey, I'd love to pick up some extra hours this week, please schedule me in for as many hour as possible', most bosses will try and accommodate that (especially if they might have some shifts they have trouble filling) but they have no obligation to you with a 0-hour contract. You can't call in and demand that you work X hours this week. It's just not that type of contract. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5:Why do 14 day forecasts exist when they can't even get tomorrow's weather correct?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fteaw
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diks9x7",
"comment_text": [
"Weather forecasts are never 100%. It's a giant game of educated guessing. Still that educated guess is better than having no fucking idea what's going on in 14days. Makes scheduling hard. So it's a thing."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dikt56o",
"comment_text": [
"This isn't even true in the slightest. One atmospheric science class and you know that even for a decent 3 day forecast you can anywhere between 5 and 20 different scenarios of what will occur and where it will travel and how long it will stay there. They pick the one that looks most accurate based on past outcomes of similar circumstances. To predict weeks out you have to look at upper atmosphere wind patterns and look at what body of air that is coming from and the conditions that will arise from it. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diktzri",
"comment_text": [
"Ensemble forecast models are a thing. There are many models run simultaneously with certain variables changed. ",
"The ",
"Short Range Ensemble Forecast - SREF",
" is exactly that. it shows confidence in forecast models with greater hourly coherency than singular model runs. ",
"I'm a technical writer for Doppler radar systems. The NWS radar network is state of the art with recent upgrades to simultaneous dual polarization. Previously, weather radars would only pump out a signal either horizontally or vertically polarized. now, we can do both at the same time. Having both increases the fidelity of the radar products while providing real-time, tangible increases to image accuracy. ",
"Then next steps in radar evolution will be solid state power amplification and phased-array systems. Solid state power instead of magnetron or klystron systems will require less maintenance and will have lower power needs. Phased array systems are still in relative infancy and are cost prohibitive, but are the long term goal post for weather sensing technology. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dikv0k2",
"comment_text": [
"My company, as well as dozens of others, are bidding on the Service Life Extension Project for NWS. It's a big contract to upgrade and modernize radar pedestals and certain hardware components. ",
"There are models run by universities and private enterprises also. ",
"You'd be hard pressed to find a country with a more robust or comprehensive weather sensing program than the United States. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dikutwd",
"comment_text": [
"Well, I know they're a thing. I was just given the impression that through a combination of factors US weather agencies didn't make extensive use of them, particularly in very extended forecasts, and it was in part because a lot of these models were run by NOAA, which only has the computer power that it's given. ",
"The only articles I find on the subjects were from 2012, about our aging weather sats, which were projected to drop to as few as 20 by 2020. ",
"NOAA also has an article about their NEXRAD system of ground Doppler radar - it looks like a handout designed to argue that the president needs to approve a certain 2016 budget to extend the life of their radar systems, which are reaching their end-of-life.",
"All of these are vague hints, but it's pretty hard finding data on aging weather hardware in google. It's drowned out by other things, and it's hard to find search terms that don't include a lot of noise."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: If stars explode because they run out of fuel, what fuels the explosion?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fqgzf
| 9
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.71
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dik79f4",
"comment_text": [
"A star is basically a massive continuous H-bomb in space. The thermonuclear reaction at the center is constantly trying to blow it apart. Gravity pushes back in the other direction. Forcing the star's mass towards the center.",
"As a star burns up its hydrogen fuel it starts to fuse heavier atoms. That seriously amps up the energy output, and the star swells to a huge size. After it burns out its supply of iron there's nothing left to fuel the fusion reaction, and gravity takes over. The star's still gigantic mass collapses in on itself, and if there's enough it it, causes a catastrophic explosion. On last truly apocalyptic fusion bang that blows the whole thing into a trillion pieces."
],
"score": 26
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dik7egz",
"comment_text": [
"Excellent explanation rhomboidus! Thank you!"
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dikz74k",
"comment_text": [
"Each successively heavier element yields less energy. Fusing into elements heavier than iron ",
" energy. When the iron core gets enough pressure to start fusing, the core collapses extremely rapidly (at a significant fraction of c!) The outer shells are left hanging in mid-air like Wiley Coyote as the photon pressure from below suddenly disappears. The outer layers then fall in at another significant fraction of c, and rebound off the now extremely dense core (which is collapsing into neutronium at this point."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dik7hbm",
"comment_text": [
"Thats not exactly how it works. Stars are constantly in an equilibrium between gravity pushing inwards and the force of nuclear fusion pushing outwards. Fusing heavier energy requires more heat and pressure to push the atoms together, so when a star runs out of lighter elements to fuse and doesnt have enough gravity pushing in to fuse the heavier elements they collapse. This collapse increases the heat and pressure in the core and allows fusion to briefly start again. Fusion of heavier elements produces too much outwards energy and overcomes the force of gravity and BOOM.",
"Edit* keep in mind this is only one possible outcomes for a stars death. If it gets massive enough for gravity to win and the core starts to fuse an element that doesn't return energy on its fusion(iron) then it will collapse into a black hole. Its also possible for only the outer part of the star to be blown off while the inner core collapses into a dense white dwarf. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dikkeup",
"comment_text": [
"So tl;dr the fuel wasn't causing the explosions, it was keeping the real explosion at bay?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: The reason why a Television show has an opening on every single episode after the first initial episode of a new season... when it could be replaced with a short title introduction.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fq2ab
| 13
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.68
|
I've always wondered this since I was a kid, sorry if this has been asked before.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dik3n2t",
"comment_text": [
"A lot of people are not progressing through the season, like on Netflix, but are glancing it during programmed television. It's important to brand identity and recognition by outsiders of glance-watchers.",
"Quick, attach a category filter, before mod-bot arrives!"
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dik7bo7",
"comment_text": [
"In no particular order:",
"1) Tradition. Back in the days of silent movies, it was normal to display some cards with the title and credits at the beginning, along with some music to help signal to the audience that a new show was about to begin. Long introductions could indicate that something epic was about to be shown. Eventually, title sequences became normal and even expected. ",
"2) They can help people new to the show to figure out what's going on. Listen to the first minute of ",
"this intro to Gilligan's Island,",
" for example. Even if you've never seen the show before, it's pretty clear what the show is about and why it takes place in such an unusual environment. It also introduces new viewers to the characters. Even if the song isn't so direct with the song lyrics, the intro can indicate to the viewer things like that ",
"The Simpsons",
" features yellow people, including a family of a bratty boy, a nuclear plant employee, a housewife, a baby, and a more well-behaved girl. If you've never seen the show before, that's useful information. And if you have seen the show, the song is more pleasant than having these ideas re-explained every episode. ",
"3) It can set the mood or the theme of the episode. If an opening is ",
"creepy,",
" it can get you in the mood for something scary or mysterious. Likewise, if a show is packed with fights, explosions, and other exciting things, it can signal to viewers what they're in for even if the episode doesn't start out with that action from the first scene.",
"4) It can provide the show with a distinctive or iconic element that people like about the show, making viewers more likely to enjoy the show. I don't know about you, but I know songs like ",
"this",
" and ",
"this",
" more than I know the shows themselves, and even after the series ended, people still remember the words to intros like ",
"this.",
"5) Highlighting the actors. Maybe someone isn't sure if they want to watch an episode, but then they may decide to stay once they see someone who looks quirky or famous."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dik3qz8",
"comment_text": [
"."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dik3tnq",
"comment_text": [
"I would've forgotten about cable, too, but I grew up on Cartoon Network on Comcast.",
"Try skipping the intro by memorizing the duration, I guess. Or go run and prepare a fruit to eat while it plays. That's what I'd do."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dikb8cy",
"comment_text": [
"Netflix has a new-ish feature that if you're progressing directly from one episode to another in the same series, it will automatically skip the title credits / opener and \"last time on...\" for you and simply start at the beginning of the show proper."
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: On traditional maps of the world, why is the Americas to the west and Asia to the east? Why was it decided that this would be how the world was to be depicted on a map?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fpe11
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijy0cy",
"comment_text": [
"It was Europeans who originally mapped the Americas and relative to them, the Americas were west of them. So they put the Americans on the west side of the map. ",
"Same reason why our map has the North Pole on top rather than the South Pole. The Chinese and Europeans primarily pioneered map making and put themselves on top to make it seem easier to use for them. But south side up is still perfectly valid."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijxvnf",
"comment_text": [
"Because Europe is in the center, and most of the mapmakers of history have been European. Asia naturally would fall east of Europe, and the Americas to the west of Europe."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijy6yx",
"comment_text": [
"In addition to what others have said about Europe, during the middle ages it was very common for maps to put Jerusalem as the center of the map, even in Western Europe. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijy37m",
"comment_text": [
"As a plus to this most of these map therefore end in the middle of the Pacific, rather than slicing through a land mass"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dikupn8",
"comment_text": [
"Because you mainly look at maps of European or American (and so European) origin.",
"Some asian countries have maps like ",
"this"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5 the difference between Ethnicity and Race (i.e. hispanic)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fni7m
| 14
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.86
|
Job applications ask me my ethnicity and then go on to ask me my race. I am hispanic, which is always the ONLY option for ethnicity, however, a lot of times then i have to answer my race and there is not a hispanic option there. WHY?!
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijmr8t",
"comment_text": [
"Because Hispanic isn't a race. There are Asian Hispanics, there are South American Hispanics, there are black Hispanics, and there are Spanish Hispanics. If you/your ancestors spoke Spanish, you put down Hispanic. For race, you put down what your race is. This could be white, black, southeast Asian, or any other type of human under on the planet."
],
"score": 10
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijlvcx",
"comment_text": [
"That's really weird for a job application tbh. But race and ethnicity is two different concept and they both are loosely define concept.",
"Ethnicity is simply group identity and that identity depend on what is important for that group of people. It can be religious, regional, racial, national, linguistic, etc. Ethnic group by itself is a very vague term that can mean several things.",
"Race have two meaning. ",
"1) Genetically. Each human have a unique DNA (almost always), but when two group of human didn't interbreed for a long period of time, the difference in DNA start to accumulate. The spectrum of human DNA isn't continuous, there is cluster of DNA with similar characteristic for group of human that interbreed for a long period of time. Where you divide those different cluster can be somewhat subjective. For example you could look at the Y-chromosome haplogroups. It's only looking at 1 single chromosome of the human 24 chromosomes and it's a chromosome only present in male, but it's also on of the chromosome that evolve the fastest so it show more difference in humans. But let say that we agree on using that to map the difference in human, then there is about 20 different haplogroups and some group them into 6 or 7 different race. Where you actually divide two different race can be tricky even if the clusters are obvious. ",
"2) Appearance. Human started to talk about race way before we mapped the human DNA. Those differences in the human genes show in physical differences in human. A south African doesn't look like a European or a Asian person. If it's difficult to know where exactly are the divisions between different race in DNA, it can be even more difficult with appearance. Some gene are dominant or recessive, meaning that someone could have a DNA mostly Caucasian, but if they have the dominant gene for a darker skin colour that will show on their appearance and people will categorise them as black, even if most of their DNA isn't. This wasn't a real problem in the past because there wasn't that much interbreed. People used to make children with their own race by choice or by geographical separation. But in the modern day this is less and less the case."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijjgza",
"comment_text": [
"Ethnicity is more of a cultural and social aspect whereas race focuses rather on phenotypical differences of human biology. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijjkd7",
"comment_text": [
"so then why is Hispanic usually the only option for ethnicity? And if i am hispanic, what am i supposed to put for race? Government forms and job applications are especially guilty of this",
"http://imgur.com/Ym3vmNJ"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijkqnp",
"comment_text": [
"That's a bad form. It's suppose to have :. Hispanic or not Hispanic. ",
"Then choices for what race you identify as, White Black Asian NativeAmerican etc",
"There are white Hispanics, aka your normal Mexicans. There are black Hispanics like some Dominican and Puerto Ricans. Filipinos could be considered Asian or Pacific islander Hispanics. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
ELI5: Why isn't affirmative action considered a racist piece of legislation?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fooh8
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijsiu3",
"comment_text": [
"I'm assuming you're asking about the US. The Constitution doesn't allow the government to favor people based on race; however, it allows the government to favor diversity in many cases. This means that a college that is mostly white can give preference to minority candidates in an attempt to create a diverse class so that multiple viewpoints and backgrounds are represented in the class (I'm using \"class\" here to talk about everyone in the same year, not just one course). However, if the college already has that diversity then they shouldn’t give preferential treatment based on race. Similarly, a college that is majority black could give preference to non-black people to create a diverse class if it wanted to.",
"It’s also important to note that the government isn’t making any school do this; it just allows it. Schools voluntarily choose whether or not to consider diversity in admissions.",
"There also isn't any single piece of \"affirmative action\" legislation or anything like that."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijs5ni",
"comment_text": [
"Think of it as a ladder. We don't have unlimited ladders, and not everyone is in as deep of a hole, so we give ladders to the people in the deepest holes.",
"But there's 300 million* people and it's very difficult to honestly and accurately judge the depth of everyone's hole, so we do it by race, knowing that several minorities tend to be in deeper holes for multiple societal reasons.",
"Once these minorites are more or less at par, we can stop using our ladders like this. But for now it's helpful. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijsqvg",
"comment_text": [
"Racism is generally when you apply a stereotype to a group based on their race, generally (but not always) a negative stereotype. ",
"That's not to say that there aren't genuine differences that can manifest based on race, for instance, differences in societal power caused by racism. ",
"Attempting to address these imbalances may or may not be considered racist, depending on the nature of the legislation."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijubg8",
"comment_text": [
"Because racism is about being mean to a group people who a whole lot of people have been mean to throughout history (and lots still are today).",
"Because of that history, and the current meanness that happens, it's much harder to judge whether the \"two equal students\" you're talking about are actually equal. ",
"Can't go into too many details for a 5 y/o, but it's a bit like me saying I'm equally good at running as Usain Bolt because I drew with him in a 100m race. You might think that that sounds fair, if I didn't mention to you that I'd got a 3 second headstart and tied his laces together. Someone who noticed those things would probably pick Usain Bolt over me for his running team, even though we had \"equal times\". That would look unfair to someone who hadn't noticed the headstart and the laces."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dijs53o",
"comment_text": [
"It ",
" racism. It's just legally permitted racism, specifically put into place to help make up for all the systemic racism that had been present for years and years prior."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is using children as actors in movies and TV series not considered child labor?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fjbbe
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
Why is a child helping their parents in the family farm bad but children working for long shifts in shows like Full House and Malcolm in the Middle OK?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diimlor",
"comment_text": [
"There is not a blanket ban on children working. There are just limits on children working. They have severe limits on the amount of time they are allowed to work, how dangerous or complicated the work they do is allowed to be, and they must have their schooling compensated for. ",
"So these children do not work long shifts in the shows like an adult actor would. They are not allowed to do specific kinds of scenes, and they have private tutors on set to keep them up to date on their schooling. ",
"Why is a child helping their parents in the family farm bad",
"That is not banned. In fact working on the family farm is one of the specifically named exemptions to child labor laws, as is a child working in a family store. "
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diimjox",
"comment_text": [
"Children in movies and TV shows are highly regulated. They can only work a certain amount of time and things like that."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diimqbl",
"comment_text": [
"I don't think a child doing chores for their parents on a farm is considered bad. Anyway, there are a number of strict regulations on child acting (they need to be schooled, get x number of scheduled breaks, only work for x hours, etc.) that have been put in place to protect the child actors. It's basically a regulated exception to child labor laws because no one else can play the part of a young child but a young child for television or movies."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diipl4o",
"comment_text": [
"This is also why the Olsen twins were hired. Individually each can't work very many hours in a day but if you have two child actors that look nearly identical you can get a whole day of filming done by alternating"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diiqfm4",
"comment_text": [
"A very young characters like a baby or toddler is often portrayed by twins taking turns on camera because there are strict limits on how long children that age can work. It is child labor, but there are plenty of restrictions in place that are intended to look after the child's welfare."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5 why we have different branches of the military when they all have capabilities in land, air, and sea? (i.e. Air-force ground troops and Army fighter jets)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fhd5f
| 10
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.74
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diiabki",
"comment_text": [
"You overstate or assume the degree of overlap between the services.",
"The Air Force's ground troops are almost entirely related to their airpower focus (rescue and recovery of downed pilots, base security, forward aircraft controllers, etc.)",
"The Navy is similar, although it's important to note that seaborne ground troops used to just be called marines, but now that the Marine Corps is more independant, things have changed some. Their air capabilities are driven almost exclusively by what can be operated from an aircraft carrier at sea.",
"The Army has the most crossover, but they are supposed to not have fixed wing (basically not helicopters) aircraft, leaving that to the Air Force. Excluding basically resupply vehicles, they don't really have any naval vessels either.",
"The US Marine Corps has evolved into something that is supposed to be a self-contained fighting unit. So they will have everything from tanks, to artillery, to fixed wing aircraft. And in side-by-side cooperation with the Navy they effectively operate large naval vessels for the purpose of amphibious assault and light aircraft carriers. (These light carriers are actually the size of France and UK's normal sized carriers.) ",
"The purpose of the Marines is to be readily deployable force and so it must be more self-contained. The Marine MEU (marine expeditionary unit) is a self-contained at-sea fighting force that has at any moment in time the ability to instantly deploy into a combat zone with incredibly firepower and versatility.",
"Interestingly, one of the reasons that Marine fighter aircraft operate from their own aircraft carriers (usually) is that in World War 2, the Navy would redirect aircraft (including those with Marine pilots) into naval operations and away from supporting Marines fighting on the ground, which greatly irked the Marine Corps. But the Marines also take pains to practice construction and deployment of rough, front-line style airfields, which is something the Navy doesn't do."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii60on",
"comment_text": [
"A mix of different reasons, tradition, result of different lobby and interest groups within the military, partially organizational and the reality that the modern military is already a giant joint operations."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii5wuo",
"comment_text": [
"The US Army doesn't have any fighter jets, and the US Air Force has very limited ground forces primarily focused on base security.",
"Each service has a specialty, and a few units with limited capabilities to work outside that specialty when necessary. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii679b",
"comment_text": [
"Ah that makes sense. Just couldnt figure out why the air force was asking for extra funding for ground troop training, and all three branches were asking for funding to purchase F-35's. I would think it would be easier to streamline each branch by having them specialize in one area, but I also dont know anything about the military in that aspect."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii9xht",
"comment_text": [
"Fun fact: the F-35 was originally called the JSF or Joint Strike Fighter. It was an attempt to build a fighter that could be easily customized for multiple services. The Navy, Marines, and Air Force all plan to use it."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5 Why only specific combinations of notes give melodious sound? In particular why be have specific frequencies for notes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6ffwyy
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
Edit: we*
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii012m",
"comment_text": [
"Musical notes are defined by the frequency of the note. The higher the frequency, the higher the note.",
"If you play a note with a frequency twice as high (or half as high) as another note, they resonate 'perfectly'. This is called an ",
", and the notes 'sound the same' to our ear.",
"Other notes of a scale were first created by other relationships of frequencies. Octaves are \"2/1\". A fifth (like a C to a G, like 'the alphabet song') is a 3/2 relationship. A fourth (like a C to an F, 'the wedding march') is a 4/3 relationship.",
"So musical scales are defined using these relationships. More details on request - I've got training in this particular subject, both from tuning harpsichords, and as a singer."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dik5x7t",
"comment_text": [
"This all starts with Pythagoras, a smart fellow in ancient Greece. You may have heard of the Pythagorean Theorem.",
"He and his crew (yes, he had a crew) discovered that different lengths of string on a harp would play different notes. And also discovered that string lengths ",
" could combine to make nice-sounding combinations of notes, either as scales (one at a time) or chords (usually 2 or 3 at a time).",
"He had a nutty kind of \"numbers religion\", so this discovery that numbers and music were connected was a very big deal. Such a big deal, that this idea became one of the foundations of Western Music.",
"So, as I said above, the most simple interval, the octave, is made with two notes whose frequencies have a ratio of 2:1. For example, the A below middle C (220 Hz) and the A above middle C (440 Hz). Intervals of 3:2, and 4:3 form a 'perfect fifth' and a 'perfect fourth'. Notice that, on the scale, a fifth and a fourth form an octave, and that you can ",
" 3/2 x 4/3 = 4/2 = 2/1, which is your octave ratio! ",
"A nice list of other ratios.",
"#Size_of_intervals_used_in_different_tuning_systems)",
"These ratios work well with most normal music. But over long ranges of notes, the system doesn't work as well. A side thought: ",
"The Circle of Fifths",
".",
"The problem isn't musical, it's mathematical. On a regular scale, if you keep 'going up by fifths', you eventually get back to your original note. But ",
". After going through the 12 fifths (for each of the notes of the chromatic scale), you end up sharp by about 1%. Bad. ",
"So there is a separate tuning system, first used on keyboards (at that time, harpsichords, virginals, claviers, but on today's pianos), but now on other instruments as well (like woodwinds). Instead of relying on intervals, it splits up the octave into 12 'equal' parts. So any half-step (D to D#, or B to C) is the ratio of \"the 12th root of 2.\" So when you repeat that interval 12 times, mathematically multiplying the 12th root of 2, twelve time, you get a 2:1 perfect octave ratio. So things 'generally' sound in tune, even if you are working in many different keys at once. The trade-off is that the original \"Justly tuned\" or \"Pythagorean\" relationships don't hold anymore.",
"One of the big differences is in major thirds: The 'Pythagorean interval' there is 5:4 = 1.200. But the 'equal' tuning, the interval is 1.189. As a singer in a choir or other group, I've been taught that whenever I sing that third in a chord, to sing it sharper than the piano. If I do that, the chord will 'ping' from the resonance of that natural 5:4 interval. On the other hand, on the piano, those major thirds are always a little bit flat, even if the piano is perfectly tuned!",
"This isn't quite an ELI5, but let me know if you have music questions or math questions!"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diiseqm",
"comment_text": [
"Please provide more details that will be helpful. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dikd6vh",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks. Its a good starter. Now I can go in deep to understand more. Thanks once again. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii7fic",
"comment_text": [
"It's mostly the way the frequencies resonate with each other. Sound is a wave. When the rolls of the wave line up and work together that's consonance. When the waves crash into each other or work against each other that's dissonance. ",
"The melodious sound to which you're referring is generally consonance harmony \nConsonance is associated with sweetness and pleasantness. Dissonance is associated with harshness and unpleasantness. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
Eli5 Why does Foster care seem so broken?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fg9zs
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihxqvu",
"comment_text": [
"Becoming a foster parent/family is a legal process. If you want to become a foster parent you need to get certified which varies based on state. Suffice to say its not just a sign up sheet. (requirements vary by state)",
"Its a stepping stone; In a lot (maybe all?) of states if you wish to adopt a child, you must become a foster parent first and there is often a grace period (such you must foster children for 1 year) before you are able to adopt.",
"Kids in foster care are coming from a bad place. ",
"Child protective services (Social Services, etc responsible for handling these cases) are often understaffed. ",
"All of the above, create a rather unfortunate environment where Social Services need to prioritize kids. Since foster families are certified, they go to the bottom of the list for investigation and remediation because, well the state already checked those parents out, right? Then there is the fact that Foster parents often end up in this terrible situation where they don't want to risk getting attached to any particular kid coming through their home because they may only be there for a week or two, or a year or two. Follow this up with the fact that these kids, especially older ones, have experienced significant emotional and potentially physical abuse which is very difficult and requires significant will power to handle. ",
"And then the elephant in the room; There aren't enough foster families as is; If you start investigating your foster families for abuse, etc...where are you going to put the children that they were taking care of? Often those offering to foster \"a child or two\" end up with a house of 7 or 8 because the state (Social Services) begs them to take more because they have no where else to go. ",
"How can the system be fixed? Thats up for debate and not really an ELI5 topic."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihy7nx",
"comment_text": [
"I mean any little insight and information you have is valuable. Where should I take this question to then if not here?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihyg5s",
"comment_text": [
"There are a few different subreddits you could pose this question",
"r/Ask_Politics",
"\n",
"r/PoliticalDiscussion",
"\n",
"r/NeutralPolitics",
"or if you'd like to get a specific view point's take on it:\n",
"r/AskAConservative",
"\n",
"r/AskALiberal",
"\n",
"r/LibertarianDebates",
"There are others; Please note to read their posting rules before blindly asking as they all are looking for slightly different content. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihyouk",
"comment_text": [
"r/askreddit",
" would probably be a good one too. That is a sub more specifically geared towards conversation and 'brainstorming' sorts of things."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihxggu",
"comment_text": [
"Things that get fixed are things that have political pressure to do so. Foster parents and children have virtually political power so there is very little pressure"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Why are tanks and armored vehicles usually carried on the back of a truck to the war?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fg4cp
| 41
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.74
|
I mean why don't they just drive the tank/armored vehicle to the front lines?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihwjz2",
"comment_text": [
"1) Tank engine are really strong, which make them ideal in bad terrain, but also make them use a lot of diesel per mile. If you put them on a specially design truck, you can drastically cut your diesel consumption. ",
"2) Tank are really expensive piece of equipment, they are a lot more expansive them these trucks that can carry them around. So if you can cut down on the driving time of your tanks when it's possible, then they will last you longer. Your trucks will last you less time, but they cost a lot less than tanks.",
"3) Tank can create a lot of damage on road because their contact to the ground is make of steel instead of rubber. That's one of the reason why some urban fighting vehicle are on tires, to limit that problem."
],
"score": 87
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihwcxq",
"comment_text": [
"Tanks have really poor gas mileage. The M1 Abrams gets about 0.6 miles per gallon. It's much more effective to transport them with something with better efficiency to save on fueling (you have to bring fuel to the front lines so its not just a cost problem).",
"Plus, it wears down on the treads. You don't want that failing in the middle of an engagement or else you'll be stuck with an immobile turret."
],
"score": 26
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihwek1",
"comment_text": [
"2 big reasons:",
"Speed; most heavily armored vehicles are terribly slow. Just a cursory search shows that tanks are lucky to have a top speed at 40 MPH",
"Operating costs: Everything about operating vehicles like tanks is expensive. They get terrible gas milage, maintenance is expensive, etc. "
],
"score": 14
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihytpd",
"comment_text": [
"You use the equipment best suited for the job. The best vehicle suited to transporting things long distance would be your freight haulers and long haul transport trucks. They are designed to travel hundreds and thousands of miles at a time without breaking. Your main battle tank, not so much. Plus tracks are hell on pavement. "
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihz69y",
"comment_text": [
"That 0.6 MPG is only at a crawl though. You get one of those up to speed and it is gallons per mile instead of miles per gallon"
],
"score": 10
}
|
ELI5: How did people wake up to work before the invention of alarm clocks?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fdoq0
| 11
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.74
|
I know that some people can just wake up at a specific time each day but was this the case for all people?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihcjf9",
"comment_text": [
"In the UK, we had a ",
"knocker-up",
" , who was a guy with a big stick and would tap on your bedroom window when it was time to get up.",
"No idea who woke him up though."
],
"score": 29
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihcji6",
"comment_text": [
"You have a natural 24 hour sleep/wake rhythm so you would in general wake up at the same time every day:"
],
"score": 20
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihd0ac",
"comment_text": [
"Dude stayed woke"
],
"score": 16
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihchl9",
"comment_text": [
"Before the industrial revolution, for the most part people didn't wake up very early for work.",
"Once the industrial revolution started, you had people sometimes known as a knocker-up who would wake people up. They would knock on your front door, or use a long stick and tap on your window to wake you up. "
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihdctq",
"comment_text": [
"it was knocker-uppers all the way down"
],
"score": 10
}
|
ELI5: Why is it that on Reddit practically everyone knows correct grammar while other parts of the Internet don't know any at all?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6feet0
| 19
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.64
|
Also, why does there seem to be an increase in English proficiency between barely passing seniors going into adulthood?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihl1dn",
"comment_text": [
"I want to believe it's because we consider ourselves the most literate of all social media. We write it, so that you can say that you were entertained having \"read it\". We are also not limited to a mere 140 characters, thus reducing the possibility of a misunderstanding (and consequently nuclear annihilation). When you don't need to purposefully shorten words for the sake of space, you are given more freedom to concisely say with your own style what you want to by providing quality information that literate readers might appreciate. To say \"I am laughing out loud\" is to put a pox on all of the houses of social media who use lol as their standard form of showing how funny someone thinks a post is. Reddit is also where we can end a long-winded post that people may be too pressed for time to get to the end of, by putting in a TL;DR to sum it all up. ",
" Reddit has more class than all other forms of social media."
],
"score": 14
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihl2hp",
"comment_text": [
"I suspect it has a lot to do with the voting system here. People like to see positive numbers, but if you type like a 6th grader you don't get that. Looking like an idiot around here ends up in you being punished in the form of downvotes. That doesn't happen on Facebook or most other forums so people don't care about it as much."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii18bf",
"comment_text": [
"From my experience, it's almost like a trend. Before I started mainly using Reddit I was actually on Tumblr for a good number of years. ",
"If you haven't seen how they type on Tumblr, the basic rule is you cannot have any capital letters or punctuations at all. Even if it's a large paragraph. I remember seeing someone explain it on Tumblr proudly saying how it's a \"stream of consciousness\" and gives the reader a certain flow that cannot be achieved with proper punctuation. It wasn't until I switched over to reddit did I realize I got so used to seeing poor grammar that people's sentences/paragraphs on this site really made everyone sound more mature. ",
"I can't speak for other websites but it probably has to do with age range. I started Tumblr when I was in college (I have graduated college since then) but I always felt disconnected since everyone on it were always high schoolers. From what I've seen here, Reddit has a much older age range too and people often point out poor grammar on this site. "
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dihl5ko",
"comment_text": [
"There is some self-selection going on. Reddit is almost exclusively a written medium. People without good writing skill would be far less likely to participate for long."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii0f4a",
"comment_text": [
"I think it's all just peer pressure. People post how they think they should on reddit because then people argue based on content and not based on medium. You'd rather be downvoted because someone thinks you're wrong, rather then someone thinks you're stupid.",
"When people are commenting that you made a typo or misused there/they're/their, they're not talking about what you actually meant to say. So you introduce their suggestions into your writing so that they'll actually stick to what you were saying and not how you said it.",
"At least that's what I think. ",
"I don't know if you're a sixth grader, but I don't actually care. I just think that everyone wants to get a word in and the easiest way to do it is to make their comments reddit friendly."
],
"score": 6
}
|
ELI5: What are the long term negative consequences associated with not eating enough fruits and vegetables?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fbl0q
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
I know many people who are in decent shape for their age and height who rarely eat any fruits or vegetables, but instead have a normal amount of calories per day. I'm wondering then what either the physical or mental consequences are of not consuming a lot of recommended foods.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih7l4f",
"comment_text": [
"It depends what you replace them with. If you eat a lot of refined sugar, the consequences will be pretty bad (weight gain, inflammation, high blood pressure etc). If you only eat from the animal kingdom, then there are no negative consequences as far as anybody knows.",
"There aren't any long term scientific studies of eating a purely carnivorous diet, but the Bellevue experiment (see eg ",
"http://inhumanexperiment.blogspot.co.uk/2009/09/two-brave-men-who-ate-nothing-but-meat.html",
") demonstrated no negative effects, and some positive effects, after a year. There are also many people who have lived like this for years or even decades with no ill effects (see eg ",
"http://myzerocarblife.jamesdhogan.com/wp/start/",
")."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih0kf1",
"comment_text": [
"There aren't any consequences at all, if you keep in balance carbs, protein, fat, vitamins, minerals and water intake. Human body doesn't distinguish between candy and banana or carrot, both are simple carbs. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih2alw",
"comment_text": [
"If they don't have enough vitamin C from citrus then they could develop ",
"scurvy",
". Although now it's easy enough to get it in pill form."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih10wy",
"comment_text": [
"That's not necessarily true.. I mean the idea is true. Sure you're not gonna gain weight if you eat 100 calories of candy versus 100 calories of a banana. But there's a few things. Candy, junk food, meat, water, etc. Doesn't have fiber. Fiber is really important for making quality stool. The other thing is, if someone is eating 100 calories of candy versus 100 calories of a banana, the banana is going to make someone feel much more full, therefore they will eat less. If people eat until they feel satisfied, they will need more calories worth of candy to feel satisfied. So temporarily it's fine, and there are people that will be fine without fruits and vegetables when they're young, but when their metabolism slows down or age catches up to them, they'll need to start eating those things"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih1sad",
"comment_text": [
"Fruits provide fiber and micronutrients. \nYou need to get those too, not only carbs fat and protein."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why is it impossible to imagine a new colour?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fgvno
| 627
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.85
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii2u9e",
"comment_text": [
"A better way to word this would be, \"Why ",
" it be possible to imagine a hue that is completely outside one's experience, to the point where the neurological circuitry to process such a hue may not even exist?\"",
"Anything you can imagine or visualize is necessarily going to be informed by and at least in part based on things you've previously experienced. By the time a person is old enough to ask a question like \"Why can't I imagine a new color\" their brain has probably already been exposed to every possible color or combination of colors available to them (especially nowadays with such widespread and easy access to video games, television, and digital artistic tools like Photoshop and Paint Tool SAI) and has adjusted itself to recognize and process them.",
"You can't imagine a new color because there's nothing to build it from; it would necessarily have to be derived from a color you already know, or a combination of those colors. Where would you even start? It's as if someone asked you to build a house out of a brand new, never before seen material, but without using any currently known or even hypothetically possible substances or combination of substances whatsoever to create it. You'd need to invent new physics and chemistry before you could even begin.",
"Edit: I want to clarify that I don't necessarily think it is impossible for a person to ",
" a new color, either because they weren't exposed to it before, or because of drug use, injury, or some other phenomenon. What I don't think is possible is for a person to ",
" a brand new color."
],
"score": 470
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii5pgy",
"comment_text": [
"Dumb question: Would a partly colorblind person be able to imagine the missing color through something like hallucinogenic drugs?"
],
"score": 47
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diic7f7",
"comment_text": [
"Let's say that you're a meditation master and have breached the deepest mysteries of the mind and imagined yourself a color never before seen by human eyes. Or you've dropped acid for the first time and you're lost in the 17th Celestial Realm being shown the wonders of the universe by Marley and Batman on a unicycle. In fact, you have only \"seen\" this new color with your mind's eye. How would you go about telling someone about it?",
"All you could really say for positive is that it's a new color. If asked to describe it, you could only say what it was not. \"It's not red... it's not blue... it's not white or black or the absence of color at all.\" If it were \"blueish\" or \"greenish\", for example, it would just be some shade of blue or green. If you take away all the colors it's not, you have nothing else left. It's a limitation of the language; you can never even walk someone through your mental process to that color as nothing in nature has ever possessed it.",
"The best you could hope for is that this new color produced a strong emotional response in you or some other synesthesic experience. At least then you could say that the new color \"is like stepping on a vacuum cleaner in the dark, but you're worried it's actually a python\". People will generally think you're a pretensions waste of time, but there'll be at least someone out there who think you're cool. If you say that the new color \"is the pure love felt for all living sentient beings in all temporal realms\" then people will definitely find you insufferable and think you're only bullshitting them because you want to sell your self-written book on success.",
"TL;DR: I don't think it's impossible to imagine a new color. It's a neat mental exercise that pairs well with doing nine impossible things before breakfast. Helpful for the budding artist. If you did succeed, I expect that it would define your artistic career trying to describe it."
],
"score": 36
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii6a21",
"comment_text": [
"While I've no concrete answer, so take this with a grain of salt, I'd imagine that this probably isn't the case. From what I've heard, people when using hallucinogenic drugs don't tend to see Infrared or Ultraviolet, and I think it'd be the same for colourblind people.",
"At the end of the day, there are thousands of colours that a ",
" person can't see. They're all around use every day. Hell, we have 3 colour receptors. Some animals have up to 15. We can't even begin to imagine what those colours would look like.",
"Anyway, my point is, even when there's more coloure around you to see, I don't think hallucinogenic drugs are the key to unlocking them."
],
"score": 29
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dii65ki",
"comment_text": [
"Follow up question: if every band of visible light is combined to form \"white\" light, what about when every band of light (gamma rays to long radio waves) is combined? Like, if you show each of those into a prism at appropriate angles for their wavelength, as opposed to scattering white light out of a prism to form a rainbow. "
],
"score": 25
}
|
|
ELI5: What are terrorist attacks supposed to be accomplishing besides "terror"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fa9bg
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.55
|
I know terror, duh but what I mean is what is the overall goal? What is the end for their means? All I am seeing is people pulling together and not being afraid and everyone wanting to wipe the terrorists and whatever they stand for out of existence. Are they trying to spread a religious message? If so they are failing. Well, everyone is hearing it but hating it. If anything it's making it worse by pushing more people to islamaphobia. Are they trying to fight a war? If so they can't possibly win. There's no chance against basically every nation. Do they just want to blow stuff up and cause damage? If so why the religious act? Just say you are blowing stuff up for "fun". If anything that's more terrifying. And if the only purpose is "terror and fear" that makes no sense. There has to (should) be an end that, in their minds at least, justifies the means right? I know some things in life make no sense but even the most deranged psychopath follows some sort of logic, no matter how flawed it is. The only thing I have heard that might make sense is that the idea is to turn everyone against each other. Make things "Muslims vs Everyone Else". Still that seems far fetched.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_digywlx",
"comment_text": [
"Religious fanatics who espouse terrorism have logic, but it's liek underpants gnome logic.\nStep 1: We steal underpants\nStep 2:\nStep 3: We Rule the world!",
"For instance, take 911. The afganistani fought a big war against the USSR and won when it collapsed. They looked at the US and thought we were in a similar situation. So they had some delusion a strike on America would cause the same sort general collapse was going to happen. Which to me an American shows they're just completely out of touch with reality and how we think.",
"The acts set their actual goals back but they think they will. Because violence has worked for them on a smaller scale in other places. It's nuts but they don't realize or care."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih5jc2",
"comment_text": [
"Basically if what you said is the ends, why are they using terrorism as means when it clearly isn't working?",
"How is it not working? One half of the political spectrum literally calls you racist and a bigot if you criticise them. If enough form a community police are told to give deferment to them and they often have their own local police enforcing religious law.",
"If you mean why haven't they established an entire caliphate yet, Islamic terror against the West is fairly recent. It would likely take 50-100 years to fully establish a caliphate.",
"Terrorism doesn't work when you are on the losing side.",
"I mean, sort of. It scares the population, into either giving up their rights or bending over backwards in some twisted sense of accomodation and support for the terrorists. Kind of like self hatred \"we must have caused this\". You see what's happening in Sweden. Many deny a problem even exists, officials sacrifice their own citizens just to avoid criticizing Islam.",
"We know they have no chance of winning any type of war.",
"They kind of are in a sense. It's one front of a war, not the whole thing.",
"We know they are in the wrong.",
"A significant proportion of America and the West in general denies this fact.",
"So why are they using terrorism as a method when it clearly won't get them what they want? How is terrorism getting them closer to their goal?",
"I assume you've seen tweets from famous figures and politicians saying after every terror attack \"remember not to be Islamophobic\" and other variations? The caliphates are either established by war or built from the inside. Take the mayor of London for example. If you are going to install a caliphate, that's how you do it. Elect a prominent member of the Muslim community, and have him downplay terror and tell the citizens that Muslims needs and feelings are to be considered before their own.",
"I don't think he's doing this on purpose, I think he's a useful idiot."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih6ps8",
"comment_text": [
"Isn't this a risky plan? How long can they \"poke the bear\" so to speak? Don't they run the risk (even more so with radical zealous believers) of angering the whole beyond the criticism of the others?",
"Of course. But my best guess is that they think that this will not happen.",
"Also even with success, if everything worked like they want it to, won't it simply lead to an inverse of the situation? Or is that thinking too far ahead? Probably.",
"Perhaps, but the fractions of the Islamic empire have maintained purity for centuries. It may fall in 1000 years, but I doubt they see that as a total defeat.",
"And they see themselves as supported by God, so it's not like they will give up short of a belief God has abandoned them.",
"Simplistic and it works here but in the real world that would require tons of officials, spokespeople and, politicians to be in on the plot.",
"No one is really \"in\" on anything. It isn't a conspiracy. The full on terrorists simply believe they are chosen by God to wage war on the unbelievers, and create this glorious empire.",
"The enablers genuinely believe what they say and report. That Muslims are victims and terrorists only exist because of something we have done wrong.",
"It's no more a conspiracy than conservatives trying to minimize abortions is.",
"So isn't that a bit of a stretch to say that their acts are meant as a decoy for their real goals? Or is it a huge coincidence it's working like you explained?",
"With the terrorists it's pretty black and white. I think the media and Left-wing ideologues are just useful idiots. Like I said before, I think the mayor of London just thinks England, for whatever reason, brought the attacks on themselves, and if simply gives the Muslim population whatever they want the attacks will stop.",
"There's also a decent number of people who want to see Western Civilization taken down a peg, but I think they are just a happy coincidental addition. They'll say stuff like \"what gives you the right to judge their culture\" and similar relativist statements."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih786n",
"comment_text": [
"Ok that makes sense. So what you are saying will happen isn't the \"victory\" that the terrorists are going for. Just a more open world for Muslim laws to be implemented.",
"I mean, eventually, the caliphate comes along, but the short term goal seems to be basically just be \"Make Islam and Muslim's lives the priority over laws, rights, whatever\".",
"Meaning the promotion of fear of action as a terrorist type activity, that in turn promotes inactivity that leads to the death of American (and other nations) citizens? Try and shut the \"useful idiots\" up. So we can take the necessary actions.",
"Only way to do that would be to violate the first amendment. But you could create social backlash like the SJWs use.",
"I don't really know what leverage you have to \"sell\" the Trump admin anything. You an editorialist or lobbyist or something?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih4gyb",
"comment_text": [
"Alright that makes sense but it's not working. It's been years and it has only gotten them farther from their goal. So why are they still trying? The means of terrorism is clearly not getting them closer to ends of getting what they want. Even the worst tactician can figure out after years and years of doing something that it isn't working. It's even moving them away from their apparent goals. Everyone knows it isn't working. It's not inspiring fear and terror, it's inspiring anger and the desire for revenge from a much much larger enemy. The metaphor of poking a sleeping bear with a stick never fit a situation more perfectly. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: why are public schools able to have and enforce dress code? Isn't it a violation of freedom of expression since it's both 1) a public building and 2) basically forced to attend
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6fbo4k
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.48
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_digz0c0",
"comment_text": [
"First of all, students are children. As a result, they have a somewhat limited set of rights compared to adults.",
"Second of all, your rights can be restricted in public buildings and on public property as long as there is a legitimate reason and the regulation is evenhanded. You have a right to bear arms, but there aren't many elementary schools that permit machine guns on the property."
],
"score": 15
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih0wqm",
"comment_text": [
"Right to vote? Right to consume alcohol? These are obvious examples, but there are plenty of others too. "
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_digzeav",
"comment_text": [
"The specific legal doctrine in play is called in loco parentis. It basically means that schools are acting as the parents of the children in their care. In the same way that a parent can enforce restrictions on a child that would be illegal if an adult enforced them on another adult, the school can enforce restrictions on students. This is the same reason schools can search lockers and use physical punishment on students. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih170s",
"comment_text": [
"8 years olds can't even get jobs!"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dikbsso",
"comment_text": [
"26th amendment"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: The jury system used in the US
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6f9aww
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
I base most of these observations on Making a Murderer episode 8, where the prosecution and defence both give their final statements for the jury to decide on. Can someone with some legal expertise please explain: 1) They have all likely been watching the media reporting on the case, which more often than not frames the accused as guilty rather than innocent. Since (at least in this case) the jury is gathered from inhabitants of the same county, how is it made sure that the jury members' personal opinions about the accused are not skewed one way or the other? 2) , when both the prosecution and defence are allowed to use all of their rhetoric power to present the case? I feel like the facts and evidence are the lesser important thing to a jury, if one side manages to convincingly paint a picture and tell an appealing story of what happened, irregardless of the facts that have been brought to the table. Especially since there must be evidence "beyond reasonable doubt" that someone is guilty before they can be convicted, how can it seem to come down to the rhetorics in this case? 3) Is it extremely rare for the judge to go against the decision of the jury? All in all, this seems like a system that makes it very possible for someone to be convicted on lacking evidence, just because the media has framed a case a certain way, the prosecution has managed to tell a convincing story, and people seem to be by default more inclined into thinking someone is guilty rather than not, out of sheer compassion for the victim.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_digf7my",
"comment_text": [
"1). Realize that the overwhelming majority of cases are not heavily covered by news outlets. There are highly public cases, that are difficult to control, but those are rare and the system does its best to sequester juror (can't watch the news or interact with the public). As far as biased opinions, the jury selection process attempts to eliminate jurors with potential biases that could affect their reliance on facts. Also, if a potential juror or anyone close to them knows the defendant, they are not selected.",
"2) The jury is instructed to only consider the facts of the case. Many defense attorneys will try to garner sympathy for the defendant when the facts stack up against them. There is no fool-proof way to stop jurors from making decisions based on emotions, but the system makes it very clear that they are only supposed to consider the facts of the case. The design of the 12 juror system is to hope that there are enough rational people in the jury that they are able to guide the jury to follow the rules.",
"3) it is rare for a judge to over turn a jury's verdict, but it does happen. Generally, a judge will only over-turn a verdict for one of two reasons. One, one of the attorneys did something to poison the veracity of the proceedings. Two, a judge might over-turn a guilty verdict if they feel that the prosecution did not present enough evidence to reasonably get a conviction."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_digh1cq",
"comment_text": [
"Note that a judge can only overrule a guilty verdict. Overriding a not guilty verdict would be a violation of a defendant's constitutional right to a trial by jury. ",
"There are occasional debates over whether we should have \"professional juries\" of law students or other people with some experience. The biggest argument against it is that legal professionals generally don't represent an accurate cross-section of the population in terms of socio-economic background. The other argument is cost. There aren't enough law students to cover every jury, so you'd need quite a few people who are essentially full-time employees. Right now, most courts only pay jurors a minimal amount to cover lunch and transportation costs - well below minimum wage. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_digfbpl",
"comment_text": [
"The only one I can guarantee the correct answer to is 1, so I'll answer that. The jury is summoned from a pool of applicants. They are then interviewed for their eligibility to be a jurer. They can be factored out and not allowed to be a jurer based on their personal views, or job. For example, someone who absolutely hates pedophiles, could not be a jurer in a trial involving a charge of pedophilia, as they would be biased. If a certain case is high profile with significant media coverage, the jury is usually a group of people who know little about the case to avoid bias. If media coverage becomes an issue during the case, the jury is forced into a hotel without communication (aside from a monitored phone call to family) to ensure their decision cannot be modified from media bias. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diggioc",
"comment_text": [
"Jury is chosen before the trial begins. Unfortunately, I have no examples of specific cases that lasted a long time as I'm not American. I don't pay much attention to trials in America. I however know that their jury works as I explained, as I'm Canandian and know that their jury system works the same. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_digg5jm",
"comment_text": [
"Ok, so the judge acts as a kind of validator of whatever the jury decides, and makes sure that decision is in line with what both sides presented in court. ",
"This begs the question though: if the judge makes the final decision in the end, and he is the one with sufficient legal expertise to weigh all the facts and counter-arguments against each other, and as a professional should be able to put his emotions aside, what is the purpose of a jury? Why is there a need to introduce this population of laymen to make a decision on something they are not experts in and risk introducing emotions and/or bias into the process? If it is to guarantee that no single person has absolute power over the decision, why not make a \"jury\" out of a couple of other judges or other legal experts?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Given that polar bears have existed 600,000 years, they must have gone through periods warmer than today (prior to and after the ice age) and somehow survived. But today they are on the endangered species list due to expected climate changes. Are they really in danger?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6f733x
| 73
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.8
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difwonh",
"comment_text": [
"Animal populations can adapt and evolve along with a changing environment if the change happens slow enough. Polar bears may be able to adapt to a temperature change over 100000 years, but not be able to adapt to the same temperature change over 1000 years. Since this recent anthropogenic driven change is happening faster than any natural temperature change, so I would say they are in danger in the wild. I guess we will be able to see them in zoos though."
],
"score": 69
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difxpn3",
"comment_text": [
"The issue is not actually the temperatures we are going to be changing to. It is the speed of the change. We have taken a warming process that would have taken up to 100,000 years or more and sped it up. Even if we have only made it 10 times faster some animals that could have adapted in 100,000 will not be able to adapt in 10,000. And odds are that the speed we have increased the change is far far faster so the chances of animals adapting is far lower. ",
"But with polar bears there does seem to be one kind of adaptation occurring. They are mating with Grizzly and Brown bear and having hybrids that are fertile. "
],
"score": 67
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difwrdr",
"comment_text": [
"There is wide scientific speculation about polar bears but the most common conclusion is that they have only been around for 150,000 years. If they are 150k then they have survived only one event of warming like we are currently undergoing. If they are 600k then only two events of current magnitude. Before large-scale encroachment & habitat destruction polar bears could migrate if they had to. "
],
"score": 14
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difx0ri",
"comment_text": [
"bigger issue isn't the main issue I think, but rate of change. It's easier to adapt when you have thousands of years than when you have hundreds."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dih3rhq",
"comment_text": [
"while your polar bear example is a good one - this is a major problem facing ALOT of wild animals. I don't want to sound like a doomsday soothsayer, but if humans keep breeding uncontrollably - there will come a time in the not too distant future when the only wild animals on earth will be humans and the farm animals and cattle used to feed those humans. It sounds crazy but it's alot closer than you think.",
"For hundreds of thousands of years, there was a natural selection - survival of the fittest where the food chain was a natural process - but humans have banded together to become bigger/smarter/better weaponized to overcome all other predators, and have halted natural selection - to where now - it is humans - and whatever humans want to let live. If the elephants have valuable ivory - humans hunt them until they are nearly extinct or until the only elephants left are close to extinction. Its the same with the millions of fishes in the ocean and the corral reefs that provide their homes. Except instead of hunting/fishing them to extinction, the humans have polluted the earth and caused the earths temperature to rise so much - that the reefs are dying off, as well as the fishies that used to call those reefs home. ",
"Humans' un-controlled breeding without limits to the point of massive over-population is a much bigger issue than greenhouse gases, (and is the biggest cause of greenhouse gases) if you had a world full of 1 million people who wanted to run electricity full blast year round - no problem, they could burn coal and drive cars and throw their trash in landfills, or directly in the ocean and the impact would be minimal. but when you are talking 7.5 Billion people and increasing every single day - with longer life expectancy and no end in site - humans will continue to destroy the earth until there's nothing left for wild animals."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: If a person was raised without any comprehension of language, what would the voice inside their head sound like when thinking about something? Could any advanced thought processes even take place?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6f6idb
| 22
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difss91",
"comment_text": [
"Language seems to be necessary for complex thought. Children raised in such a way as to not be exposed to a language during critical early years display significant cognitive deficits, in particular a difficulty in learning language when given the opportunity. Many children raised in confinement or \"feral children\" often never learn to speak a real language and generally have difficulty with a wide range of mental tasks."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difu7p1",
"comment_text": [
"Interestingly, this doesn't only apply to spoken languages. Born deaf people think in sign language and text, and in a way that is very unique to them."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dig3whu",
"comment_text": [
"If you want an interesting read that somewhat addresses this, check out ",
" by Oliver Sacks. It explores the history of the deaf community as well as deaf neurology. I mention it because congenitally deaf children suffered from a similar issue before more modern methods of education. Specifically the lack of sign language. There was a point when the predominant goal in educating deaf children was to try and make them \"normal\". This meant reading lips and learning to speak. No formal sign language existed, and any that was improvised by deaf students was strictly discouraged and even forbidden. This was at a time when the phrase \"deaf and dumb\" came into common usage and is largely why the word \"dumb\", meaning speechless, has become synonymous with \"stupid\". Deaf students also had great difficulty with more complex ideas, and it was widely believed that whatever caused congenital deafness was also linked with lower intelligence.",
"This all changed when schools for the deaf began to change strategies and sign languages began to be built, formalized, and encouraged. Finally, with a language they could utilize fully, as opposed to one based on a sensation that was meaningless to them, deaf students began to perform complex mental tasks with the same ease as their auditory counterparts. As for the \"voice in the head\", it could now exist, but in a visual rather than auditory manner. I don't know much about this, but I'd love to see the response of someone who is congenitally deaf weigh in on what the \"voice in their head\" consists of. I'm sure they could describe with infinitely better accuracy than anything I could conjecture.",
"Hellen Keller also wrote about her experiences as a girl, deaf and blind and without any understanding of language, as she struggled to understand what her teacher, Anne Sullivan, was trying to show her. The teacher had stuck Helen's hand into a stream of running water while spelling out the word \"water\" on Helen's other hand with her finger. Keller describes it thus,",
"\"As the cool stream gushed over one hand she spelled into the other the word water, first slowly, then rapidly. I stood still, my whole attention fixed upon the motions of her fingers. Suddenly I felt a misty consciousness as of something forgotten–-a thrill of returning thought; and somehow the mystery of language was revealed to me. I knew then that ‘w-a-t-e-r’ meant the wonderful cool something that was flowing over my hand. That living word awakened my soul, gave it light, hope, joy, set it free! There were barriers still, it is true, but barriers that could in time be swept away.”"
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diftxcf",
"comment_text": [
"may I add there is a thing referred to as the 'forbidden experiment': to raise a child in a dark empty soundproof room and only give it tasteless food (other mechanics such as how to handle the child's excrements have not been considered as, again, this experiment is not to be done) until it grows up. Then expose it to the world and see what it does. ",
"any feral child experimented on or monitored so far has simply been the consequence of (very) bad parents or guardians, which means a feral child ",
" most likely been exposed to other forms of abuse other than the severe neglect of the forbidden experiment. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difu7m7",
"comment_text": [
"If you want to read up on this have a look on Google for \"Genie\". She's one of the most well documented feral children in recent times, and Victoria Frompkin wrote a few papers on her development."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: how do choreographers write out choreography?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6f4jm1
| 5
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.61
|
Musicians have a notation that they use to write out their music, is there an equivalent for choreographers? How do they keep track of all of the details of the movements that they want to incorporate into their dance?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difcxvn",
"comment_text": [
"There have been multiple choreographic notations throughout history. One of the most famous is Labanotation, but in my experience, choreographers use anything from stick figures, to shorthand, to coded words for movements. Movements stay in people's bodies for a long time, even after years of not doing it. So they repeat it in their own time to better explain it. Often you'll see a choreographer mark the dance very quickly to remember the next part. They also use their stick figures, shorthand, and coded words for remaining movements. What's nice is a lot of movement names are under a shared vocabulary that all dancers learn through years of training. ",
"In terms of preservation of dance pieces over time, video is obviously now widely used for reconstruction, but before video it was basically passing the choreography down through memorization. Every piece I've been in I've either learned through video or physical demonstration from the choreographer or an assistant (if the choreographer isn't physically capable of demonstrating, which is often the case when it comes to older pieces or pieces not done very often). ",
"Labanotation: ",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labanotation",
"Dance Notation: ",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dance_notation",
"Ballet Dictionary: ",
"https://ballethub.com/ballet-terms-dictionary/",
"edited formatting and a missing word"
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difcjyp",
"comment_text": [
"It's a sheet with the specific cues/times, the actions, the notes, and a space for drawings or photos to go. Known dance patterns can be called by name, and dancers are drilled to go to specific locations, as written on the sheet.",
"Example: ",
"http://kellylasley.com/uploads/2/8/3/5/2835519/2976682.jpg?529"
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difdd7x",
"comment_text": [
"SWEET this is awesome thanks!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difdjb0",
"comment_text": [
"this is more for technical staff rather than the choreographers themselves. you can see the light cues listed. dancers don't need to know that necessarily. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difdn25",
"comment_text": [
"Oh okay, I just used a search engine to find out how they did it because I was interested in how they did it too."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5:why do liberals get so angry when you ask that Islam be held accountable for daily atrocities committed against others?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6f3zhl
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.48
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_difb9gc",
"comment_text": [
"Targeting providers of legal abortions is terrorism. Barnett Slepian? Or is that ancient history to you? It isn't to me or people who knew him.",
"These Christian sovereign citizens that attack and kill cops?",
"Dylann Roof? Timothy McVeigh?",
"Do you pay attention to events at all? Or do you only recognize terrorism when brown people do it?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dif87dx",
"comment_text": [
"Your exact response is what he's talking about. Also Islam has been way worse for even longer.",
"Not a lot of Christians ",
" (you know what daily means right) do be-headings, mass murders, and terror attacks."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dif7znf",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"ELI5 is not for:",
"Subjective or speculative replies - Only objective explanations are permitted here; your question is asking for speculation or subjective responses ",
"If you want to know why a group think or do something, ask that group.",
"ELI5 is not the place to be conducting opinion polls.",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dif7sf9",
"comment_text": [
"Is Christianity held accountable for the atrocities committed against others?",
"How do you hold an entire religion accountable?",
"Are all members of a religion accountable?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dif84kw",
"comment_text": [
"What is Christianity doing today that's so bad? I haven't seen any news about their constant terror attacks, be-headings and mass murders.",
"You can hold an entire religion accountable if the religion states that you should kill all infidels and everyone who doesn't believe in the \"true\" book are infidels. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is it necessary to "register for selective service" in the U.S.? Seems to me, the moment you're issued a SSN, you're "registered". It's not like "they" don't know how to FIND you, 24/7/365.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6f3lm0
| 6
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.7
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dif520d",
"comment_text": [
"Social security is neither automatic nor mandatory. It's only for claiming social security, which some (like the Amish) don't do. It also doesn't mean that the government knows where you are. People move and don't leave a forwarding address; people change their names or their sexes on birth certificates; sometimes people don't apply for jobs or driver's licenses or other things that require a SSN for identification.",
"Unsurprisingly, it's difficult to find someone in a country the size of the US, even if you have a lot more identifying information (like a physical description) than what you have on your social security card."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dif5u6g",
"comment_text": [
"Those aren't ",
" consequences. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dif4lz7",
"comment_text": [
"Selective Service and Social Security don't really talk.",
"The way the Selective Service system is set up you can decline to register for a number of reasons."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dif4to6",
"comment_text": [
"The US does not have a central registration of citizens. You are not required to get a social security number but this means you can not get social security. You can also get a new social security number any time you want. And the social security database is only intended for the social security administration and will only record relevant information to them. You are not required to keep that data up to date."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dif6stm",
"comment_text": [
"Yes, but should a draft actually happen, they'd all conscientiously object on the basis of their religion, so it's a moot point."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Why does shipping tracking sometimes show packages as "delivered" while they are still in transit?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6ew7xd
| 5
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.73
|
I've had several packages say that they have been delivered, but they actually don't show up until the following day or sometimes later. Amazon states in their FAQ: Wait 36 hours. Packages can show as delivered while still in transit. What would cause this to happen? I'm unaware of the underlying mechanism, but it seems like it would have been deliberately marked delivered by the carrier.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didkqxo",
"comment_text": [
"In addition to the possibility of the carrier lying, sometimes the last link in the chain is handled by someone/a service/the USPS, that doesn't do delivery tracking. So the carrier before that just guesses when it's expected to be delivered. (Usually, it's handed off and delivered that day, so they're usually right, but if some delay happens, it can be late. It's generally considered better to be checking for a package that doesn't come, than to have a package sitting outside that you didn't expect yet.)"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didqf1x",
"comment_text": [
"Interesting! All of the packages this has happened with weren't delivered by USPS or UPS, they were handed off to OnTrack. You must be right, the best they can do is estimate their delivery time, as working them into the tracking system would be a lot of work."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didsvob",
"comment_text": [
"I think that iS exactly what's happening. Their marking late or almost late packages as delivered to fulfill their agreements with Amazon etc..."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didjjpa",
"comment_text": [
"I always assumed that it was the carrier marking it as delivered to meet the requirements of e.g Amazon even when they weren't able to meet that requirement."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didqd8f",
"comment_text": [
"This is what I thought to be most likely."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: If we do nothing about climate change, what will be the long term economic consequence over then next century or so?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6evoea
| 4
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didisb0",
"comment_text": [
"Solar energy eliminating our emissions by 2030 is all well and good, but stopping emissions at this point won't just suddenly halt the rising temperature. There will still be the run-on effect due to many factors and we can't be sure of how big an impact those will make or when that will stop.",
"Also, frozen wastelands wouldn't typically have many nutrients good for farming, even if the heat opened them up. What we're unearthing from the ice will almost certainly be an abundance of cold dry deserts."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didj01y",
"comment_text": [
"Climate change won't end humanity. But you don't need to end humanity to be pretty bad.",
"Seawalls are costly. In Venice the MOSE project is estimated to cost a bit more than 6 billions USD and that's to protect one city. In Netherlands the Delta Works costed almost 8 Billions USD in 1997 and it wasn't the only work of the type in the country. It would cost a lot of money to protect cities and region. Not only that, but some region are just too poor to protect themselves with such infrastructure.",
"Some region couldn't be protected and this will create climate refuge. Look at the mess the Syrian refuges crisis created. There is about 5 millions of Syrian refuges. Sea level rising could create up to 150 millions refuges by 2050. A good portion of them would be from Bangladesh, and most of them would be going into India, this would create huge financial stress on India and the risk of Muslim vs Hindu violence is high in that kid of situation. Another big source of refuges would be from pacific Island and those can't walk to another country. We could see millions of people trying to flee on boat, we could see what is happening in the Mediterranean but way worst.",
"Humanity would not go extinct, but a lot of human suffering, death and billions and billions of dollar would be spend to protect the richest region."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didjc2o",
"comment_text": [
"What about \"an entire country could be underwater\" do you think isn't an enormous disaster? Where will those 100,000,000 go? Europe is having trouble with two million refugees, what about fifty times that much?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didg43s",
"comment_text": [
"There are plenty of places where you can find doomsday scenarios. I recommend you consider the natural progress of energy, medical, and most of all computer technology will do many magnitudes of impact to economies at all levels more than the Earth getting a degree or two warmer will."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dideymr",
"comment_text": [
"Multiple entire countries could wind up underwater, including several considered developed. Cities like Venice, New Orleans, and segments of New York could wind up not existing. Traditionally farmable areas could wind up being deserts, pinching global food supplies. Sources of freshwater, already strained by overuse, could just completely dry out.",
"It's entirely possible that there wouldn't ",
" a global economy if we do nothing because the powerful nations that don't entirely sink will wind up fighting massive resource wars to desperately feed their populations. Estimates vary, but in the worst case scenario over a billion people could wind up homeless, nationless refugees. The world simply isn't prepared to handle that, so hundreds of millions would die.",
"Humanity would survive. We're too tenacious to do otherwise. But society might not. We could be cast back into a new Dark Age where all of our lore is forgotten and our creations rot, reclaimed by nature.",
"All of that could happen, but the worst part is that we simply do not know. We are rendering every weather system on our planet chaotic and unpredictable. It could be better than what I said. It could be much worse.",
"No matter what would actually happen, we cannot risk it. We gamble with the very concept of civilization, and that is far too high a price to pay for anything."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How can we be masters of climate science and fully understand that we're the cause of climate change when we can't accurately predict the weather more than several days into the future?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6euzwo
| 8
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_did8ac6",
"comment_text": [
"Generally it becomes easier to predict something the bigger the scale.",
"Let's use people as an analogy. Let's say you're out on the street asking people what their favorite food is. Now, you know that some foods like pizza and burgers are very popular, so you expect to get those as answers a lot. However, any given person can have any favorite food, so while you know generally what answers you'll get over time, you have no idea what the next person you ask will say.",
"Weather/climate are similar. If you look at one week at a time you can't always predict if it will be warm or cold because of how many short term factors there are. In the long run, however, we can look at long term trends and tell where the climate is headed. Next week may be unusually cold, but overall the temperature is still rising."
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didbp1u",
"comment_text": [
"Add into this the the national weather service is actually really good at predicting weather but local stations tend to ignore them and report their own predictions...",
"http://www.randalolson.com/wp-content/uploads/weather-forecast-accuracy-flipped.png"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diddvnh",
"comment_text": [
"\"Climate\" refers to long-term averages, whereas \"weather\" refers to day to day conditions. Some places are hot and dry, others are cold and wet - some places experience frequent storms, others hardly any. This is what's meant by \"climate\" - it doesn't mean that because a place is a desert it never rains there, but it does mean it gets very little rainfall on average.",
"It's very difficult to make any accurate prediction of the weather because it is chaotic - a very small error can lead to big changes down the line, until your predictions start to look nothing like each other more. This sets a limit on how far in advance you can expect to predict the weather.",
"But just because the small scale behaviour is unpredictable doesn't mean you can't say anything about averages. Suppose you fill a bucket up half with red balls and half with blue balls, and then shake it around for a bit. It's almost impossible to predict where a specific ball is going to end up, but you can confidently say that given enough time, the red and blue balls will be evenly mixed.",
"Also, climate models aren't necessarily all that precise. There are a lot of unknowns involved that have to be estimated, and different assumptions can lead to different predictions. You don't need such predictions to realize that climate change is happening, though, since you can look at historical records of temperature and precipitation, and more recent satellite data, to see how the climate has changed dramatically over the past century or so. It's not a huge leap to assume that this trend will continue - the aim of climate models is to predict how quickly the changes will progress in future and what the likely consequences will be, as well as to assess the effectiveness of proposed measures to combat it."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didyws9",
"comment_text": [
"We can know it is on average warmer during the day than at night a few hundred years in the future for the same reason. We understand some basics of radiative transfer (how light affects heat for ELIm5).",
"For the global warming it goes like this...",
"Equilibrium temperature is ~0 F for Earth. That's the average temperature that our atmosphere has to be at a layer to transmit enough infrared light to balance the incoming solar/visible light/energy that is absorbed by Earth (primarily at the surface). If it becomes harder for infrared light to escape, the average altitude of that layer has to move upwards, closer to space to still let that light out (higher up less to pass through). In general, it gets warmer the lower you get (there's a reason for this too), in the portion of the atmosphere we're talking about (like why it's colder on a mountain than down below). Which now means you have to travel farther from this cold 0 F layer to the surface, which means you will experience more warming to reach the surface."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_did7es8",
"comment_text": [
"Climate = statistical trends/averages of weather conditions over a long period of time. Climate is basically a study of the weather at multiple time points to build a model of how the climate is changing and what the \"average\" weather will look like in x year.",
"Weather = extremely short term weather conditions influenced by countless factors. Weather is impossible for us to understand currently because of a \"butterfly\" effect where there are too many factors."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How exactly does traffic work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6euqng
| 11
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
Why are some days stop and go and the next day at the same time absolutely fine? Aside from the obvious like accidents and construction, what causes the slow movement?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_did56lj",
"comment_text": [
"Differences in acceleration. When you are at a red light, there is a line of cars behind you. You see the light turn green, and so does everyone else. You begin to accelerate, but the cars behind you don't until they see you have began to move.",
"Traffic could essentially be eliminated if all the cars accelerated together at the same time, but humans are not perfectly coordinated enough to ever pull that off. Some days traffic is worse than others because of a \"chaos theory\" sort of phenomena or \"butterfly effect\" where one light going red at the right time can put the flow of traffic out of sync.",
"Here is a great video by redditzen CGP Grey. ",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHzzSao6ypE"
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_did7kbc",
"comment_text": [
"You are driving 50mph. You slow down to 49mph. I could slow down to 49mph too, but by the time I see your brake lights I've already moved a little closer to your bumper. So I have to slow down to 48mph to maintain a safe distance. The guy behind me does the same to 47mph. And so on.",
"This is how you get traffic even though there is nothing blocking the road."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_die8lqu",
"comment_text": [
"Also those \"very pleasant people\" who don't understand how merging works either onto a highway or off of a highway. Imagine that in a construction zone where the road goes down to one lane everyone took their turn and maintained speed, I wouldn't be sitting there 2 miles back wondering who fucked up."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_did5ezv",
"comment_text": [
"Let's take into account that a lot of the large metropolitan infrastructure were built a hundred years ago and mostly only expanded upon. At some point, you reach critical mass in terms of population that that infrastructure can handle. Now there are more vehicles on city center highways than capacity allows, imagine if one of those vehicles brakes suddenly, every vehicle behind it does the same, upwards of 10 miles back, which can via rippling, cause the vehicles in the back of that line to sit in a parking lot for hours on end until the entire mess can ripple forward again. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_didca2v",
"comment_text": [
"That is indeed a great video! Thank you for sharing"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: If water expands as it freezes (and vice versa), how will sea levels INCREASE if the ice caps melt?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6eugeb
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_did2q9e",
"comment_text": [
"Ice that is on land will melt and flow into the sea. More water in the sea will raise the water level."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_did2zyd",
"comment_text": [
"Lol I just realized that I added the line after i dropped in the ice. Whoops. Haha."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_did2spe",
"comment_text": [
"Ice cap melt = more water.",
"You can experiment with this: fill a cup to almost the top with water. Now draw a line at the water level. Now throw in 5-6 ice cubes. This line is your current sea level. Come back an hour later, and see where the water in the cup is in relation to the line. The water level will be higher then the line, because the ice cubes melted and added more water to the cup.",
"edited for grammar.",
"Edit two: add the line before. at first I said draw the line after throwing in the ice. My mistake. Thinking after typing."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_did2x50",
"comment_text": [
"I think you need to try that experiment 😁",
"If the ice is floating in the water it won't raise the water level after it melts it will stay the same. The ice has already displaced it's mass of water."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_did34nx",
"comment_text": [
"Mistakes happen"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5:How is borderline starving yourself not a good strategy in losing weight?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6epvqe
| 6
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
As in, you eat as little as you can, between large breaks (such as a whole day or more than 15 hours. It sounds legit, but is not recommended. Could you explain?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dic40h4",
"comment_text": [
"What you suggest will absolutely caused you to lose weight. However it will not make you more ",
". Most people that are interested in losing weight want to do so to get healthier. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dic3rjd",
"comment_text": [
"Your body stores fat reserves which give you the necessary calories but you don't store protein or vitamins and trace minerals. You need a consistent intake protein and trace minerals or you'll do damage to your body."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dic8ejn",
"comment_text": [
"There are lots of ways to diet but they all come down to eating less calories than you expend over time, which is functionally starving yourself. While this is simple enough, often you have to battle bad habits and even though many people can lose weight they often gain it back.",
"High caloric deficits like you mention have a negative impact on your energy levels and attitude but you lose weight the fastest. There are some more controlled methods such as fasting or protein sparing diets. These are usually only successful short term due to the difficulty of maintaining the regimen and the effects it will have on your quality of life. Further once you stop this regimen many will have bad cravings and simply eat all of the calories that they had avoided while on their \"crash diet\".",
"As an anecdotal point if you watch shows like Survivor or Naked and Afraid, you will see the contestants lose massive amounts of weight within a month (20-30lbs). Once you see them in the post show they almost always have regained the weight.",
"Typically if someone can control food cravings then they will not have a weight problem in the first place and subsequently wouldn't be considering some form of rapid weight loss. While a lot of this is an oversimplification, this is why they are not typically recommended even thought they are effective.",
"Now regarding why it is unhealthy, another commentor already mentioned we need a regular supply of some nutrients and minerals to stay healthy. Additionally, putting your body in such an extreme caloric deficit will affect your hormones and if you were to stay in this state for a long period of time it could have an impact on your health and quality of life."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dic8l5v",
"comment_text": [
"Did some research and found some clarification. The body will first burn glucose and glycogen found in the muscles which results in a loss of muscle ",
", not loss of the muscle tissue itself. The body then turns to fat for energy and only then will it begin to burn muscle. That was a misunderstanding on my part. ",
"Source"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dic7roo",
"comment_text": [
"That's total bollocks! Please STFU if you haven't got a clue."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why do we have bounty hunters? Isn't that the job of the police? If it is for bail skippers, why do they have powers others don't?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6ensfp
| 6
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.8
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dibn3md",
"comment_text": [
"People who skip bail often run far, far away - this is difficult for the police to handle, as they have to work with the police of other cities/states or other law enforcement agencies. On top of that, police still have their everyday duties to do.",
"The bail bondsman wants his money back as soon as possible - so he's able to send someone out specifically to get back the bail skipper, so that they don't have to wait on police or depend on different agencies. Since they're only hunting people who have already been accused and imprisoned (and then skipped bail), we give them certain powers when tracking down their target, like entering their property without a warrant. Though those powers depend quite a bit by the state. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dibmwff",
"comment_text": [
"There are not enough police to do that work. Police you see out on the street are patrolling, waiting for a call, or waiting to see something happen. ",
"With people who have skipped bail, you'd need a detective, and there aren't as many of those. Not to mention people who skip bail are probably not in that city anymore. So you need someone to find the person. Bounty hunters just take the next step and apprehend the person instead of having the police do it."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dibp1mk",
"comment_text": [
"Of course that isn't what should happen - what normally happens first if someone skips bail is that the local police check out the normal spots - the suspect's home, place of business, homes of nearby relatives, etc. ",
"The case you're talking about I believe was a suspect from Minnesota who they'd pursued to Texas. Bounty Hunters are expected to notify local law enforcement of a suspect's location, especially if they expect him to be armed and dangerous. It looks like that case was handled badly for sure. And I'm not saying we shouldn't have stricter regulations in place for bounty hunters either, this is just the state of the system now. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dibr2eh",
"comment_text": [
"In all fairness, a bounty hunter can only enter the suspect's property without a warrant (at least in some jurisdictions.).So if I'm sheltering a bail jumper on my property, they'd need to get a warrant just like anybody else. Impersonating police officers definitely seems like a serious no-no, though."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dibpbti",
"comment_text": [
"Bounty hunters work for the bail bondsman, who fronted the bail money for the accused. The bounty hunter's job is to prevent the bail bondsman from having to forfeit the whole bail amount, and in return he gets a cut of the fee paid."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: What happens if you defend yourself against a bounty hunter?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6eo12g
| 13
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
Saw a news article and it made me think of what would happen if i successfully defended myself against a bounty hunter. For instance: The perp has an outstanding charge and did not show up to court. A bounty hunter gets assigned and finds the perp. The perp defends himself against the bounty hunter which results in the death of the bounty hunter. Would the perp receive charges for the death of the bounty hunter(murder/manslaughter)? What is the threshold for identifying yourself as a bounty hunter or any LEO? Thanks
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_diboraa",
"comment_text": [
"Bounty Hunters aren't supposed to attack with deadly force in the first place. In theory, they're supposed to approach peacefully and ask the guy to comply, and can make it clear they're armed if necessary.",
"This way, the perp isn't in the \"defending himself\" position. If he attacks, he's the one who started the fight. "
],
"score": 20
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dic4x10",
"comment_text": [
"Oh to clarify, I didn't mean run up like \"I HAVE A GUN\" I meant like approach politely and calmly but have a weapon openly carried on your belt. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dibrf4h",
"comment_text": [
"Could the defendant be charged with a crime? Absolutely. Bail bondsman, police officer, or any other civilian, a homicide happened. There's only a few select reasons to exempt a homocide from being charged, legal self defense being one of them. However a fleeing criminal can't use that as a legal defense against his pursuer. At the point in time when bounty hunter is on you, you have been charged and found guilty of failing to appear at the court hearing. Whether you are guilty or not of the original reason why you were summoned to court in the first place is irrelevant at this point. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dicje07",
"comment_text": [
"If it is a LEO it is not legal self defense.",
"This is not actually correct. If a cop arrests you for an illegal reason you are allowed to tell them \"no\". If they try to use force and you kill them it is 'legal'.",
"I put 'legal' in quotes because this gets into the difference between the law and 'the law'. Many, many Americans are under the delusion that the law is what's written down on paper in some dusty old books. It's not. 'The law' is how things are enforced moreso than the legal rules that are passed by politicians and the courts.",
"So if the cop blows your brains out for resisting arrest that's technically them committing murder. But the prosecutor isn't going to prosecute them for it - he's going to drop the case or perform poorly in court in order to get the cop off. And the judge is also on the cop's side - he's a cop in a dress and he's going to rule for the cop when the prosecutor says \"evidence of the cop admitting to rape isn't admissible\".",
"And in fact the prosecutor will prosecute you for defending yourself. And will probably get a conviction, or the cop will get off, because he and the judge pick the jury, and they are going to pick people who give the cop the benefit of the doubt. In a group of 12 people you're going to find at least one who thinks cops are always right, no matter if they are on camera raping a 5 year old, so that's that. It's a very widespread delusion.",
"And if the cop feels like lying and there isn't video + audio proof then it's a criminal's word against a cop's word, and the judge is going to side with the cop every single time and twice on Sunday's, and half the jury is too.",
"So while it make be techincally legal for you to defend yourself from a cop acting illegally, good luck winning against a legal system stacked against you all the way to the Supreme Court."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dic4i12",
"comment_text": [
"Making it clear that they are armed? Sounds like a threat that a fight might happen even if the perp doesn't start it, but also doesn't comply. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: How do information leaks happen?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6emus3
| 39
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.68
|
[Not sure if repost, checked but couldn't find anything related] One I'm especially curious about is government information leaks. Who leaks this kind of information, and how do they get it in the first place?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dibgb9y",
"comment_text": [
"That all depends on which \"flavor\" of leak you're talking about. ",
"There's the Edward Snowden type of leak where someone deliberately shares private and confidential information with the public because they felt the public needed to know. Conscious intent and action. ",
"Some leaks aren't intentional at all like the Podesta emails, and are obtained through illicit means like hacking/stealing/espionage. Malicious intent and action. ",
"Then there's the flat incompetent/accidental types of leaks like when the boss left the company's failing budget and list of people to get laid off next month on the printer for a bit too long. Genuine accident. ",
"There are also tactical leaks used by politicians. You can spot these whenever the reporter is citing \"a Senior White House Official\" in their report. This lets the White House \"react\" to this new national issue and put public pressure on political opponents without looking like the bad guys. ",
"Wall Street types will also use this to manipulate prices. Day traders are constantly watching company financial reports, and the pros are often looking for insider tips from big companies so they can make their plays ahead of the public. These leaks are often traders calling college buddies that work for Apple's Engineering department looking for key tips like \"the next Iphone has a 2hr battery life\" so they can sell before it tanks. ",
"In all cases, reporters that get the first leaks are often personal or professional friends that have developed a trusting relationship with the leaker, who is trusting that they leak it appropriately, on their schedule, and for maximum impact. Politicians for example, may give a leak to a story, but ask the reporter to sit on it for a couple of days to avoid suspicion. Should the reporter jump to publish early, it fucks the politician and virtually guarantees the end of secret sources for that reporter. "
],
"score": 29
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dibkj6l",
"comment_text": [
"Let's point and laugh at the fuckwits who are so unaware of security policy as to fall for that, but are in positions of power, control, marketing, or high public visibility. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dibkuo2",
"comment_text": [
"Look at the emails man, its some pretty incriminating shit, alot of it prison worthy"
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dibjk7p",
"comment_text": [
"Podesta fell for a phishing scam, he willingly gave out his password "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dibnbsp",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah, I was using the popular definition of \"hacking\". By phishing, brute force or cryptology it was still an unauthorized access of secret information, which is the moral of the story. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: why do sports cars/luxury vehicles require premium gas? Does regular gas harm them in some way?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
68h8qd
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.81
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgyfkdc",
"comment_text": [
"Sports cars and other vehicles with high performance engines may use a higher compression ratio cylinder and piston in the motor. Higher compression requires a gasoline with a higher resistance to pre-detonation to prevent the air/fuel mixture from igniting before the spark plug fires. While most modern emotors can detect pre-detonation and adjust to prevent damage, older motors can be damaged by the detonation occurring before all the mechanical bits are in the right place. The octane rating you see on gasoline is a measure of its ability to resist pre-detonation.",
"High octane fuel in a low-compression motor just wastes money, and low octane fuel in a high-compression motor can cause damage (in older motors) and will reduce fuel economy and performance."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgyuecx",
"comment_text": [
"A lot of these engines don't have high compression ratios but rather have forced induction. For instance the corvette zr1 requires premium but only has a cr of 9.1 to 1. That is very low and doesn't require premium. It requires premium because it's supercharger forces more air into the cylinder thus increasing the effect compression ratio.",
"The answer for a lot is turbos and superchargers. If those cars didn't have them they would likely have high compression ratios that would require premium. Modern sadan cars that require premium is likely because they have turbos. These cars will run on regular but will get way worse milage and less power if the manual says premium then run premium. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgyfcpo",
"comment_text": [
"First of all not all luxury car manufacturers require that you use premium gasoline. Check the car manual. Premium gasoline has a higher octane rating which means that it burns cleaner and smoother. But the difference between it and regular gas is minimal."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgyfrto",
"comment_text": [
"Not entirely accurate. The octane rating correlates to how hot the gas needs to be before it will combust. The higher the octane rating the more heat it takes to start combustion. This is useful due to the fact that if you want more power (and efficiency) from the same size engine you have to increase the compression ratio of the engine. Increasing the compression inherently makes the gas hotter. So if you put low octane gas in a engine rated for higher octane there is a chance the gas will ignite before the spark plug discharges. This is called detonation and can ruin your engine if the detonation is frequent or severe. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgyu3pe",
"comment_text": [
"It doesn't burn cleaner and smoother.... "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: The stigma around pre-ordering video games
|
explainlikeimfive
|
68gb9x
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
I'm an avid gamer and I very often pre-order both physical and digital editions of games (physical is usually for limited/collectors editions) and I am just wondering why people have problems with pre-orders when there is so much else wrong with video game marketing like platform exclusive DLC and earlier access to games/DLC on certain platforms.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy92uo",
"comment_text": [
"No one has touched on the real reason its so frowned upon these days. For the last few years major game dev's have been producing sub-par releases, whether through games that were incomplete, performed below standards, or were downright broken. ",
"The practice of giving the company your money before anyone has seen the actual game takes the power of the consumer away. It rewards the developer and the publisher for rushing out an incomplete game because they are at no risk of losing money by giving you a broken product. ",
"It makes no sense to essentially pay the highest possible price for the worst version of the game. Usually if you wait after release to see what reviewers are saying you can judge the perfect time to buy the game, when all the bugs have been ironed out. Normally there will be a sale by that time so you actually end up paying less for a better product. ",
"Even if money is not your concern you need to stop looking at it as buying something, when it comes to buying things in america you vote with your dollars. Companies you continue to patronize will succeed and the ones you avoid will fail. If the game comes out and is in 100% condition then I have no issue with you jumping on it at full price. But if a developer can get paid the same amount for 60% they have no reason to do more. ",
"Take the recent Mass effect game as an example, people that played that game on launch got the worst experience, the most game-breaking bugs and the horrible immersion breaking animation problems. Now that some of it is fixed how many people that already finished it are going to go back and play it again? ",
"The users that didn't buy and waited get to reap all the rewards in that situation, the media coverage the bugs got had a clear impact on sales, a large group of potential customers said they wouldn't buy. I am one of those customers, I loved the rest of the franchise and really dont want it ruined. The fact that they have customers who wont buy until they fix the problems gives them a monetary incentive to actually do something about it. "
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy7kjg",
"comment_text": [
"in the digital age there is no reason for pre-orders to be necessary as they cant run out of copies. all it does is show the company that people are so willing to pay them that they dont even have to show a working product. it decreases their incentive to make the game as good as possible",
"early access is just a step further. if people are willing to pay to access an incomplete game, why bother completing it?"
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy8qfq",
"comment_text": [
"My opinion on pre-orders (and this applies for physical copies too) is that you are paying for a product you know little about. Nobody has played the game, nobody has reviewed it, the only things you get to see are the best parts the devs want to show you.",
"This means devs can make a lot of money on bad games, because you've paid them before you know whether the game is good or not."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy8hpe",
"comment_text": [
"Pre-orders used to be necessary when there was a limited number of physical copies of a game - especially cartridges which are much more expensive than discs, so they were made slower and fewer. ",
"Companies still want people to pre order games - so they started making artificial reasons like extra exclusive content for pre orders. ",
"It's like gas companies making you line up and overcharging for gas when there's no shortage. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy8sw0",
"comment_text": [
"Do you think that digital refunds by steam/Xbox makes this less of a worry because people can pre-order based on what they've seen and then if once they have played it they hate they can get their refund a move on with their lives?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: Is there any science behind Graphotherapy and Handwriting analysis?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
68g3x1
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy5yh5",
"comment_text": [
"There is none. At all. It is absolute garbage. Your handwriting is the result of many factors, from cultural expectations to practice, how you were taught, learning or writing disorders like dyslexia, how much fine motor control you have in your hands and fingers, your patience to write slowly and carefully, etc.",
"There is no science behind it at all. None. There is virtually no information you can glean about someone based on their handwriting other than how much they care about their handwriting."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy94pm",
"comment_text": [
"There is a little science, in that handwritng analysis can be used to detect forgeries and the like.",
"As far as matching up to personality traits, that is complete pseudoscientific voodoo without any rational basis. Other than very crude results, like \"might not be well educated\", \"that shaky hands\", or \"probably a reason they prefer to type\", there is nothing insightful you can find in someone's handwriting."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy6ltq",
"comment_text": [
"Agreed, the only science behind it is being able to say if it is likely that the same person wrote two different samples of handwriting, anything else is just junk."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy917m",
"comment_text": [
"Even that's a little dodgy, with a lot of margin for error."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgyddo8",
"comment_text": [
"Yep which is why I used \"likely\""
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:How to attract beautiful women?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
68fa3v
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.4
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxza8i",
"comment_text": [
"If you think there's any specific way you can manipulate women as a category into having sex with you, give up the entire idea, because that way lies a sexual assault conviction or worse. Improve yourself ",
", stop keeping track of how many times you have sex as some kind of scoreboard, and focus on being an interesting person other human beings want to be around, and you'll end up having enough of a sex life for all but the most depraved."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxzjms",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"ELI5 is not for:",
"Subjective or speculative replies - Only objective explanations are permitted here; your question is asking for speculation or subjective responses ",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxzag9",
"comment_text": [
"There is no definite way to attract beautiful woman. But being very wealthy reallyyyyy helps"
],
"score": 0
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxzk56",
"comment_text": [
"Dress up as a mirror. Beautiful women have to check their reflections a lot to make sure they're still looking good so they'll come over to you to look at themselves. Then say something surprising like \"did you know that many worker ants don't actually do any work at all?\". Beautiful women like interesting facts so she will be immediately taken with you. While she's amused by your interesting fact offer to buy her dinner. Make sure you get her full home address, and then sign her up for Hello Fresh or some other cook at home delivery service. When the food arrives she'll call you to ask what's going on. This gives you the perfect excuse to go to her house to cook her the dinner you've bought her. Cook it very slowly to give her time to become accustomed to your presence. Before long she'll start to assume she must like you; otherwise why would she be spending so much time with you? When that happens you can begin the mating dance! Wiggle your bottom and strut left and right while maintaining firm eye contact and shrieking in a high pitched tone to warn off other males. When she displays her sexual organs to you and makes a soft cooing sound that means you can mount her. Once mating is complete the female may attempt to eat you so it's best to get out of there sharpish. "
],
"score": 0
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxzl21",
"comment_text": [
"Just find one and tell her your gay. She and her friends will be there for you. Repeat this process until your living in your own harem. Start by getting a job at a place like JCPenney or Kohl's or something. "
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5:what's the difference between the US Coast Guard and the US Navy?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
68f9mp
| 13
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.64
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxzahq",
"comment_text": [
"There are many differences but the primary one is their mission. The Navy is a naval war force designed to win wars, deter aggression and maintain US armed presence in the seas. The Coast Guard is more for law enforcement and search and rescue. The Navy is under the Department of Defense and the Coast Guard is under the Department of Homeland Security. The Coast Guard is there more for domestic interests than the Navy, although there is certainly some overlap. ",
"Theoretically, if the US were to declare war on another country this would radically change Naval actions but have a more limited effect on Coast Guard. I say \"theoretically\" because Congress passed a law in 2006 giving the President the power to place the Coast Guard under the authority of the Department of Defense during wartime. The President doesn't have to do this, but there are advantages to placing all armed forces under one department in wartime. ",
"Hope that helps! ",
" The President has had the power to put the Coast Guard under the DoD for a lot longer than 2006, see comments below for details."
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy1l7g",
"comment_text": [
"That is not to say that the Coast Guard has not been involved in war before",
"In WWII they were involved in convoy and landing operation. Coast Guard personell were involved as Coxswain (navigation and steering) on landing crafts like in Normandie",
"From Wiki about WWII",
"\"During the war, Coast Guard units sank 12 German and two Japanese submarines and captured two German surface vessels.",
"More info at: ",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_Coast_Guard"
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy135g",
"comment_text": [
"The President has had the ability to transfer the Coast Guard to DoD for longer than that. It was done in WW1 and WW2. Peacetime control of the Coast Guard was originally with the Department of the Treasury. Then it was placed under the Department of Transportation from 1967 to 2003, then under the Department of Homeland Security via the Homeland Security Act of 2003. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy1iu2",
"comment_text": [
"Fun fact: In addition to the Cost Guard the US also has two further uniformed service that wear navy uniforms: the NOAA corps and the Public health service commissioned corps. The NOAA corps even has its own ships and the PHS guys are the ones who in theory shut down everything if there is a plague outbreak. The surgeon general is actually a vice-admiral in the latter organization."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxzgu7",
"comment_text": [
"Very insightful! Thanks very much "
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: Why are Freudian Slips often depicted in popular culture?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
68dq07
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.62
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxoq84",
"comment_text": [
"The reason they are commonly shown in tv shows and movies is because it is a convenient plot device. It allows the writers to move the plot forward in a way that appears natural.",
"Other reasons it can be used is as a comedic device. It can also be used to underline a feeling of dramatic irony in the audience."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxoi21",
"comment_text": [
"Although I have only see them online, I have seen a couple. For instance, there is the saying \"/There are flat Earthers all around the globe.\" \nI also remember a video from a few years ago where a lady takes a video of her trip to the field museum. She compares something to being not real like dragons, which she thinks exist. \nI think it must only happen to really stupid people."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxpnj8",
"comment_text": [
"Those aren't examples of Freudian slips... "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy0ms8",
"comment_text": [
"Those aren't really examples of Freudian slips. A Freudian slip is typically thought of as a slip of the tongue that reveals a secret desire. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgycz6i",
"comment_text": [
"It is a storytelling device.",
"Freudian slips, to the extent they actually exist, are more subtle and gradual. If you live with someone, over time clues will build up and you will have to finally admit that no, you really don't like their sister.",
"You don't have the luxury of that kind of build up on a TV show, so you condense it down into a single slip."
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: How does a cashiers check work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
68dcjb
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.63
|
Thanks for anyone who reads my post. Before I ramble on let me give you a quick summary that leads to my question. Im selling my Rolling Loud ticket concert and I posted it on craigslist in hopes of someone wanting to buy it. I had a person contact me. I would rather do cash but this person is wanting to send a cashiers check to me and make arrangments to pick up the ticket once the check clears. Does this sound too good to be true? What information would they need from me to send the check? Also, how long would it take to recieve the money if I do agree to it? Edit: Thanks to those who gave me advice. I went through another website & I sold my ticket! I will receive my payment through paypal so no hassle having to deal with a cashiers check!
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxle6v",
"comment_text": [
"All they would need from you is a mailing address to which they could mail the cashier's check.",
"Cashier's checks normally clear very quickly and are usually considered better and safer than currency. That is because a cashier's check is drawn on money that is definitely on deposit at a bank as distinguished from money that may or may not be on deposit in your personal account. ",
"Let's look at it a little differently. Money that is on deposit in my personal account can be withdrawn at any time by me. So if I was the purchaser of the ticket, I could mail you my personal check, you could send me the tickets, but in the meantime I could withdraw so much money from my personal account that the personal check would not be able to be cashed, and you would not be able to get your money for the ticket. ",
"However, a cashier's check doesn't work that way. The cashier's check is guaranteed by the bank because to obtain a cashier's check you have to take hard currency to the bank and give it to the cashier. The cashier will then issue you a special check with the name of the bank on it, and certain other features that make it look special, such as raised lettering, special paper, etc. That's why it's called a cashier's check, and not a personal check. The issuing bank will hold the currency on deposit until the cashier's check is negotiated by your bank and the money is in your hands."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxn4jp",
"comment_text": [
"Do not take anything but cash and do in-person transfers when buying things on Craigslist. You're about to fall for the oldest scam out there. They're going to send you a bad check & you're going to send them the goods. It'll take a few days for your bank to figure out that it's a bad check at which point they're long gone with the goods.",
"A common variation is that they'll send you a check for ",
" and ask you to send them a refund for the difference. When the check bounces, you're not only out the goods but whatever money you sent them."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxmm50",
"comment_text": [
"Just remember that while a cashier's check is legitimately backed the the institution that issued it, alot of bank and credit unions have had their cashier's checks stolen. Upon receipt of the check, you should call the issuer and verify its legitimate"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxlhyu",
"comment_text": [
"that makes more sense then. The person asked for my address and name. I felt a little uncomfortable reading that so I wanted to make sure it wasnt a scam. Craigslist is a little shady to me lol. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy6csf",
"comment_text": [
"The less work you put into the sale (finding a buyer) the more work you are putting into closing the sale. If this ticket has remote value I suggest using a remote platform like eBay. More buyers = less closing work. And in this case less risk."
],
"score": 3
}
|
ELI5: Why can't each one of us "copy" history and become millionaires?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
684kid
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.4
|
By history I mean why not copy what people did in the past, or are doing now, that will make them millionaires for sure?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgvmadb",
"comment_text": [
"Because what worked then won't work again usually.",
"You could copy Zuckerburg's life exactly... except that Facebook is already a thing. You cannot exactly copy history and expect the same outcome because ",
". You cannot become the founder of Microsoft by imitating Bill Gates because Bill Gates already did that.",
"Now you CAN take the lessons and ideas taught by the history of Bill Gates to forward your own idea or company... but that isn't the same as what you are asking."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgwf86w",
"comment_text": [
"Being rich is mostly luck. ",
"That being said achieving a net worth of 1 million dollars isn't overly difficult if you live in a 1st world country. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgvmabg",
"comment_text": [
"On a fundamental level, it's impossible to copy anything or anyone. There is guaranteed to be a different nuance, circumstance, detail, etc. ",
"Some of those can be controlled for, but many cannot. ",
"So even if you replicated someone else perfectly in behavior and methods, something else will mess you up."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgvmg2z",
"comment_text": [
"Because they are good at those things and had the means to do it, and they are a product of their time. ",
"Microsoft made an operating system just when computers were getting to be household things. Now they are ubiquitous. You could go and make an operating system like Bill Gates did... but no one is using it because they are already using Microsoft products to do those things. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgvqglt",
"comment_text": [
"Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell covers a lot of examples. Usually has to do with being in the right place, at the right time, with the right knowledge and resources and even then takes a lot of random, lucky breaks. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5:Why can the POTUS repeatedly call media outlets, such as CNN and MSNBC, 'fake' without getting sued for slander?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
68f60e
| 748
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.82
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxykym",
"comment_text": [
"It is really hard to sue the president for anything. The sense behind this law is so his political enemies can't just tie him down with lawsuits. For serious things the president can be impeached but that is a major political event. The system assumed presidents would be sensible adults. This may have been misguided. "
],
"score": 329
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy43h9",
"comment_text": [
"If you are a public figure or you are involved in a matter of public concern -- and media outlets are -- then there are some rules that apply to a suit for defamation no matter where in the country you are:",
"You have to prove a high standard of intent. This standard is misleadingly called \"actual malice.\" What it means is: you need to prove that the person knew the statement was false, or that the person was reckless with regard to its falsity -- i.e., there was reason to know the statement was false, and the person didn't care whether it was false or not. ",
"You need to prove that the statement would be taken as a factual statement, not a statement of opinion. You can't defame someone with a pure opinion or an interpretation of true facts. To be actionable, the statement must imply something about a matter that is provable true or false. And the statement has to be such that a reasonable person would listen to the statement and think a specific false assertion was being made. ",
"You need to prove that you, specifically, were defamed. A person cannot sue for defamation of a group. Only individuals can be defamed. So, saying that a particular news organization lied is something that might be actionable, but saying \"the media lies\" is not actionable unless you can tell that some individual news organization is meant by that statement.",
"You need to prove damages in a suit for defamation. That means you need to show how the statement hurt you, and how that harm is reducible to money. For a news organization that usually means showing lost profits. As you can imagine, it would be very hard to prove that one of Trump's statements was the direct cause of any lost profits for a news organization today.",
"Others have mentioned the difficulty in suing the President, but that isn't likely the reason. The president can be sued personally. The difficulty is mainly in the discovery process, which is likely to be held up by the President's schedule. But a defamation suit does not necessarily require much discovery from the defendant. It is the public statement that forms the crux of the suit.",
"More likely, there simply is no point to suing. You would have a hard time establishing liability and a harder time establishing damages. You would waste a lot of money and time for nothing. A news organization that did that would also hurt its own reputation with the public."
],
"score": 204
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgy6wlw",
"comment_text": [
"It's not slander when there is truth to the statement. There have been times when CNN, MSNBC, and FOX have jumped the gun and gotten things wrong. Those examples could be used in court and the case would go out the window. "
],
"score": 59
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxzs09",
"comment_text": [
"Don't forget that it can be an asset for those media outlets to be attacked by the President.",
"Trump is very polarizing. Some people love him but a lot of people hate him, and they believe his positions and opinions to actually serve the opposite of a credible critique.",
"So if Trump calls your news outlet a fake, ",
"you discredit Trump so much that it'll only make you have a stronger opinion that your news outlet is true.",
"you discredit Trump enough to just not listen to him",
"you're not going to watch that news network anyway because in your opinion they're already unfair.",
"Any way you look at it, the harm that such a statement makes is pretty minimal.",
"...although such statements made by a different president that was substantially more trusted and popular might have a different result."
],
"score": 35
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgxzs09",
"comment_text": [
"Don't forget that it can be an asset for those media outlets to be attacked by the President.",
"Trump is very polarizing. Some people love him but a lot of people hate him, and they believe his positions and opinions to actually serve the opposite of a credible critique.",
"So if Trump calls your news outlet a fake, ",
"you discredit Trump so much that it'll only make you have a stronger opinion that your news outlet is true.",
"you discredit Trump enough to just not listen to him",
"you're not going to watch that news network anyway because in your opinion they're already unfair.",
"Any way you look at it, the harm that such a statement makes is pretty minimal.",
"...although such statements made by a different president that was substantially more trusted and popular might have a different result."
],
"score": 35
}
|
|
ELI5: How do we know something occurred in 200 BCE if the start of the common era could not have been predicted?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67z9fo
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgue047",
"comment_text": [
"Well, they didn't call it 200 BCE back then. They had other dating methods and you're right that they didn't know that Christianity was going to come along and be as popular as it was with its own calendar that would be used around the world.",
"But we know it occurred in 200 BCE because we're able to date it either based on references to the calendars of the time (and then do the adjustment for our calendar today) or determine how long ago it happen. If it happened 2217 years ago, that's 200 BCE."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgue1cr",
"comment_text": [
"They had different calendars at the time. There were tons and tons of them. Every culture had (and has to some degree) their own calendar and based on the writings of historics, we can compare those calendars to each other and to our modern own (which will undoubtedly be replaced by something else at some point) and calculate when something happened. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dguf80x",
"comment_text": [
"Honestly, it depends. Some events, especially those written about by multiple cultures / historians are going to be more accurate. But there are also plenty of events that we know happened, but might not know exactly when. Information can also be lost across the ages.",
"If we take Rome for example, there is a lot of date stuff that we are very certain about because it was written about by multiple dependable historians and we can easily calculate those dates into our own. But if we go further back to the beginnings of the Roman Kingdom, we have a lot more trouble accurately dating some events due to the amount of information that was lost and the obvious biases of the remaining information. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgue2q3",
"comment_text": [
"Today is April 27th (depending on where in the world you live). How many days ago was April 7th? It was 20 days ago. Let's call it \"20 days before today\" or \"20 DBT\"",
"Just like that."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgueeho",
"comment_text": [
"It's not like recordkeepers at the time were writing down the date as 200 BCE. Back then, they were more likely to write things like \"n the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar--when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene....\" ",
"The BC/AD, BCE/CE calendar that most of the world uses today was first invented in 525 by a Roman monk (named Dionysius Exiguus) for his own use -- he (somewhat arbitrarily) determined that the calendar should start counting years from the birth of Christ, and calculated (a bit sketchily) that it was then 525 years after the birth of Christ. As a monk, it makes sense that that's where he'd start the count. ",
"Dates before 525 are calculated backward. The Romans were very active historians, as were the Greeks, and so we have very good records of rulers of Rome, for example, and how long their reigns lasted. That provides a good set of stepping stones back to historical events to 200 BCE or so. Other events are given \"modern\" dates by networking from that sort of known event."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Why are we supposed to "adopt, don't shop"? Why does it matter as long as the pet finds a loving home, right?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
681bi5
| 33
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.7
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dguwwjb",
"comment_text": [
"The idea is that buying animals in a pet shop encourages bad breeding practices. People churn out animals for profit with no thought for the welfare of the animals being bred. ",
"If you adopt you are taking in an animal that needs a home, but you are not financially rewarding someone for potentially unscrupulous behavior. ",
"There are reputable breeders out there of course, but if you are walking into a pet store it's hard to tell if the animal came from one of these. "
],
"score": 96
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgv6hvm",
"comment_text": [
"Supply and demand. ",
"If a pet shop that has pure bred dogs is constantly selling them, they will constantly be bringing them in. There is a demand for them. The more demand, the more breeders will breed. ",
"So why is this so bad? First, you could get into the argument of how breeds have been completely changed into very problematic and sick animals. GSD and Goldens with huge hip issues, bulldogs can't reproduce without c-section, etc. Additionally, purebreds in general have been shown to have higher rates of cancer and other issues. ",
"Second, you encourage \"bad\" breeders, especially puppy mills. Puppy mills typically have low standards for animal care, and many animals are neglected or force to breed well beyond when it is healthy too. Many also inbreed, since they only care about a specific look, and this could be the fastest way to get that look. ",
"If tomorrow 100% of everyone decided to no longer buy dogs, instead getting from rescues, places that sell dogs will no longer be incentivised to breed them. Stores don't want to keep puppies on hand too long because they require care (food, cleaning, etc.) which costs the store money. If they have to put $500 into the care of the animal that is only worth $500, then they don't make money, and they wont keep stocking them. ",
"Breeders wont have any orders from stores, nor any requests direct from customers, so they wont keep breeding. Obviously this isn't going to happen, but the lower the demand, then the lower the supply. ",
"Additionally, there is the argument of why do you want a pure breed dog? If you're looking for a companion animal, most often your mutt from the local shelter will be just as good as any pure one. Many people get animals as status symbols (\"I have an AKC registered so-and-so\") and people can questions the ethical nature of this, is this animal just a tool to you, or a companion. I personally don't have qualms over this because many people use farm animals as tools, and if you're treating the animal properly, who cares, beit dog or horse. The ethical part I don't like is are you supporting bad breeders in order to buy your tool?",
"Then the issue of all the strays out there. Many are caught and put into shelters for adoption. Many who are not adopted out within X period of time (busier cities may put one month time limit) are then put down. Pure bred animals in stores can be there for a while, and the store will eventually just mark them down to sell them ASAP and recoup as much as they can, but shelters don't have this capability. They're limited by the space that they have, and more often than not, \"no-kill\" shelters are completely full, while county shelters can make room for new incoming animals. ",
"Finally, many pure bred dogs can actually be found in shelters. Have a friend who has a pure sheltie, but was thrown out because the dog is too big for the breed standards. When we volunteered years ago with an animal shelter, I'd say about once a week a pure breed would come in. Obviously it would be different breeds, so what you're looking for may not be there, but it is amazing how often someone gets a \"gift\" dog and a few months later it is turned over to a shelter. ",
"So TL:DR buying dogs can encourage bad breeders who bring more animals into the total animal population that doesn't need to be increased, while adopting doesn't. "
],
"score": 46
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dguwv8s",
"comment_text": [
"There are way more shelter animals then there is demand. However, people still buy puppies from pet stores, which creates demand, filled with newly bred puppies. Each one of these is a dog that is not adopted from a shelter, and as a result usually euthanized. ",
"TL;DR\nA new dog is a competitor to a shelter dog. "
],
"score": 26
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgux6u4",
"comment_text": [
"Because when you purchase an animal, it encourages the breeders to continue to breed more and more animals also known as breeding mills. Animals from breeding mills are bred over and over again until they are no longer able to breed and then are usually euthanized. It is a painful process that never ends. By encouraging people to adopt instead of shop, breeders are in less demand. I suggest doing a search on puppy mills and you will see the horrifying conditions of abuse these animals are living in."
],
"score": 18
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgvatla",
"comment_text": [
"If someone is that cavalier about giving up a pet what makes you think they would be a good pet owner who should be owning a pet in the first place?"
],
"score": 9
}
|
|
ELI5: How do food recalls protect consumers who purchase contaminated goods prior to their removal from shelves?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67wr3o
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
Beyond the highly publicized cases of many people dying, I don't find that there is much in the way of warning people who may have purchased a bad food product. Is this just a risk we have to accept, or are there other ways we are alerted (or procedures that are designed to alert consumers that may not work) that I'm not aware of beyond the regular posting of the products by the USDA?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgtt9b5",
"comment_text": [
"are there other ways we are alerted",
"There are in some cases, yes. If you shop somewhere with a membership or loyalty card, they'll send you a recall notice in the mail (assuming you gave them the correct info). They give you instructions on what to do with the food (hint: You throw it away. You don't have to tote the lysteria-riddled fish dip back to Whole Foods, ",
".) and how to file a claim with the manufacturer, which is done online these days. After a little homework and a lot of waiting, you'll receive coupons from the manufacturer for a boatload of replacement products. Happened to me at BJ's with Sabra hummus. Now I have like $40 worth of free hummus vouchers.",
"Barring the loyalty card route, I think they have to rely on notices through the news and at the grocery stores."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgu1htk",
"comment_text": [
"In Ireland, shops that sold recalled products will put a notice at the entrance so that customers can see as they walk in that something they recently bought may be problematic. I've seen those signs for cups (there was a danger of cracking with hot drinks), food, shoes, and more. The signs help people avoid potential problems."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgtt3c7",
"comment_text": [
"When there are recalls for things like automobiles, there is a very easy way to find the people who bought them. Dealerships.",
"For food, the supermarkets don't have your contact information, and it's not like you're registering your products with the food equivalent of the DMV.",
"Ultimately, public notifications are the way to go for food. You will see them on the news, on the internet, hopefully. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgtt694",
"comment_text": [
"It really doesn't, but outside of going the Big Brother route and tracking grocery metadata (who bought what products when and where), what other method do we have? By announcing a recall manufacturers are at least giving consumers an opportunity to hear about the problem via the news, the Internet, word of mouth, etc. before consuming the product.",
"EDIT: I just checked the app for a local grocery chain I have a shopper's account with and I'm able to view receipts for past purchases so it looks like we may already be headed the Big Brother route."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgty3ma",
"comment_text": [
"I get them. They are very specific down to the locations they are sold etc. some of them are mislabeled packaging. But there are so many recalls for listeria and salmonella now. What's even more crazy to me is the frequency of recalls involving organic products. All of these recalls definitely make you question your food supply. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: Why do some colleges, universities, and other schooling sites look for (and require) a high GPA? Wouldn't it be more profitable to look for lower GPAs?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67t49y
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgt237n",
"comment_text": [
"why would it be more profitable? most universities can't possibly accept every student that applies. they would be more inclined to accept the best students since they would be most likely to be high achievers after graduation which contributes to the schools prestige and also creates a pool of successful graduates as potential donors to the school. also, creating strict acceptance criteria contribute to the schools perceived exclusivity which means they can charge higher tuition."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgt1umu",
"comment_text": [
"Colleges want students who will be able to complete the college curriculum and have successful careers after graduating. Successful graduates can provide career opportunities to future graduates of the school, elevate the school's reputation, and donate lots of money to the school. Since high GPA is regarded as an indicator of performance in college and ability to be an accomplished worker, schools want students who have previously done well in school. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgt4dmv",
"comment_text": [
"Colleges compete with each other for reputation and prestige. That is what gives your degree its value when you get out into the work force. If you have a degree from a university that hands out degrees to dumb people like candy it devalues your degree and future job prospects and you'll go elsewhere for your degree rather than pay ridiculous amounts of money for a degree that isn't worth the paper it is written on."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgt4za4",
"comment_text": [
"Not good for the brand. If you are known as the school where only great students come from, you keep the institution Running for centuries. Get known for accepting every do with at least 3 brain cells and you will crash much faster than a few centuries."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgt6wxg",
"comment_text": [
"It's not that colleges \"require\" a high GPA, it's that there are far, far more applicants than seats at most quality schools. Therefore, those schools can be selective about who they choose to admit, and GPA is one of the factors they get selective about. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why do people in failing restaurants believe that their food is excellent?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67qn96
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.56
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgsg28f",
"comment_text": [
"Because most Chefs have huge egos and looking at what they could do to improve just isn't even possible for them.",
"All they are is their ego. They can't even fathom not being a culinary god.",
"Source: Worked in many kitchens, with many drunk, rude and egotistical Chefs."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgsga0o",
"comment_text": [
"Tons of restaurants have great food but close. Why? They're not profitable. Either they're not charging enough, the market's oversaturated, they're not marketing correctly, they're wasting money in one of 40 ways, etc etc."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgsgakj",
"comment_text": [
"I looked into starting a BBQ place about a year ago because I loved smoking brisket, ribs, etc, and got great remarks from friends and family I made it for. There weren't a lot of good places where I lived, so thought it might be fun. ",
"Some quick research though uncovered the huge flaw in opening one, and most any restaurant.",
"Pretty much any place on those shows is someone that was like me, had some food they make for friends and family and they \"love it\", probably heard for years that they should have their own restaurant. But instead of doing like I did and look into why they shouldn't, they just did it. ",
"Well your friends and family are of course going to support you, even if what you produce is just okay. You get this strong base of support and love, and you go forward thinking you will do no wrong and the public will line up for miles because Aunt Shelly said you should open this restaurant. ",
"Reality starts to set in when the public tries your food and it's either not really good, or it's a novelty and fun for one or two visits but doesn't have anything people must have. So the restaurant does poorly, their family and friends keep saying to hang in there because your food is amazing, and suddenly you're on a reality TV show at best, deep in debt and out of business at worst. ",
"Obviously there are people that do make something great and do very well, but it's the extreme minority. ",
"Of course I don't just give up on things because some internet sites say it could be tough, but when I got the details on costs, how long you could go before turning a profit, etc, it just didn't sound as appealing to me. I'm happy to keep BBQ a hobby. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgsg4oo",
"comment_text": [
"Sometimes it's not the food. The way the restaurant is managed also has a lot to do with things."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgsggqh",
"comment_text": [
"Why mountain time? Random choice"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is it not a good idea for everybody to turn on their ac to reduce global warming.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67q5fq
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
I know how precarious this sounds, but i want to know what would be the downside to everyone turning on their ac at full blast and opening the door or opening their car windows. I got this thought because i went outside and forgot to close my door, when i got near my door again it felt cool in the close area around my door. what effect would something like that have?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgsbxlr",
"comment_text": [
"Running the AC actually ",
" the environment. For every bit of cold air you get from your AC, it dumps even more heat energy outside. So the net is that running the AC actually heats up the earth."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgscwsm",
"comment_text": [
"If you're curious, this is a consequence of the 2nd law of thermodynamics. If we could create cool air without producing hot air in the process, we could create a machine which would give us free energy (and that's not physically possible). So, the best we can do is create both the cold air and the hot air, but pump them to different places so that they are separated."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgsc4l2",
"comment_text": [
"Cold air isn't created/invented. ",
"Hot air is moved.",
"An air conditioner pulls hot air out of an environment and moves it outside. ",
"In doing so, it itself creates heat and usually burns fossil fuels in the process. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgsc8k6",
"comment_text": [
"An AC cools a house by essentially transferring hot air from inside to the outside. If everyone opens their doors and windows, now there's really no separate \"inside\" and \"outside\", so you're ADDING heat by heat waste generated by the AC/electricity, related emissions from the energy needs required for the ACs."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgsc85c",
"comment_text": [
"Ahhhh you're right, although walking near my house feels cool, i went near the ac unit which is pumping out ht air like crazy, thank you!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why weren't native Americans as advanced as Europeans were when we found the Americas?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67pup1
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
They were lacking in crucial technology that all of Europe had at that point, what caused this??
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgsb18r",
"comment_text": [
"It depends on what we consider \"advanced.\" Mesoamerican natives had advanced cultures, did war well (and for sport), and we pretty solid at mathematics and engineering. North American natives built an incredibly large city, Cahokia, near modern day St Louis, which might have rivaled locations like London and (maybe, yet unlikely) Paris. The idea that Native Americans were merely \"noble savages\" is a bit off base. Check out a book called 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus. ",
"If you are thinking about stuff like gunpowder, mass animal domestication, and (sadly the mis-cited) the wheel, well, there are reasons for many of those things. ",
"For example, some folks point out that the Aztec, Maya, Inca, and Mesoamerican nations in general didn't have the wheel. Technically, no. They had it, on children's toys. But the wheel doesn't do much good in the spongy loam of tropical middle and South America. It didn't make sense, so they didn't screw with it.",
"Gunpowder was co-opted by the Europeans from the Chinese. Natives didn't have contact with the Chinese, as far as I know; so, no gunpowder.",
"Domesticated animals is a bit trickier but easily explained by pointing out that many animals are not suited to domestication because of temperament or utility. Some critters are ornery and among those that are not ornery, we don't domesticate those that do not possess more utility than we would get by straight-up killing a (relatively) docile plant-eating something. Combine this with the relative abundance of food in across the Americas, in the form of nutritious fruits and vegetables and large prey species, and there is no serious motivation to domesticate animals. ",
"IF you are talking about written language, art, culture, mathematics, and other (more abstract) things, they existed, they were generally pretty awesome (from a practicality standpoint, they were on par or better than their European counterparts). There are some weird \"exceptions\" to this statement. For example, if I remember correctly, the Aztec had a pictographic form of writing where certain symbols combined to form ideas (like kenning); so sort of what would happen in Egyptian hieroglyphics interbred with Chinese pinyin."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgte4g2",
"comment_text": [
"Native Americans were Nomadic and followed the food source which stopped settling and development to enhance settlement.",
"Most Native Americans were agriculturalists and live in settled villages, towns, and cities."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgtnv9w",
"comment_text": [
"Its the fact that they never traded or grouped together like the Europeans did, Europe had trade routes all the way into China. Comparing population and the need to invent things. Kinda left Native Americans behind. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgs9ik7",
"comment_text": [
"Settling problems, if I remember my history correctly Native Americans were Nomadic and followed the food source which stopped settling and development to enhance settlement. ",
"Europeans made cities and keeps around their monarchies, while in the city people had to address settlement issues lets say Rome had sewage problem and decided to make plumbing, agriculture developed aquaducts. etc."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgs9w82",
"comment_text": [
"It's also relevant that European societies had a lot of contact with each other. For something to have been ubiquitous-in-Europe doesn't indicate that it should have been inevitable for someone to invent it in any society; it indicates that ",
" been invented in one society it spread to others. There wasn't exactly a lot of contact between Europe and North America, so of course the ideas didn't cross the Atlantic."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: How does credit card fraud work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67p0q6
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
Recently my card was hacked by someone 500 miles away. First, they tried to spend $100 at somewhere, then 26 cents at another place. My bank put a block on my card as soon as they noticed something weird. How did someone get my number though? Is it just random guessing until they get a combination that works? And also how do you spend 26 cents somewhere without looking suspicious?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgs2rxj",
"comment_text": [
"There are a number of possibilities. Here are some common ones:",
"There are many other ways your credit card information could be stolen but these are fairly common ways."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgs78zw",
"comment_text": [
"Multiple answers to your question:",
"How did they get your number? Generally, they're bought and sold from when your card information was stolen in a hack of a company (think Home Depot or Target hacks). The hacker will sell bulk sets of card numbers - and that information can be easily put onto a magnetic stripe and made into a functioning credit card.",
"the 26 cents was probably a test swipe to see if the card number is still working. This is usually done at a gas station to see if the card will activate the pump (or another purchase doing the same thing) The $100 was probably their first purchase",
"Credit card companies have incredibly sophisticated software designed to look for fraudulent purchase patterns. Which is probably why your card was turned off immediately."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgs2o4p",
"comment_text": [
"no buddy. fraud is not normal "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgs34bk",
"comment_text": [
"No shit Thats what I am saying! Sorry i only do sarcasm."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgs2dke",
"comment_text": [
"Seriously this is not appropriate.\n I have been jacked by people 3 times. Why would I let that be public. Getting hacked is normal. Don't use it online unless its a gift card etc... you cannot trust the internet. People rob us everyday."
],
"score": -2
}
|
ELI5: Why are mediocre posts, comments and users popular on Reddit, while quality content is buried along with trash content?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67lzw5
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.23
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgrgtak",
"comment_text": [
"Because \"quality\" is a subjective opinion, and your standards are different from majority of users. Perhaps you could start your own subreddit where you collect quality content. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgrhjg0",
"comment_text": [
"It is by definition the most popular if most people like it."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgrhswl",
"comment_text": [
"\"You people\"? How rude."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgrhn0s",
"comment_text": [
"Anything that gets popular must appeal to a lower common denominator than other forms of entertainment. Not everyone likes free jazz, more people like normal jazz, even more like rock, and then even more like pop. That doesn't make people who like free jazz better than people who like pop, it just means pop is able to appeal to more people by using simpler musical designs. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgrir87",
"comment_text": [
"Not necessarily simple-minded. Free jazz can be called simple-minded. Sometimes it is simplified, sometimes it is just made of things that have been found to appeal to the vast majority of people. Just because few people like the color 'sewer green' doesn't mean that people who like blue are more simple-minded than them."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: It is safer to leave the keys on the door or take them off in terms of security? Which makes it harder for the lock to be picked?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67nulz
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.81
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgru4d1",
"comment_text": [
"If you have your key in the lock on the inside, wouldn't the tumblers still be aligned? Meaning all someone would have to do from the outside is turn the lock?"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgrszz2",
"comment_text": [
"So instead of the lock being picked you just leave the keys so someone can get in that way?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgrtg3w",
"comment_text": [
"I think OP means in the other side of the door. I am not sure but I'd wadger it does not make the lock harder to pick."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgrtq50",
"comment_text": [
"That's exactly what I mean. I thought it would be implied I meant the other side of the door but, oh well. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgruzk5",
"comment_text": [
"Like if its a two way deadbolt or something? Meaning you have to use a key to unlock it no matter which side youre on?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why people praise ability to hardwork and persistence much more than being talented in something
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67h54w
| 8
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.69
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgqbnov",
"comment_text": [
"Because, VERY generally speaking, hardworking and persistent are character traits that make you an excellent human being while simply being better than everyone without effort turns people into assholes."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgqblxv",
"comment_text": [
"Talent, in my opinion, doesn't really exist - not in the way people talk about it. When people say someone is \"talented\", what they basically mean is that person is ",
" better at something: they are innately better at it to start with (so when they start learning the skill, they will already be better than other beginners), and they will reach higher levels than anyone else is capable of (an untalented person will never be as good as a talented person no matter how hard he works).",
"Now, it is true that some people take to certain skills more easily, and reach greater heights with seemingly less hard work. This is not because of magic. This is because they have picked up skills and knowledge from related fields at some stage - even if only from reading about it.",
"So if you agree with me on all of the above, then it stands to reason that the single biggest determinant of whether you get good at something is whether you work hard at it and persist. Not whether you have a head start.",
"There's a second reason, which is that even if \"talent\" exists, then praising talent is like praising someone for being white or female. We generally feel as a society that we shouldn't praise people for inborn traits, as they have no control over these. But working hard - that's something you choose to do."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgqgmbf",
"comment_text": [
"well, Talent as we know it exists and it's a real thing. Some people are way more predisposed to math and numbers while others not, so we say they are talented with calculations and numbers. Let's take pro sports players - a lot of people keep saying that's it's not talent it's hard work, just to please the media asking this question and copy from previous people who answered the same. While they know as well as others that talent got them there, and hard work elevated their game and got them even further. You see, no matter how hard you train to be good at something, everyone has a hard cap - a limit. Talent defines where that minimum cap begins and it's way higher than people with less talent or not talented at all. Being talented and not being talented is talking about different tiers altogether. I'm not trying to discredit hard work because it's important, but i think saying Talent isn't real/doesn't exist is pure wrong from a evolution and genetical standpoint. Everyone is different and sometimes even the hardest of work won't get you farther than others."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgqlexa",
"comment_text": [
"You're still talking about athletes, and I make a distinction between ",
" and ",
". Obviously if I'm a 1.9m tall skinny motherfucker I'm probably going to be able to become a faster runner than someone of average height; but that's a feature of my body, not ",
".",
"have seen a lot of athletes playing since childhood just to be eclipsed by a guy that started playing in their highschool years or so.",
"That's a very simplistic version of what I'm saying. High school guy may have grown up in a house that watches a lot of sports, or talks a lot of sports. Or maybe he pursued other skills early on that translate to effectiveness in a sport. That doesn't mean he has a magical football gene."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgqwn7p",
"comment_text": [
"Also usually people who are talented who don't put in work don't get as far as someone less talented that work their asses off"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: why Angela Merkel appears to be crying on this photo?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67f4j2
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.33
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpxgp1",
"comment_text": [
"I don't see tears, so it would seem she's not crying. I assume you've tried a reverse image lookup ? "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpxjel",
"comment_text": [
"\"Appears to be crying\".",
"Tried google images."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpxs2k",
"comment_text": [
"Watch a video of someone talking and pause at random points, you'l see plenty of weird expressions that make no sense if taken out of the context of whats happening.",
"My guess, she was sneezing and the photo was taken halfway through the motion."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpypjt",
"comment_text": [
"It's only an educated guess but i think this picture was taken at a football (soccer for all the US people) game in the last World championship. Merkel is a huge fan of football and probably the picture was taken when either a foul happened or it came close to a goal."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpyrvl",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"This is not a complex concept. ",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why are the psychological symptoms of autistics so heavily reinforced through accomodation when many other psychological disorders are dealt with by trying to normalise the sufferer, such as vehimently contradicting schizophrenic delusions?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67k0ke
| 29
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgr0iea",
"comment_text": [
"Autism is a neurodevelopmental disorder, not a psychological disorder. They are accommodated in the same way as giving someone with paralysed legs a wheelchair is accommodating them: it's the only thing that works to improve their lives. Of course there are therapies that can help someone with autism to improve their quality of lives, but sometimes you are going to run into gaps (especially with people on the lower-functioning end of the spectrum) that simply cannot be bridged.",
"Someone who is suffering from delusions is not actually helped by reinforcing those delusions. That often only works to escalate them and make them even more unlikely to take the medication that works. "
],
"score": 47
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgr1ib4",
"comment_text": [
"First of all, autism is a spectrum disorder. As such it is very hard to give an answer that applies to every person. The reaction someone with high functioning autism (what used to be called aspergers) might have to a situation like that is going to be wildly different from someone with low functioning autism. And, as such, what therapies can and cannot address is also going to very wildly. Taking your example, there will be plenty of people with autism who won't actually be affected or affected very minimally by something like that, people with autism who feel the effects more severely but who can get by if allowed to adjust to a new routine, and people very severe autism who will have enormous amounts of trouble with something like that. ",
"Another thing to remember is that autism spectrum disorders often coincide with other disorders. That means some people are dealing with two, sometimes three disorders at the same time (autism and anxiety is very common, as well as ASD and some form of intellectual disability or even depression) That can severely change what a therapy can and cannot address or even where the focus should be. "
],
"score": 25
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgr5i2d",
"comment_text": [
"Most people with autism really do try very hard to \"be normal\" when they have to. And the only time you'd notice is when they don't succeed 100%.",
"This is true for schizophrenia too. Really the majority of behaviourial health is like this: when you seem normal, nobody can guess how hard it is. And when you seem strange, people assume you just need to try harder.",
"So another way to ask your question is \"how hard is it to seem normal?\" The answer is that for some people it's actually ",
" Maybe impossible.",
"(And that's why I question how useful \"being normal\" is in the first place.)",
"Like, I bet I could cause you to have a meltdown. Suppose that you came home and found that all of your furniture had been replaced with ",
" You'd probably scared and confused. You'd wonder if you'd accidentally wandered into someone else's home. Maybe you'd talk to neighbors, maybe you'd call the police, maybe you'd tell yourself that it must be a prank.",
"Even with all those coping behaviours, I'm pretty sure you'd ",
"Now imagine that many of those behaviours ",
" You can't talk to yourself to calm yourself down, because that's an \"executive function\" and specifically something that autism limits. You don't know if asking the neighbors \"hey, was my home burgled\" is something that 'normal people' ",
" Police are really impatient with you or worse because when you're upset, they assume that you're high or dangerous.",
"Dude, ",
"The potential for meltdowns exists in everyone. ",
"Now, you're right: a Blockbuster closing isn't the worst thing. You can still watch Netflix. And it's not like you've become attached to picking out a movie every Friday night.",
"Well, unless you have. Unless it's hard to say comforting things to yourself. Unless you can't imagine Netflix being the same - because it obviously isn't the same.",
"I mean, I'm not an expert on ",
" change is so hard to process for someone who has autism. But the basic kernel: \"change is scary\" is a human universal, I think, and something we can all ",
" empathize with. "
],
"score": 25
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgr2lmk",
"comment_text": [
"with high functioning autism, there are many aspects of it that can be worked on, but many that cannot.",
"Social issues, for example. With time, effort and patience we can learn to be sociable, at least to a point. We get better at it over time, very slowly. But there are also physiological problems that cannot be fixed, because that's how our brains work.",
"In my case, one of the big ones is sound sensitivity. If people play extremely loud music for very long, I simply cannot handle it. Ive tried for decades without making a dent. Ill have panic attacks for days afterwards. LIkewise, being touched not only makes me mentally uncomfortable, but physically too. Its highly unpleasant feeling. Almost painful.",
"People who are not high functioning have the same problems but much more severe. These are things that cannot be overcome its very important for you to understand that.",
"And we truly hate those things. We don't want to have to deal with it and if aynthing could stop it, we'd gladly do so. But we can't. Many of us can understand that, though we can't handle things, soceity likes to do things some ways and thats all there is to it. We can accept this and move on.",
"Those who can't are... inconsolable. And they cant even communicate the issue well enough to understand whats happening. They are in extreme distress and have no way to feel better."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgr4xvk",
"comment_text": [
"Actually, a lot of upcoming psychological treatments for schizophrenia involved metacognition--thinking about thinking with the goal of identifying delusional thoughts and thoughts grounded in reality.",
"But fundamentally, delusions are not a permanent state for someone with schizophrenia or any other psychotic disorder. They are symptoms that ",
" be managed or eliminated, so most treatments generally aim towards managing or eliminating symptoms. In addition, research continues to suggest that validating delusions can complicate treatment, so it's no accident that delusions are framed as experiences that are part of an illness and not a part of someone's reality. (If you're wondering, yes, there are people who disagree with this philosophy.)",
"Autism is an entirely different illness. The brain has developed differently. When someone with autism is dealing with sensations that are upsetting, they are learning to ride out the situation rather than acting out, but the underlying sensory difficulties are still there. When someone with autism has tics, they might learn to suppress or hide tics, but the mechanism behind the tics is still there."
],
"score": 6
}
|
|
ELI5: How are we able to play games for long periods of time without feeling the need to eat/go to the restroom?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67es03
| 4
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.61
|
(First time posting sorry if I do anything wrong) I don't know if this true for everyone but me and my friends often play games for HOURS (8+) everyday nonstop but we don't feel hungry or we "forget" to pee. What goes on while we're in our "gaming zone"?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgq02q8",
"comment_text": [
"Aside from dehydration, hunger and a mess (possibly death if you keep it up).",
"You've likely told your body to essentially stop working on a vast majority of your body, and only focus on what you currently need, so your brain, arms, hands, heart, ears and eyes are using what energy the body currently has stored.",
"I personally recommend that you start taking breaks in your gaming session, the amount of hours your playing without breaks is actually doing damage to your body.",
"Just some of the things that happen:",
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrombosis",
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_thumb",
"(not entirely sure how to explain Nintendoitis and Thrombosis to a 5 year old, so I linked their Wikipedia pages)",
"Yes video games can also be good to help improve your social skills and hand-eye coordination (just to name a few), however this is only possible due to moderate gaming and taking breaks when you do game.",
"If you don't believe me, then just google \"does not taking breaks from gaming affect my health\" to know of the damage your doing to your body."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgrhojf",
"comment_text": [
"I know what you are talking about. I often forget to drink, and then come out of a game with a huge headache. I also do not realize that I am getting cold, and end up with runny nose. ",
"I think the game is so realistic that your brain forgets that it has a real-world body and needs to take care of it. ",
"You really gotta find a way to break those spells. Make \"bio\" breaks between battles, so you can go pee and get water. ",
"And do try to cut down on gaming. I used to play like you, and I totally regret it. I almost dropped out of school, and might have developed ADHD (or at least made it worse). And if you are playing an MMO and feel that you are \"developing\" or \"building\" something, this is just an illusion. You will burn out, and quit, and never feel anything but embarassment over the lost time. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgr4i3g",
"comment_text": [
"Haha yes, it was meant tongue-in-cheek. I was hoping that guy would read it and realize why his comment was a useless anecdote."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgq1rvj",
"comment_text": [
"Probably not true for everybody, just this weekend i spent 25 hours playing games. No health issues after doing the same kind of shit for 15 years"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgq2bzz",
"comment_text": [
"I agree with you. I've smoked and drank a shit load for about 15 years and it hasn't really affected my health at all. These 'studies' are all bullshit."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: What would you do if you had literally nothing?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67e0np
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgppf9t",
"comment_text": [
"Since the mods are probably about to delete this, just post it in ",
"r/askreddit",
" instead. That's the right place, and it's an interesting question."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgppgtl",
"comment_text": [
"I did. It got deleted because I used the text box. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgppwpo",
"comment_text": [
"Then don't use the text box."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpqabm",
"comment_text": [
"I'm sorry to hear that! I know it's really confusing, but each subreddit is completely independent, and over the years they've diverged and created their own sets of rules, which are detailed in the sidebar. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpq8ww",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"ELI5 is for requests for explanations to complex conceptual questions. \nQuestions that are subjective or asking for/about opinions are not what ELI5 is for. That doesn't mean your question is bad, it would just fit better in another subreddit. Try ",
"/r/askreddit",
", ",
"/r/casualconversation",
", ",
"/r/nostupidquestions",
", or another more general \"ask\" subreddit. This post has been removed.",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why isn't the government's promotion of Mar-a-Lago not an ethics violation?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67bp07
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgp6ini",
"comment_text": [
"I thought that it belonged to trump"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgp6jd4",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"/r/changemyview",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgp7tyl",
"comment_text": [
"So the original owner willed it to the government with the hope that it would be used by the president. And Trump is not the first president to stay there. If Trump purchased the property from the government, I don't know. I just saw what OP had in the link he put up with the post. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgp6q97",
"comment_text": [
"Mar-a-Lago is not owned by the people. While it was willed to the U.S. Government in 1973 as \"The Winter White House,\" it was returned to Post's estate in 1980 because succesive Presidents declined to use it. Trump purchased Mar-a-Lago in 1985."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgp8g70",
"comment_text": [
"What is unethical about a person using his personal property to host a foreign dignitary during his time as president? If Trump charged the government obscene amounts of money, there might be a case for conflict of interest. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why hasn't there been more political debate regarding mass surveillance after the Snowden leak? What did he sacrifice his life for if everything he fought against is still here, and if anything, has gotten worse?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
67df8h
| 12
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.82
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpln0b",
"comment_text": [
"The short answer is, voters don't care. There is a very vocal, but very small minority that care strongly, but they aren't big enough to really push the discussion anywhere. And they're more than balanced out by the hawks who will do anything to be tough against terrorism (although the successes of surveillance to date have been slim.).",
"If you ask people, they will say privacy is important, but their actions don't follow. You see something similar with how people use services like Google/Facebook - the general public is willing to give up quite a bit of privacy for convenience.",
"This is compounded by the fact that 99.99% of it will never effect anyone directly, which makes people tend to discount it. Out of sight, out of mind."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpkh8w",
"comment_text": [
"From my experience, most people actually think Snowden is a traitor to the US, which I personally find absolutely ridiculous. This assumption has lead to people not caring as much or even dismissing his claims. Hope that helps :)"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpl2zm",
"comment_text": [
"How do you figure?"
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpky0m",
"comment_text": [
"The politicians of both major parties support it, and American voters don't care enough to make it an issue. Privacy is one of those things people are really vocal about, but doesn't actually mean much to them once they have to sacrifice for it. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgpmpzm",
"comment_text": [
"There was a pretty huge political debate around the times of the leaks, however it just never got enough political support to pass meaningful legislation.",
"For any change to actually occur in the government it must have a \"champion\", i.e. a major political figure/organization with the position and power to be listened to have the potential ability to make the change a reality. Not only must it have a champion, but it must also have a not-insignificant amount of public support. This may also influence whether you find a \"champion\", as very few expert political figures/organizations will champion a worthless cause.",
"Unfortunately, privacy just wasn't a popular topic at the time among political circles, indeed it wasn't a good time for anyone to be passing any kind of meaningful change. Snowden had released the documents in December of 2012, just after the reelection of Obama and missing any opportunity to find a political ally to leverage the issue during the campaign.",
"In 2013 Democrats were busy trying to get an obstructionist Congress to move it's fat lazy ass on healthcare, and Republicans were still busy dealing with the schism that formed among the main-line Republicans and the Tea Party who wouldn't move their fat lazy asses on healthcare. Throughout the next year Congress would move from deadlocked issue to deadlocked issue, each of which showed both sides refusing to back down. All of this drew the media's attention away from privacy and the NSA. Things wouldn't get much better in 2014 when the media's attention was again drawn by the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner and and resurgence of the topic of Police Brutality. Congress (Tea Party Republicans) still wouldn't move their fat lazy asses on healthcare, and even worse started a counter-attack ",
" Obama on healthcare. I'm only touching the surface, but needless to say there was a lot of shit going on.",
"As of now, it's been too long and the shock of the revelations has effectively worn off. Democrats are too focused on doing the opposite of whatever Trump is doing, and Trump is too busy doing god knows what while the Republicans are still chasing their tail on meaningful healthcare reform.",
": Never gained enough political traction to enact permanent change due to poor timing and lack of partisan support."
],
"score": 3
}
|
ELI5: Why is the most accepted answer in "Explain it like I'm 5 (ELI5)" really more like "Explain it like I'm 30" (ELI30)"
|
explainlikeimfive
|
679ig8
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.23
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgontko",
"comment_text": [
"Because ELI5 isn't here to offer up explanations at a literal 5 year old's level. Per the sidebar:"
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgontg7",
"comment_text": [
"This question gets asked a lot. The answer is over there ->",
"LI5 means friendly, simplified and layman-accessible explanations - not responses aimed at literal five-year-olds.",
"Additionally, for further information:",
"Perform a keyword search, you may find good explanations in past threads. You should also consider looking for your question in the FAQ."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgosnf7",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"The subreddit is not targeted towards literal five year-olds. ",
">\"",
"\"",
"\"Layman\" does not mean \"child,\" it means \"normal person.\"",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgonwla",
"comment_text": [
"Which is why you still come here, right? No fun at all."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgonz8l",
"comment_text": [
"Well after I found askreddit, I did pretty much stop with ELI5 all together. BUUUUUUT every so often I do find a question worth having some fun on."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is ketchup the same flavor in every restaurant around the world but mustard is different?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
678cgp
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.56
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgonzin",
"comment_text": [
"That's not necessarily true. There are a large variety of ketchups out there - (fruit ketchups, mushroom ketchup, banana ketchup, etc) and many restaurants these days will make their own tomato ketchup ",
", which has a really different flavor profile. In much of Europe, Curry Ketchup is incredibly popular. Every German restaurant I've been to offers it. ",
"The reason most ketchup is the same flavor at restaurants is Heinz. Heinz sold cheap, ready-to-serve ",
" soups & baby food that could be stored indefinitely during the Great Depression and were top sellers. Heinz further developed it's popularity and clout during WW2 as their products were freely included in ration packs in US and UK militaries (baked beans!), it offset food shortages - and it was considered a 'patriotic' brand. ",
"Today, Heinz has 82% market share of ketchup in the US. Goodwill gave that product it's popularity - and ubiquity keeps it alive today. ",
"Mustard has just always been a more competitive product and Heinz didn't really get super involved in it. French's, Grey Poupon, Gulden's, etc. No one company has ubiquity. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgonzin",
"comment_text": [
"That's not necessarily true. There are a large variety of ketchups out there - (fruit ketchups, mushroom ketchup, banana ketchup, etc) and many restaurants these days will make their own tomato ketchup ",
", which has a really different flavor profile. In much of Europe, Curry Ketchup is incredibly popular. Every German restaurant I've been to offers it. ",
"The reason most ketchup is the same flavor at restaurants is Heinz. Heinz sold cheap, ready-to-serve ",
" soups & baby food that could be stored indefinitely during the Great Depression and were top sellers. Heinz further developed it's popularity and clout during WW2 as their products were freely included in ration packs in US and UK militaries (baked beans!), it offset food shortages - and it was considered a 'patriotic' brand. ",
"Today, Heinz has 82% market share of ketchup in the US. Goodwill gave that product it's popularity - and ubiquity keeps it alive today. ",
"Mustard has just always been a more competitive product and Heinz didn't really get super involved in it. French's, Grey Poupon, Gulden's, etc. No one company has ubiquity. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgop3y6",
"comment_text": [
"So.. I'm not a 'ketchup connoisseur' or anything, (Hell, I usually eat my fries with Honey Mustard) but this is like a weird area of expertise for me. I used to live near a Heinz plant, and their company history was somewhat well-known in my town.",
"These days, I near a Euro-Import grocer and I keep a 'pouch' of Russian ketchup in my fridge. Looks ",
"like this",
" - the pouch makes it easy to squeeze out. ",
"Just gotta say, Russian ketchup is amazing. It's much thicker, has some tomato pulp in it, and more vinegar/spices. I love the flavor, very rich. It's as close to 'house-made restaurant' ketchups as I can find readily available.",
"If you ever get a chance, try Curry Ketchup. Ziesner's like the staple-brand for it, but Heinz makes their own varient you could find at your local grocery store. It's a gamechanger. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgop3y6",
"comment_text": [
"So.. I'm not a 'ketchup connoisseur' or anything, (Hell, I usually eat my fries with Honey Mustard) but this is like a weird area of expertise for me. I used to live near a Heinz plant, and their company history was somewhat well-known in my town.",
"These days, I near a Euro-Import grocer and I keep a 'pouch' of Russian ketchup in my fridge. Looks ",
"like this",
" - the pouch makes it easy to squeeze out. ",
"Just gotta say, Russian ketchup is amazing. It's much thicker, has some tomato pulp in it, and more vinegar/spices. I love the flavor, very rich. It's as close to 'house-made restaurant' ketchups as I can find readily available.",
"If you ever get a chance, try Curry Ketchup. Ziesner's like the staple-brand for it, but Heinz makes their own varient you could find at your local grocery store. It's a gamechanger. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgokw74",
"comment_text": [
"Heinz is the most commonplace ketchup in the world, however there isn't such a prevalent brand for mustard. Different types of mustard are popular in different places. Coleman's English mustard is a strong mustard popular for roast dinners in the UK - perhaps it's stronger because it mixes with gravy. French's mustard is more popular in the US on hot dogs, it's weaker as it's often not mixed with anything that waters it down so much. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5:Why do you die instantly when shot in the guts with a shotgun?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6789ml
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.55
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgof3mr",
"comment_text": [
"With penetrating trauma to the torso there is always a risk of lacerating the aorta. It's a candy cane shaped artery, and it's the largest artery in the body, carrying nearly all oxygenated blood. It runs from the left ventricle (lower left) of the heart, travels up a short distance, then then turns down, running nearly the length of the torso. ",
"With the exception of the veins that travel from the lungs to the heart muscle, nearly every drop of oxygenated blood travels through this one, very large artery. (The part of the aorta that passes by the gut is, appropriately, called the abdominal aorta.)",
"Since shotgun rounds (known as shot) contain multiple pellets, the chance of one of those pellets penetrating the aorta is very large, whether you're shot in the gut or the chest. ",
"The rate of blood loss from such a would is likely to be severe, rendering the victim almost immediately unconscious, and brain dead within minutes. ",
"Any other significant trauma to the intestines that didn't result in immediate incapacitation and quick death would still be extremely dangerous, as sepsis is always a concern in such a wound. But absent hitting the abdominal aorta (or one of its major branches) \"instantaneous\" death is unlikely. ",
"One note: There are those who are proponents of the 'hydrostatic shock' theory of gunshot wounds. But the subsonic nature of shotgun shot means that such a theory doesn't even apply. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgoetnd",
"comment_text": [
"What is the difference between \"instantly\" and \"moments later\" in your opinion?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgoeusq",
"comment_text": [
"People generally ",
" die instantly from being shot, with a shotgun or anything else. It ",
" happen, because hydrostatic shock to the blood can cause massive brain damage effectively instantly, but in general it doesn't.",
"Most people who die after being shot don't die only ",
" later, either, especially from gut wounds. Bleeding out takes around a minute if one of the biggest arteries (aortal, carotid, femoral - possibly others, but these are the most obvious candidates) is heavily damaged, but can take a matter of hours in other cases."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgoewqn",
"comment_text": [
"Modulo the rare case of hydraulic shock doing exactly that, anyway..."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgoewqn",
"comment_text": [
"Modulo the rare case of hydraulic shock doing exactly that, anyway..."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is is that people who don't make much money always have so many kids?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
672svh
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgn75l1",
"comment_text": [
"I have always wondered this about third world countries. I mean no one should be denied the right to raise a child but there is a point where you need to be able to look after yourself before you take on the responsibility of a child. And i know it can happen after the child is born and i do feel sorry for those people "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgn794p",
"comment_text": [
"Remember that in America at least, there are huge tax incentives to have kids. I work at a credit union, and it's not uncommon to see $5,000+ tax returns. I've seen two for around $8,000. ",
"I have a relative that has kids for the child support and tax refunds that they provide. She doesn't worry about how much the kids will cost, because child support and the government enables those kinds of parents. ",
"Dont forget also that the same people that don't put much thought into planning out their birth control probably aren't the type to sit and plan out their finances. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgn7slz",
"comment_text": [
"Not to over generalize it but, many third world countries still have high infant and child mortality rates... So some times it's to ensure some will survive. Also, those that do survive can then contribute in the labor (whether that's cleaning the house, working in a farm, looking after animals or other children, etc.)."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgn7k1w",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"Loaded questions are not allowed on ELI5.",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgn7orc",
"comment_text": [
"Not having children is expensive -- birth control is not cheap, and more long-lasting and effective forms (such as the IUD or sterilization) is far more expensive than the forms that have a higher user-error rate (condoms or the pull-out method). A lot of middle-class couples have their planned one or two kids and then one of the couple has surgery to get themselves permanently sterilized -- that's a lot less plausible for low-income couples."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: US Mercenaries in Iraq. Why would ex military groups think they would be quicker than the military?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
670anh
| 7
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.82
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgmofch",
"comment_text": [
"UN law does not supersede US law as far as the US Government is concerned. The 2001 treaty you are referring to was never ratified by the US Government, or any permanent member of the UN's security council for that matter. As to why former military members want to do it, it pays A LOT. Back in Iraq's hay day in the mid 00's Blackwater contractors in Iraq were pulling in 500k a year. It's easy to see why someone would prefer that compared to 60k as an Army Seargant that's in more danger than the contractor."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgmovpm",
"comment_text": [
"They typically augment the existing nations capabilites, instead of competing directly with."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgmovpm",
"comment_text": [
"They typically augment the existing nations capabilites, instead of competing directly with."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgmwfq5",
"comment_text": [
"I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting but it's mostly about salaries, not bounties. I may be mistaken but I think you're talking about looting, which is a war crime.",
"As for why the US army would rather pay mercenaries 10 times more to do a job than to do it themselves, there's 2 reasons:",
"1) capacity. If the US forces aren't enough to do the job they need to buy in extra",
"2) politics. If too many soldiers come home in body bags people start to ask questions about what the war is for and how it is going. Eventually political pressure builds to the point where you have to pull out. But if mercenaries die, no one really cares."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgmoj8a",
"comment_text": [
"it pays A LOT.",
"it's also worth noting that a lot of positions in the military (for instance, spec ops) don't have a civilian equivalent outside of places like blackwater"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5:What makes this an amazing goal in soccer?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66xs4f
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgm2et6",
"comment_text": [
"Not a big soccer guy myself, but the power and precision of the goal is probably what makes it so great.",
"Any higher and it would have hit the crossbar and not have scored, any softer and the goalie would have had time to react to it and make the stop. ",
"Basically he challenged the goalie straight up and the goalie still had no time to react to it. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgm2ufm",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"ELI5 is not for:",
"Subjective or speculative replies - Only objective explanations are permitted here; your question is asking for speculation or subjective responses ",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgm33nz",
"comment_text": [
"If you want to know why a group of people think something, ask the people who think it. ELI5 is not the place for gathering opinions."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgm33nz",
"comment_text": [
"If you want to know why a group of people think something, ask the people who think it. ELI5 is not the place for gathering opinions."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgm4q14",
"comment_text": [
"That's asking for an objective explanation as to why something is happening.",
"Your question is asking about the opinion held by a group of people. You may as well ask why some people prefer the colour green rather than blue."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is figure skating considered an athletic sport while ballet is not?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
671ai1
| 7
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.74
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgmycmj",
"comment_text": [
"A core part of being a 'sport' is the element of competition. If the primary outcome of the activity is one party 'winning' while one or more parties 'lose', then you might have a sport. However, if the activity merely serves to entertain without any final determination of victory, it isn't a sport.",
"Many people would also classify figure skating as 'not a sport' because it involves subjective judgment rather than objective scoring metrics, but major organizations such as the NCAA and the Olympics Committee do not use this as determining factor in what constitutes a sport."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgnpop5",
"comment_text": [
"exactly Shortest answer, ballet will become \"a sport\" the day that enough Ballet dancers decide to challenge each other to some sort of competition with agreed upon rules for winning. ",
"It can become a sport the day some folks decide to make it one. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgmzuau",
"comment_text": [
"But by extension, why is figure skating scored (and thus a sport), but people don't score ballet (thus making it a sport)?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgmzy6q",
"comment_text": [
"I may have never seen competitive ballet, but ",
"Dancesport",
" is very much a thing. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgn7dph",
"comment_text": [
"Figure skating didn't originate as theater. It originated around other sports and was tied in either those realms and like the activity of hockey, there evolved rules and structure around it and became competitive. Ballet did not. It was seen as argue and theatre based and stayed in that realm and never had the pressure to drive to competitive levels. It's just not structured that way. ",
"Edit. Spelling "
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: why do people say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results, when it is not the definition
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66ulzm
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.59
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dglghb9",
"comment_text": [
"Probably not in the context you intended, but as of recently, because a variant of it was made kind of famous by a video game: ",
"The quote in full: ",
"I know Einstein is apparently credited (emphasis on apparently) with saying this but if you've been seeing this phrase used more recently I'd wager a few sandwiches it's because it's one of the most memorable moments of Far Cry 3 and even enjoyed some time as a widely spread meme."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dglfow3",
"comment_text": [
"because it sounds cool/smart.\nreally, that's it. there is no other reason for it.",
"the quote has been attributed to Einstein (and Mark Twain and Ben Franklin and others) which again gives the speaker the impression he/she is insightful for quoting a genius. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dglhy62",
"comment_text": [
"This isn't a good answer. The saying has been around a lot longer than 4 years (FC3 was released in November 2012)."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgli06j",
"comment_text": [
"That's why I said it probably isn't in the exact context that OP was probably asking, merely explaining why the saying has likely come up more often in the last few years: because it became a meme due to FC3. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dglfr15",
"comment_text": [
"Its a very famous quote often attributed to Einstein. There is debate over its actual origin with some people drawing connections between it and some Chinese proverbs. A famous quote that illustrates a good point non the less. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How does the Mandela Effect work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66uloz
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgli3d6",
"comment_text": [
"Mandela Effect is when you're ",
" sure of a certain fact but you're wrong. However, apparently you're not the only person that believes in this fact, there are plenty of others who can swear up and down, your version of the fact is what they remember",
"The difference between Mandela Effect and simply forgetting is that you're not alone and you all vividly remember that fact"
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dglf4bl",
"comment_text": [
"Someone you're sure has passed on or remember news of them passing only to see them alive and well. Many people have memories of Mandela passing away in the late 90's yet he just passed away a year ago or so. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgll7ty",
"comment_text": [
"I'd have defined Mandela Effect as \"Alternative Fact\" honestly but that phrase has taken a new definition by the current American Administration "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dglkzfv",
"comment_text": [
"basically, the mandela effect is when there is something that you remember vividly, but its different, and other people remember it the way you did as well.\nProbably the most well known example is the Berenstain bears, where people remember it as BerenSTEIN bears and not BerenSTAIN bears."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dglqsdt",
"comment_text": [
"The difference between Mandela Effect and simply forgetting is that you're not alone and you all vividly remember that fact",
"Thanks to the internet, wrong-headed people of all stripes can easily find each other. I won't name any but there's more than a few subs on Reddit where delusional or mentally ill people reinforce each other's beliefs."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why did the Soviet Union have such a hard time feeding its population.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66yghx
| 64
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.77
|
Russia, especially, seemed to have a lot of money, plenty of farmland, and a decent infrastructure. So, why did it have trouble filling its grocery stores with food?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgm8ntt",
"comment_text": [
"Because at every level, the incentives were all in favor of people making decisions contrary to the public good. It was a logistical structure built around the premise that people would simply obey their masters because their masters worked for the 'public good'.",
"On the one hand, working harder and innovating didn't yield any rewards. On the other hand, cheating the system ",
". So all up and down the system, you had people who were either withholding the full measure of their capabilities or turning those capabilities to graft.",
"In contrast, an American farmer works harder because he makes more money. He doesn't under-report his production because it wouldn't make any sense to do so - he won't get paid for anything he doesn't report. Similarly, the people transporting, distributing and retailing the food are all primarily interested in getting the most they can to the customer so they can get paid."
],
"score": 90
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgmd5wy",
"comment_text": [
"Black markets work best with valuable, portable and durable goods - none of which apply to basic food. You can smuggle tens of thousands of dollars worth of cocaine into your glove compartment. You'd need to rent multiple shipping containers to fit tens of thousands of dollars worth of apples.",
"Moreover, that cocaine in your glove compartment will last indefinitely while you need to get rid of those apples in short order or you'll be out your investment.",
"This also affects the supply chain all the way down to the producer. Growing food for money is not a particularly profitable enterprise no matter how you structure it. You need vast fields worth of apples, maintained daily, to make enough money to live off of. In contrast, I've known people who actually made their entire income off a few marijuana plants, maintained intermittently while sober, in their closet.",
"Ultimately the reason the Politburo were not able to get decent food was because it wasn't being grown in the first place. In the West, we have a tendency to think of a wide variety of common services as things that 'just happen' - like there are magical gnomes delivering our water, power and food rather than complex systems of interlocking commerce. But when those systems break down, they break down ",
".",
"You can see this in action in places like Venezuela and Zimbabwe. There was no great revolution, no massive catastrophe. They just changed the rules so it was no longer sensible/possible for people to produce the goods and services necessary for a functional nation."
],
"score": 42
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgmifca",
"comment_text": [
"The Soviet workers had a saying. \"As long as they pretend to pay us, we'll pretend to work\". "
],
"score": 24
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgmcn3t",
"comment_text": [
"From what I understand, which is, admittedly, little, there was a sort of black market for goods and services that applied to those who wanted to cheat the system, but this did not apply to food. Yeltsin seems to admit, anecdotally, that even those in the politburo didn't have access to the food common westerners had. So, why didn't food have such a black market? What were the restrictions, political, economic, and other, that prevented even the elite from access to quality or even plentiful food? "
],
"score": 14
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgml58c",
"comment_text": [
"I am not an expert, but from what I understand the Soviet economic system was really good at completing big projects or really general things, but it was not good at regulating itself to resolve 'small' issues. So for instance, they were good at making 'enough food to feed people' but they were not very good at giving people any choice in what they ate. ",
"In a capitalist system if the people don't like a product that creates a market for that type of product but done better. Since there's money to be made, someone starts making that product. People need something to drink. They don't want to drink water all the time, so someone invents Coca-cola (in this example at least) and voila, there are now 2 competing drinks on the market. And then of course, not everyone likes how sweet coke is but they also want something tastier than water, so Tropicana starts selling orange juice. But Tropicana isn't perfect, so Florida's Natural makes a competing orange juice. And on and on and on. ",
"What this means is that not only is there food in the super market, there is ",
" which is mostly what was missing from Soviet super markets compared to US ones from what I know. In a Soviet supermarket you went in, there were food staples (beans, flour, some vegetables, etc) but there wasn't really an incentive or the ability in that economy for someone to say 'yeah they have flour to make bread, but what if WE made bread for them and it was high quality, and therefore some people would pay us more than the cost to make it'. ",
"So they did have food to eat, but there wasn't much choice in the types of food they had access to. Of course though, the other things people are saying are true as well. The corruption and other flaws in the centralized economy ALSO created inefficient production systems which meant that even though they had the ability to produce X amount of food, in reality only X - losses made it to the stores for people to eat. "
],
"score": 11
}
|
ELI5: Why is it that fast-food is drive-thru, pizza is delivery, and Chinese is takeout?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66tesh
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.56
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgl53x2",
"comment_text": [
"Burgers don't keep like pizza or Chinese food. You can put Chinese in a paper container and as long as it stays warm it is fine. Pizza is the same way and often has less expensive ingredients per serving.",
"But burgers have minutes of optimal quality. You have hot meat, cool toppings, and an absorbent bun. If you put that in a bag and rush it over to deliver... the final product is invariably crummy."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgl520o",
"comment_text": [
"Chinese is also delivery. They were traditionally delivery before pizza was. ",
"And pizza places offer take out. ",
"And all three have sit down portions that also allow you to place an order to go. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgl5xr6",
"comment_text": [
"Chinese & pizza are also difficult to eat while driving. A burger is doable."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgldaxr",
"comment_text": [
"better the pizza, messier the meal? I always felt it's not dry enough to eat without a plate and napkins. Although flat bread stuffed in the same ingredients is almost fine and many places sell single pizza slices \"to go\"."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgldaxr",
"comment_text": [
"better the pizza, messier the meal? I always felt it's not dry enough to eat without a plate and napkins. Although flat bread stuffed in the same ingredients is almost fine and many places sell single pizza slices \"to go\"."
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5:How to eat a taco
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66ss2i
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.55
|
When I bite into one side, it squeezes everything out the other side. There must be a better way!
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgl08nr",
"comment_text": [
"Then don't eat a taco"
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkz42d",
"comment_text": [
"OP, don't be afraid to grab that butt. \nPinch the opposite end of the taco from which you want to take a bite before biting in, and make sure it acts as a seal of sorts. A little pressure assures that nothing will slide or fall out. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkz8au",
"comment_text": [
"So sexy"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgl69v0",
"comment_text": [
"This is why authentic places serve tacos with 2 tortillas. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dglg10t",
"comment_text": [
"Have you considering alternating the side you bite? Also, you could put less stuff in the taco and use the rest to make a second taco. Also, have you tried praying to Jesus? That seems to be a common practice in places where tacos come from."
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: How does a gun kill a person?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66rgcz
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.35
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkooc3",
"comment_text": [
"Bullets travel very fast, which gives them a lot of kinetic energy. When they hit people two things happen: a) they rip through things; and b) the body absorbs the energy. You can be killed by (a), if they rip a part that you need to have unripped to stay alive, like your aorta. You can get killed be (b) because the shock wave causes a lot of little leaks and all your blood leaks out. "
],
"score": 10
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkpupc",
"comment_text": [
"You're responding to the person who made the original post. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkpbpw",
"comment_text": [
"Bullets that kill you will typically effect your bodies ability to pump blood (the stuff that keeps every single cell alive) around the body. It either rupture one of the pipes (veins, arteries, etc.) carrying it, ruptures one of your organs that filters your blood, or ruptures your lungs that provide your blood with oxygen. Then there are head shots which essentially destroy the part brain, either directly or by messing with the system to circulate blood to the brain. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkpluk",
"comment_text": [
"In addition to WRSaunders' answer, the term for the energy absorption is called hydrostatic shock. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkrfgp",
"comment_text": [
"This happens in selective cases ....its not a generalized algorithm .."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: When you buy land, what do you actually own in terms of height and depth? And who dictates this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66ro6w
| 11
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.74
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkq9f0",
"comment_text": [
"Well, first off it's important to note that the land may not include mineral rights. So you can purchase the land, but you may not have the rights to any valuable things in it, like oil or gold or whatever.",
"From a practical view, you own enough land beneath the ground level, and enough air above the ground level, for you to reasonably use and enjoy the land. So, for example, you can't prohibit a plane from flying 30,000 feet over your house -- but you may have a cause of action against someone flying a drone 100 feet over your back yard."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkqjt1",
"comment_text": [
"That depends on jurisdiction, but often, you own the land to an indefinite depth. There may be restrictions, however. Certain underground resources may be reserved to the government, utilities may be able to run through your land, you may be required to inquire about the presence of those utilities before digging, and so on.",
"How far ",
" your property you own is another question, and one that's come up a lot recently with the advent of consumer-class drones. Again, this depends on jurisdiction, but in the USA, landowners own at least 365 ft above their land, and at 500 ft, the airspace is open to the public regardless of ownership."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkqp87",
"comment_text": [
"The whole drone thing lacks a definite ruling, unfortunately. The FAA argues that they can regulate ",
" airspace, from ground to \"space\". The FAA has issued some simple rulings, like all drones over a few grams needing to be registered, just to test the water. They're antsy about big rulings that could possibly get smacked down court and set bad precedents."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkqybn",
"comment_text": [
"Right. And so much depends on state or local law. While the state can't regulate the airspace, they can (and do) pass laws on privacy that can land someone in hot water for their use of a drone over private property."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkqbrd",
"comment_text": [
"Although it's not totally clear, you own 500 feet above ground. As far as below ground, you would have to own the rights to the minerals underneath, which most people do not have."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: why is plastic harmful to the environment?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66qg0y
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
I have been researching ways to be more environmentally friendly, I have come across the 'zero waste' movement, the aim is to live a plastic free life but I was under the impression that plastic was recycled? Why is it harmful? (Sorry, I know this is probably a dumb question!)
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkhkob",
"comment_text": [
"If you recycle all your plastic, then you're certainly preventing some of the worst impacts of plastic, although it's still not perfect. ",
"The big problem with plastics and the environment today is that a vast quantity of plastic not only doesn't get recycled, it doesn't even get landfilled. Instead, it ends up in the environment. This can include people littering out of laziness, plastic microbeads in toilettries which get washed off, plastics which get blown out of bins etc. This plastic then ends up in the ocean and in other natural habitats, where it causes many problems. Depending on the type of plastic, organisms can get tangled up in it or try to eat it. In particular, many marine organisms filter feed - i.e. feed by simply collecting small particles in the water. Small fragments of plastic can get ingested this way, and then passed up the food chain.",
"Even recycling plastic isn't perfect. Recycling still takes energy. Although much better than creating virgin plastic, if the packaging (or whatever) is entirely superfluous, then it's an unnecessary use of energy. ",
"Furthermore, most plastics tend to degrade, so each time they are recycled they can only be turned into something of lower quality plastic (e.g. a plastic bottle might be turned into a speed bump - a process known as ",
"\"downcycling\"",
". This means that high quality plastics must be continually made as virgin plastics."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkgsit",
"comment_text": [
"A lot of plastics do not break down naturally. So the plastic bags that accidentally blew away will still be around in some form hundreds of years from now. It might get broken up into tiny pieces but it will still be around. Those pieces of plastic might have an affect on the digestive system of animals. Especially fish which pulls in a lot of water and just filters out the water from anything else in the water. If there is a lot of plastic in the water it will go though the digestive system together will all the plankton. Since plastic does not have any nutritional value the fish might not get as much food as it needs and can starve. If there is larger pieces of plastic it might not be able to make it though the digestive system at all and cause irritation and blockages. It does not only affect fish but any animal might accidentally eat plastic.",
"As for recycling plastic is a very large group of chemicals. And the chemicals looks very similar. So even the first step of recycling which is sorting is a very hard problem that we have not quite solved. And then a lot of plastics contains additives like die which is hard to extract. It might not be as simple as remelting the plastic either depending on the type of plastic. It is much cheaper to make plastic from petroleum then to recycle it. Most plastic is buried but this only delays the problem. When a landfill is full it still needs to be maintained. In the end most things in the landfill will break down but not the plastic. So you end up with a big pile of plastic after a few hundred years that you need to get rid of some way. The currently best solution is to burn the plastic which does break it down. However a lot of plastic contains chlorine and fluorine which can make toxic or environmentally destructive gases when burned. This is currently a better alternative then dumping plastic in the nature but is still not a good solution."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkgdqm",
"comment_text": [
"Plastic only decomposes very slowly in nature. Times of 500 to 1000 years are no rarity in this regard. If you bury a plastic bag in your yard today, you can count on it being still being almost exactly the same as it is now in 2267 or even 2517.",
"Many countries do indeed recycle plastics, but much of it lands on dumps in Africa or even directly into the ocean. Latter is inhabited by animals that think the plastic bag is food or harmless. Resulting in their death sooner or later."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkgduv",
"comment_text": [
"Most plastic isn't recycled and it doesn't decompose. Many animals get it stuck in their throats, it fills the oceans killing sea life. All-in-all, plastic is a wonderful creation, people are just crappy and don't dispose of it properly."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkgg6p",
"comment_text": [
"By isn't recycled, I mean that most plastic that's used by people isn't tossed in a recycling bin, its tossed into the ocean or sides of the road, or sent to a landfill where it just sits."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: How can airlines bump passengers who have seemingly bought and paid for a ticket and a seat?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66qppk
| 9
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.69
|
I'm sure we have all seen the massive number of posts about people being bumped off of flights recently. How does this happen? I am about to get on a flight tonight and I'm curious if there is a chance that I could end up bumped. Are these people buying weird ultra cheap special tickets that have a chance to get bumped that makes them cheaper?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkjgqj",
"comment_text": [
"Please check out the link I gave you, it explains the exact process of determining who gets bumped from an overbooked flight.",
"The chances of someone being involuntarily bumped from a flight are trivial and even if you do, you're due compensation well in excess of the ticket price and the airline still needs to get you to your destination. They're not throwing you off the flight and saying \"good luck!\"."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkijqp",
"comment_text": [
"Every airline has provisions in their contract of carriage (which you agree to when you purchase the ticket) to allow for you to be bumped from a flight under specific circumstances. Aircraft are consistently oversold as a certain percentage of tickets end up getting cancelled or transferred to different flights before the flight actually takes off, and making sure flights are as close to capacity as possible brings costs down. In addition, sometimes (as with the United incident) there's unforeseen circumstances in which a flight crew might need to be moved from one airport to another in order to accommodate a flight at the destination airport and if this is the case, room must be made on a flight to get the crew to the new airport, or an entire plane's worth of people won't be able to travel on the other flight.",
"https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx#sec25",
"In addition to any individual airline policies there's FAA rules on reimbursing people for being bumped off flights. in the vast, vast majority of cases someone on a flight will volunteer to be bumped, as there's a substantial financial incentive offered to voluntarily bump yourself. If there's no takers however, someone needs to be taken off involuntarily."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkiyvk",
"comment_text": [
"You can be forcibly removed for pretty much any reason including the flight being overbooked."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkloi5",
"comment_text": [
"He has no lawsuit against united. They broke no laws, and the only thing they owe him is normal damages for not fulfilling the terms of the ticket, probably about 4 times the ticket price. His occupation is meaningless and will have 0 effect on anything.",
"The only time medical personnel get priority is when they are escorting a patient or transplant organ or other situation like that, and they have to inform the airline prior to arrival."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkkfnm",
"comment_text": [
"Before boarding, they can ",
" do what they like. They have a broad permission to bump passengers as needed (although they ",
" required by law to go through a certain procedure, including asking for volunteers first).",
"After you have boarded, they have committed to transporting you, and they can only remove you in the situations listed in section 21 of their ",
"contract of carriage",
":",
"Once you've boarded, they can't just point at you and go \"you there, out of my plane!\" They have confirmed the agreement to transport you at this point, and the contract of carriage applies to both you and them.",
"Note, it ",
" say anything about \"we really needed to get flight crew to another city\" on this list. That's generally something they have to handle before boarding. If they need a few seats for their own staff, then they'll handle it then, and bump someone else off the flight ",
" they check in."
],
"score": 3
}
|
ELI5: Why aren't metropolitan transit services (such as subways, commuter rail, and Amtrak) privatized in the U.S.? Put another way, why does the U.S. lag behind the rest of the world in providing reliable, high-speed transit services?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66q6g6
| 8
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
Facing another rash of horrendous travel delays in the NYC area today, it begs the question, why are these services provided by the government, or heavily subsidized in the case of Amtrak, and not privatized? Would privatization help? Why does the U.S. lag behind the rest of the developed world (especially Japan, for instance) in providing reliable, high-speed transit services, especially in the densely populated Northeast corridor? Not trying to get political. Thanks!
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkei6x",
"comment_text": [
"Subways don't lend themselves well to privatization because they depend completely on city-owned rights of way -- that is, they are underneath the streets.",
"As for other rail service... Amtrak exists because privatized rail service was failing. Even with its subsidies, Amtrak offers an alternative to air travel that is slower and more expensive, except for places like the Northeast, with large cities closely packed together.",
"It's really hard for a private company to want to enter a market where their competition can already do it faster and cheaper."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkgw89",
"comment_text": [
"Important to note here, there was a fairly massive subsidy given to the automotive industry, in the highway system, and one before that in the regulated fare costs of passenger train/subways/trolleys. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkevaa",
"comment_text": [
"Why does the U.S. lag behind the rest of the developed world (especially Japan, for instance) in providing reliable, high-speed transit services, especially in the densely populated Northeast corridor?",
"The answer is both geographic and political. ",
"The geographic answer is that Japan has just under 130 milliion people living in an area similar in size to California. The US' population density is ",
"182nd out of 246 States and Territories",
". While it has more densely populated regions (like California and the I-95 corridor), the most ",
"densely populated state",
" would only be 25th on the list (and New York State would be the 150th well below most developed nations). ",
"That low density (even in our relatively dense regions) means a given length of transit crosses fewer people's paths, making the average cost per rider higher than in most nations. ",
"Further there are political problems. The US was designed to be a federation of states. To achive this federation, smaller states had a justifiable concern that they would be dominated by the large, high population states. So the compromise to get all of them to join, reserved significant political power for the smaller states (and many states do something similar for their smaller, less populated regions). As a result of this political power, it's difficult to spend lots of money on transit for the dense regions that ignores the lower population regions, so either you spend a ton building mass transit to places that don't have the population to justify it (high costs and low usage that makes projects a boondoggle) or projects are hard to justify at the state level (because those city folks want to spend all our state money on projects that only benefit them). ",
"Specific to Japan, geography means that a large proportion of the people live in ",
"two rough bands of population",
", so two railroad lines that go up along each coast of the nation, plus a few interconnections between the two create a network that covers an enormous proportion of the population of Japan. That means the average cost of a high speed rail ticket in Japan can be significantly lower than in the US. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkecez",
"comment_text": [
"The US has a huge driving culture, that's the simple enough reason. ",
"That makes it really difficult to live in a lot of places without a car. There may be transit from A to B, but you might need a car to get from your home to A, or from B to your workplace.",
"Car culture is a self-catalyzing thing. The more your culture is about owning and driving your car, the more you need a car (because cars and parking and roads take up a lot of space, meaning you need a car to go longer distances)."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkn5i2",
"comment_text": [
"The reason memes exist about nobody owning a car in The City, is because there are already too many fucking cars there. Yes there are a ton of people walking, but there are still a shitload of cars."
],
"score": 3
}
|
ELI5: What are technical differences in making different kinds of yellow cheese?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66pdat
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.63
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkbrhj",
"comment_text": [
"What is the difference in making them? ",
"There are many variables in cheese making. Ignoring the curing stage for now, some variables of the production stage are (but not limited to):",
"Why do they smell, taste, look differently?",
"The main factors here are: milk source, cultures used, production style and curing environment.",
"Why are there holes only in a few kinds?",
"This comes down the culture used for that type of cheese and the consistency of the cheese. The culture releases gas during curing and the structure of the cheese traps the gas, rather than allowing it to escape, creating voids in the cheese.",
"Why are there blue cheeses? ",
"After production of a 'typical' white cheese, the blue mold is introduced by puncturing the cheese with, essentially, a dirty needle. (the needle is coated with the blue mold culture, then pressed into the cheese) This why the blue part of blue cheese has 'veins', that's where the needle was pressed in.",
"Do they involve different ingredients than a milk?",
"Beyond the basics: milk, cultures, rennet and salt, the sky's the limit on what can be added to cheese. Usually herbs and spices, but I've seen various berries, and, of course, hot peppers (Pepper Jack). The local store used to sell a chocolate cheese, which was like eating fudge.",
"What would be the closest type of 'modern cheese' to the cheeses in, say, middle ages?",
"Cheese has been with us for a long, long time. It was one of the first, if not the first, preserved foods. We may have gotten better at making large amounts of cheese, but I'd guess that a brie today, made in France, in a traditional way, is very similar to brie made 500 years ago."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgk80fr",
"comment_text": [
"Cheeses with holes in them have bacteria that fart as well as poop (they let out gasses as well as solids). ",
"They don't fart like humans do, it is more like exhaling. It is also the curdling of milk solids (fats, proteins, and some sugars) that give it the solidity. Mixing with the bacteria and mold's by products. Don't say poop because poop is non-digested material that gets compacted then expelled. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgk7s04",
"comment_text": [
"Okay so cheese is essentially bacteria poop. After gorging on milk, different types of bacteria certain different tasting flavors and colors (though sometimes dye is added). Cheeses with holes in them have bacteria that fart as well as poop (they let out gasses as well as solids). Certain cheeses are made with goat milk instead of cow milk."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgk8y8f",
"comment_text": [
"Okay but like this was ELI5 so i was trying to keep it as simple as i could"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgk8zo9",
"comment_text": [
"Read the sidebar, layman terms not children."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5:Why is the VA better than regular hospitals/clinics for Vets?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66o0hp
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
With all the talk lately of allowing US veterans to go to private hospitals for care instead of the closest VA due to waiting periods and what not it got me thinking. Does the VA provide specific care that is specialized for Vets, or can we just take the same amount of money and provide free healthcare for our nation's veterans (I am one btw)?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjyd5h",
"comment_text": [
"VA hospitals exist because it is more efficient and cheaper for the government to group them together when they are paying for their medical care than it is to have them scattered among civilian hospitals who then bill the government for their care. ",
"VA hospitals also have more doctors that specialize in the kinds of damages they have, such as amputation, which make them better. ",
"But for basic medical care or emergency care any hospital can do what they can do. It just generates more paperwork and costs more for the government as the civilian hospitals charge higher rates for procedures. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgk4t4r",
"comment_text": [
"For Veterans the VA is a last resort. It is cheap/free in most cases, but the conditions are notoriously bad. Funding is far too low to make the staff/facilities/care equal to private hospitals. Our government loves to say they take good care of Veterans but, just like everything run by the government it is rife with poor management, corruption and too much burocracy. If a veteran has private insurance, they go to a regular hospital."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgk574i",
"comment_text": [
"In a lot of cases, it's not the LAST resort... But rather the first and only. ",
"Some (read: a lot) veterans cannot afford private care... So the VA is all there is, for vast swaths of veterans....myself included. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkarwg",
"comment_text": [
"Yes. You would go somewhere else if you could, right?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkbrqk",
"comment_text": [
"Absolutely! Why shouldn't veterans be allowed to choose the doctor that works best for them? Much like someone with private insurance can. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why World War 3 is supposedly on our doorstep...?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66nwi7
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.4
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjxvsi",
"comment_text": [
"Yes.",
"The likelihood of another \"World War\" is very impractical. Since the invention of the nuclear weapon, we have created a weapon that can wipe out most of society. To use it is a last option. The threat of nuclear destruction is so absolute that most nations don't want to go to that extreme. Because of this, most rational figureheads know that any type of world conquest is now irrational.",
"But nuclear weapons don't stop wars. The Vietnam War, in particular, was a proxy war between the USA and USSR, using very nasty and personal guerilla tactics, while avoiding a nuclear war.",
"What is going on with North Korea right now, is just another example of a potential proxy war. Most likely the situation will diffuse. ",
"If war does develop, it will be conventional weapons, because, again, no nation wants to destroy all nations on the planet."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjys5h",
"comment_text": [
"The Second World War wasn't exactly a single war either: the war against Nazi Germany wasn't the same as the war against Imperial Japan. The two countries weren't exactly allies, but when Japan attacked the US to try to stop the US interfering in their war in the Pacific, Germany just took the opportunity to declare war on the US for no particular reason. Until that point there had been a war in Europe and another war in Asia, and the US had tried to keep out of them.",
"The First World War also started with a series of apparently banal events. There was a revolution in the Kingdom of Serbia, the new regime was antagonistic towards the Austro-Hungarian Empire which actually ruled Serbia. The Archduke Franz Ferdinand was sent by the Austrian emperor to Bosnia: he wanted to combine all the Slavic lands into one empire under Austro-Hungary, but Serb nationalists wanted a Serbian empire, so one of them assassinated the Archduke. This led to increased anti-Serb sentiment in Bosnia and in Austro-Hungary, including riots and murders, Austro-Hungary demanded Serbia open an investigation and take steps to stop anti-Austrian propaganda, Serbia responded by mobilizing its troops, Austro-Hungary broke off diplomatic relations, a Serbian boat carrying soldiers strayed onto the Austro-Hungarian side of the river Danube, the Austro-Hungarian press blew that incident out of all proportion and Austro-Hungary declared war on Serbia. Germany had already pledged support for Austro-Hungary. Under the terms of a long-standing treaty, because Austro-Hungary had mobilized its troops, France and Russia also had to mobilize theirs. This meant that Germany and France were now at war, so Germany decided to invade France. To do this, they went through Belgium, which was neutral; Britain claimed that under another treaty they were obliged to protect Belgium and so declared war on Germany.",
"Remember, this all started with one small country that resented being kept under the thumb of a more powerful country. But it set in motion a domino effect that snowballed very quickly until the entire continent was at war.",
"That's how really big wars happen: it's not two teams of countries facing off against each other and saying, \"Okay, this means war!\" It's a ratcheting up of tensions with one incident leading to the next, bigger, incident. That's why people get nervous when one country's airspace is violated by somebody else's military, or Russia keeps sending warships through the English Channel, or the US announces it's sending an armada to North Korea. It may come to nothing, but there's a chance something like that could be our \"Archduke Ferdinand\" moment."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjxr66",
"comment_text": [
"The US currently has a lot of tension with Russia due to signs of corruption and possibly treasonous connections between many people in Trump's inner circle and the Russian Government. There is also signs of possible Russian interference in our election. ",
"There are Tensions with China creating man made Islands and attempting to expand their sea territory in some of the most important shipping lanes in the world. ",
"There are Tensions with North Korea testing missiles and threatening the US and its allies. Due to treaties and connections that North Korea has with both Russia and China this increases tensions with them further as attacking North Korea has a large likelihood of prompting war with both China and Russia. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjxuwj",
"comment_text": [
"As a member of NATO if the US goes to war with Russia or China your treaties automatically bring you into war as well. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjxzc7",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah I understand that nuclear weapons are more of a muscle flex than an actual weapon to be deployed.",
"Interesting to think how a war would pan out these days. Would it be military vs military or could it evolve as far as public drafting of sorts?",
"When you use North Korea as an example of a proxy war, are you suggesting that it is being used as an excuse for animosity between USA and Russia?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do non-smokers smell that someone has smoked while smokers can't smell the same?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66nakh
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
I'm a non-smoker who has never smoked a cigarette in my life and I live with a family of smokers. Every time I come back to their house (usually every 2 weeks) I can smell when they smoked a cigarette before we came, yet my mother (who has smoked for ~40 years) could not smell the same smell. Why couldn't she smell the smoke? Is it due to lung conditioning or smelling smoke so much that she simply got used to it? On top of that, why is smoke so pungent that it persists on clothing?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjtvhu",
"comment_text": [
"To quote a febreze commercial: \"you go nose blind\"",
"Basically once you smell something for awhile, your brain decides. meh this smell isnt important anymore so we will just ignore it. (The same reason why you dont notice your house's smell until you are away from it for awhile) They just smell it too much for their brain to forget about it."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjtw64",
"comment_text": [
"Okay, thank you. And I love that commercial lol"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjw57w",
"comment_text": [
"And even more so, smoking kind of kills your sense of smell anyways. Since i quit smoking two years ago, my sense of taste and smell got much better. I nearly forgot how good some things smelled while i smoked."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjx810",
"comment_text": [
"It's more of a subtle loss of smelling. You still taste the stuff but its just not as intensive as when you don't smoke. Especially in wine you miss very much any of the more subtle aromas. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjtph4",
"comment_text": [
"When you smoke cigarettes, I don't know exactly why, but it clogs your sinuses or something and you just can't smell anything."
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5 why do smokers have a "brand"
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66mjls
| 6
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.63
|
I've noticed that most smokers only smoke one brand, and practically ignore all the others. It's all the same tobacco right? Why does one brand taste better than all the others for each specific person?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjnn23",
"comment_text": [
"It's not all the same tobacco. There are different leaves. Different filters. Different levels of dry. Different tightness of packing. Slower burners. Faster burners. All kinds of different things. Why do gum chewers tend to stick to one kind of gum? I always buy cobalt 5. I only smoked splash cloves. And if you don't chew big red then fuck you. "
],
"score": 21
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjno99",
"comment_text": [
"Different brands have slightly different flavors. As a smoker, you can definitely tell the difference between a Camel Light and Marlboro Red.",
"On top of that, it just becomes habit. I'm sure part of it is driven by marketing & the \"image\" that is associated with the brand."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjte1l",
"comment_text": [
"Smoker here. I stick with Marlboro red 100s. All tobacco is not the same and there's a big difference between different brands. But mostly it's because it's the first thing I started smoking and it's familiar and comforting. Even though I've tried other brands they've never caught on. I prefer 100s because regular cigs go to fast for me."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjoafv",
"comment_text": [
"There are subtle differences between cigarette brands, and between different types of cigarettes by the same brand. Most choices are due to personal preference. ",
"When I smoked I used to like Light American Spirits (yellow package), or Marlboro Lights. They both tasted different than other cigarettes."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjopu6",
"comment_text": [
"They all taste different. I only like one specific brand and type because to me they taste like mint and coffee."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why do languages have homonyms?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66p94r
| 379
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.88
|
Bat and bat, muñeca and muñeca. I'm sure there are a ton more in all languages, but why? Did we run out of words so we have to start using some twice? Note, this is not homophones, which sound the same (raise, raze, rays), but homonyms, so the exact same word. EDIT: Also, .
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgk6q1v",
"comment_text": [
"There are two ways for a single word to have multiple meanings:",
"One word branched off in the past and the connection between the different meanings is now secondary or obsolete.",
"Two different words converged on the same sound by coincidence.",
"The word \"hard\" is an example of the first: It can mean strong/rigid, or difficult. The concepts are related - it's ",
" to break something that's strong and rigid - so it's an example of a single word with divergent meaning.",
"Another example of the first would be \"book.\" Someone makes a reservation, the reservation was recorded in a book, ergo they \"booked\" the reservation. Reservations today are not typically recorded in books, but they're still booked.",
"The second (convergence of multiple words) usually happens with simple words - especially ones that are a single syllable. An example would be \"mole\", which converged from different roots describing either a blemish on skin or a burrowing animal. There's a bunch of other meanings too."
],
"score": 212
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgki41q",
"comment_text": [
"Technically I believe the description you are looking for is homographic homophonic antonyms, meaning words that are spelled the same, sound the same, but have opposite meanings. Others have taken stabs at explaining why this happens, but it is still weird as heck. ",
"for instance, dust. ",
"dust can mean the actual physical particles that accumulate upon things. ",
"or it can mean the removal of particles from things. (as in to dust the counter top).",
"or it can mean to put particles of stuff onto things (as in to dust crops). ",
"I'm sure people learning English find it annoying, but i think it is kind of cool. "
],
"score": 39
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkj1sd",
"comment_text": [
"Well, I really was just looking at homonyms, but this is even more fascinating! Are there any more HHAs?"
],
"score": 24
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkc6gs",
"comment_text": [
"A good example of both of these happening at the same time is the word ",
"'set'",
", largely because it has ",
" meanings: some come from convergence (the sense of 'a collection of things' is from Latin via French; the sense of 'hardening' or 'being firm' is from Old English), and others by branching from these two basic roots."
],
"score": 16
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkiq4x",
"comment_text": [
"The subreddit name isn't meant to be literal. They just mean \"accessible.\"",
"If my explanation isn't accessible, I'll be happy to break it down further."
],
"score": 9
}
|
ELI5:Why are countries like Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia included in Uefa?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66i21o
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
Isn't Uefa European soccer?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgilj2n",
"comment_text": [
"Yes. These three countries are located in the Caucasus region and straddle the (vague) border of Europe and Asia, but are considered culturally European and so are included in European stuff like UEFA and the council of Europe "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dginfoc",
"comment_text": [
"Actually originally they were part of the AFC until 1974 when they were kicked out and joined... The OFC.",
"They didn't join UEFA until 1991."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgkapw5",
"comment_text": [
"thanks!"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgimv82",
"comment_text": [
"and what about Israel?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgimygw",
"comment_text": [
"Agian culturally European, as a lot of Isrealis and their ancestors came from European nations "
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELi5: Why do many people continue to hear/see sounds and images from a video game they've played recently for hours or days after they've stopped playing?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66ijxy
| 68
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.78
|
I know there is some basis for asking this question, with Tetris being the ultimate example of unshakable automatic gameplay in a person's head after s/he puts the game away, but my mobile search of ELi5 didn't turn any answers up, so I figured I'd give it a go. This topic is in my head because I played Fallout Shelter on xbox for several hours yesterday (I was sick and bored, what can I say?) and all last night and into today my brain kept "playing" the game even though, as of writing, I haven't opened it in 12 hours. I even startled awake several times during the night in the process of mentally checking on all my rooms, complete with full-on imagined sound effects and images, only to realize after a few moments that I was actually in bed and not playing. Though I've spent a lot of hours playing video games in my life, this has only happened to me with a small number of them, including Tetris (after a few hours of playing my first time in high school, my brain kept obsessively clearing imaginary lines all night and into the next day). Since this doesn't happen with all games, nor does it happen with other extended visual/auditory experiences (like binge-watching a TV show, say), I'm curious what the mechanism may be. My coolest theory is that my brain, not understanding the subject of its autopilot background obsession is just a game and not actually important to my life, is trying hard to sharpen a new skill it's been exposed to in order to rapidly improve at the task in case those skills are needed again. But I think that may be giving it too much credit haha. Anyone know why this very strong, unshakable phenomenon happens sometimes?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgirt2z",
"comment_text": [
"Funny you mention Tetris several times, this is actually a widely recognized phenomenon aptly called the 'Tetris effect'. There is a respectively named Wikipedia article on it that I would link to if I wasn't on mobile and too lazy to bother with cross app links."
],
"score": 21
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgit01v",
"comment_text": [
"Here ya go"
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgiwc2t",
"comment_text": [
"Your theory is (as far as I know) not that far off from the truth. I have heard many speak about playing or dreaming about gaming, and that it is the symptom of your brain forging new pathways and connections to improve your cognition towards the task. (going to look for credible sources now)",
"\nabout the most relevant: ",
"https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18082-dreams-of-doom-help-gamers-learn/",
"\n",
"http://www.psychologyofgames.com/2010/08/gamer-dreams/"
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgj6qd4",
"comment_text": [
"Last summer I was celebrating my break off of school appropriately by sitting in my room for 4 days playing terraria... for the next few days all I saw in anything was a terraria monster or some terraria terrain. My microwave looked like an undrground cavern and the floor looked like a texture for one of the blocks in the game... never again. Also to answer your question: Tetris effect "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgj5dke",
"comment_text": [
"So is this why I keep having dreams about sex?? Cause my brain is trying to get better at the task ??? Sorry, I had to say this.... Thank you for the answers as i have always wondered this myself."
],
"score": 3
}
|
ELI5:If Christianity was born in the Middle East why is Vatican the holy city?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66inxv
| 5
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.65
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgisjaq",
"comment_text": [
"According to Catholic tradition, when Christ told Peter he would be the rock upon which the church was built, that wasn't just flowery language, that Peter being put in charge as the first Pope. Peter (probably) went on to found the church in Rome, which claims his authority. Other sects of Christianity dispute this, and as there is very little historical record, it is impossible to know definitively what happened.",
"In the early church, there were several roughly co-equal bishops in important cities like Rome, Antioch, Alexandria, and eventually Constantinople. They were a lot of politics, and Rome was quick to play the Peter card, which other bishops rejected. Rome was able to solidify it claim, especially after crowning Charlemagne Holy Roman Emperor, but its hold was still often weak. The centuries that follow had popes and their political masters deposing and killing each others, often with rival popes setting up in other cities. During the 14th and early 15th Centuries, for example, there were popes in both Rome and Avingon, each claiming power over the church."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgiqo7z",
"comment_text": [
"1) Vatican is only holy to Catholics, not to all Christians. ",
"2) It is considered holy because it is the country (it is a city state) that is the ruling body of their religion. ",
"3) When 90% of Christians (including Catholics) say the phrase \"The Holy City\" they are talking about Jerusalem, not Vatican city. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgir7ua",
"comment_text": [
"Christianity knows multiple holy cities. Bethlehem (where Christ was born), Mount Sinai (where the commandments were passed down by God), Jerusalem (where the temple was build by Solomon) and Antioch (one of the biggest centers of early christianity) are all considered holy in the middle east.",
"Vatican city is also considered holy (though only by catholics, not all christians) due to it being the papal enclave and where St Peter (disciple of Christ and the first pope) was crucified and entombed. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgiu6mn",
"comment_text": [
"Nazareth was where he spent his childhood. It is also where Mary was born. ",
"(also worth noting perhaps that only two of the four gospels mention Jesus' birthplace, whereas the other two focus more on his later life and only ever refer to him as Jesus of Nazareth.) "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgjrg53",
"comment_text": [
"Nazareth is a region on the coast of the sea of Galilee not a single town/city. It is also where Jesus spent his childhood, not where he was born. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: If you had two breasts of Chicken and one breast was cooked and put in the fridge for 4 days and the second was left raw in the fridge for 4 days and then cooked. Which would be safer to eat?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66g1xv
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgi8lp9",
"comment_text": [
"The latter. The uncooked chicken will be fine after 4 days in a fridge, and cooking will kill any bacteria nicely.",
"After 4 days, the cooked chicken is likely to have picked up bacteria, which may have grown enough to make it dangerous. At least, you'd want to properly reheat it."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgidujv",
"comment_text": [
"the bacteria on the chicken itself is not what makes us sick",
"Incorrect. Many germs that cause food poisoning can make it through the stomach, get into the intestine and multiply and sicken us there. For example the campylobacter and salmonella bacteria and norovirus.",
"There are germs that produce toxins on the food that make you sick even if the germs are killed, but not all of them work that way."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgil0ms",
"comment_text": [
"Obviously both cooking and reheating would be safest, but what about the given options?",
"Campylobacter and norovirus do not multiply in refrigerated food, so there is little difference between the two pieces of chicken for these pathogens.",
"For all of the major pathogens which are primarily of concern due to internal growth, there should be little difference between the two pieces of chicken, as in either case the pathogens multiply by about the same amount in the refrigerator, and have about the same fraction killed by cooking. The order doesn't tend to overly matter. The growth amount isn't huge for 4 days in a refrigerator at a reasonable temperature, and almost all of the pathogens die due to proper cooking (for most pathogens), so you should generally be fine in either case with proper cooking.",
"In the case of accumulated toxins, you're four days worse off in the case of the chicken cooked later. Usually this should be fine, but what about the case when the chicken was about to go bad when you bought it?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgis5r5",
"comment_text": [
"Oh. Ok. Thanks! "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgi9qjs",
"comment_text": [
"The latter would be safer. As you are cooking it just before consumption you will be killing the bacterial growth on and in the meat. Eating the pre-cooked chicken without bringing it back up to cooking temps means you will be consuming all bacterial growth that it has had. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do navy ships travel so close together?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66cy87
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.81
|
I always see pictures of like 6 ships in a fleet surrounding an aircraft carrier, all separated by only few hundred meters. Wouldn't it make more tactical sense to spread these ships to be at least a mile or so apart, especially considering they increase the area that their countermeasures and detection systems can reach if they dont all stack right next to each other?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghhp8a",
"comment_text": [
"The purpose of the close formations isn't \"tactical sense\", it's to make good pictures.",
"\nYour question is sorta like asking: \"Why do all the Cadets at Westpoint stand tightly bunched during graduation, won't they just get taken out by an artillery barrage?\" "
],
"score": 19
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghhkz9",
"comment_text": [
"Consider that maybe you always see pictures like that because that's what it's viable to take pictures of. You wouldn't see pictures of ships separated by miles because they'd be so far apart that it'd be hard to get them in a single picture.",
"So maybe what you're referring to is the practice of photographers, not ships."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghj1fi",
"comment_text": [
"I do appreciate a good analogy. So many are so poor."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghhn0l",
"comment_text": [
"Those pictures are PR pictures, designed to flaunt the ships. Real operations, those ships would be quite a distance apart unless they were actively refuelling from one of the tender ships in the convoy."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghsfh4",
"comment_text": [
"\"Note to self. Drop nukes on picture day.\" -Kim Jong Il"
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: If a right handed person writes with their right hand as its more dextrous, why do string players finger with their left?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66cx1h
| 4
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
Surely fingering is a more dextrous task than strumming or bowing?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghhcyy",
"comment_text": [
"There's a saying:",
"If you play the wrong note at the correct time, you are 50% correct but if you play the correct note at the wrong time, you are 100% wrong.",
"iow, timing is more important than intonation. The most dexterous hand is (usually) better at timing."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghhicm",
"comment_text": [
"Fun fact: dexterous has its roots in Latin meaning \"right\" as in right handed so a violin player that uses their left hand for fingering and their right hand for bowing does so because in this instance bowing is a more dexterous task. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghipgy",
"comment_text": [
"So that the rhythm and dynamic control is left for the stronger hand. That is much harder than just holding down the right note!"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghjw2a",
"comment_text": [
"dexterity is a product of practice and experience. Many right handed people are initially inclined to play a stringed instrument with their right hand fingering the notes, but will succumb to playing the other way. The reason for this, in my case, was that my dad's guitar that I came up practicing on is a normal guitar, so when I tried flipping it, having the lower strings on the bottom instead of the top is frustrating and reading tablature became difficult, so I just just went with it and eventually became decent at it."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghr3qj",
"comment_text": [
"I encountered this question when I was shopping for guitars as a kid. I told the salesman I was left handed and he said \"oh it doesn't matter, you'll still use your left hand to finger the frets.\"",
"I tried it out and that store and for some reason I just could not strum the guitar with my right hand, but I could efficiently finger the frets with my right hand.",
"I think it has to do with wrist motion. My left hand is much better with anything that involves using my wrist (i.e. writing, strumming, throwing, shooting a basketball)."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: How come when we drink orange juice or something similar after we brush our teeth the juice tastes horrible?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
66bctf
| 38
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.71
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghaki2",
"comment_text": [
"One of the chemicals in toothpaste (and other products) binds to your sweet taste buds so they don't work as well. This makes orange juice taste very bitter and sour. It also isn't just juice, but anything that is mildly sweet but also sour or bitter.",
"There are a lot of chemicals that do this. Your taste buds are kind of like puzzle pieces. Some of them are in the sweet shape, some bitter, some sour, some salty, and some savory. Sugars will attach to your taste buds and make them send a signal to your brain that you are eating something sweet.",
"But some chemicals are close to the right shape, but not quite. So instead they get stuck on your taste bud without activating it and get in the way of anything else activating your taste bud. Over time they fall off, but till then you can't taste something.",
"A few chemical is a fruit called Miracle Berry. It is like the chemical in toothpaste, but instead of blocking sweet it blocks sour. If you chew on the berries for 10 minutes, for 30 minutes after you can't taste sour anymore. And other fruits will taste incredibly sweet."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgh4w6i",
"comment_text": [
"Because toothpaste has non sugar sweeteners in it that kind of numb your sweet tasting taste buds and allows you to taste all the other flavors in the juice without being covered up by the normal sweetness of the juice. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgh8rui",
"comment_text": [
"I'm pretty sure this is wrong. From what I understand, the surfactant sodium lauryl sulfate opens up your bitter receptors by removing fat from them. After that comma the orange juice's acidity just act on the bitterness receptors.",
"TL;ELI5: the chemical that cleans your mouth leaves your bitter taste buds open. The acid in the orange juice acts on those taste buds."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dghamai",
"comment_text": [
"You are close. It binds to the sweet receptors, inhibiting them from activating for a while."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgh9192",
"comment_text": [
"Apparently different sections of or specific tastebuds for certain flavors was proven a myth"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How do streaming services work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6661ds
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfvlq8",
"comment_text": [
"Those services pay for a license to show the videos or play the music. They pay the artist or the artist's manager or management company a fee to use their work. The streaming service gets money from the end user/consumer to pay for the licenses, and the service usually makes a profit also. ",
"Different streaming services operate differently but this is the gist of how most operate."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgg6olc",
"comment_text": [
"Sorry, can you reword your question? I don't quite follow.",
"The artist does get paid, yes, but Spotify pays pretty low rates. The label signs them into it and the artists often cannot opt out even if they wanted to. Indie artists have an advantage because they can, and many choose to opt out from Spotify. It can severely affect their career, but it works out well for some (like Taylor Swift, but I'm not sure you can use the exception on the rule)."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgg6olc",
"comment_text": [
"Sorry, can you reword your question? I don't quite follow.",
"The artist does get paid, yes, but Spotify pays pretty low rates. The label signs them into it and the artists often cannot opt out even if they wanted to. Indie artists have an advantage because they can, and many choose to opt out from Spotify. It can severely affect their career, but it works out well for some (like Taylor Swift, but I'm not sure you can use the exception on the rule)."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfzmt5",
"comment_text": [
"No problem! "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfzmt5",
"comment_text": [
"No problem! "
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: What is the Silicon Valley?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
6653ce
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.72
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfnpjy",
"comment_text": [
"Silicon Valley, a big ass area near San Francisco with loads of tech companies like Google, Apple, Tesla just to name a few.\nThe name comes from the green boards in electric devices, its made of silicon.\nIf you want to make an IT start up, this would be your dream, but the competition is immense."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfn9s8",
"comment_text": [
"It's a place in the San Francisco bay area, also called \"the valley\" its Real Name is the Santa Clara valley and its surrounding area. Its where companies like Facebook, Apple, Google all have HQ's. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfncoe",
"comment_text": [
"A whole bunch of tech start ups where banks were more likely to fund the larger number of tech companies in the late 80s to mid 90s (iirc on the dates). So it created an environment filled with companies in the specific area."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfust3",
"comment_text": [
"it goes much further back, to the 50s - Intel, Fairchild Semiconductor, and HP all got their start there"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfncrr",
"comment_text": [
"It's a place just South of San Francisco where lots of tech companies are located. A few firms that became very important in the tech industry like some of the big semiconductor manufacturers were founded there, which made it more attractive to found other, related firms nearby."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: What is a "snap vote", what is its purpose, and how does it work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
664kwi
| 11
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.8
|
I'm not from the UK, so I'm unfamiliar with their government setup. Is this to replace existing MPs or are there empty slots? What laws allow the PM to just announce this?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgflgr5",
"comment_text": [
"In the US election dates are fixed. We know that there will be a presidential election in 2020, no matter WHAT. It will not be early, it will not be late, if the president is shot or otherwise removed the presidency will go down the order of succession until the next election date rolls around.",
"Other countries, particularly those that follow the commonwealth system, are not like this. Election day happens with the government decides that it will happen. There are certain limits, such as it must happen every X years, but there is no guarantee as to what date the election will happen on. In Canada (for example) the liberal government was elected on October 19, 2015. The next election must be called within 5 years but could happen sooner. ",
"You may have noticed that the US elections are very lengthy and drawn out, and that does not happen in other countries. This system of \"calling\" an election is part of the reason. Since we don't know exactly when an election will happen, the time period between calling the election and holding the election is fairly short. Wheres everyone in America knows exactly when the next election will be held. ",
"So this process of calling an election leads to some things that an American might find somewhat odd. Mainly there's the notion that if the government is going to do anything tremendously important, if circumstances change significantly or if parliament just can't get it's shit together, an election should be called.",
"In the case of the UK, the whole Brexit thing is a big fucking deal. So they've decided to hold an actual election before they make the process final. This allows some parties to campaign on not going through with it, and they have a \"mandate\" to go aginst the recent referendum if they win. ",
"If the government can't pass a budget, like happened a few years ago in the US. That would trigger a new election in a parliamentary country. Also if the PM dies or is otherwise changed, a new election does not need to happen, but it's customary that one would, where as in the US the VP would simply step up and become president. "
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dggeyjs",
"comment_text": [
"Election day happens with the government decides that it will happen",
"This used to be true in the UK but since 2011 is no longer the case ( ",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011",
" ).",
"You now need to either:",
"In order for the election announced yesterday to go ahead a vote, to be held on Wednesday, needs to be won by 2/3rds. ",
"It seems likely this will happen as the Labour Party (second largest party in the House) have said they're in favour of it and, obviously, most the of PM's party will vote in favour."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfojm2",
"comment_text": [
"In Canada (for example) the liberal government was elected on October 19, 2015. The next election must be called within 5 years but could happen sooner.",
"By law the next election can't happen until 2019 because the Liberals won a majority and so are not in danger of losing the confidence of the house. ",
"The only exception to this is if the Governor General dissolves parliament and issues a writ of election early, but he or she had better have a damn good reason if they want to avoid a constitutional crisis."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfrdbd",
"comment_text": [
"qewrteyhtjuk"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfj9mk",
"comment_text": [
"A snap vote is just a new election.",
"Rather than waiting for 5 years to have past since the last election, you do it now. ",
"It reelects the entire parliament, it's intended purpose being reshuffle parliament if no governement can be formed.",
"Snap elections in the UK occur if the government looses a motion of confidence, or if 2/3 of the MP's vote in favor of it."
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5:Why do some(private) universities in the US have religious affiliations, such as Catholic, Protestant and so on?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
663wbz
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.22
|
Doesn't it run completely counter to secular state? Isn't it in the constitution? Another non-secular thing with the US gov't I'm aware of is the swearing-in process at the National Cathedral that presidents go through.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfczrs",
"comment_text": [
"Private universities are founded by groups or individuals for whatever educational purpose they have in mind. Many religious groups founded schools to provide instruction in theology, or to educate students from a religious perspective. A lot of schools today that formally have a religious affiliation may be fairly secular in reality.",
"Doesn't it run completely counter to secular state?",
"On the contrary. In a secular state, private religious efforts are not hindered. This is different than state atheism.",
"Isn't it in the constitution?",
"No, it's not. The First Amendment would generally prevent Congress from establishing a public religious university, or from treating private secular and religious universities differently."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfd3w0",
"comment_text": [
"You said it yourself: those universities are private. Separation of church and state doesn't enter into it.",
"As long as they don't illegally discriminate in their admissions, they can affiliate with anyone they want."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfuoo1",
"comment_text": [
"We should note that over the years many of the schools have also shown themselves to be focused on the quality of education first, religious affiliation second. And have in some cases centuries of practice to back it up. ",
"EXTREMELY well regarded schools in the US, such as Georgetown and Notre Dame still embrace at least a portion of their identity as originating from the church and have priests in senior leadership. But the collegiate experience is little different than most of their peer schools, with maybe 1 or 2 required classes that offer overviews on the history of religions or theocratic debates and such. ",
"While many of the oldest schools, and indeed most well known schools which even predate the nation itself such as Harvard, Yale, and William and Mary began as institutions with clear religious affiliations. If they weren't out there spreading it it was clear which sect they were meant for. But that hasn't really held them back from being world class, and outside of some basic trappings and history it isn't really a thing today for them.",
"But you also have some schools like Brigham Young and the Mormon Church that take things very seriously today. Or Liberty University which would be a bad joke if it wasn't all too real. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgh1psd",
"comment_text": [
"In general, the American philosophy of secular government is non-interference of the state by the government. That is, the right to freedom of religion is ",
" the state. While it prevents the state from being affiliated with an organized church, it does not strictly separate the state from religion, per se--but it does demand equal treatment.",
"This is still more restrictive than what is practiced in some countries, which provide equal public funding even to private religious institutions."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfd618",
"comment_text": [
"Why the hell would a private university be against a secular state? Actually, it would be against the US constitution if the university was forbidden to have a religious affiliation.",
"Also the presidents are sworn in at the Capitol I'm fairly sure, not a cathedral."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: How do thread "edit" explanations work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
663jn9
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.66
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfa8d3",
"comment_text": [
"Because it is part of reddiquette to do so, manually so as not to manipulate votes.",
"Example",
"The sky is green\n",
" ",
"no it isnt \n",
"Edit so that it says the correct answer or more often than not something less contraversial.",
"*katievsbubbles",
"the sky is blue\n",
" ",
"no it isnt \n"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfa8lq",
"comment_text": [
"Ok, thanks all"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgf9sdd",
"comment_text": [
"They get a couple of responses similar to one another, and then they hit the edit button and then add the text to hopefully prevent people from adding the same response to their feed."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgf9tiy",
"comment_text": [
"They post it so that someone who has already read the post knows what the pertinent change is, or so that follow-up posts still make sense when the content they originally replied to has changed. ",
"It's basically a act of etiquette. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgf9vmm",
"comment_text": [
"You can edit your post at will 3 minutes after you've posted it.",
"After that it will appear a * in the comment, showing other people that you've changed something.",
"Usually people put ",
" in the bottom to tell other users what they've altered in the comment. It's courtesy"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: What is the difference between zyrtec, claritin and benadryl?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
663a0t
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfeizt",
"comment_text": [
"Zyrtec (cetirizine), Claritin (loratadine), and Benadryl (diphenhydramine) are all antihistamines. The body releases histamine in response to allergens, causing things like stuffy nose and rash. Antihistamines block a type of histamine receptor in the body, stopping histamine from triggering this response.",
"Benadryl, however, does other stuff too. It blocks certain acetylcholine receptors, producing a bunch of side effects like dry mouth, constipation. It also can cross into the brain, where histamine is important for regulating sleep and acetylcholine plays a role in thinking. Therefore, Benadryl can cause sleepiness and foggy thinking. In older people, it can cause some real issues with things like falls and urinary retention.",
"Zyrtec and Claritin were some of the newer drugs developed to only block histamine receptors and not cross into the brain. This produces a pretty good allergy drug with far less sedation, dry mouth, and other side effects."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgf87zw",
"comment_text": [
"Benadryl to counter effects you are experiencing now, zytec or Claritin to prevent later effects from occurring."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfc43t",
"comment_text": [
"With children and the elderly benedryl can act as a stimulant, as a heads up."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgfewa6",
"comment_text": [
"Wow this is another top notch answer! Thank you. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dgf7g2q",
"comment_text": [
"The level of drowsiness you feel. The main ingredient is different for each one, but unless you're allergic to one or don't want the drowsy side effects, you can use any of them. However, Benadryl is more immediate acting, the other two are more day to day relief."
],
"score": 1
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.