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: What happens to subscriptions when someone dies?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5zjj5g
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.63
|
For example, if someone had amazon prime and died, would they keep paying for it after they die, or would amazon get an email or letter saying they died and would have to cancel it.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deyjo7t",
"comment_text": [
"Whichever family member is handling the estate will call to cancel the subscription, and send a death certificate to the service provider to verify the death of the subscriber. If the deceased has a will, they've typically designated someone in that will to handle all of this. If they don't have a will, it's basically up to the family to handle.",
"I had to do this for all of my Dad's accounts years ago, and it sucked. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deyjvk2",
"comment_text": [
"I'm sorry for your loss.",
"Wouldn't the easy route be to cancel all of the person's credit/debit cards? Every subscription would fail to renew because of lack of valid payment method. And you're cancelling credit/debit cards anyways."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deykd3j",
"comment_text": [
"The companies would Likely still try to bill you. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deys7xp",
"comment_text": [
"Like i said. It all depends on what is being charged and how that is structured. They can go after people for unpaid student loans - they might give up once they discover the person is dead but it doesn't stop potentially harassing bill collectors from coming out not realizing their target is dead. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deylmpb",
"comment_text": [
"Is this legal though? I heard that family were not forced to take the bill but companies would still try and convince the family to continue payments"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5:When and why did we start booing as a universal expression of disapproval?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5zeory
| 51
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.83
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dexw6t1",
"comment_text": [
"Booooing?",
"I thought it was BOOurns."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dexuk9l",
"comment_text": [
"This actually dates back to prehistoric times, when people didn't approve of something or didn't like it they would mimic the sound of a cow--which eventually through time turned into what we know as \"boo\""
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dey010f",
"comment_text": [
"Can we bring back mooing?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dey2aaf",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"ELI5 is not for:",
"Information about a specific or narrow issue (personal problems, private experiences, legal questions, medical inquiries, how-to, relationship advice, etc.) ",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dexunmr",
"comment_text": [
"Damnit I love this sub "
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: How does steam manage to convince publishers to sell their games for ridiculously cheap prices during sales?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5zd4sz
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex4d4h",
"comment_text": [
"the publishers agree to it. Steam is just the middle man in the deal.",
"That is why not every game is on sale."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex4ez4",
"comment_text": [
"An older game isn't selling very many copies at the usual price. A steam sale offers publishers an opportunity to collect a large boost in sales. Since the costs were paid long ago, the large boost in sales is mostly profit for the publisher, and they've already reached almost everyone who would purchase it at normal prices (so the sale doesn't cannibalize too many potentially full price sales). "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex4gra",
"comment_text": [
"Steam doesn't convince anyone .. the publishers just decide they think the more units sold will counter the money lost per sale."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex4jep",
"comment_text": [
"Pretty sure it's just in the publisher's best interest. Fewer sales will result if prices are higher, meaning less publicity. The sales help spotlight the game in a way for a period of time. ",
"Also, when there's a big sale, how often do you buy games at full price? I can imagine game publisher's realize this and choose to discount their games to increase sales."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex4llv",
"comment_text": [
"Steam is a reseller. They have agreements with the publishers about how much they get from each sale. If it does not say anything about sales periods in the contracts then the publisher will get a fixed price for each unit sold no matter if it is on sale or not. So Steam might sell some games at a loss, but overall they make money on it since people buy more of other games and also buy games at full price when lots of others own the game. However it is likely that the publishers will get less money if the game is sold during sales but that they limit how many units can be sold with a discount."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is the military justice system "worse" to the offenders than to those in the civil justice system? (Canada)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5zcxrc
| 5
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.66
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex379r",
"comment_text": [
"If discipline breaks down in any army, it severely reduces the capability of the entire unit to operate.",
"Put simply, this means that lots and lots of people could die.",
"So, lets consider civilian life someone refuses to do what his boss says. Well, generally, a sale or two could be lost - or a project delayed, or maybe even some product destroyed .. and that person is sacked.",
"Now army life. A machine gun operator refuses to open up on the enemy as they advance towards other Canadian troops - about the same lack of discipline has occurred (refusing instruction), but now 24 Canadians are dead.",
"So yes, a lack of discipline anywhere has to be damn well stamped out when we're talking about the army."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex4bld",
"comment_text": [
"Precisely. My daughter is 6."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex2tsh",
"comment_text": [
"how do you define \"worse\"? the military justice system isn't much different from civilian. ",
"Is there a specific example you have that prompted this question?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex3xvv",
"comment_text": [
"I tried to do a generalisation, to a level my 6 year old daughter would understand."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex78on",
"comment_text": [
"Agreed on this. Other than defining military crimes that do not apply to civilians, in what ways is the military justice system 'worse'?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why is there a statute of limitations?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5zc3u0
| 16
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.69
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deww814",
"comment_text": [
"The difficulty of prosecuting a crime years after the event is absolute pain in the backside. ",
"Do you recall what you had for breakfast a week ago \nDo you recall what you had for breakfast a week and 21 years ago.",
"Human memory is fragile. that's the first point",
"Then we get into the logistic of a trial 20+ years after the event now officer Murphy the officer who discovered the crime and took information is in Alaska and retired officer jimmy has degenerative brain disorder, officer jones was on his first few days and had no idea what was going down. officer tom died three year after the crime",
"Getting them in for this case also cost money and court time that is needed for all of today's crimes (all of today's crimes that the state or crown can win other wise the DA or CPS will drop the case)",
"The witnesses are even harder to track, even if they can recall it. and we do kinda need them to have the look of a trial that any defense lawyer can't just break over his knee. ",
"Edit can you tell I did one of these..."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dewxdxz",
"comment_text": [
"The poster listed some problems with old cases, but it is actually not the reason for a statute of limitations. It is not for the prosecution, it is for the defense. ",
"How are you supposed to defend yourself and tell them what you did if you can't even remember it yourself? There might be a great reason you were carrying a gun that day, and you might have a great reason you didn't shoot jim (like the gun was broken that day, and jim shot himself trying to fix it after you left). But you can't remember since it was 50 years ago and now all that is left is a video of you walking into jims house with a gun and later jim has a bullet in his chest, and you can't remember what time you left so you can't prove you left before the witness heard the gunshot.",
"Since it is unreasonable to throw someone in prison because they can't remember what they did 50 years ago, we decided it would result in shoddy trials and innocent people in prison, so we set a limit on prosecuting crimes. The more egregious the crime, the longer the limitation. Also, if we decide to prosecute someone, that timer stops. So people can't just run away to run out the time."
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex0zp0",
"comment_text": [
"One the practical side, it's just nearly impossible to prosecute a case for, say, stealing a candy-bar forty years after the event.",
"On the ethical side, there's a couple reasons. One is that, if you haven't been caught for more crimes since then, you've apparently changed yourself to be a good, law-abiding citizen, so why bother punishing you for something done long ago? Nothing would be gained. Along a similar line, most people change so much over time that we general accept they lose responsibility for things done long ago. (If dad catches you stealing a cigarette from him today, he'll ground you. If you tell him about it in 20 years, he'll laugh about it.) ",
"And, to a certain extent, living under the constant threat of arrest and persecution for years or decades is itself a punishment."
],
"score": 10
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dewxls1",
"comment_text": [
"The defence only has to prove reasonable doubt",
"The defense doesn't have to prove ",
". The prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dex04o1",
"comment_text": [
"The statute is actually there to help the defense.",
"I'm 36 years old. I was in high school in 1996-1999. Let's say that today, in 2017, the police arrived at my home to arrest me for raping a girl while I was in High School (something that never actually happened, I did not lose my virginity until my 20s). They say the rape occurred on January 16th, 1999.",
"There is no physical evidence, but she says it happened and it was me. So they bring me to trial. She testifies and is believable. ",
"Now, in a normal trial, I could testify as to where I was on that day. But that was 17 years ago and I have no fucking clue where I was on that day. I know that during that time of my life I was spending almost every Saturday with my best friend, but he won't remember that specific day any more than I could. I know that we were no life nerds who rented videos every weekend and did not attend many parties. I'm sure Blockbuster has a record of what videos we rented, perhaps there was even security camera footage... only Blockbuster no longer exists, so I can't get any of that. ",
"I could ask around the neighborhood that I grew up in to see if anyone remembers that day, only I don't even live in that city anymore and neither do most of my classmates. I could look through a yearbook and start hunting people down, but they are as likely to remember that day as I was. ",
"In addition, while you might think that you'd remember high school classmates the truth is that most of that stuff fades fairly fast. I have memories of specific events and a general sense of what the day to day was like, but specific days are lost to time and the faces of most classmates have blurred together. ",
"While our court system is based on the presumption of innocence, there is still a need to mount a defense. A defendant, like me, should not need to only rely on this presumption in order to maintain my freedom. I have a right to defend myself and a part of that defense is that I need to have the timely opportunity to gather evidence. The accuser and the state can use that time to their advantage as I don't know I'm going to be accused so I don't know I should be preserving evidence. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
|
ELI5:Why can't we set a program to randomly generate pixels until it creates art?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5z6yyd
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.72
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devqymu",
"comment_text": [
"Why can't we set a program to randomly generate pixels",
"We can. That part's really easy.",
"until it creates art?",
"How would it know when to stop or what is considered \"art?\"",
"You can program a computer to draw pictures by randomly assigning a color value to each pixel, but you'll most likely get something out that looks like a random mess. If you start telling the computer how to color each pixel then it's no longer random."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devs1mg",
"comment_text": [
"Software developer here,",
"Go ahead, but you better pour yourself a cup of coffee, because it's going to take a while...",
"Your binary computer represents all data as bits, 0 or 1, be it a text file, a picture, or a program. It's all bits, it's how it's interpreted that distinguishes one from the other. You can even see this if you open a program or a picture in notepad, this is a text file program interpreting it's input bits in the only way it knows how, as text, and what you get when you open a binary file (they're all binary files), but like a picture or program, is those bits in terms of how they map to text symbols - there's a map of bits to bits, bits of those files to bits that are the pixel patterns that make up text symbols.",
"Anyway, we can contemplate this data in terms of a singly large binary encoded integer. Let's consider a small picture by today's standard, 640 pixels by 480 pixels. If each pixel is full color, that's 24 bits, 3, bytes, per pixel. So that's 640",
"24 = 7372800 bits. And each place is a power of two, so 1 = 1, 10 = 2, 100 = 4, 1000 = 8... Each place doubles the number space. And we have over 7 million places...",
"So how many possible pictures can you generate? 2",
" = ~8.95e10",
" or ~10",
" This is a huge ass number. Many will make an intelligible picture, many more will be one bit different from said picture, utterly indistinguishable to the human eye, most will just be pixel noise.",
"Let that sink in, just imagine how many meaningful pictures you can draw in that space, how many are only different by degree. And of all the possible pictures, frames of video, whatever that can fit in that space, they're all a drop in the bucket compared to the number of pictures that are just random noise.",
"The chances of rolling those dice on your computer and ending up with the Mona Lisa are so slim you'd experience the heat death of the universe first."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devqw1s",
"comment_text": [
"You can. Who's stopping you? Of course, it might well take longer than the lifespan of the universe to generate something most would call \"art\" rather than multicoloured static, but there's no reason you ",
" do that."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devsmky",
"comment_text": [
"Correct - the real problem is that the computer can't tell whether it has created art. Nowadays there are experiments with neural networks that would be able to do that though: there is one network that generates images and there is another one that tries to tell whether they're \"good\". Take a look ",
"at this",
", it's a nice example."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devrofk",
"comment_text": [
"There is a website called the ",
"Library of Babel",
" that has, somewhere in it, every word ever spoken by humans. Most of it is garbage--if you pick a random book on a random shelf, it'll just turn out a bunch of random letters. In fact, it would take a very long time browsing to find a single coherent word in the sea of randomness. But somewhere out there, there is a complete biography of every human ever to exist.",
"Nobody has the resources to generate that many images, and nobody has the time to look through them until they find something interesting. The best we can do is tell computers what art looks like, and ask them to come up with something. Look up Deepdream for examples of this. But generated random images, pixel by pixel, is not the way to make anything useful."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Do pharmaceutical companies really want to stop the legalization of marijuana?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5z709z
| 12
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.74
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devrhdi",
"comment_text": [
"With marijuana legal, the sales of the follow medications would drop tremendously because marijuana is cheap and will get cheaper the longer it is legal.",
"Muscle relaxers\nanti nausea\npain killers\nappetite increases\nmood suppressants\nanxiety meds\nmany more, but the above alone account for about billion dollars a year in the US "
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devrj2u",
"comment_text": [
"https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/13/one-striking-chart-shows-why-pharma-companies-are-fighting-legal-marijuana/",
"https://news.vice.com/article/leading-anti-marijuana-academics-are-paid-by-painkiller-drug-companies",
"You can easily google for more sources."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devrgs1",
"comment_text": [
"Right but what evidence is there that they are actually trying to stop legalization? "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devrj5v",
"comment_text": [
"What evidence is there though they are actually trying to stop or repeal or interfere with legalization? "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devwice",
"comment_text": [
"You're looking for hard evidence/paper trails/ monetary proof, but since Citizens United it is nearly impossible to tell exactly where funding for political causes ",
" comes from. That's why al the answers so far highlight the incentive/motive for pharmaceutical companies to do so: medical cannabis is thought to be a cure for a wide range of symptoms (the fact that it's thought is enough to influence purchasing decisions) and it's not very profitable from a pharmaceutical standpoint(no patents). \nTh question is: why wouldn't they protect their profits? "
],
"score": 5
}
|
|
ELI5: How do pharmaceutical drugs make it to the streets for sale?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5z5u6d
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
Is there some kind of major shipment like with cocaine or marijuana? Or is it on a smaller scale, spread out across the country?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devhf11",
"comment_text": [
"People fill thier rx, they sell them either to a dealer or directly themselves, go back next month and repeat. ",
"They either get their rx through legitimate means, dont take them and sell them, go to a crooked dr who is known to write rxs for cash called \"pill mills\", or steal rx pads and forge the rx. ",
"Though alot of areas have been busting alot of drs running pill mills, and most pharmacies now call the drs office and varify any rx thats for a narcotic. Which is why alot of areas saw a sudden dry up of pills, and as a result much higher heroin use, as heroine had became cheaper and more readily available. ",
"Opiates kill people and ruin lives. We need to OUTLAW opiates and LEGALIZE cannabis on a federal level already. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devirue",
"comment_text": [
"Well I know that opiates are the main one but I was actually thinking of other ones like ADHD meds and also Xanax. I used to know a guy who sold xanax (the old school 2 mg bars) and he would get like a shitload at a time (hundreds). I never asked him what the logistics were because that's not a good idea but I wonder how do some dealers get their hands on a lot of script pills at once? SOMEONE has to be working on the inside, not just the doctors. I wonder if pharmacies are involved? I would imagine they are pretty strict. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devnh8u",
"comment_text": [
"Not really. Probably had a couple people who were gaming the system and getting alot a month. Ive known of people who were getting around 320 percs a month. Way more then anyone would ever need to take. Get a couple people who sell you their rxs every month, thats over 1000 pills a month from one dealer. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dew3699",
"comment_text": [
"There was a guy who did an AMA about selling Xanax on the darknet he ordered the active ingredient in bulk from China and was pressing his own pills. Found the ",
"AMA"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devktug",
"comment_text": [
"In Ireland they are just posted via the mail and then dispersed between a few people who then feed it down to more people."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5:What is Independence referendum proposed by Scottish Firth Minister about?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5z4kw5
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dev7h1m",
"comment_text": [
"Scotland had a popular vote in order to decide whether or not they should leave the uk in 2014, they voted to stay by a narrow margin on the basis that the UK would remain in the European union. ",
"however now the UK have chosen to leave the European union. ",
"Unlike the rest of the United Kingdom, Scotland voted to stay in the EU with a 70% majority. So now, Sturgeon, the head of the Scottish government is seeking permission to have another vote, to see if Scotland want to leave the UK to presumably join the European Union again. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dev9dbx",
"comment_text": [
"No one knew there was going to be a referendum. While Cameron put it in as an election pledge in early 2013, it would only happen if they won a majority in 2015 ",
" . The Scottish referendum vote was in 2014.",
"Even then, the referendum was generally viewed as a political move to placate his own party members, not something that would actually mean britain leaving the EU.",
"I think it's difficult to argue that Brexit doesn't substantially change the nature of the relationship between England and Scotland, given the huge difference in feeling between the two countries.",
" And lets face it, how many election pledges ever get followed through on?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dev84dc",
"comment_text": [
"Except it was a British public vote and not one of regional concern. So the fact it many people in Scotland voted to remain is irrelevant. The Scottish are British citizens, the same as Wales and Northern Ireland. So in that respect we are all in the same boat."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dev8tki",
"comment_text": [
"Agreed, just outlining the motivations for a potential new referendum. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_devff3a",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"ELI5 is not for:",
"Recent/current events - Because things in the news are fast changing and the whole story is often not available, it is difficult to explain many current events fully, and objectively. ",
"/r/outoftheloop",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do teachers/professors set an page expectation?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5z3bj9
| 4
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.69
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deuyxc1",
"comment_text": [
"It sets a standard.",
"I can write a 1 page, 10 page, or an entire book on, WW1. Which do you want?",
"Length dictates potential depth. On the other side of things; as a teacher/professor, if I do have a student when given an arbitrary length paper to write, decides to write a novel...I certainly don't want to expend the time necessary to grade it. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dev36wb",
"comment_text": [
"Several reasons."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deuyghc",
"comment_text": [
"I tell my students their work needs to be \"as long as a piece of string\" but they have a very hard time without a concrete number."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deuylb1",
"comment_text": [
"It's usually so they will be forced to be thorough rather than just skim the surface of the topic. Often at the graduate level the page limits go away because the students understand they must write enough to prove they know what they are talking about."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dev9epf",
"comment_text": [
"Number two sounds correct. When it came to my major university projects it was a word ",
" - x thousand and no more. Many of my fellow students had to shorten their initial drafts. (I on the other was the procrastinator who rushed it all at the last minute and thus turned in short projects for mediocre marks.)"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: The difference between the different German cases
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5z1b57
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.59
|
When do I use Dativ vs Nominativ vs Genitiv vs. Akkusativ? I'm struggling to remember when to use der/die/das and I think understanding the cases may help
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deuhe7s",
"comment_text": [
"Nominative when the noun is the subject of a sentence.",
"Genitive for possessive.",
"Accusative for receiving action (direct object) ",
"Dative for indirect object.",
"Accusative and dative for objects of prepositions, depending on the preposition."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deuhyqo",
"comment_text": [
"Learn to recognize those components in English sentences. If you get to the point where you can recognize them easily in a sentence, it will make understanding German easier."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deupv5m",
"comment_text": [
"It's \"Jemande",
" ein Geschenk machen\". You need Dativ for that. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deuhmd1",
"comment_text": [
"Thank you, so really is just a matter of remembering all that then remembering when to use der/die/das within each of those cases. Simple lol"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deujlia",
"comment_text": [
"It gets complicated with prepositions. Some prepositions always take accusative, some are always dative, and some take different cases depending on the circumstances. \"Ich laufe in ",
" Haus\" means you're walking around ",
" the house, but \"Ich laufe in ",
" Haus\" means you're walking ",
" the house."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: why do men feel guilty after masturbating but women don't?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5z01jr
| 0
|
Other
| true
| true
| 0.29
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deu7bmg",
"comment_text": [
"There is loads of women who feel guilty after masturbating (especially if they were raised in a sex negative, masturbation is sin sort of way). On the flip side, there are also tons of men who feel no guilt whatsoever after jerking off.",
"This is not really a women are X and men are Y thing. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deu7bmg",
"comment_text": [
"There is loads of women who feel guilty after masturbating (especially if they were raised in a sex negative, masturbation is sin sort of way). On the flip side, there are also tons of men who feel no guilt whatsoever after jerking off.",
"This is not really a women are X and men are Y thing. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deu7bmg",
"comment_text": [
"There is loads of women who feel guilty after masturbating (especially if they were raised in a sex negative, masturbation is sin sort of way). On the flip side, there are also tons of men who feel no guilt whatsoever after jerking off.",
"This is not really a women are X and men are Y thing. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deu7wp2",
"comment_text": [
"Men by default do not feel guilty masturbating, and women by default do not feel \"not guilty\" for masturbating. ",
"Feeling guilty for masturbating requires you to have adopted the idea that masturbation is wrong, at least to a small degree. As such it is just as likely for a woman to feel guilty as it is for a man depending on their social and religious background experiences. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deu9jrw",
"comment_text": [
"How can you say female sexuality is empowering when women all over the world suffer from body shaming, slut-shaming, and sexual assault? There are many cultures where women are \"supposed\" to be pure and asexual until their husband comes along."
],
"score": 4
}
|
|
ELI5: Opposites of shapes
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5yzw5g
| 4
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.65
|
My little sister has been telling me about "the opposites of shapes," with things such as "the opposite of a triangle is a square." I don't see how that logic flows, so if anyone can actually tell me whether or not she's just bullshitting me, and if she isn't, explain the logic.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deubaf9",
"comment_text": [
"Your sister is wide of the mark, the \"opposite\" of a triangle is not a square, not for any reasonable definition of \"opposite\".",
"That said there is a kind of opposite in geometry, called duality. Take any polygon (shape with straight sides), find the midpoint of each side, join those midpoints together, and that is the dual polygon. Repeat the process and you get the original again but smaller.",
"The dual will always have the same number of sides, so the 'opposite' of a triangle is another triangle, differently shaped and the other way up. Regular polygons are their own dual - the dual of a square is a square. Non regular polygons are not, for example the dual of a rectangle is a rhombus (a diamond shape).",
"The same idea applies for 3D shapes or polyhedrons, putting a point (a vertex) in the middle of each face and joining them up to make the dual polyhedron."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deu5qze",
"comment_text": [
"Your sister is mistaken. These shapes are not opposites. The only real \"opposite\" of a shape is the hole you get when you cut that shape out of something."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deu5xu9",
"comment_text": [
"Or maybe two shapes that fit together like a yin yang"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deubcf3",
"comment_text": [
"The only opposite of shape is anti-shape. That was a joke, but the way i think about it opposites can only exist in concept and idea. Good vs bad. Big vs small. Shapes can't have opposites because there's nothing subjective about shapes. If shapes have opposites they only exist in a plane we cannot perceive."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deuvyot",
"comment_text": [
"The opposite of a square is a square root."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: What is the argument behind not imposing term limits on United States congress members?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ywz0x
| 20
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.72
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_detjwoc",
"comment_text": [
"The argument is that we have regular elections where their seats come up. This means that they have to earn re-election each time and if their States want them to represent them then why should that be denied them. ",
"There is also the argument that experience in lawmaking is very important so the longer someone can be in congress the better. "
],
"score": 20
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_detldd9",
"comment_text": [
"Great responses so far, want to add another point.",
"People (organizations) who support term limits claim that term limits would somehow limit the influence of \"special interests\" by removing their long-time-affiliated legislators. The opposite, however, may actually correct: That new, junior legislators are more easily influenced by \"special interests\", and that it takes experience as a legislator to learn how to work and pass legislation without their influence."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_detk9qs",
"comment_text": [
"I had a government professor in college who was an expert at keeping his political opinions a mystery, but he did take a very firm stand against congressional term limits.",
"His two biggest points were that it was undemocratic for the government to take away the people's choice of their elected officials and that it was unnecessary because the average person only serves about 10-15 years in Congress. That means most people who serve only spend a fraction of their working years in Congress. That's only two or three elections for a senator. There are a few extremes, but in general there is already high turnover in Congress. Occasionally I see a Facebook post claiming that serving just one term gets you a lifelong pension, but that's not the case. You have to put in a lot of time to pull a full pension."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_detmtx7",
"comment_text": [
"Also, let's say you limit to four terms in the House. This means that, on average, a quarter of the chamber ",
" they can't run again -- meaning they aren't accountable to voters, ",
" need to start worrying about their next job, which is substantially likely to be a lobbying firm. So a quarter of the chamber has big incentives to ignore voters and please lobbyists"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_detm12p",
"comment_text": [
"In fact, there have been a number of studies. The problem is, they've all been conducted by organizations with a pro-limits or anti-limits agenda."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: Men's pants sizes
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5yuhpg
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desz9cd",
"comment_text": [
"In the uk it's normally just 1 number which is the waist size. Leg sizes are sometimes then split between short, regular and long. Most retailer websites have size fitting guides for clothing that should give you further measurements."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deszz68",
"comment_text": [
"Sadly, I am in the US, probably should have mentioned that sorry."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_det0abz",
"comment_text": [
"...its the same in the US"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_det0eg5",
"comment_text": [
"Every pair of pants I've every bought were sized with two numbers, waist x length."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_det14ty",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"ELI5 is not for:",
"Straightforward answers or facts - ELI5 is for requesting an explanation of a concept, not a simple straightforward answer ",
"/r/answers",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:In music, what exactly is RMS and what's a "good" RMS?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5yswg4
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dest9q8",
"comment_text": [
"The RMS wattage of a simple Sine Wave AC signal will be 0.707 (70%) of the peak AC Wattage.",
"While the RMS voltage is 0.707 of the peak voltage, RMS watts are 0.5 of peak watts for a sine wave. That's because power changes with the square of the voltage. ",
"Peak power refers to the maximum of the instantaneous power waveform, which, for a sine wave, is always twice the average power.",
"In audio amps, \"peak power\" has also been used to refer to PMPO (Peak Music Power Output) or for IHF (Institute of High Fidelity) power. They measure power of short duration peaks. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desn9os",
"comment_text": [
"If you're talking about audio amplifiers, it stands for \"root mean square\". It is a measure of true continuous power as opposed to peak power. Some audio amp makers claimed higher wattage numbers based on short term peaks, they were forced to advertise the true continuous power in RMS watts. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desnguq",
"comment_text": [
"The only RMS that I know of that relates on any way to music is the Root Mean Square calculation to find the equivalent DC voltage load of an AC waveform, like the amplified audio feed to a speaker. The RMS wattage of a simple Sine Wave AC signal will be 0.707 (70%) of the peak AC Wattage. ",
"A quality speaker will be rated with a power capacity in Watts (RMS) to reflect the fact that it is possible through some combination of clipping, compression, and source can lead to a DC or near DC electric current being passed through a speaker by the amplifier. Unless the speaker has the capacity to handle that DC power, such an event will most likely overload and destroy the driver coil wire, leaving the speaker blown. As such, only RMS Wattage ratings should be used when selecting speakers to match with an amplifier of a given power output.",
"There is no such thing as a \"good RMS\". The use of RMS in speaker power rating is just used to reflect the fact that a \"70 Watt RMS\" rated speaker coil has the exact same power carrying capacity as a \"100 Watt Peak\" rated speaker. Similarly, a \"140 Watt Peak\" speaker has the exact same power capacity as a \"100 Watt RMS\" speaker."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_destfi0",
"comment_text": [
"Thank you for the correction."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desnihp",
"comment_text": [
"In terms of speaker output, it stands for Root-Mean-Square.",
"If you imagine a normal sine wave (the wavy line with represents the frequency and amplitude of a sound wave), it is equally above and below the 0 line, which makes it hard to calculate a suitable number by which to measure it.",
"If you Square every point on the curve, then you end up with a wave which only has positive numbers (negative numbers squared become positive). You then take the Mean of this wave, to give you an average (so no more peaks and troughs), and then you take a square Root of your new number, to come up with a number which is now a pretty good positive average of the amplitude (volume) of the wave produced by the speaker.",
"In terms of what a good RMS is, most good home stereo speakers will be in the 75-100 watts range. Mine are 90 Watts RMS, and they are loud enough to be deafening while still not distorting in a small bedroom. Obviously you will need more to fill a larger space.",
"Speakers are also sometimes measured by PMPO, which is Peak Music Power Output, and is whatever the maxima of the sine wave is, so is a little bit higher than RMS values. PMPO is a good way to determine the loudest single output that a speaker can produce, but sounds only make sense when they have a series of rarefactions and condensations, which means output over time, and RMS is a better measure of that than PMPO."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Is there anything that says you can't cheat in a US election? If cheating was proven true, would it have any effect on the results?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5yu2ya
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.61
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desw4ks",
"comment_text": [
"It is illegal to vote multiple times. Illegal to vote under someone else's name. Illegal to vote in a jurisdiction you do not live in. Illegal to stuff the ballot with false votes. Illegal to take away votes from a competitor. And many other laws regarding voting. So yes there are lots of laws that say you cannot cheat in a US election. ",
"Doing so will result in you being arrested and fined, and there may be grounds for there to be a recount. If the person running is the one guilty of such a crime (such as stuffing ballot boxes) then they are removed from office and often arrested. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deswkjw",
"comment_text": [
"Pretty much by definition it's illegal. The \"rules\" for an election are the laws. So if you're cheating, you're breaking a law. If you're not breaking any rules, then you're not cheating. You might be acting like a dick, but that's not the same thing as cheating. ",
"The election agencies can't just decide to throw out the results because someone cheated unless they did so in a way that would invalidate them. You still have to be tried and convicted. Depending on local laws and the position you're elected to, you could be removed or disqualified from running automatically. In other cases there might need to be a separate process to remove you from office if you don't resign. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desx7qa",
"comment_text": [
"Certain things are illegal, like those mentioned below. Things that directly impact the actual voting process. ",
"What the Russians and others are alleged to have done in this past election is a little different. Even if it's proven without question that the Russians hacked emails and used social media and the internet to strongly influence voters in the election and favor Trump, that will not change the results. Trump still won and they will not be removing him from office over this, even if we know the Russians did all of these things. ",
"Laws may have been broken there, but it's the actual votes that are placed that determine who won the election. Unless you've hacked a computer directly to make more votes appear in your column, then you haven't violated that. Manipulating voters into voting for a certain candidate may be unethical, but at the end of the day the voter has free will, so if they make the vote and it's recorded correctly then it's a legitimate vote. ",
"Hope that makes some sense. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desxkjv",
"comment_text": [
"There are many things people consider \"unfair\" that are not illegal: ",
"Make it harder to vote in ways that affect your opponent's voters more than your own.",
"\nExaggerate, misrepresent, or lie about issues-- including your opponent's positions. ",
"And then there are gray areas...",
"\nYou're allowed to benefit from embarrassing information about your opponent that becomes public. After all, it's partly their fault for doing embarrassing things and it's definitely not your fault that stuff was released.",
"\nAnd yet if you hack their computers or ask somebody to hack their computers for you to get and publicize embarrassing information... that may not be illegal in the context of an election but it's illegal just based on the actions you took (cybercrime). ",
"So the short answer is, certain types of \"cheating\" are or are not allowed. And a major question in the US at the moment is not whether an activity was allowed, it's who did it. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_det7umj",
"comment_text": [
"The rules for elections are laws. Therefore if an action is not illegal it is not breaking one of the rules and is therefore not cheating. It may be unfair to you, but just being unfair is not cheating. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why aren't you supposed to use a phone in petrol stations?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ysbgt
| 37
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.73
|
I've always been told it's because they'll blow up; but is this the real reason?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desj7nb",
"comment_text": [
"In the early days of cell phones, people were concerned that a ringing cell phone could cause a spark that could ignite fumes and cause a fire. There have been many stories circulated about it happening, but none of them have ever been confirmed. Cellphone manufacturers have stated that there is a tiny possibility that a cellphone could cause a spark, but no actual incidents have ever been documented. Snopes has an article about it ",
"here",
"."
],
"score": 29
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desvb34",
"comment_text": [
"Nowadays it's more about people being distracted if they are using their phones, leading to spills which are hazardous. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desjb45",
"comment_text": [
"Devices designed to be used in places where there are flammable vapours are built differently to normal electronics. They are built so that under no circumstances could they be a source of ignition. Anything that could heat up or spark is mounted inside completely sealed chambers, power levels are kept very low. The idea is that it could not catch fire if dropped or even crushed.",
"A phone is not built like this. It could become a source of ignition randomly due to any number of internal failures, and is highly likely to ignite if dropped or crushed. This means it should not be used around flammable vapours, such as you get when fuelling a car.",
"A side point is that a person using a phone is likely to move around while their car is fuelling. This movement can build up a charge of static electricity on them, and a common source of gas station fires is a static electricity spark when they touch the fuel nozzle."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desj8vk",
"comment_text": [
"Okay thank you. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desnasu",
"comment_text": [
"This is no longer relevant thanks to vapor recovery systems. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
ELI5: Why does a Chinese company such as ZTE feel obliged to pay a $829m fine for infringing US-imposed sanctions against Iran and N Korea?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ysacp
| 104
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.85
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desj84i",
"comment_text": [
"The reason they were fined is because they sold US made/designed goods to Iran and North Korea, among other permitted countries. They want to continue to sell those goods to the \"other permitted countries\" but would be prevented from doing so if they didn't pay the fine.",
"They have tangible assets in the US, if they refuse to pay the fine the US could seize those assets.",
"Like most companies engaged in international trade they use the US banking system. If they refused to pay the fine they would be prevented from using the US banking system, which could destroy their ability to do business in much of the world."
],
"score": 85
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desjbgt",
"comment_text": [
"Great explanation thanks, a follow on Q though: does that mean if they were selling goods to these countries that were not US made/designed that they would be beyond the scope of the sanctions?"
],
"score": 15
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deslscl",
"comment_text": [
"This is correct. If you look at the US sanctions against Russian officials, some of them were only on name only, as they had no us holdings the US can go after. ",
"The goal here is to find other countries to apply sanctions as well, so that basically the only place you can do business is your own. "
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desu87l",
"comment_text": [
"The scope of the sanctions are anyone doing business in the US and wishes to continue to do business and hold assets in the US. If they didn't pay the fine they couldn't sell in the US and other countries/US allies could impose sanctions on them as well."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_det3zpl",
"comment_text": [
"this is the right answer. it's not about the origin of the goods. if you don't comply you lose access to the US market and the US controlled global financial system."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: French Press and Pour Over Coffee..?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ypxhg
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.72
|
I'm not sure if this is due to hipsters influence over the world or just the instagrams I follow but I am wondering why these are suddenly SO popular and if there are benefits compared to using a regular coffee pot or Keurig.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des09xo",
"comment_text": [
"They make a better tasting coffee. For example, for a French press, you can steep it longer or shorter for your desired strength.",
"I use a pour over for my coffee for three reasons. First, as mentioned, it tastes better. Second, it takes up as much space as a coffee mug instead of a countertop appliance. Lastly, for a Keurig or drip machine, there are hoses that eventually build up with gunk in them. They become very difficult to clean, and the cleaning only partially works with harsh chemicals. My pour over is a simple ceramic device that I wash with a sponge or dishwasher, just like a mug.",
"Are Keurigs or regular drip makers bad? No. They are convenient as hell. They just don't make the best cup of coffee."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des05nr",
"comment_text": [
"French press uses a metal filter rather than paper. This prevents all the flavorful essential oils of the coffee from being caught in the filter as they pass through metal just fine. Same deal vs. Keurig except Keurig is even worse since you can't even use quality, freshly ground coffee."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des8bbx",
"comment_text": [
"Things get really fun when you learn how to make Turkish coffee! "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des7ba0",
"comment_text": [
"Why do you use a keurig, then? Don't you want to be able to control how long the beans steep?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des7ba0",
"comment_text": [
"Why do you use a keurig, then? Don't you want to be able to control how long the beans steep?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: How does a nuclear meltdown work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5yqppy
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.63
|
How does a nuclear meltdown work and what are the effects? As much as I understand, it basically happens when the cooling system malfunction, but my question is how does everyone get radiation poising and all that? Does it explode or something?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des8mo8",
"comment_text": [
"Lit."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des7bkr",
"comment_text": [
"People get radiation poisoning by getting struck with high doses of radiation, or by ingesting or absorbing radioactive material. If radioactive material is released into the atmosphere, water supply, or the environment in any other way, both these things can occur.",
"Does it explode? Well, the radioactive material itself doesn't explode, but the water used for cooling can easily be vaporized, and if its trapped inside pipes or another pressurized container, it will explode. This ejects radioactive material into the environment, causing the effects I said above."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des7e11",
"comment_text": [
"The core overheats and melts, in a literal sense. ",
"You get a mixture of molten core material pooling at the bottom of the containment. That core material may or may not destroy the bottom of the containment and escape. ",
"A meltdown is, strictly speaking, not actually dangerous on its own. A pool of molten core is not really any different than an intact core ",
". Take Three Mile Island as an example - it did not have significant releases of radioactive material. ",
"What's dangerous is the fact that the whole system is, as a whole, pretty FUBAR by the time you have a meltdown."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des8ljh",
"comment_text": [
"The trees surrounding Chernobyl are so irradiated that they do not decompose when they die because the bacteria and fungus that would decompose them are dead. This means that we have thousands of dead trees just standing around. one forest fire and there will ",
" of irradiated soot particles wafting all over the world. Have fun sleeping tonight. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des8lmu",
"comment_text": [
"in order for a nuclear reaction to be controlled, it has to be kept at a certain temperature, so its water cooled. If the cooling fails, heat builds up and accelerates the reaction, compounding the heat. Since the reaction has reached a high temperature, the nuclear reaction becomes self sustaining, and will keep going until all the fuel is used. It's called a meltdown because it gets so hot it melts through the reactor core"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Who decides which channels are allowed to broadcast on television?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5yptuh
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.63
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des28ot",
"comment_text": [
"Did they drop Universal's channels? That's the company who owns / runs NBC I think "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des28ot",
"comment_text": [
"Did they drop Universal's channels? That's the company who owns / runs NBC I think "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des3z5r",
"comment_text": [
"This is why most companies give you 200+ channels even when you only want maybe 50 or so. The broadcasting companies require sub-channels to be carried along with their normal content. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des562n",
"comment_text": [
"In the US, the FCC controls licensing of transmission frequencies for radio and television. That covers the over the air transmission.",
"The cable, fiber and dish providers decide what is transmitted over their systems. This is done under negotiated contracts. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_des5oue",
"comment_text": [
"In the US, the FCC issues licenses to television stations, which gives them the legal privilege to broadcast in a certain part of the electromagnetic spectrum (AKA what we traditionally think of when we hear the terms \"broadcast/network television\" or UHF/VHF specifically). This is because towards the beginning of the 1900s (or possibly late 1800s), the US government decided parts of the spectrum are classified as \"public goods/utilities\" and therefore they have an immediate interest in protecting them from privatization and letting anyone in the public have the right of use.",
"This leads to these stations being local/regional based, though, since there's also a maximum amount of power (wattage) they're allowed to output, meaning their reach is inherently limited (just as with radio stations, you don't want someone in Springfield overpowering and preventing someone in Ogdenville--who's also dutifully licensed--from broadcasting).",
"Over time, groups of stations banded together and promised each other--or a larger, parent organization--that they'd broadcast the same content, usually in return for cuts on profit, easier content access, etc. These \"networks\" of stations become the traditional networks you know of today: NBC, CBS, ABC, etc.",
"Note so far the only channels I've spoken about are broadcast networks operating over the airwaves. Cable (Freeform, USA, Syfy, HBO, etc.) is a completely different medium that the FCC does not (and cannot) regulate, so the only parties then \"deciding\" which channels are allowed are the operators themselves.",
"Does this help?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How do child sex abusers recognize children that have been sexually abused before?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ynvnq
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.54
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_derq5at",
"comment_text": [
"The kids don't act \"normal\" in all respects. They will exhibit behaviors that are a product of their prior abuse. As most child molesters will be repeat offenders, and frequently will have an ongoing relationship with their victims, the child molester will know these behaviors from their previous victims. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_derq5at",
"comment_text": [
"The kids don't act \"normal\" in all respects. They will exhibit behaviors that are a product of their prior abuse. As most child molesters will be repeat offenders, and frequently will have an ongoing relationship with their victims, the child molester will know these behaviors from their previous victims. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_derqphj",
"comment_text": [
"You'd need to ask a professional about the details, but yeah, I would assume that most people wouldn't recognize the behaviors because they wouldn't have the association without prior knowledge of the abuse.",
"You can probably find organizations that can tell you how to spot abuse."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_derqphj",
"comment_text": [
"You'd need to ask a professional about the details, but yeah, I would assume that most people wouldn't recognize the behaviors because they wouldn't have the association without prior knowledge of the abuse.",
"You can probably find organizations that can tell you how to spot abuse."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_derj9ee",
"comment_text": [
"It likely has less to do with knowing history and more to do with seeing the same signs that made them a target the first time (but worse now because the kid's already been abused). A kid who has been abused and not received the proper treatment and therapy for that is likely to continue looking like a target to other abusers."
],
"score": 0
}
|
ELI5: Is there a certain trait that many doctors have that causes them to also have terrible handwriting?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ym4dj
| 5
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.86
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der3cy5",
"comment_text": [
"I have thought about that and think it is because diagnosing patients is really both a right and left brain hemisphere discipline. Creative people often have worse handwriting."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der4cmq",
"comment_text": [
"It actually takes a lot of creativity to reach a diagnosis and to treat. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der3eol",
"comment_text": [
"My wife is a doctor at Mayo Clinic.\nOne reason is because she is swamped during the day and extremely busy.",
"Second reason is because most of her exams in medical school had to be hand written",
"Third reason is because, subconsciously, she felt like she 'had' to have bad handwriting because of the stereotype out there.",
"Fourth reason is because, nowadays, the majority of her work is done on the computer. ",
"So, no, there is no 'characteristic'"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der4mcz",
"comment_text": [
"I always thought that it was just quicker... and in school we are taught that as long as you can interpret your notes then it is fine"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der5r25",
"comment_text": [
"being understandable to patients has never been a priority for doctors, to the point that various places are now considering (if they havent already implemented) laws to force doctors to explain things in words patients can understand instead of tossing around latin which might as well be gibberish"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: If a symphony has set notes and tempo, at the most elite levels, how does an orchestra decide who is the best during the audition process?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ymgc0
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
Considering playing for the best of the best, I assume the audition process is grueling and intense. I mentally equate it to sports, but in sports the best QB's can do things others can't. But in an orchestra, if the pieces that are playing have a preset sound, how can you tell person A is better than person B. Should it sound the same?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der6ls2",
"comment_text": [
"First of all, audition music is very rarely the same as what you'll be playing. Secondly just as your two QB have different skills there are different techniques musicians can have that are better or worse than others. It's not exactly like a math quiz where there is 1 and only 1 answer, it's closer to an English paper on a topic. Yes there can be incorrect things but there are also multiple right answers. Thirdly there's a thing commonly referred to as 'musicality' that very prevalent in solos (which is how you usually audition). Similar to how 2 people can read the same book to you there will be someone who pauses differently or longer or has better inflection for specific voices etc.",
"Finally many orchestras actually sight read the music when they perform it. it's not unheard of for the players to get the music the day of or just hours before the performance. So their ability to quickly play or learn new music is variable. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der9tgb",
"comment_text": [
"If a symphony has set notes and tempo",
"It doesn't, not really. If you have every listened to computer generated music, it usually sounds plodding and mechanical. Good musicians go beyond what is on the sheet music, maybe anticipating or lagging the beat, altering their volume or pace, and other little touches. There is often more than one way to play a note on an instrument, and the technique you choose influences both the character of the sound and how you transition from note to note."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der805s",
"comment_text": [
"Well, first, audition music is rarely ever the music a band/symphony will be playing in a concert. But, to answer the question, the best musicians have a flair in how they play, a personal spin, a special interpretation. In high level music, just playing the music correctly isn't good enough. I would argue that a musician who comes in for an audition and plays the piece perfectly, but without expression of interpretation, would lose to a musician who gets a few things wrong, but has feeling and style in his performance. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der85wx",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks, that makes a lot of sense"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_det70s0",
"comment_text": [
"Well from my experience,(I did band in college, not a music major, but know plenty of them), in a high collegiate level, if you play beautifully, in terms of interpretation, you can miss a note or two and many judges won't notice, or at least won't care as much. Obviously if you play well but miss many notes, you won't get in at a professional level, but I've known people who practiced their ass off for an audition and could play the piece perfectly in technical terms, but his flair and interpretation wasn't developed enough. But that's just a personal example, not a statistical guarantee."
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: How to monetize dance videos?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5yllf6
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.27
|
I have made a dance channel. I have made a dance tutorial using the song of a movie. When I am uploading, it is telling copyright claims, can't monetize. Can anyone help me with the monetization of my dance tutorials?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der0xil",
"comment_text": [
"You probably have to use music you own the rights to or find music the creator allows you to use for free."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der1it4",
"comment_text": [
"I want to use the Hollywood or Bollywood movies songs. :("
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der0z8e",
"comment_text": [
"You can't because you are using a song that is not yours. But what could happen is that the producer of the songs puts ads on your video. But you can't. q"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der1iat",
"comment_text": [
"Thank you for response. Isn't there any way?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der0zun",
"comment_text": [
"The music is too prevalent. Look at all the dance channels on YouTube, like ",
"Wildabeast",
", their music is almost always <45sec, and playing in the background and/or softly overlaid. Another option is to pitch up/down the song (while still doing the previously mentioned methods). If you just replace the video recording audio with the song and did >1min of the song playing continuously, that will easily get flagged (which has happened to Wildabeast a few times, especially their Beyoncé Formation video which got millions of views)."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: What would happen if someone guilty admitted their crime after being found innocent?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ys2t8
| 1,732
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.93
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desi30h",
"comment_text": [
"Double jeopardy prevents someone from being re-charged with a crime after having been acquitted of same. So if, for example, you reside in the state of California, and you are validly tried for the murder of John Doe and acquitted, you may never be re-tried for the murder of John Doe, whether by California, another state, or the federal government. This is true even if you hold a press conference the next day to say \"Guess what? I did it!\" Post-acquittal confessions are not common--most people who get away with crimes are smart enough not to draw attention to this fact--but it's not unknown. In most cases, those people do not face additional criminal charges due to double jeopardy.",
"But of course, no legal answer can be that simple. As other responses have noted, the doctrine of dual sovereignty means that the federal government and individual states are treated as distinct from each other, each with their own law, and each with the authority to bring prosecutions for the violation of their law. It is therefore possible that a single set of actions can constitute crimes in multiple jurisdictions, and while a failed prosecution for one charge eliminates the ability to bring the same charge (or a reasonably similar charge) a second time, this does not mean that sufficiently distinct charges are barred, as well. Bottom line, under certain limited circumstances, the federal government may bring a prosecution concerning the same events (though not the same charges) as a failed state prosecution, and vice versa. In the case of Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932), the Supreme Court announced a rule that still applies regarding the scope of double jeopardy: following acquittal, the government may bring a second prosecution on additional charges arising out of the same underlying events as the first prosecution so long as both the new crime charged and the prior crime each contain an element of proof that the other does not. ",
"Let's go back to the California example, where the defendant has beaten a murder charge for killing John Doe, let's call it second-degree murder. After the state acquittal, the federal government cannot come in and bring a first-degree murder charge: this is because while first-degree murder contains elements not present in second-degree murder, there are no elements of second-degree murder not present in first-degree murder, so the later prosecution would fail the Blockburger test. Going in the other direction, the federal government cannot charge with a less severe offense such as battery, since battery is a lesser-included offense (i.e., it is subsumed) in murder. However, if the federal government wanted to charge the defendant with a violation of the victim's civil rights, 18 U.S.C. 242, that would potentially be possible, because there, the crimes have substantially different elements. Therefore, in a situation where a criminal confessed guilt after acquittal, there might still exist other crimes in other jurisdictions that pass the Blockburger test and allow for a second prosecution.",
"Further, as Jennifer Huber-Julie has rightly pointed out, double jeopardy has nothing to do with the civil system, so a failed criminal prosecution does not impact one's ability to bring a civil suit. (Note that there are protections against civil retrial, e.g., res judicata and collateral estoppel, but a failed civil suit would not preclude criminal charges, either.) So confessing to a crime would open the door for a possible civil lawsuit--in the case of murder, the tort of wrongful death would apply."
],
"score": 2052
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desi4c3",
"comment_text": [
"i bow down to your awesome knowledge ",
"thank you very very much!!!"
],
"score": 449
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desltaz",
"comment_text": [
"What about trying them for lying under oath, interfering with a police investigation, tampering with evidence, or something along those lines after a confession is made? In the example of murder, they are significantly less severe crimes but couldn't you try them for as many of those types of crimes they committed and get justice in some form from those convictions? Even if the ones that took place with the original crime they were acquitted for, such as tampering with evidence, couldn't lying under oath be reasonably considered? "
],
"score": 58
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desluby",
"comment_text": [
"As a criminal lawyer, much of this is wrong.",
"1) Blockburger does not really apply in the context of subsequent prosecutions, it applies in the context of being punished twice after conviction within the same indictment. An analysis about whether the government can bring a prosecution for the same EVENTS later on a separate indictment is an entirely different analysis, and is a more equitable type of analysis. This is also usually governed by state criminal procedure rules, not just constitutional principles.",
"In other words, whether you can be punished twice (receive a sentence for each) for separate counts in the same indictment, one which is a lesser included of the other, that would be your time that Blockburger typically comes up.",
"Whether you can, after acquittal, then seek a new indictment, EVEN if there is no Blockburger issue, is typically equitably estopped by rules which require all offenses known from the same criminal event/transaction to be brought in the same indictment. Of course, there are exceptions and complexities to this analysis.",
"2) You are completely wrong about the fed/state prosecutions and how they work together. Under the dual sovereignty doctrine, the feds absolutrly can try a person, even after acquittal on the state level, for the same offense and the same facts. No constitutional bar to that. However, there is a federal DOJ policy about when to do that known as the Petite policy. Check it out."
],
"score": 53
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_desmfpn",
"comment_text": [
"sorry i just presumed everyone would answer for their own country which is really interesting to see how different it is around the world "
],
"score": 40
}
|
|
ELI5: why is some fried food super greasy and some isn't?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5yjmqk
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deqo5rg",
"comment_text": [
"If the oil is hot enough, the liquid in your food turns into steam and pushes out on it, keeping the oil from soaking in. If the oil isn't hot enough, or if something like crowding the pan lowers the temperature, then it gets super greasy as the oil soaks in and the resulting food isn't nearly as appealing."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deqm8y2",
"comment_text": [
"Not entirely true. Most of the greasy feeling from fried foods has to do with the temperature of the oil as well as the temperature of the food. ",
"This video",
" shows you what NOT to do when deep-frying."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deqo8vd",
"comment_text": [
"This is my answer too. Temperature of the oil and of the thing to be fried are key. Different kinds of oils heat differently and so do different foods. Add batter to the mix and things get really complex. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deqoqpq",
"comment_text": [
"Right. The most important thing is removing as much ice or free water as possible, ideally by only deep-frying meat that's at room temperature."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deql2mv",
"comment_text": [
"There are multiple kinds of frying using varying amounts of oils and fats. Pan frying like you'd do at home (probably) uses very little fats or oils, and results in very little grease. Compare that to deep frying, where you're completely submerging a food into a vat of oil, which produces a large amount of grease."
],
"score": -1
}
|
|
ELI5:I don't understand how the US can be accepting the "one-china policy" all the while selling arms to Taiwan, as it has been doing for decades.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5yir0e
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.64
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deqf7w7",
"comment_text": [
"But China doesn't ",
" to take Taiwan back if we all just talk as if Taiwan is part of China."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deqehj2",
"comment_text": [
"Diplomacy is often a bit hypocritical. The current situations is the result of the US and China settling on a situation where both sides can claim a victory. China gets to pretend Taiwan isn't independent and the Us gets to guarantee Taiwan's independence.",
"Sort of like Israel's \"We don't have nuclear weapons, but if you fuck with us we'll nuke the shit out of you\" policy. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deqehon",
"comment_text": [
"Rejecting the One-China policy isn't really an option. China has the world's largest economy and the second-largest military; Taiwan simply isn't worth the ramifications of such a dispute (for either side).",
"The U.S. and Chinese governments make a lot of noise over Taiwan, but in the end they're both happy to maintain the status quo of Taiwan being functionally independent but not officially recognized."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deqflc7",
"comment_text": [
"Exactly. Nobody is exactly ",
" with the current situation, but changing it would probably be a huge pain in the ass for everyone involved.",
"I also doubt the PRC has any real designs on Taiwan at this point. It'd be a hugely expensive boondoggle to try and invade, even if the ROC (Republic of China, aka Taiwan) didn't have a fairly impressive little navy and enough anti-shipping missiles to blot out the sun.",
"Remember that the last war China fought was in 1979 against Vietnam, and it didn't go well."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deqf85b",
"comment_text": [
"I wouldn't think so. What has changed to indicate a tipping point? I do hear many Taiwanese want to abandon Taipei's claims to China though.",
"I also heard many governments keep informal relations with Taiwan (some crazy countries like Palau even recognize it instead of the PRC). It's a stable country after all, it's not like they can just pretend it doesn't exist."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: Why does it look like people in flint seem to use water bottles exceedingly in all the photos?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5yg3tn
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.44
|
Surely Cans are cheaper than bottled water. They can be returned/refilled. Why are water tankers not used to provide water for needs other than drinking ? Why are temporary water tanks not put at various places for needs other than drinking?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_depp3ck",
"comment_text": [
"Logistics, Cost.",
"Plastic Waster Bottles are cheaper than Metal ones.",
"You assumption is that everyone returns every can and there is a cheap way to clean refill and get ready.",
"Plastic bottles are super easy to make, cheap and readily available.",
"Water tanks are good if there are water pipes, but thats the problem in Flint the pipes are bad too. People filling bottles would take longer and harder to get to people than handing out cases of water, easier to transport.",
"Is it ideal no, but when responding to a disaster you need speed, Low cost, and a readily available supply chain. You go custom or have special needs the wheels will fall off.",
"Edit: Typo"
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deprg7h",
"comment_text": [
"And that cost a lot of money. Do you want that or the problem Fixed. its about Speed and cost. Your solution is complex verses handing out plastic bottles.",
"Metal cost more than plastic ;)"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deprp8t",
"comment_text": [
"The logistics behind what you are thinking are more complicated than what you are presuming. The water tankers have to come from somewhere, every day, and have to not empty out before everyone gets their fair share. The water tanker has to stay in the center of town and cannot go around town distributing the water (unlike bottles or cans, in which you could split them up and get them to everybody else faster). Then, of course, you can't store the excess water from the tanker easily (most tanks in Flint are probably compromised), so it gets sent back with unused water. ",
"Compare this with bottles or cans, you can literally have any truck, specialized or not, bring water into the town. The bottles can be offloaded and the truck can leave much earlier, then the townspeople can distribute the water much easier and better. Excess water just gets but into the basement. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_depxnan",
"comment_text": [
"oh ok .. that clears it up .. ",
"For rest of their water needs they use tap water right ?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_depr8ll",
"comment_text": [
"those are not metal cans .. they are 20 litre plastic BPA free cans ..",
"The first can is given on deposit .. which can be replaced when the empty can is returned .. ",
"You don't connect water tanks to existing pipes.. you use water tankers to fill water tanks which are put at various locations .. From which the residents fill water whenever they need",
"Edit: typos"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: What made the football match between Barcelona and PSG so amazing?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ydbpd
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
Ignorant American here. I've read several reports of the game and seen the quotes from players, coaches, and fans. It apparently was an incredible game and comeback. I know the very basics of the game but what I'd like to know is this: what made this game in particular so amazing? Thanks
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dep4gg1",
"comment_text": [
"These games are done in 2 game series (home and away), and the total aggregate score from both games determines the winner.",
"BCA lost the first game 4-0, meaning they were pretty much screwed going in to the second game.",
"With 2 minutes left in the second game, they were up 3-1. But with the aggregate score, they were still losing 5-3.",
"They managed to score 2 goals in the final minutes. Amazing. However, with the aggregate score tied 5-5, they would have lost the tie breaker.",
"5 minutes in to extra time at literally the last possible moment, they scored one more goal, winning 6-1, or 6-5 in aggregate. 3 goals in 2 minutes of regular + 5 min extra time is INSANE in soccer."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dep9b3q",
"comment_text": [
"You know how amazing the Super Bowl was this year? And how the patriots came back from what seemed like an impossible position in the last quarter to win it in OT.",
"Barcelona are the Patriots "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dep8r0s",
"comment_text": [
"Also minutes aren't minutes of American sports with fouls and timeouts, and rules upon rules etc. The clock just keeps ticking so it's bugger all time."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dep6401",
"comment_text": [
"That makes sense of what I read. Thank you for the explanation"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dep8xn2",
"comment_text": [
"Is it like last years NBA championship loss for the warriors then? It's a best of 7 game series, they were up 3-1. All they had to do was win one more to win it all and they ended up losing in the 7th game."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: In the Christian context, what is the "Holy Spirit?"
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ylw6k
| 971
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.88
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der5coc",
"comment_text": [
"To make a modern analogy:",
"God is the Developer of an MMO. He notices his players are misbehaving, and logs into the game as Jesus. He travels around as Jesus talking to people and preaching. He then gets lynched and killed by trolls. God resurrects Jesus and walks around talking a bit more, then ascends him out of the game.",
"God keeps sending messages and buffs to players using \"The Holy Spirit\" special account, which isn't his Jesus player account, but a fundamentally different sort of thing. This account doesn't have an Avatar in the game world, but acts more like a GM account."
],
"score": 2895
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der3eo1",
"comment_text": [
"The doctrine of the Trinity is one of the least understood aspects of Christian theology, but by no means the least important. Theologians have wrestled for it for 2 millennia and it is still not fully understood, though many would argue there are aspects of God that we will never be able to understand, or wrap our minds around. Argument over the role of the Spirit is actually one of the leading causes for why the Eastern and Western churches split. The Western church believes the Father and Son (Jesus) breathe/send the Holy Spirit, while the Eastern church maintains that it is only the Father who breathes the Holy Spirit. The Trinity is often regarded as 3 persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), and 1 substance (God). The doctrine is clearly open to criticism for being illogical and out of line with human reason, though most theologians will argue that human language and thought can't do justice to the transcendent God. Two terms are worth understanding: Perichoresis and Appropriation. Perichoresis basically says that the 3 persons of the Trinity maintain their own individuality while sharing in the life of the other 2 persons. This is seen as \"a community of being.\" Appropriation suggests that every person of the Trinity is present in the outward action of God, but it is \"appropriate\" to speak of 1 of the persons being responsible for different revelations throughout history. (Example: all 3 persons were present and took part in the Creation, but it is \"appropriate\" to speak of creation as the work of the Father) These two ideas together also help to reject Modalism (this is a belief that the Trinity can only appear as one Person at a time, think of ice, water, and water vapor)",
"\nThere are many analogies to how the Trinity works. Augustine suggested that it can be seen as a lover (the Father), the beloved (the Son), and the love (Holy Spirit) that unites the 2. This is a decent analogy but it tends to depersonalize the Holy Spirit and can cause us to view It as just that, an \"it\".",
"\nThe actual functions of the Holy Spirit are generally agreed to focus on 3 areas: revelation, salvation, and the Christian life. Revelation: we need the Holy Spirit to discern truth about God. Salvation: the Spirit plays a role in establishing a relationship between Christ and the believer and uniting us to God (much in the same way it unites the Father and Son). The Christian Life: this takes place both in individuals and corporately (the Church as a whole) The Spirit brings unity to the Church, helps us to experience God in worship prayer, and devotion, and empowers/moves us to live a Christian life (think in terms of morality) ",
"This is not even a scratch on the surface of the current understanding of the Holy Spirit and Trinity in theology. I'm about to finish my bachelors in Christian Ministry and plan to go on to get a Masters of Divinity and Masters of Theology. One of the biggest problems is defining the terms, and every time you bring up a new term, there are more terms to define lol Specifically, it is pretty impossible to speak about the Holy Spirit without some understanding of the Trinity Also the majority of these descriptions come from Alister McGrath's \"Christian Theology\" and I apologize for butchering them!",
"\nedit: There is some irony to the ELI5 Holy Spirit/ Trinity because it is one of the most complex doctrines of Christian Theology, and any simple answer given (including mine) is really an injustice to the true Holy Spirit lol"
],
"score": 461
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der5q38",
"comment_text": [
"This is the only answer that was eli5.",
"Thank you."
],
"score": 252
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deramcc",
"comment_text": [
"ELI'm in the final year of my theology graduate degree"
],
"score": 141
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_der9p7h",
"comment_text": [
"True, it's the moderator account without an avatar."
],
"score": 73
}
|
|
ELI5: How did that one single hole cause the demise of Space Shuttle Columbia?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ye6gc
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.54
|
Watched it on Seconds from Disaster. Just curious on how that hole, no bigger than a suitcase, managed to doom the structure during its return.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_depasgu",
"comment_text": [
"During reentry, the shuttle was subject to temperatures of up to 3,000 degrees F (1,650 C). The shuttle's aluminum structure would have melted well below this, so the shuttle was protected by a layer of special thermal tiles that protected it from the heat. The hole smashed these tiles on the leading edge of the wing, which was subject to some of the highest temperatures. With a big hole, the searing heat began to melt the wing structure to the point where the shuttle disintegrated from the extreme aerodynamic stresses."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_depbqj3",
"comment_text": [
"They recovered some remains."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_depai40",
"comment_text": [
"That hole represents a weakness. ",
"The shuttle on re-entry is subject to massive temperature gradients and stresses. To shield against that you need a consistent protective barrier. Having any kind of hole in that barrier mean the unprotected material underneath gets exposed to the heat. And then bad things happen.",
"It's the same principal as a chain being only as strong as its weakest link."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_depb1dy",
"comment_text": [
"I always wondered if they ever found the bodies though."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deqsdcy",
"comment_text": [
"It is not well know, but they recovered them all. Equally not well know is that the crew portion of the ship survived the explosion in tack, and fell thousands of feet with them mostly conscious, into the ocean, where the impact/hydraulics pushed the forward wall into them. The thinking was that on the event of an explosion, the crew wouldn't survive, so there was an need to reinforce the end walls."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why isn't The_Donald sub reddit banned yet?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ycp86
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.41
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deoz75d",
"comment_text": [
"Firstly, they aren't breaking site rules on a regular basis, and second, the massive shitstorm that would be unleashed by banning such a subbreddit."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deozgif",
"comment_text": [
"They're not breaking Reddit's rules. There's a lot of unpleasant content on Reddit that's allowed to continue. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dep05tg",
"comment_text": [
"All of that is totally irrelevant to Reddit. Reddit isn't for spreading political messages of any particular slant. It's just for commenting.",
"I'm aware that T_D is a cesspool. But you are aware that there's a lot of propaganda of ",
" political slant scattered all over Reddit, too, right? "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dep0754",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"Don't post to argue a point of view.",
"ELI5 is not your soapbox. Don't use it like it is.",
"detailed rules",
"."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deoz2mp",
"comment_text": [
"It's impossible to say for sure what's going on in the Reddit admins' minds without any insider information, but I'd be willing to speculate that they are concerned about violent backlash if they take down that sub like other hate subs."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Do US sports fans go to away games?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5y72ta
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.76
|
I've never been to a sports game in North America, but here in Europe it's normal for football (soccer) fans to travel along with the team to their away games. This means that the hosting club has to make provisions for dealing with said fans and avoiding violence, riots, stampedes etc. Usually, a section of the stadium is reserved for away fans, and they are kept separate from the home fans as much as possible. Ajax Amsterdam's stadium even has a separate train station for away fans to avoid trouble. In the US, the distances are much larger. I would not expect many fans of, say, the Denver Broncos, to attend games in Miami. Therefore, it would be unreasonable to expect Miami to keep a large section of its stadium open for non-attending Denver fans. However, in games between teams from the same cities, or cities close by (say, New York and Philadelphia), you would expect some amount of away fans to attend. So, my (convoluted) question is: How does this work? Are away fans simply banned from sports games? Do they just mingle with the home crowd if they want to attend? Do the teams have to make special provisions for away fans, and if so is it only for nearby teams or for all?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deno89p",
"comment_text": [
"Some fans do go to away games. It's fairly common to see people wearing the away team's colors/jerseys/etc at games. I've never seen them segregated from the home team fans at a professional game, but many schools near me (Ohio) have an away team section in their bleachers. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deno9rc",
"comment_text": [
"Generally speaking;",
"Unless it is a large game (think championship level, or sometimes playoffs) people generally will not go to an away game, and will instead attend games closest to them (for example - I enjoy hockey, and have to sit through watching the Dallas fucking Stars bumble around for hours on end constantly just to see a live game.)",
"There is little to no regulation, for the most part, on home/away seating. This is done sometimes for lower-level sports (like high school football) because it's easier done at that level, but us Americans tend to like our sports-related violence to be done in riots outside of the games. We're classy like that.",
"If you're going to an away game, you take care of yourself."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denoa7n",
"comment_text": [
"Sometimes but not very often.",
"Don't forget just how big the US is. While in Europe, the next team in your league might be an hour or two away drive/train, doing it in the US probably requires a much longer trip - at least an overnight stay and a flight (a direct flight from LA to NYC is 5.5 hours one way).",
"In many cases, even traveling to see your \"local\" team involves a pretty big trip. ",
"Here's a map of the areas where NFL teams are \"favorites\"",
". Driving from Portland, OR to Seattle, WA to see a Seahawks game is at least a 4 hour drive - possibly more if you run into traffic.",
"In the cases where there ",
" two nearby teams, they're usually in different divisions so they don't really play each other during the regular season. For example, the (NFL) San Francisco 49ers and Oakland Raiders are only a few miles apart but one is in the AFC and the other in the NFC. Similarly, the (Baseball) New York Yankees are in the American League what the NY Mets are in the National League."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denoaja",
"comment_text": [
"Americans move around a lot, so at any given time there are people with team loyalties from all over the country in most major areas. People who are from New York and move to LA may keep their loyalty to the Yankees and go see them play the Dodgers or Angels.",
"To some extent it's the same with college sports. You went to college at UCLA and now you live in Florida, you might go see a UCLA/Florida State game as an Away fan."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denvmoq",
"comment_text": [
"The USA is big and pro sports are extremely expensive, traveling to multiple road games is cost prohibitive. However, college football has much cheaper games, a shorter season, and publishes the schedule years in advance so there is a much more significant traveling fan presence. Schools like Nebraska and Texas are well known for the convoys of RVs that travel with the team. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: Can a quarterback say something that sounds like hike in order to induce offsides from the other team?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5y8blm
| 5
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.73
|
If the QB can yell call kinds of different numbers and words, can they yell 'Height' or 'Hi'?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denwr0d",
"comment_text": [
"Yes. The play starts when the ball is snapped and if the defense crosses the line of scrimmage before that, it's an offside penalty.",
"The problem with this, of course, is that your own team mates fall for it as well and you end up with a false start and penalty on your own team."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deo52hj",
"comment_text": [
"First, note that the QB can use any word they want to start the play, or no word at all. There is nothing special about the word \"hike\".",
"It is an accepted strategy for the QB to try to fool the defense into committing an offsides penalty. It is called a hard count."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denwoow",
"comment_text": [
"Yes, some pros do this quite well. It's usually called a \"hard count\" and the offense knows to go after a number of shouts, not the loudest one.",
"It can also cause a false start on your own team if someone isn't paying attention, so it needs to be well coordinated."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denwuc3",
"comment_text": [
"He can say anything he wishes, the ball isn't typically snapped with the word hike, (at lower levels it usually varies around some fixed command, ie 1st hut, 3rd hut), but at the NFL level it's typically much more complicated, with activation words, for example, snap the ball on the 2nd hut after the 3rd Omaha, so the offense would ignore any number of correct sequences before the 3rd Omaha. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denyiq6",
"comment_text": [
"There is something called a snap count, and is given in the huddle. So in the huddle the play caller would say something like i247 on 2. This would mean on the second time the qb says something the ball will be snapped. This is to draw the defense off sides, but sometimes the linemen forget the count and false start. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: Why do people believe the CIA?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5y5qog
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.46
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dengcci",
"comment_text": [
"Just 2 of many reasons why you shouldn't:",
"By testifying falsely, Director Clapper appears to have violated laws prohibiting false statements and obstruction of a congressional inquiry. In 1977, in an analogous situation, DOJ prosecuted then-CIA Director Richard Helms for lying to a congressional committee about CIA operations in Chile.",
"http://www.citizensforethics.org/legal-filling/crew-calls-on-doj-to-investigate-dni-clapper-for-lying-to-congress/"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deneong",
"comment_text": [
"The CIA director serves at the pleasure of the President. The country elects a president that they believe will choose a trustworthy CIA Director. It's up to the President to continually evaluate the trustworthiness of the CIA Director and replace them should they lose confidence in their trust. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denf2zi",
"comment_text": [
"No, if you don't trust the President to chose a trustworthy director. ",
"As far as I know, this is the only mechanism of trust behind the CIA. There is no other process that ensures that the CIA is trustworthy. So that's the only thing to ",
". "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denf2zi",
"comment_text": [
"No, if you don't trust the President to chose a trustworthy director. ",
"As far as I know, this is the only mechanism of trust behind the CIA. There is no other process that ensures that the CIA is trustworthy. So that's the only thing to ",
". "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denf347",
"comment_text": [
"No, you trust them based on the reports you've seen and what the director says.",
"Don't take anyone's word for it."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: How do you teach a baby two different languages?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5y5fjp
| 9
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.82
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deniu63",
"comment_text": [
"You speak your mother tongue at home with your children. This lets them get started with understanding one until they go to school.",
"They will then pick up the mainstream one from school and their surrounding which will be their dominant language, however they are still able to understand your mother language. ",
"Then you take them to a specific language school to further their understanding of your mother language."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denn91y",
"comment_text": [
"I grew up trilingual and today I'm in my 20s and I can still speak and understand both languages my parents taught me fluently. The biggest issue I have is vocabulary: I simply learned the vocabulary of my parents which makes sense sense I never actually formally studied their languages. It's more of a technicality though: if another native speaker from my parent's country talked to me we could communicate perfectly fine. I can pick up new words and understand them even though I never heard them before simply due to the context, and if I don't understand then I'm not so arrogant that I can't ask for them to explain. Sometimes I don't know the vocabulary to voice something so I just use what I know, and when/if I'm corrected or learn a new word I start working those into my vocabulary. It's a pretty fluid thing and not something I really think about or have to \"translate\" to or from.",
"I don't think my parents did anything special to teach me. They just talked to me. They are immigrants and where they're from they speak and use three totally different languages (+ English nowadays). The two they taught me are their \"mother tongues.\" I didn't actually learn English until kindergarten but you would never know that from listening to me."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deno9pg",
"comment_text": [
"It shouldn't if you do it at an early enough stage where they're developing their grasp on language.",
"By speaking to them, you're building a vocabulary into them in which they can connect words to action. By the time they hit preschool/kindergarten; their interactions with other children will develope the second language without sacrificing their grades (what grades?). By the time first grade hits, your child and other children will have started at the same level when it comes to reading and writing (with your child already developing the basic understanding of a second language). Even though they learn (say English for example) as a second language, it is still their primary language due to exposure. School all day, and chilfren shows afterschool compared to the little interactions with their parents.",
"This is why children of immigrants are able to understand their parents lsnguage but are unable to speak it other than a few basic responses. The have everyday conversations ingrained into them but lack the vocabulary to form their own sentences. Which makes it obvious with their slow reactions as the have to think of a reply instead of an instant reaction.",
"Once you're confindent that your child won't fall behind, you take them to extra language classes to increase their knowledge of the language to fix the above problem. Their already ingrained understand will fast track their learning compared to a foreigner learning a new language."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denp2yc",
"comment_text": [
"alright, makes more sense when considering kindergarten.",
"In my head I was imagining a situation of children visiting 1st grade of elementary school without basic knowledge of the language. (does also happen, though)"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dennsqi",
"comment_text": [
"I don't have any experience, just curious.",
"isn't it dangerous to the childs education, if the child can't speak the language when it already goes to school? it also seems like quiet a challenge for the teacher, that I as a parent wouldn't want to be responsible for. ",
"to me it seems like that the child in your example would pick up the countrys official language as a secundary language, which could be a disadvantage."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How is the global warming situation so dire that humans may die out in the next couple hundred years?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5y4a9g
| 15
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.73
|
I apologise for my ignorance- I've actually never researched global warming at all and I know very little about it. I keep hearing that if warming continues as it currently is, we're toast. Can someone explain to me in general what is happening in regards to global warming, and why it is such a crisis at this point?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_den3s59",
"comment_text": [
"Time and spatial scales are important here.",
"People who think humans are not at all at risk of going extinct due to climate change do not understand the ramifications of our civilization's environmental impact, how these will change the political behavior between nations, and how reliant we are on this careful stability. They also do not seem to understand the scales involved in the statement of \"humans becoming extinct\".",
"They are severely underestimating just how much we rely on natural balance of ecosystems in order to survive as a species, from a natural and geopolitical perspective, and they certainly don't seem to make the distinction between \"human species\" and \"human civilization\".",
"The truth is that our civilization is very fragile, and most modern humans do not have enough knowledge to survive on their own even on smaller groups. A large-scale destabilization of our civilization can plausibly be significant enough to render us unable to survive on the scale of a few centuries.",
"With climate change, the oceans become warmer, more acidic and less oxygenated. This destroys coral reefs and other delicate basal ecosystems which support thousands upon thousands of species. This severely disrupts macroscopic ocean life. The increase in water temperatures and atmospheric temperatures disrupts water and atmospheric currents that are responsible for creating some stable matter exchange cycles between different regions.",
"For instance, there are several barren patches of very high salinity water in the oceans that are being disrupted because of this, which means the ocean's salinity will likely increase and damage more ecosystems. The change in currents prevents distribution of nutrients in one region to others, which in turn also destroys animal life due to a sudden lack of nutrients, which in turn disrupts other animals higher in those food chains.",
"All of this means climate change can and likely will collapse ocean life in a very short time. You'd instead have a huge increase in microscopic life like algae and bacteria, which are potentially toxic, which could pose a serious threat to other life forms, including us. After all, we still rely on fishing to sustain a large number of our population.",
"On ground, climate change also disrupts life. If birds start going extinct due to deforestation and loss of vegetation (due to many reasons) you may expect a huge increase in insect population, which can attack our crops and will require aggressive use of pesticides. This could disrupt insect populations we rely on, like what's happened with bees. Without bees and other species, pollination of plants becomes a huge problem, and not just OUR crops, but all other plants that sustain the ecosystem we rely on to survive. (And for a sense of scale: right now, farmers hire beekeepers who come in with big trucks, just to help with this because of the sheer scale of the farming industry necessary to sustain us.)",
"We can't simply pack up and move our crops to higher latitudes either, as some people seem to think, as the soil is not as fertile due to the lack of historical ecosystems to enrich the soil with nutrients, and to maintain it. Soil is not just dirt, there's billions of things that make soil good for plant life. We do not have anywhere near the technology to render so much soil fertile in a short time.",
"Climate change will also increase the severity and length of large-scale climate disasters like droughts, snowstorms, blizzards, floods, tornadoes and hurricanes, and change the seasonal cycles of plants and animals which took thousands of years to stabilize. All of these can severely disrupt the lives and existence of millions of species of plant and animal life, and billions of people throughout the world. Such shortages and disruptions in food production (among other industries) and mass re-allocation of populations can severely disrupt our social and political structures.",
"Worse, our civilization works because of a very careful social and cultural structure, which is also based on specialized knowledge of a few individuals (do you know how to plant crops? how to treat diseases? how to run a power plant? how to refine oil? how to forge steel?), and large scale scarcity can quickly deteriorate that structure. It doesn't even have to be global, as we rely on international stability. (What happens if China collapses?) Tension inside countries, the distrust of governments and authorities to handle these situations and the lack of cooperation between countries can quickly get out of control. Our reliance on capitalist economics to act on these issues and its economic inequality will certainly play a role in this tension and general distrust of the system.",
"This leads to large scale conflicts, disease, violence and wars, all which cause immense loss of human life. Once the farmers, the doctors or the power plant engineers are gone, how are we supposed to pick up ourselves in time? How are other countries who relied on some other country's infrastructure supposed to adapt in time? Because a person's knowledge of Excel spreadsheets quickly becomes meaningless when things start to go bad. How long can most modern humans survive in the wild without reliance on the luxuries of our large scale civilization?",
"But the takeaway from this is that you must not be anthropocentric when viewing this situation, like everyone always is. \"Humans can adapt to anything!\" is an ",
" anthropocentric view of nature, which pretends that humans are outside of it. People always talk about what climate change will do to our crops and how we'll adapt, to our cities and to our populations and how we'll adapt, but they do not understand these things all rely on an entire natural ecosystem beyond our civilization in order to survive and to exist.",
"Without these natural ecosystems in balance, humans cannot exist, and certainly not our civilization. So if you want to see the impact of climate change in our civilization, you must look at the ecosystem and the natural world first, not humans.",
"So no, humans will not go \"extinct\" overnight, if that's what you think that word means here, but climate change certainly puts us into a path where our chances to survive as a civilization for thousands of years more is ",
" reduced.",
"Civilization as we know it is certainly at a huge risk, and the humans remaining may not last long enough in that post-civilization post-climate change world depending on the severity of the situation. Like I said, it doesn't take many humans to die before you lose the foundation of our civilization's survival, and most of us do not have the knowledge to restart things. It's not hard to imagine a scenario where we go extinct after a few centuries.",
"Regardless, the planet will likely recover, but that will happen over tens of thousands to millions of years.",
"Here are some sources:",
"https://ocean.si.edu/climate-change",
"http://e360.yale.edu/features/will_climate_change_jam_the_global_ocean_conveyor_belt",
"http://www.oceanscientists.org/index.php/topics/ocean-deoxygenation",
"https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ocean-s-oxygen-starts-running-low/",
"https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/climate-change-and-harmful-algal-blooms",
"https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-could-alter-key-ocean-bacteria-study/",
"https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/increase-in-harmful-algal-blooms-possible/",
"http://agadapt.ucdavis.edu/pestsdiseases/",
"https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/display.files/fileID/7490",
"Some recent examples of how climate impacts large scale conflicts:",
"https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/science/earth/study-links-syria-conflict-to-drought-caused-by-climate-change.html",
"https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-hastened-the-syrian-war/"
],
"score": 27
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_den4s2y",
"comment_text": [
"Thank you for this. It really laid it all out in front of me. Sometimes I can't help but think that maybe it would be a good thing if humans were either extinct or massively reduced in population. We're a very destructive species."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_den2c0h",
"comment_text": [
"It seems unlikely to me that humanity will go extinct. However, global warming can set off some pretty alarming changes. A ",
" of humanity resides on the coast, and ",
" of them are going to have to move. This alone is going to represent a pretty huge effort when it comes to logistics.",
"Then consider that areas that are verdant now (america's breadbasket, for instance) may shrivel up. At the same time, areas that are inhospitable now (sibera? the sahara?) might become productive. Or worse yet, verdant areas may go south, and ",
" areas might become more productive. What happens to the global power scheme when \"where we get food from\" changes rapidly? Who is going to have what power might shift rapidly. People with power are going to want to retain it. People with new power are going to exploit it. All of this makes for a very dynamic situation, and dynamism can be worrisome when everyone has large armies and big weapons,.",
"And this is not at all a full tally of the potential outcomes of climate change."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_den2g37",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks for the reply. As far as people who live \"on the coast\" having to move... How close to the coast are we talking? Within 15 miles? 50? 100? "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_den2szz",
"comment_text": [
"That's harder to answer. First off, sea level rise isn't 'equal' everywhere. Various factors like the contour of the land itself mean that some areas will feel the impact more than others. But estimates put over half a billion people within 30 feet of sea level, and they'd certainly be at risk. That alone would present a humanitarian crisis unmatched in human history, even ignoring the political and economic ramifications to having so many centers of human civilization and commerce rendered uninhabitable. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
ELI5: Why does Little Caesars serve Crazy Bread sauce cold when that's absolutely disgusting?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5y459k
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_den1o1y",
"comment_text": [
"It is kept cold to keep it preserved.",
"Little Ceasars is not serving food, they are delivering it. It is incumbent upon the recipient to serve it. That includes plates, utensils, condiments, etc. ",
"It is foolish to imagine that a teenager in a hatch-back is concerned with the temperature of the product when it hits your lips. That is your responsibility."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_den1qwy",
"comment_text": [
" is a pretty important characteristic of food for delivery, I'd argue. Hot, even. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_den1zun",
"comment_text": [
"Plenty of things are delivered cold. Some are intended to be served cold, others are intended to be heated.",
"A third category may exist, where you are intended to decide for yourself as the deliverer is unconcerned with you."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_den23si",
"comment_text": [
"Sure, that ",
" exist, but it's pretty common (read: almost universal) for take-out food of any type to be expected to be in ready, edible condition the way it's intended to be eaten."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_den91jd",
"comment_text": [
"Not at all. Condiments (and dipping sauces) are kept separate. Salads are undressed and untossed, features that would be unacceptable at a full service restaurant."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Asexual people, and (how) do they masturbate
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5y1yh4
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.39
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_demiyts",
"comment_text": [
"Being asexual means not feeling sexual attraction to someone else. Since asexuality isn't equivalent to having a lack of libido, masturbating and having sex is something aces may or may not do. Some of us enjoy having sex or masturbating, some of us only enjoy getting others off or masturbate simply to “clean out the pipes”, and others never have and never will. As long as you don't feel sexual attraction, you are still asexual.",
"You can find more information in the stickied post/FAQ in ",
"/r/asexual",
"."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_demkk61",
"comment_text": [
"You're free to present your preferred definition to OP instead of telling me I'm wrong, because as far as you're going to get here is us agreeing to disagree. I choose not to tell anybody that their personal sexual identity is wrong, but maybe that's just me."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deml89r",
"comment_text": [
"Asexuality is not the same as choosing not to have sex. That's celibacy. Some asexual people do choose to have sex, and not all celibate people are asexual.",
"When referring to people, asexual means the lack of sexual attraction. Some asexual people still enjoy the physical sensation of sex, despite not being sexually attracted to anyone/anything."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_demk148",
"comment_text": [
"I got this straight from the ",
"/r/asexual",
" community. I'm going to go with their definition over the dictionary. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_demkwhc",
"comment_text": [
"A ",
"recent survey",
" given to 351 asexual people and 388 heterosexual (or just non-asexual? not sure) people showed that asexual people tend to masturbate significantly less, and when they do, they generally do not think of themselves in an arousing situation. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: Can anyone to whom 'The Simpsons' is socially and culturally relevant, explain the context and relevance of the show so that a person totally alien to it could appreciate the humour in it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5y1t81
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.38
|
Hey, I am not from the U.S, So The Simpsons is totally alien to me. But I learned from the internet that it is highly rated and it has stood the test of time so far as a lot of memes have been made based on the sitcom. I just started by watching the very first season 01 episode 01. I don't know whether there were multiple reboots and all. So what more can you tell me about the satire and the context of the sitcom and how was it relevant for you personally and generally. What is the relevance of 'The Simpsons' in the current sociopolitical scenario?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_demj5gx",
"comment_text": [
"In the 1980s, US TV had a number of sitcoms, like ",
", that portrayed happy, loving, successful families whose biggest worries were whether Jr. would make the football team. Given that it was a period of economic hardship for some, these portrayals often felt unrealistic.",
"By the late 1980s, shows started lampooning the Cosby familial bliss, showing dysfunctional families with flawed characters. ",
", ",
", and ",
" are some of the more successful examples. ",
" became a cultural phenomenon, and soon outgrew its parody of other shows, and became a satirical representation of the American experience. By virtue of its nearly thirty years of material, it has spoken to just about every topic imaginable.",
"I could see how watching early episodes could be difficult from outside the US. The show has always been steeped in popular culture, and sorting through another country's decades-old pop culture can be difficult. When an episode from 1990 pays homage to a 1980s movie, that reference isn't quite as fresh in 2017."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_demigsy",
"comment_text": [
"On many occasions The Simpsons has predicted a social movement or political happening years in advance. I'm sure there are examples on their wiki somewhere."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_den7cuq",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks a lot for the comprehensive response.. :-) Now, this give a near perfect outline.. Even though I am a person from the other part of the globe, I kind of get the humour. I understand that it is hilarious. But now I suppose, I am going to get a cleared picture! Thanks a lot buddy..."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_demi21h",
"comment_text": [
"No reboots, but what you need to know is that The Simpsons has always been culturally relevant in the same vein as South Park, and on more than one occasion has actually predicted the future. The further you get into the series the more you will appreciate and understand the comedy."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_demihf4",
"comment_text": [
"It's not what it once was. It's been on since 1989, and it was definitely revolutionary at the time. It should be on a top 5 list of animated shows that proved animation isn't just for children (that's the way things were seen then). It was considered rude at the time (but so tame by today's standards), just like South Park after it, then Family Guy after that, and something like Rick and Morty today.",
"After being on for 28 years (longer if you count the shorts from the Tracy Ullman show), it has long since turned into just an animated sitcom where it's more about the characters than the plot (whereas South Park in its 20 years has stayed closer to pop culture and exploring current ideas).",
"In the current day, The Simpsons is more about its entire body of work than individual episodes being relevant. As shows get older, they aren't what they once were. And that has a lot to do with society changing, not necessarily the show. But the earlier episodes were definitely way more edgy (having the family give each other electric shocks as part of therapy was definitely seen as bad taste by old fuddy-duddies back during the early days, and it's not really something you'd see with more recent episodes).",
"Also to answer your other question, there haven't been reboots. It was first shown as small shorts between comedy sketches on The Tracy Ullman show starting in 1987, but once it became its own show on Fox, it has been in production every year for the last 28 years."
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: Why does the US struggles to have a proper health care system, even though the premiums paid by the patients are much higher than most of the countries, where there is a working health care system (e.g. most of the European countries)?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5y7pqs
| 10,438
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.86
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_densdae",
"comment_text": [
"Health insurance is the single ELI5 answer to this question. We have a multi-billion dollar industry standing between ourselves and our health care. The insurance industry making more money for everyone except the person who is sick and the millions that will never get sick.",
"With insurance, there became a financial disconnect between the doctor and the patient. Health care providers were able to charge the insurance companies a higher rate then the individual patient could afford. And of course, the patient seeing nothing but the benefit of not having to pay that high bill basically became a product to be bought and sold by these two entities.",
"The absolute best thing we could do as a country is dismantle the health insurance industry and return to patient/doctor relationships. The next best thing we could do is close down the VA and expand Medicaid to every single American by default funded by a large increase in the SS tax and allow those with the money to augment their coverage with those golden plans everyone wants.",
"Thanks for the gold stranger. I'm going to trade it for some health care."
],
"score": 3881
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denxpn3",
"comment_text": [
"I'm a Canadian married to an American so I do have some perspective on the issues, because there are multiple reasons. ",
"1 - Fear. The average American is terrified of anything messing with whatever \"plan\" they have chosen. ",
"2 - Distrust of Government. As a canadian I think that government's job is to provide a protective role between the people and corporations and our baser instincts of greed etc. They do so by passing laws that protect the people who are in a very inequitable position to defend themselves. A whole swath of America thinks that the government should just go. ",
"3 - Propaganda I have seen over and over again in thread like these people come and say ridiculous statements like \"Canadians are coming to the USA to get health treatment because it's so good\" like the exception makes the rule. Or Canadians have to wait so long for health care. `The truth is that for the vast majority of people especially the indigent and middle class, you are so much better off anywhere with socialized health care. Yes sure if you're part of the 1% you'll be fine, but you'd be fine anywhere. ",
"4-American Exceptionalism (More propaganda) Many Americans are completely convinced that America is the best country in the world. Truth is they just make this very general statement but what is America best at? Sardine fishing? (No) Clown schools? (No) Italian cuisine (Hell no) What the fuck does that statement even mean? The rest of the world (some of whom actually love their countries) just don't even at this statement. So one statement I have heard is that America also has the best health care in the world and if you look at certain hospitals who do research and specialized medicine that may well be true in part, but you \"Average American\" will never set foot in the hallowed halls of those places. ",
"5- Health Care is a human right. This is how other countries look at health care. We all gladly pay so that we are all protected cradle to grave and it's cheap. For instance my no deductible, no co-pay plan costs us on a sliding scale a maximum of $900 per year. ",
"https://www.ontario.ca/data/ontario-health-premium-rates",
". My 70 year old mother in law pays more than that for her Medicaid top up. My husband when he first came here had no health coverage, and he got really good free checkups from a community health center and no it wasn't overrun. We all believe that we should all be taken care of and healthy and that we will pay for other people. Illness is the great equalizer. ",
"6-The major reason that health care is expensive is that there are literally hundreds of thousands of people that work at the hospital processing insurance, at the insurance company denying claims, staff at the hospital to collect cash payments, checks, billing, accounting. For the most part, those people do not exist here. In fact, one time I was in ER because I had a foot infection and was getting IV antibiotics, and this American guy came in and broke his arm, he had an X-ray and a cast and Dr. care. So it came time to pay and no one could accept his payment, the nurse literally didn't know what to do. They charged him $375 and then they told him to sit by the door lol. They had to go upstairs and find out how much to charge, and how to accept payment. The guy had cash so they finally just found a paper and wrote a receipt on that. It took longer to take the money than to treat his arm. ",
"7-You don't ask for it. Because you've been told that socialized medicine is bad, you don't demand it. If the government took away our socialized medicine here in Canada, we would draw and quarter the responsible people. No politicians dare fuck with health care because it would be political suicide. The End. ",
"Imagine a world where the Dr doesn't care how much to charge and you can go to any hospital or Dr and they are on your plan. Your Dr has one goal, to treat your condition. Imagine never having to wait for your new job coverage to kick in, or even deal with preexisting conditions. No one goes bankrupt because of medical debt and in fact it doesn't exist, unless you take a loan for your boob job or botox. It's really nice. You should try it. "
],
"score": 3767
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denvsib",
"comment_text": [
"Health insurance companies. I do billing for offices and let me tell you that health insurance companies only exist to make money as the middle man. ",
"Let's say you and your employer pay $2000 a month to an insurance company to have decent coverage for a family. Well most likely you will still have a deductible/coinsurance/copay on top of that premium. If your family is relatively healthy (which if you think about it the majority of people are) then you have paid over $24000 for one year and let's say for argument sake less than $2000 in health services.",
"And not only that but the insurance companies are contracted with your health care providers to pay the lowest rate they can. So what your doctor actually bills out is much higher than the actual cost. Therefore someone without insurance can be screwed even if they can get some kind of discount through their provider. I personally find it all insane. The amount of rules, red tape, delay and bullshit insurance companies cause I believe is a major factor in why our health care system doesn't work as well as it could. They basically control the patients and providers. ",
"Edit: This has way more responses than I expected. I'm not saying insurance companies are the only factor, but they are a huge part and to say otherwise makes me believe you either work for one or have never dealt with them. There's many problems with the current system and I believe it comes down to it being a for profit system. I don't believe it's doctors that are the greedy ones. They deserve to be well compensated for the amount of school and work they have done. "
],
"score": 3236
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_densn20",
"comment_text": [
"Money, it usually comes down to money and greed. We, in the US, have a political system that allows politicians to be bought by corporations. Private health care is a HUGE industry generating billions of dollars. A lot of that money finds its way into the pockets of lawmakers. Health Care, prisons, guns, religion, and many others are massive wealth generators, subsequently they \"contribute\" i.e. legalized bribery to American political campaigns. These \"contributions\" along with massive lobbying efforts by groups dedicated to supporting the privatization of health care, prisons etc wield ridiculous amounts of power in our government. "
],
"score": 758
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_denujte",
"comment_text": [
"I work in the healthcare sector - so I'm only partially spewing smoke. America has embraced free market principles in healthcare and thereby allow (more than other countries) healthcare providers to set prices. But the healthcare market lacks price visibility, price impact is minimized by insurance, and any medical services are difficult to 'shop' for. The result is low 'competition' for services regardless of price driving prices higher and everyone down the chain from hospital admins, doctors, insurance, equipment providers and others profit (at the expense of patients). Outcomes are not significantly better, but adoption of new technologies are in theory much easier (for example medical technology is further progressed than Japan - which has vastly lower cost healthcare with similar outcomes). Either US needs to copy price controls / bulk negotiation of other markets or accelerate healthcare market disruption with technology as we've seen with finance, travel, and other industries. That said, healthcare has a long way to go to reach that technology tipping point."
],
"score": 680
}
|
|
ELI5:Why does weight loss not show instantly, if we're just burning calories?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xyzo7
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_delzhbf",
"comment_text": [
"It doesn't take months. You'll start seeing changes on your bathroom scale within days.",
"Why does it take months to ",
" a difference, looking in the mirror? Because humans are large creatures, and you can only burn so many calories in one day. If you lose a little weight each day, then day by day it eventually adds up into a noticeable amount. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_delzjef",
"comment_text": [
"Because 3500 calories are 1 pound of fat. It takes you a long time to burn that much for only a pound. Besides, if you're exercising, you're gaining muscle mass, so you might not even lose a pound. A pound of fat, yes, but not a pound on the scales, because you have more muscle mass.",
"(Not talking about water weight, I'm talking about actual fat)."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dem10xe",
"comment_text": [
"Even the scale weight can take a long time to see; your weight day by day fluctuates a lot and so don't be discouraged if you're gaining and losing here and there every day. It's the trend downward over time that's important."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dem8j5h",
"comment_text": [
"Also if you begin weight training for the first time your body tends to retain water. As yoru body gets used to it you will stop retaining and have a big whoosh where your weight cant drop many pounds in a day. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dem122r",
"comment_text": [
"Muscle mass is actually heavier than fat, as it's a lot more dense than sitting fat. So if you're doing muscle building exercise and taking protein you might actually gain weight.",
"But it's actually muscles and not.. a glob of blood vessels and sitting calorie storage.",
"That's part of why a straight height to weight BMI chart is mostly pointless."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why are reputable sources like NYT, CNN, WaPo considered "Fake News"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xxsg9
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.54
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_delp8q6",
"comment_text": [
"This is just one person's opinion of things. It's got it's own very obvious biases such as placing the truth squarely in the middle of the current American political spectrum as well as using some perfectly arbitrary metric of trustworthiness.",
"\"Fake News\" is just a label that has quickly been twisted and turned into a catchphrase. Trump calls ",
" critical of him & his administration \"fake news\"."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_delph59",
"comment_text": [
"Trump calls them this to discredit them when they publish stories that criticize him. That being said, lately they have all published stories that have been either blatantly false, or delibarately misleading. Their anti-Trump bias has been show time and time again and has begun to compromise their journalistic integrity. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_delpmkv",
"comment_text": [
"Fake News used to mean \"stuff that's not true\", like the notion that the Clinton campaign was running a child brothel in a Pizza place.",
"When the term got some momentum, the Trump organization started using the term with a new meaning \"stuff that Trump disagrees with\". Even though it's the same term, it's two different meanings, like \"desert your post\" vs \"dry in the desert\"."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dels6z7",
"comment_text": [
"I think it's important to also note that this info graphic isn't very accurate. For example, the author seems to have it out for CNN, it is not more clickbait than other outlets on there.",
"Also, the NY Times is not moderate. They are fairly liberal. Vox is not as reputable as they would like you to believe. The Atlantic, Guardian, and Slate are not \"in depth\" sources of news. MSNBC should be evenly matched to Fox News. HuffPo is pretty much on par with conservative blogs, etc..."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_delq921",
"comment_text": [
"any links for reference? i'm only aware of the russian golden shower one."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: military band members' ranks - do they exist in the same command structure as infantry personnel?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xv0dk
| 7
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
I'm thinking of someone who is a lieutenant in the Army, but her job is to sing in an Army big band. Could she give an order to a private of infantry? Would he be obliged to follow it? One could also broaden the discussion to include other MOSs like doctors and nurses and computer programmers. Obviously most of the time it wouldn't come up.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_del3pm0",
"comment_text": [
"There's two relevant aspects here: Line vs Staff officers and rank vs possitional authority.",
"Line officers are those who's training and background is in command, particularly of combat units. Staff Officers are specialized in a particular field (like doctors, supply officers, lawyers) where they are granted the rank and commision without the training or authority to command a combat unit. This is mostly only relevant in extraordinary circumstances, such as POW camps, where (US military) prisoners of war are expected to reorganize under 1) the highest ranking Line officer or 2) the highest ranking non-commissioned officer (corporals, sergents, and petty-officers). Staff officers get skipped over completely as they simply are not trained for command in that context.",
"Next, there's possitional authority and rank. Possitional authority is when an individual has explicit authority over a particular area/item/situation/ect. Rank is the pay-grade of the individual. Possitional authority ",
" overrides rank. Generally, higher levels of possitional authority will be occupied by higher ranks, but this is not necessarily true, and someone outside of that positional authority structure must follow those ",
" possitional authority regardless of rank.",
"For example: it's reasonably common for a low-ranking enlisted soldier/sailor to be on guard duty. That enlisted person has authority to control access to their post through their Officer of the Watch and Commanding Officer. While the guard will be under orders from the Watch Officer an CO (who have possitional authority over the guard), they have full authority to deny access to anyone not on the access list, regardless of if the person requesting access is a 4-star general.",
"With specific regard to musicians, I'm not 100% certain if the officer leading the band is a line or staff officer. If they are a staff officer, they will not be ever put into positionap authority over an infantry unit. If the are a line officer, it is possible, though unlikely, that they could take command of an infantry unit under extreme circumstances where an ad-hoc unit is formed from scattered soldiers."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_del6j1l",
"comment_text": [
"Great answer, thanks! ",
"I was aware of positional authority in a situation like, for example, bomb disposal - where if someone tells you not to step on something, you would be well-advised to heed the warning regardless of rank.",
"Part of my curiosity was about the \"ad-hoc unit formed from scattered soldiers\" in an extreme situation, rather than normal stuff like base guard duty. ",
"I think one could make a very terrible war movie in which a clarinet player who was technically an officer ends up being thrust into a situation where he or she needs to interact with people who are much more, um, military in their worldview. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_del6u4l",
"comment_text": [
"Cast Bill Murray and I'd watch it. It might be unrealistic, but it might still be funny.",
"I ",
" musician unit officers are not generally line officers, with the possible exception of the Marines, who are a special case because of certain aspects of their organizational culture.",
"Edit: Friend and I even thougt up a title: \"Directing the Troops\". Pitch it to Mel Brooks."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_del376r",
"comment_text": [
"In most militaries, you can only give orders to people who are in your chain of command. You can't go around giving orders to random people just because you have a higher rank than them."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_del83md",
"comment_text": [
"A friend of mine went to a recruiter once and was thrilled to see that \"electric bass player\" is an MOS.",
"\"We kick out more funky licks before 8 AM than most people do all day.\"",
"I want the movie to have a scene where mortar fire is raining down, the bass player slides into a foxhole, and they're radioing, \"We need a generator and an amp up here NOW!\""
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5:Why are waterbeds no longer popular?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xxpje
| 16
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.72
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deloy6o",
"comment_text": [
"Because it was a fad. They were cold, very uncomfortable, hard to get out of without waking your SO. MOST importantly....lord help you if that thing popped."
],
"score": 38
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_delvdcy",
"comment_text": [
"As a sleep specialist I can say that they don't really offer much in the way of support or spinal alignment. They are worse for your back than an air mattress (I'm lookin at you, Sleep Number bed)! ",
"That back and neck pain combined with the fact that if you sprung a leak you were soaked, if your heater went out you had to sleep on a freezing bag of water, they took hours of draining with a hose just to move them, you sloshed all over if you or your partner so much as thought about moving, and often times you couldn't put it on a second floor in a rental because your landlord was afraid it would cause water damage if it did leak... you were wishing you had a good old innerspring!"
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_delny2m",
"comment_text": [
"You ever been on a water bed?"
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deloisg",
"comment_text": [
"According to this Mental Floss article it was high maintenance more than anything else. ",
"http://m.mentalfloss.com/article.php?id=71404"
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_delnxkb",
"comment_text": [
"You ever experienced a rip current while sleeping? Well, thanks to my wife, I did, and nothing has been the same ever since. "
],
"score": 8
}
|
|
ELI5: What's that feeling in the middle of the night where the thirst is intolerable?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xtnry
| 80
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.7
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekuyuk",
"comment_text": [
"Yes, if you drink enough water, you won't be thirsty."
],
"score": 136
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekuyuk",
"comment_text": [
"Yes, if you drink enough water, you won't be thirsty."
],
"score": 136
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekr7ki",
"comment_text": [
"Because you don't drink enough water during the day so you're dehydrated af. "
],
"score": 135
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekr7ki",
"comment_text": [
"Because you don't drink enough water during the day so you're dehydrated af. "
],
"score": 135
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekqyzd",
"comment_text": [
"I'm not sure I understand your question. 'Intolerable thirst' is still the sensation of thirst. "
],
"score": 103
}
|
ELI5: If we have protected and thorough verification systems, why can't we vote for things online?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xrnam
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekeizl",
"comment_text": [
"There's an 8 minute video by Computerphile explaining why online voting isn't a great idea. Basically, there's way too many vulnerabilities, and hacking would be virtually guaranteed.",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI"
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekfsn5",
"comment_text": [
"The biggest reason is that the United Stars of America is not a democracy. We are a republic, meaning we elect representatives to vote for us. The idea being that the average person does not have the time to research every aspect of every bill to make an informed decision. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekegxt",
"comment_text": [
"So it's lobbying from Republicans that keep us from progressing towards more efficient things like that? "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekerf4",
"comment_text": [
"I agree with everything you said. Republicans always push to make voting harder, and Democrats try to make voting easier. However, online voting isn't a thing in America because it's incredibly easy to hack, and pretty much every election with online voting has had major issues with hacking."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekd64l",
"comment_text": [
"Republican voter turnout is very stable - for instance, they get about 60 million votes in presidential elections every time. Democrat voter turnout fluctuates with total turnout. If you make it easier to vote, more people will vote - and they'll mostly be Democrats.",
"That's why the Republicans like to push for laws that make it harder to vote; and Democrats push the other way."
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: How can Google make profits by providing free services like Google Map?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xs8s4
| 8
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekh1h3",
"comment_text": [
"\"If a service is free, you're not the client - you're the product.\"",
"Google Maps allows Google to collect data from its users - where you are, what kind of restaurants you like, which places you like to visit. They can use this data to show you ads, or they can charge businesses to make them appear first in your search results."
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deki9ke",
"comment_text": [
"Not just that, they also use it to build detailed statistics over traffic congestion, peak visiting hours for businesses, etc. Every person who agreed to use \"google's location service to improve accuracy\" has agreed to become a data point that lets them build these models. ",
"It is sort of an emergent system. The data they can extrapolate from lots of users doing lots of very different things lets them gain a much bigger and greater understanding of the situation than just the extra data points would suggest. Knowing what 10000 people do rather than 1000 people do lets them gain more than 10 times the knowledge, and this is very valuable when they want to predict customer behavior, including advertisement and other marketing.",
"Google is an advertising company first, everything else is seconday. Same with facebook."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekiau8",
"comment_text": [
"Google maps is not a stand alone product it is heavily integrated into search, most of their products are integrated to search. They make revenue through ads and nothing else. So more information they collect on a user more through database they have on that user and more targeted ads to cater to the person and google other than showing targeted ads also sells your data to third parties for advertisements. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekhyfi",
"comment_text": [
"Bingo. Much the same with social networking sites; their business model is not so much the ads that they show as it is the metadata that they can sell on to other companies for targeted marketing."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekh1m0",
"comment_text": [
"I dont think they do... they make there money elsewhere. E.g. google ads, youtube ads etc. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: If the earth's crust is on top of the mantel in the form of plates, and the oceans are on top of the plates, wouldn't there be some spots for you water to spill through the plates and hit magma?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xp6b2
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.72
|
I've been rewatching Bill Nye.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejvhko",
"comment_text": [
"You've just described how Hawaii was formed. Because the water is much less dense than the molten rock, it doesn't spill through the cracks in the crust. Instead the magma pushes up through the crust. It solidifies into a small pile, then some more magma breaks through the pile and solidifies, and if the process repeats for millions of years, the pile becomes an underwater mountain, and when the mountain builds up over the surface of the ocean, it now you have an island."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejs8qo",
"comment_text": [
"Yup!",
"One such location is the rift valley at the center of the ",
"Mid-Atlantic Ridge",
". Where the plates separate magma meets sea water and forms new crust material. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekiqu3",
"comment_text": [
"A couple of ways have been mentioned that magma is generated on Earth, such as at Hawaii and the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. It's important to note that neither of these are due to the addition of water to the mantle. In fact, before we go any further, know that the Earth's mantle is solid rock. We talk about convection currents circulating in the mantle because that's what happens over millions of years - solid rock behaves like a very, very stiff fluid. Areas where the mantle is molten are limited to special areas near the surface, like Hawaii and such. ",
"To answer your question there are definitely places where ocean water seeps into the mantle, though this is a slow process. Lets look at ways that the solid mantle melts to form magma, and we will come to the answer:",
"1) Decompression, resulting in a lower melting temperature. This happens when the crust has been thinned enough to allow the mantle to approach the surface. As it does so the pressure within the Earth reduces due to less material on top to squish it all down. The mantle can then melt (without ever having increased temperature), and leak out on to the sea floor. This is our mid-ocean ridge system. ",
"2) A hot-spot. Areas of unusually high temperature near the Earth's crust that cause mantle material to melt and sometimes erupt at the surface. Hot-spots are caused by mantle plumes from extremely deep within the Earth. This is our Hawaiian type of melting. ",
"3) Hydrous melting. The addition of water to the mantle lowers its melting temperature and will generate magmas that rise up through the crust. This can only occur at ",
"subduction zones",
". These are areas where two tectonic plates meet, one oceanic and one continental. The oceanic plate will always subduct below the continental one as it is denser. Down with it goes all the wet sediments that accumulated when it was just being a regular old ocean floor. At a certain depth the water is squeezed out of the sediment, driven off into the mantle above, and this allows magmas to form which may rise up through the continental crust above and erupt, or just get stuck in the crust and form big blobs of molten rock which solidify whilst completely covered. ",
"The core of the Sierra Nevada mountains",
" formed this way, only becoming exposed after a load of uplift and erosion in the area much later. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dell8ty",
"comment_text": [
"This is basically how the island of Surtsey off the coast of Iceland was formed in the 1960s (and how Iceland itself was formed a little longer ago ─ but not a lot longer, Iceland is geologically very new)."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejt4rn",
"comment_text": [
"There are.",
"What happens is the magma hits the water and cools, temporarily sealing the caps in the plates. Then the plates move a little, break up the hardened magma (now rock), and more magma spills out."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why does Milka-Orea commercial calls it "European candy" instead of Milka chocolate, even though it says Milka right in the packaging?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xmmkg
| 4
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.56
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejauy5",
"comment_text": [
"Probably because it doesn't use the legal amount of chocolate or milk to be called a chocolate bar. "
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dej9hvy",
"comment_text": [
"Maybe because it's European exclusive and proud of it? I'm American and have no idea what you're talking about. Never hear of the candy or chocolate. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejnqq7",
"comment_text": [
"I didn't detect any sarcasm in their comment, FWIW. I'm Canadian, and the only reason I've ever heard of Milka was seeing the logo on a trailer mod in Euro Truck Simulator 2.",
"Like it or not, most of Reddit's users are from the U.S., and Milka isn't sold there. Providing a link to said commercial might help, especially since searching \"Milka-Orea\" brings up very few results. I assume you mean \"Milka Oreo\"?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejp4cs",
"comment_text": [
"What do you mean? They don't say \"Milka\" in the advert?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejl2ht",
"comment_text": [
"WTF is Milka? What is this? Do you have a link to an example?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Earlier today I went into some deep, existential thought about life and how it works and didn't feel like myself. Now I feel normal again. What happened earlier?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xoi6k
| 109
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.76
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejnfiu",
"comment_text": [
"Nobody exists on purpose, nobody belongs anywhere, everybody's gonna die. \nCome watch TV."
],
"score": 19
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejox61",
"comment_text": [
"Try taking a NyQuil and DayQuil at the same time"
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejox61",
"comment_text": [
"Try taking a NyQuil and DayQuil at the same time"
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejnbof",
"comment_text": [
"What were you thinking about? "
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejo8du",
"comment_text": [
"How everything more or less is dependent on pain and pleasure."
],
"score": 8
}
|
|
ELI5: The 'Blue Whale' game and why people play it
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xm3jt
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dek6fsp",
"comment_text": [
"Sounds like an urban myth or one of those bullshit stories that \"concerned parents\" eat up from shitty journalism."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejydyh",
"comment_text": [
"The Blue Whale game is an online social media game in which accounts lure in teens and other unsuspecting victims to play a dangerous and deadly quest and reward game. Most of these people who play the game are from Russia and Bulgaria, from what I've seen. A basic outline is you message one of the accounts (Usually on Facebook) once you have, you have entered the game. Now why people continue to do it, I have no clue. There are theories that these accounts dox you and threaten to release your information and stalk you, even as far as threaten to murder your loved ones. They're fifty tasks, one each day. Each one is more grotesque than the last. From what I've heard, task one is cut a code into your hand and eventually if you pass all the other tasks, you are commanded to end your life by jumping off the tallest building around you on day 50. The game is about encouraging teens to kill themselves, and harm themselves. Once you enter, you're in. This could be legend, but with the numbers of teens killed from this I doubt it. Please do not enter."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dej7qxo",
"comment_text": [
"Well,you take some tasks from a admin for 50 days if you complete them you can suicide.Maybe people who are suicidal want some adventures before they do it,other may think it is a joke.You should not play this game,it killed over 110 people already."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dej8kmn",
"comment_text": [
"This only leaves me with more questions."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dek72rp",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah it does, I certainly think it's being dramatized. However, there have been enough teen suicides that were 100% linked to the \"Blue Whale Game\" to consider it dangerous. I don't doubt the idea that a group of malicious people who try to get young and dumb teens to hurt themselves exists. After all, the internet is at the hands of many nut jobs. Also living in America, I don't have the full details, most of what I know has come from translating Russian and user accounts. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5:What exactly are paradoxes and can they be proven to exist through physical means?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xm433
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.43
|
Most of the paradoxes you read about are philosophical or reasoning brain twisters. But is there a paradox you can actually prove occurs through physical means or is the concept of a paradox only a philosophical one?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dej595z",
"comment_text": [
"Paradoxes are a hypothetical contradiction. They try to give a real world example of something that can't occur in the real world. That is, something that is both true and false at the same time.",
"Some people, dialetheists, believe that paradoxes do actually exist. That's not a popular view, though. ",
"Basically, if paradoxes do exist, then logic is no longer a reliable system of truth. It might just be a case of not wanting to bite the bullet but most philosophers would deny that they exist. A good deal of modern logic works on finding ways out of supposed paradoxes."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dej5qwe",
"comment_text": [
"If God created it, who made God.",
"That's more of a theological issue and not really true problem. Once you're dealing with ideas outside the Universe, don't expect them to be bound by the rules of the Universe. I don't believe in God but that's just a non-issue, that question."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dej5sax",
"comment_text": [
"The trouble with applying the logical constructs of our Universe to whatever came beyond or before it is that there's no reason they should apply. Time, space and all laws of physics are properties of this Universe. A theist would say God has no need to obey these things since they it is beyond them. An atheist can very well say the same of the Universe itself. Why do these laws and concepts need to apply before the point at which they are created?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dej5tgc",
"comment_text": [
"Let me save you some time... it's turtles all the way down."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dej60kp",
"comment_text": [
"While I agree with you, the implications that laws can change would be astronomical. I mean I have heard that the speed of light has changed over the years so perhaps you are more right than we think. But that big of a change that something can be made of nothing is huge."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: What exactly is in 5 Hour Energy if it has no sugar and almost no calories? And how unhealthy is it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xl98g
| 5
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.78
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deiy89q",
"comment_text": [
"Caffeine, more caffeine and a bit of caffeine on top. It's pretty unhealthy if you're sensitive to caffeine, or if you go way over the recommended maximum daily caffeine intake. Too much caffeine can give you diarrhoea and/or an elevated heart rate/blood pressure."
],
"score": 10
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deiy692",
"comment_text": [
"loads of caffeine. and aspartame instead of sugar. it is an energy drink so EXTREMELY unhealthy"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dej3ydb",
"comment_text": [
"It's really not that much caffeine. Only about 200 mg, or 1/2 of a venti coffee from Starbucks."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dejin9n",
"comment_text": [
"That's probably true, but those 5 hours energy shots are often considerably smaller, so the caffeine concentration is a lot higher.",
"1500 mg of caffeine is generally considered the limit for how much caffeine an average person can take before they start feeling sick. At this point, cold sweats and nausea is common.",
"It's easy to drink 7 energy shots in a relatively short time, but not as easy to drink 15 ventis."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dej8f3x",
"comment_text": [
"How is it unhealthy though? Specifically? "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why does going the speed limit save gas?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xjsjf
| 10
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.92
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deil0da",
"comment_text": [
"1) Increasing air resistance. According to CNN, \"Pushing air around actually takes up about 40% of a car's energy at highway speeds. Traveling faster makes the job even harder...The increase is actually exponential, meaning wind resistance rises much more steeply between 70 and 80 mph than it does between 50 and 60. \"",
"2) Engines are designed for specific speed, temperature, and rpm ranges. Driving out of these ranges goes against the fundamental design of the engine. ",
"Source: ",
"http://www.mpgforspeed.com"
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deil14v",
"comment_text": [
"Once a car's in its highest gear, going faster takes more fuel. That means there is usually an optimal speed that's lower than the speed limit, but since the alternative is usually speeding, going the speed limit is better than going as fast as the car can go."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deit3wb",
"comment_text": [
"In general, driving slower results in better fuel economy because of decreased drag on the vehicle from the air and friction losses from the tires, as well as not losing as much economy when braking. Slower vehicles don't have to brake as hard and use less fuel recovering speed after braking. ",
"The detailed explanation is a little more complicated. ",
"It's not that going the speed limit saves gas, it's that every vehicle is going to have a particular speed for the real world conditions it's driving in, that will result in the greatest gas mileage. Whether that number equals the speed limit or not is inconsequential. ",
"Start at slow speeds. Your car is parked with the engine running. You are getting 0 mpg because you are burning gas with no distance traveled. ",
"You let the brake off and allow the car to idle up to whatever speed it will idle at without applying gas and you go about 14mph. Now you have a measurable mpg and while an idling engine sips little fuel, you also are not traveling very fast, so it will have to sip that fuel for a much longer period of time which lowers your mpg rating. Lets say it's now 15mpg. ",
"You accelerate up to 35mph. Now the airflow over the vehicle starts to noticeably produce drag which slows the car down so you have to use more gas to overcome it. However the car is now moving much faster so you cover more distance even though fuel use is up. Lets say you now get 30mpg provided you don't have to ever hit the brakes because the brakes take speed and turn it into heat, which requires the engine to burn more fuel to recover the speed. ",
"Now lets say you gun it and go 70mph on a highway. You are burning much more fuel, but traveling very fast. However the air resistance has risen much higher than it was at 35mph. In fact instead of being twice as drag inducing, it's more like 4 times more drag, which means much more fuel is used to overcome this drag, but you aren't going 4 times faster, so your mpg actually goes down compared to 35mph. ",
"So in this comparison, it's better for fuel economy to go 35 than it is to go 70. The speed at which drag becomes a real problem changes depending on the body of the car. Moving vans, trucks, and SUV's are not aerodynamic and drag slows them down at lower speeds than something sleek and aerodynamic like a small and sporty car. So the better the coefficient of drag, the faster the vehicle will be going when it hits it's optimum mpg speed. ",
"However it's not a perfect world, and we often have to speed up and slow down. The faster we are going when we have to brake, and the more we have to slow down, the more fuel we burn getting back up to speed. ",
"So in stop and go traffic, gunning it to 35mph, then hitting the brakes then gunning it again, would be worse on mpg than driving at 20mph and hitting the brakes less often. Even though on a perfect drive, 35mph might get better fuel economy. ",
"The faster you are going, the more fuel you burned to get up to that speed, and having to slow down hurts your fuel economy more the faster you go. ",
"So all of these factors come into play when deciding what the most efficient speed to drive is. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deil156",
"comment_text": [
"I'm sure a engineer with chime in but in a nut shell, as you increase in speed, more energy is required due to drag. To produce more energy your engine uses more fuel. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dej5w7a",
"comment_text": [
"This is why drafting on the highway is important"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: How can the president order a wiretap?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xis9v
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.4
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deie6pe",
"comment_text": [
"That would still require a federal judge to review the evidence for the need for a wiretap and then agree that there was enough evidence to warrant a wiretap before signing the AG's warrant. If that's the case, the wiretaps would be legal and justified.",
"The president has constitutional power to target and kill U.S. citizens abroad who have committed or are planning to commit terrorist activities against the United States."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deidk1j",
"comment_text": [
"Any number of ways. During Obama's presidency the Justice Department tapped and infiltrated media reporters. The Attorney General Holder even lied about it under oath, personally signing the warrants.",
"The AG is a politica appointment and the Justice Department is largely led by the President. If he wants something done it wouldn't be that hard. I mean Obama managed to have himself granted the authority to assassinate US citizens without a warrant and without the involvement of the courts.."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deies4x",
"comment_text": [
"When you're the AG you know which judge to ask when you want to get something done. Federal judges are also political appointees."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deihksm",
"comment_text": [
"Right, the same as any other political appointment by the President..."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deifjxx",
"comment_text": [
"Federal judges are nominated by the executive branch and confirmed by the Senate."
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: Is it possible for Earth to be or has been 100℅ body of water?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xgruv
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
Just saw the episode in Cowboy Bebop where they go to Earth. Just wondering what event(s) would have to take place if it were to happen.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dekk06s",
"comment_text": [
"Actually the full extent of the disaster is only hinted at in the series- the meteor showers are just one symptom of the Gate Accident, which also involved an explosion that destroyed North America and produced a lot of radiation.",
"That said, although the water level seems higher in some places, Bebop's world isn't really submerged- at the end of #9, you can recognise South America pretty distinctly from orbit. Many people simply live underground because it provides protection from the falling moon debris."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_del4jjx",
"comment_text": [
"The underground living is alluded to in that episode by the Indian reporter on the news, and the spy satellite that no-one is aware of was of US origin. Later episodes that feature Earth show some distinctly dry landscapes.",
"The thing is with Bebop is that it doesn't really do exposition though, so some of the backstory details are only dealt with in things like staff interviews after the show was completed. But it's an unquestionably great series to dig into the world-building with."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehxkg1",
"comment_text": [
"The total amount of water on Earth is enough to flood the whole planet ",
" the surface were quite smooth. But right now, the surface has high points and low points. The high points are so high that there just isn't enough water on the whole planet to submerge them.",
"The surface's shape is constantly changing, with geological forces creating new high areas about as fast as erosion wears them down. So it seems unlikely that the surface will ever be smooth enough (no high points) to be completely flooded."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehxlgs",
"comment_text": [
"I guess, theoretically, if all the worlds land mass was flattened to the same level (including raising the sea bed) so that it was a perfectly smooth sphere, then all the water could float/sit on top - I haven't done the math to work out just how deep it would be, but it wouldn't be very much. You've probably seen ",
"this picture",
"...."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dei1m1a",
"comment_text": [
"There is approximate 1.5 billion km",
" = 1.5*10",
" km",
" of water on the earth",
"The surface area of the earth is 5.1*10",
" km",
"Even spread over the earth it would have a depth of 2.94 km",
"That would be the result if the earth were a perfect sphere that does not rotate but the earth does rotate. There is a bulge of 8km at the equator as a result of the rotation so the poles would be dry because the water would migrate to the equator as a result of the rotation of the earth. Of-course there is a shape that would result in even spread of water but is would not be a perfect sphere",
"You can see pictures of what the earth would look if it did no spin at ",
"http://www.esri.com/news/arcuser/0610/nospin.html"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: In areas with large rivers or lakes (grand canyon for example) how is it desert?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xes0z
| 5
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.85
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehia9j",
"comment_text": [
"Desert is classified as an area with an extreme low amount of annual precipitation. The Gobi desert is covered in snow during winter - but still a desert bc of the lack of rainfall"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehnu90",
"comment_text": [
"It's so cold in gobi- the snow falls so little it never melts. Desert is like less than 8\" precipitation per year. (From memory)"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehnul3",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks captain"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehiar7",
"comment_text": [
"A desert is a barren area of land where little precipitation occurs and consequently living conditions are hostile for plant and animal life. The lack of vegetation exposes the unprotected surface of the ground to the processes of denudation. About one third of the land surface of the world is arid or semi-arid. This includes much of the polar regions where little precipitation occurs and which are sometimes called polar deserts or \"cold deserts\". Deserts can be classified by the amount of precipitation that falls, by the temperature that prevails, by the causes of desertification or by their geographical location.",
"Literally taken from Wikipedia "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehig0q",
"comment_text": [
"I get the precipitation, but with the amount of water why isn't there more plant life near the rivers? "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Piracy terms: Nuking and Internal
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xelvv
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.55
|
What do these terms mean? I know "internal" is a label meaning "not the scene", but by logic it should be "external" since the scene is an exclusive group not everyone can belong to. I have no idea what "niking" can refer to, however. Could someone explain these terms to me, please?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehhqnq",
"comment_text": [
"My L33T days are behind me but an internal is where a group specific to a site, forum, or tracker make a better quality release than the groups who try to release quickest.",
"If there are any problems with a scene release it is nuked on that specific site, forum, or tracker. Reasons for nuking can be A/V quality or synching issues, commercials before, during, or after the capture. Most of the time if a release is nuked a different release from another group, sometimes an internal one, is labelled a \"proper\""
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehipfs",
"comment_text": [
"De nada."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehiyd7",
"comment_text": [
"De dónde eres?",
"Chicago-ish. It's part of my plan to obfuscate my identity in case you work for the federali's."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehivdc",
"comment_text": [
"De dónde eres?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehhx59",
"comment_text": [
"Thank you!"
],
"score": 0
}
|
ELI5:Why do so many desert peoples wear head coverings, even when it's hot at night? Doesn't that just hold in more body heat?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xcdpb
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degz12r",
"comment_text": [
"I was in Iraq as a soldier for a couple of years. The temperatures in the desert have wide swings. Although 70 degrees may feel good here in the desert 70 degrees can feel freezing. That is because the daytime temperatures can be well over a hundred. Your body is trying to regulate that swing in temperature and those differences make it hard.",
"By wearing layered clothing and head coverings your clothes act as a thermal barrier during the day and thermal insulation at night. ",
"Essentially you are mitigating the temperature swings. ",
"There is also the sand aspect. They use them to block out sand from sand storms. A face full of sand will make you always want a head covering on you at all times. ",
"I wore winter clothes more during the summers in Iraq than I ever did in the states. I was always freezing at night. Teeth chattering cold. The sun wasn't that big of a deal. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degybq7",
"comment_text": [
"Now I'm not a scientist and i may just be making up facts but I believe it's to keep the direct sunlight off their heads."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degyb0n",
"comment_text": [
"The dessert is usually actually very cold at night. There isn't moisture in the air to hang onto the heat of the day. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degytpl",
"comment_text": [
"During the day it prevents too much sunlight from teaxhing their skin, and during the cokd desert night, it keeps them warm."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deh3zna",
"comment_text": [
"Cold desserts are the best imho..im rather fond of magnums.."
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELIF: Why isn't Jurassic Park possible?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xc8j0
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
I'm sure I'm being stupid but it sounds so plausible in the films?!
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degx4ua",
"comment_text": [
"DNA has a half-life of 521 years. After which, half the bonds holding the sequence together are broken. Another 521 years, and you lose half the remaining. And so on. After 1.5 million years, the sequences left are too short to be readable by any existing technology. Dinosaur DNA has had 65.5 million years since the last went extinct."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degxcw8",
"comment_text": [
"Its practically long gone at this point."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degx8f3",
"comment_text": [
"because there's no DNA that you can clone from. DNA doesn't get locked amber like the movie claims. DNA deteriorates at a rate of having half the amount of viable every 100 years or so. it's been 200million years since the dinosaurs. there would be 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 can't type enough 0's 1% of DNA available to make a dinosaur. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deh4sih",
"comment_text": [
"So you're saying that a children's film lied to me?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degxc1p",
"comment_text": [
"Damn that's aggressive but totally makes the point. Upvote. 👍"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5 Why did the Nazis call themselves Socialist if they hated communism?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xeiqw
| 12
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.68
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehga8i",
"comment_text": [
"In theory, \"National Socialism\" meant \"socialist (not Marxist) principles applied to a nation, rather than internationally\". Fascist movements in the 20th Century developed not necessarily out of, but alongside leftist movements. For example, the first Fascist manifesto in Italy had some rather progressive goals in labor rights and wanted to redistribute wealth generally. However, they were emphatically ",
" Marxists or communists - they rejected both historical materialism (the foundation of the Marxist left) and proletarian internationalism, in favor of \"racial science\" and nationalism. Nonetheless, they professed to stand for worker's rights, hence the \"Socialism\".",
"In reality, however, this was never more than a neat trick to get workers on their side. Hitler liquidated the left of his party (led by the Strasser brothers) and privatized a great deal of German industry, as well as reining in trade unions."
],
"score": 18
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehnv28",
"comment_text": [
"That sort of \"left-centre-right\" analysis is horribly inaccurate. You're ignoring the existence of anarchism, for example - which is a form of communism - the fact that communism implies the eventual end of the state, the Leninist, Market Socialist and Left Communist definitions of socialism (basically, anyone who thinks that socialism =/= government intervention) and the difference between communist politics and communist theory. It's basically the worst possible understanding of the distinction."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehkxz2",
"comment_text": [
"... can you really not say why you disagree with the consensus? Just throwing it out there isn't really helpful."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehm90k",
"comment_text": [
"I never claimed they were. Note I'm a communist.",
"Although your definitions of both of them probably diverge ",
" from anything a 19th/20th-century person would have given. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dehgph7",
"comment_text": [
"Marxist Communism was a particular, and at the time new, form of \"socialism\". It has since become the dominant understanding of the word, but that wasn't so much the case in the 20's and 30's when NAZIism was on the rise in Germany.",
"The real identifying quality of various \"socialist\" philosophies is the idea that the economy should controled and made to serve the society rather than the individual (as opposed to classical liberal and capitalist philosophies).",
"National Socialists would then view 'Society' as the cultural nation (German, then later Aryan in this case), where Marxism generally rejected national identity for worker/proletariat identity and idealized ending in a stateless, nationless society.",
"That, and the Communist party were a political threat to the NAZI party, largely regardless of philosophy, in the same way that Republican and Democratic parties in the US are at each other's throats, in spite of being closer to each other in many ways than any party in Europe or South America. On this level, it's not so much about policy differences, it's about who weilds power."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: Moving out into an apartment for the first time
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xb7qo
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degow0x",
"comment_text": [
"I'm going to need to furnish the apartment. I want it to be nice without having to spend too much if possible...Obviously going to need a bed, mattress, bedding, towels, kitchen/cooking supplies. I'd also eventually like things like a couch, tv, etc. but those things can probably wait.",
"You can try Craigslist for used furniture (try to stick to wood and plastic unless you thoroughly check the item out - you don't want to get bugs or weird smells in your house by getting a nasty mattress or couch from Craiglist). There's also the classic Ikea.",
"I am a very clean person. Germ-a-phobe. Although, I've never really cleaned. My parents cleaned for me. What do I need as far as cleaning supplies go? And where to store the cleaning supplies? I want to keep my apartment clean, smelling good, and looking good. Tell me everything.",
"You need a way to clean the floor, so a broom and vacuum for carpet or mop for hard floors. You need toilet cleaner and a brush and a plunger (just in case you need it, you want to have it on hand). You'll need to change your air filters every so often. You have to clean the bathtub, so bath cleaner. You also need window cleaner for glass and mirrors. And dish soap for dishes. The exact brushes you use for cleaning dishes, toilets, etc. are largely personal preference. Just don't use metal implements on non-stick pans!",
"I'll also be living in a rainy/wet place. Any recommendations on things to help when entering the house with wet shoes, wet jackets, etc.",
"Have a coat and shoe rack by the door or right outside the door.",
"I am pretty clueless and overwhelmed. I don't want to end up wasting money",
"You sound like you're more on top of it than most people. There aren't likely to be any crazy cleaning emergencies since it's just you, so you can largely just get things as you need them. If you forget something, you'll figure it out when you need whatever you forgot.",
"I am not sure if this is the correct sub to post in. If there's a better one, let me know",
"It isn't really, since this isn't a request to explain anything. If you want to have an idea of what a realistic budget would be, try ",
"/r/personalfinance",
". If you just want apartment tips generally, then I'm not sure. Maybe just see what ",
"/r/casualconversation",
" can offer?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degpdk0",
"comment_text": [
"Going to need to clean clothes. So laundry detergent",
"Clean dishes. So dishsoap, a sponge and maybe a drying rack or dishtowel to dry. Even if you have a dishwasher, it wont clean everything. ",
"To clean the rest of the kitchen. Any general purpose cleaner works. ",
"Bathroom is similar but the gunk is going to be different. I suggest yet another sponge just for bathroom stuff. Something like CLR to help clean up soap scum and hard water deposits is handy after a few weeks. For the toilet, have a plunger. It'll save you one day. ",
"Floors. Small vacuum for carpets and it also helps with hard floors. Broom to sweep. If you have a lot of tile, maybe a mop. If not so much then you could do it by hand. Have a bucket anyway. Also acts as a good place to store cleaning supplies. ",
"Something to dust with. Damp cloth works fine. Static duster if you want to splurge. Something to wipe down your windows with. If you want to go cheap then vinegar technically works... but I personally hate the smell. Better option is to buy a cheap window cleaner and dilute it with water to make it last longer. ",
"For your entrance, get a mat. It'll contain the mess and water to your front entrance. Hang your wet coats over that mat. ",
"Last bit of advice, get a desk/table and a chair at fairly early. You don't want to live out of your bed. It wears on you over time."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degpgc0",
"comment_text": [
"This is a link I found in the sidebar of ",
"r/malelivingspace",
": ",
"http://lifedontpanic.blogspot.com/2011/10/living-on-your-own-things-you-will-need.html?m=1",
" . Not that I'm assuming you're male, but I'm a guy, and it seems pretty general and thorough in any case. You might also want to check if there's a sub on Reddit for your new city or state. Best of luck! "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degqey6",
"comment_text": [
"First thing to make sure you have on move-in day... a shower curtain! Nothing worse than spending hours moving and wanting a nice, hot shower only to realize you will have to flood the bathroom floor in order to do so because you have no shower curtain. And curtain rings to attach the shower curtain to the rod, too! And don't forget the damn toilet paper.",
"A basic toolkit is absolutely necessary... something with a hammer, screwdrivers, tape measure, pliers, wrench, box cutter, etc.",
"Also, you will be amazed how much random stuff you take for granted being around that you suddenly need... when we moved into our new house about 2 years ago, we spent like $500 at target on random stuff, and we had a lot from our apartment but just needed more for a bigger house (more waste baskets, toilet bowl brushes, hand soaps, etc.)",
"If your Mom is available, take her to Wal-Mart or Target with you to help out. Moms love to feel needed and are great at this kind of stuff. She'll make sure you have cleaning supplies, paper goods, housewares, linens, etc. Ask her what she has around the house you can take, too, to help save money.",
"Ikea is a great resource for housewares and furniture if you have one nearby... even worth a couple hour drive if need be. Matching/coordinated furniture will look nicer than random odds and ends."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degqga4",
"comment_text": [
"Ideally, your rent should be no more than a third of your earnings. Then another third for living expenses, and the last third for spending/saving.",
"Pay attention to the terms of your lease. Make sure you know exactly what day rent is due (most places have it due the 1st, some places due by the 5th, some places give you prorates when you're on time but give you a grace period where you can still turn in your rent but you lose the prorate...). Pay particular attention to what's included in your rent - power, water, cable? And what repairs you're responsible for. There will be a security deposit, which you will get back as long as you leave the apartment spotless when you move out - more than likely, you will not get ",
" of it back, but as long as your landlord isn't sketchy and you take care of the apartment you should get most of it. You may also be required to pay the first and/or last month's rent up front. This is to make sure that you don't move in, trash the place, and duck out of your contract. Sounds like you have plenty of money handy, though, so you should be able to cover it. If you have pets, there will also either be a pet fee or pet deposit or both. Most places have restrictions on what kinds of pets you can have. Pro tip: take a ",
" of pictures before you move your stuff in. Take ",
". Save those on your computer, then back them up on a thumb drive and tuck that away somewhere you can find it again. When you move out you can prevent your landlord from taking your deposits if you can show from the pictures what was pre-existing damage so they don't try to charge you for something that was there when you moved in.",
"If you're looking for a cheaper way to furnish your apartment, consider going to Goodwill or similar places to find furniture for relatively cheap. You will need a truck (or a friend with a truck) to move it back to your apartment. If your car has any kind of pulling power, you may be able to rent a Uhaul trailer for a day (they usually give discounts on hitch installs when you rent from them). You will then also need friends or friendly neighbors to help you move it all into your apartment. Here's hoping you're on the ground floor, or there's an elevator. IKEA is also a great place to get cheap furniture. Don't forget to grab a set of towels and a couple sets of bed sheets, pillows, blankets, etc.",
"To fill in some of the space and make it feel homey, grab a cheap bookshelf and some wall hangings (artistic prints, photos, stuff like that) that look nice to you. Pro tip: wall clocks are classy af.",
"You will likely want a washer/dryer in your apartment, or at least hook-ups. Using a laundromat is a pain, and if you're making that much you should be able to afford a place with hookups without a problem. Check to see if a washer/dryer is included (and check to see if it's a washer/dryer ",
" or ",
"). If it has hookups, but not the machines, you'll want to get them. Those can be expensive, but remember it's your first apartment so don't go crazy for super awesome amazing units. Also know that you can offer to leave them with the unit when you leave in exchange for, say, prorated rent one month or more of your security deposit back. Or you can try to sell them to the next person moving into your unit.",
"Don't go for a crazy big expensive TV. In fact, don't go for crazy big expensive anything. Know how much money you have and budget accordingly. If you don't already have a credit card, you should open one but remember always that credit isn't free money. You will have to pay it back, so don't open a card and go nuts spending. It's definitely OK to spend money on yourself and nice things, but consider your budget carefully and prioritize the stuff you want/need. And remember, everything you buy for this apartment has to get packed up and moved later, or thrown away.",
"You'll need a bed, I'd shoot for a full-sized mattress. You probably don't need an expensive headboard, just get a mattress and frame, eh?",
"For your kitchen, that depends entirely on how much you cook and what you cook. Good plan, get a set of pots (small, medium, and large) and you can sustain yourself on ramen and mac & cheese at least. A nice deep skillet opens up a ",
" more stuff, too. You'll want a cutting board...actually let's just do it like this:",
"something in this range",
"For your bathroom, you'll need a shower curtain, probably. Obviously towels and toilet paper. Grab a plunger ",
" you need it so you have it (pro tip: ",
"get this kind",
"), hand soap, toothbrush/paste. Grab some trashcans (big one for the kitchen, small one for the bathroom, small one for your bedroom, small one for the living room).",
"For your bedroom, you'll want a desk of some kind, and at least one end table for next to your bed. Also a lamp or three. Desk chair for your desk. Don't forget stuff like alarm clocks, coat hangers for your closet, etc. And a dresser or some kind of shelves/drawers for storing your clothes. In fact, look into shelves and storage in general. Whatever looks good and matches the rest of your stuff.",
"If you do get a TV, don't forget a TV stand to put it on. Nothing looks trashy like a nice TV just sitting on the floor. Check the light bulbs that are already there and grab replacements for any that don't work.",
"For dealing with the damp, definitely grab a doormat for outside, and probably another mat for just inside the door. Maybe a shoe rack? You can probably hang some pegs for jackets right inside the door. Before you hang anything, check with your lease about what you're allowed to modify (it's reasonable for you to be able to hang small stuff), and absolutely 100% ask the guys at Home Depot or wherever the right way to do it so you don't bust a giant hole in the wall."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:How is it determined whether or not citizens of a country need a visa to travel to another country?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xavwv
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.64
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deglyup",
"comment_text": [
"Every country sets rules for what admission policies they set for people from other countries.",
"Basically, you start with the idea that everyone needs a visa. Then, you make exceptions for other countries -- some countries you have agreements with that both of you will accept the other's citizens without a visa. And some countries won't make that agreement with you, but its in your economic best interest to allow people from certain countries into yours without a visa -- say a poor country that wants businessmen and vacationers from wealthy countries to be able to get in easily and spend money."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deglzu9",
"comment_text": [
"The default is \"You need a visa\". Some countries negotiate treaties among themselves and agree to waive the visa requirement. For example, in the EU you don't need a visa to go from one country to another. These are exceptions to the rule."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degoozy",
"comment_text": [
"For example, in the EU you don't need a visa to go from one country to another.",
"Inside the ",
"Schengen area",
". It has a large overlap with the EU, but it is not identical. There are countries in the EU that are not in the Schengen area, and countries in the Schengen area that are not in the EU.",
"It is not just the absence of visa - there are no border controls (with rare exceptions). You can freely cross the borders in the same way you can cross the borders of US states, for example."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degxnd6",
"comment_text": [
"I recently had to get a visa to go to the US from the UK, but obviously don't to travel across most of Europe.",
"Oddly enough I didn't need one to go to Bahrain. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degyk05",
"comment_text": [
"Exactly, it's not an algorithm, but it's negotiated country by country."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: What constitutes a reliable news source?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5xb3ph
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.55
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dego1tm",
"comment_text": [
"You should always look for the source of a story. A lot of times news sources copy stories from other sources, but they usually attribute the original source. So the LA Times may print a story that was broken by the New York Times, but they will probably put a reference to the original NYT piece. In these cases, you should check the original source to judge reliability. There are a few news agencies that get reprinted a lot, like the Associated Press, Retuers, and Agence France-Presse, since they are very large and have reporters all over the world to gather facts.",
"Once you get to the original story, see where the information came from. A lot of things, like government statistics, you can check on your own if it sounds fishy.",
"For things you can't check on your own, you have to go on reputation. Most news agencies with any decent reputation won't make up a quote and wrongly attribute it to somebody, so you can usually trust it if it says \"Donald trump said 'blah blah blah' at the rally.\" However, a lot of news relies on anonymous sources since those sources don't want to be fired. Most journalists take reporting seriously and won't make up facts from an anonymous source. They are also supposed to have verification from more than one source. When it comes to anonymous sources, reputation is the main thing. You can usually trust the New York Times, for example, because it has broken big stories based on anonymous sources in the past that were true. It also has a ton to lose from breaking a false story.",
"It's also important not to mix up the news with editorials. Editorials are more like opinion pieces. Although they can cite facts and rely on them, they are written to be persuasive and the facts are chosen for that purpose. Most newspapers clearly mark their editorial sections. It can be harder to tell on TV since editorial shows like to blur the line (The O'Reilly Factor, etc.), but stick to shows where the host doesn't have a clear political agenda and they rely on other reports to go out and make stories.",
"It's also important to note that you can't entirely remove bias from news coverage. So Fox could say the crowd at Trump's inauguration was large while MSNBC could say it was small and neither would be lying. However, it would be lying to report incorrect numbers at the inauguration or to say that it was the biggest on ever since those can be objectively disproved."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degnemy",
"comment_text": [
"Objectivity.",
"The news should present the facts, regardless of what they are, and without bias. Opinions are fine at times, but when the opinions start overshadowing the facts, and start skewing the way the news is presented, then it becomes a problem.",
"Unfortunately, right now, in the U.S., all 3 major news networks (MSNBC, CNN, and Fox) are guilty of this."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degnp0j",
"comment_text": [
"I hear people say CNN is biased, but I've never actually seen proof of that. It kinda just sounds like people came up with their own theory and convinced themselves its true."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degntwl",
"comment_text": [
"I hear people say CNN is biased, but I've never actually seen proof of that.",
"Here ya go: ",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-8Cn6boqcA"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_degy8wt",
"comment_text": [
"CNN is NOT a reliable source of information. They tend to spread a lot of false narratives, this being one of them"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do we use 8.5x11" paper as a standard and how was that number decided?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5x70l2
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.55
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_defrlej",
"comment_text": [
"There's a bit about this in the show Adam Ruins Everything (and it's easily found on YouTube, but you need a subscription to see it, otherwise I'd post it here). From what I remember, the president decided to standardize on a paper size. There was an entire committee put together, and they went with 8x10.5. But then xerox came along and they used 8.5x11, so it was adapted everywhere. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_defri2p",
"comment_text": [
"It's actually unknown. It's suspected that 11 inches was chosen, because it's about 1/4 the length of the average arm of the people who made paper way back when, but the 8.5 is a little more mysterious. ",
"In Europe, they use A4 which is based on the square meter and some special mathematical properties related to the square root of 2. In America, it's a bit more arbitrary. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_defrtsu",
"comment_text": [
"Wait, Americans don't use a4 size paper? :o"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_defsbed",
"comment_text": [
"Standard letter paper is 8.5\" x 11\" (roughly A4-ish size and uses), legal is 8.5x14 (slightly longer) ( ",
"http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kcFss9pRPFM/UN8ZXfBDi7I/AAAAAAAAObo/zV5oXj1I6EE/s1600/photo2.png",
" )",
"...and nobody remembers why."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deftf63",
"comment_text": [
"Its close to A4. I've never seen an actual sheet of A4 paper in my life.",
"https://indiesew.com/img/blog/a4-vs-letter-paper/paper-size-comparison.jpg"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do they still make complicated stop-motion movies if there is more-efficient animation software available?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5x6bjx
| 14
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.72
|
Why do they still make complicated stop-motion movies, like Kubo and the Two Strings, if there is more-efficient animation software available?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_defl5g2",
"comment_text": [
"Because it has a very particular style. It's like why do people still paint with paint and brushes when they could do it on a computer, or why do people buy records when they can just get an mp4. New and efficient doesn't mean better in every way."
],
"score": 21
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_defqg7m",
"comment_text": [
"Why do people paint when photography exists?",
"Sometimes the medium or methods used are more important than the final product."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deg7ykv",
"comment_text": [
"Never is a tall order, but, right now, no."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deg5gyz",
"comment_text": [
"I was asking myself the same question as OP today when I watched Kubo, but this is precisely why."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deg9i98",
"comment_text": [
"Laika in particular makes stop motion movies because it's essentially a passion project for two super rich dudes (Phil and Travis Knight, the founder of Nike and his son). They're not looking to make money, they're doing it because the appreciate the art form."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: If all jobs in a particular trade require at least two years of on the job experience, how does one get that experience?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5x5r71
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.58
|
Sometimes taking college classes or school of the trade isn't enough. If you drill back far enough, eventually you'll have to get to a point where no individual has the experience.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deffy3i",
"comment_text": [
"In some trades, there are still apprenticeship programs that are run in conjunction with trade schools. There is classroom time along with real-world application of the skills taught in class. This real-world time is usually considered as \"experience.\""
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deffzg9",
"comment_text": [
"Internships would be one way to get it, either that or an assistant of some sort and work your way up from there."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_defo2sd",
"comment_text": [
"Also, many jobs will list 2 years experience as a prerequisite for the job when, in fact, it is just strongly preferred."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_defqd5i",
"comment_text": [
"That's probably what they'd prefer, but if they don't get enough candidates or the right candidate with that experience, they're usually willing to back down and take someone with less experience and train them up."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deh46ag",
"comment_text": [
"By being an apprentice. In most trades, the \"2 years experience\" requirement means they want at least a Second Year Apprentice."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why we often hear someone calling our name when no did?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5x45y8
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
I see that ofeten people turn to each other and say 'did you call me?' when no one did, is there an explanation for that?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_def2tep",
"comment_text": [
"It has happened in my parents house to everyone! My parents, myself, my sister my son and my niece!! It was at first an individual experience then it happened to my son and niece, together!!\nIt's always someone's voice who lives there not my deceased grandma. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_def3tr7",
"comment_text": [
"I have a friend whose name is \"Phillip\" but most call him Phil. So many words have a \"fil\" sound that he hears his name called all the time and it drives him nuts.",
"I think we are just turned into sounds that make up a name we've responded to our whole life and our brains pick those sounds out."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_def7ril",
"comment_text": [
"The human brain is tremendous at pattern-matching, far beyond what any computer we've yet designed can do. It's why captchas work, because we can recognize things even when they're seriously distorted or partially obscured.",
"The downside of this is that our brains will often think it recognizes things that aren't there. If something is critically important, especially to our safety, it's better to have false-positives than to miss something, so our brain overcompensates. We see faces in mountainsides, clouds, fruits and vegetables, martian craters, etc., because recognizing familiar (or even just human) faces is absolutely critical to our survival on a primitive level. Our name is of obvious importance to us since it is how others identify us, so from the youngest age our brains tune themselves to recognize things that kinda sound like our name. Watching an infant react much more to their name than to any other words or sounds is an amazing experience, and happens long before they have any real language skills. They know very quickly that the sound of their name represents them, and that if someone is saying it, it's probably important to them."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_def33pw",
"comment_text": [
"I know, it happens a lot in my house and got me thinking that there might be a cientifical explanation behind it."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_defpxr6",
"comment_text": [
"When he becomes a doctor...",
"Then you can legally call him Dr. Phil"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: How can we distinguish something that is real news and fake news?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5x3wm8
| 96
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.8
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deezxpn",
"comment_text": [
"First, look at the reputability of the source. The source may be a ",
" source (every source is biased in its own way), but if it's reputable, then you can typically trust the facts. If the source has a print edition or was around 30 years ago, its reputability increases. If the source's headlines are typically sensationalized or \"click-bait\", its reputability decreases. If the headlines are written in a way such as to make you feel angry, jubilant, or prideful, its reputability decreases. ",
"Also, look for multiple reputable sources reporting the same facts. If nobody else is reporting it, wait a day and see. You don't always have to be up-to-the-second with whatever the news cycle is telling you."
],
"score": 60
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_def557r",
"comment_text": [
"I really like this blog post from ",
"Popehat",
"Essentially, read every news article like it's a search warrant and look for the presence or absence of three things: attribution, corroboration, and particularity.",
"Attribution: For every fact asserted in the article, how does the author know it? If a statistic is reported, where does it come from?",
"Corroboration: Other facts support what the author is saying. Anonymous sources are permissible if other facts support the assertions.",
"Particularity: If a story attributes a stance, or a goal, or a motive to a public figure, does it give specific examples of conduct consistent with stance?",
"Ever since I read this post I've looked for all three things in news articles and it makes it pretty easy to distinguish fake news (fabricated) from news that isn't fake (just because something doesn't confirm your world view doesn't mean it's fabricated).",
"Of course, there's still the issue of bias. Bias (implicit or explicit) can still encourage authors to make the facts fit the conclusion and that's why it's really important to read things critically. Be on the look out for logical fallacies that are used (many times very successfully) to manipulate readers. Appeals to emotion, attack the messenger, straw men, and ad hominem attacks (i.e. personal attacks), are good examples of logical fallacies that unscrupulous (or unwitting) reporters use to force a particular world view."
],
"score": 57
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_def0rbz",
"comment_text": [
"It is admittedly hard to tell, as no site is correct 100% of the time, but some do have a better track record than others. There are a few things you can look for though."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_def3dc8",
"comment_text": [
"\"Real\" news is clearly distinguishable from \"fake\" new. \"Real\" news will usually cite multiple sources, and will fact-check their material. Their sources ",
" be credible (Verified eyewitnesses, expert testimonials, hard scientific or statistic data, information from authorities, videos/photos). \"Real\" news also tends to be at least somewhat decent about correcting itself on inaccuracies they reported earlier. \"Real\" news tends to agree with other news in most cases, if not initially, eventually. Have you ever noticed that while FOX and NBC have quite different demographics for viewing, when they both report on something, the reports are often almost identical? \"Real\" news will be reported as it is, not as it is wanted to be. This is why critical stories that multiple networks report on are near-identical. They are all working with the same source material, they are all fact-checking the material. It's hard to come up with a different story from the guy ten feet away when you're both looking at the same thing.",
"\"Fake\" news will fail to cite many, if any sources. These sources, if present, will not be credible. Sources may be heavily altered photo/video, false witnesses, experts nobody has ever heard of, statistics that don't match the norm, and a lack of information from the authorities. Fake news will usually not correct itself, and it will usually come from small, obscure \"news\" outlets. These outlets may be disguised to look like mainstream \"real\" news outlets, but can often be caught by check the url, or other details. Fake news reporting on a common story will often not match any other reports, with either no similarity, or changes to major details.",
"Please note, just because a news outlet makes a mistake, that doesn't make them fake news. Just because they don't agree with what you think, that doesn't make them fake."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_defjqh2",
"comment_text": [
"To add to your comment: I think it's very important to know what we mean when we say \"fake news\". Fake news is not when a source reports a story in a biased way. That's biased reporting, it's a problem but it's nothing new. ",
"Fake news is (or at least started as) literally that: a completely fraudulent story posing as reporting of real events. By conflating biased reporting with outright fake news, usually by saying something to the effect of \"Organization X is FAKE NEWS\", certain groups have both delegitimized mainstream news organizations while simultaneously damaging the public's ability to detect news that is actually fake. Ironically it's even become more difficult to root out plain old run-of-the-mill bias. As you said, almost all organizations have some bias, so if we now dismiss any bias (that we don't agree with) as FAKE NEWS, we can't even tell what's biased and what isn't. ",
"It's a weird time for journalism in America, that's for sure. "
],
"score": 8
}
|
|
ELI5: What other ways are there in a Pansexual?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5x35a3
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.44
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deev0g9",
"comment_text": [
"The other answers here nail it pretty well, but I do want to add a friend's 'pizza analogy' because it's hilariously accurate (source: Am Pansexual, this works very well and is funny).",
"So think of it like this:",
"A straight person likes meat pizza.",
"A gay person likes vegetarian pizza.",
"A bi person likes both meat and veg pizza, sometimes together but usually apart, with little preference for either.",
"An asexual person doesn't like pizza.",
"A pan person likes pizza. Just in general. Sure, there are some toppings they prefer or don't particularly like, but for the most part they don't mind what's on their pizza as long as they get pizza!"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_def0len",
"comment_text": [
"If a man is only attracted to people who identify as female, then he is heterosexual. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deevweu",
"comment_text": [
"Suffix -philia ≠ suffix -sexual",
"Nice try tho"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deevweu",
"comment_text": [
"Suffix -philia ≠ suffix -sexual",
"Nice try tho"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deetk0j",
"comment_text": [
"Pansexual means you are attracted to people regardless of their sex, gender identity, etc.",
"So a bisexual might not be attracted to trans people, non-binary, genderfluid, etc. But a pansexual would be.",
"To quote my pansexual friend: \"Pansexuality is sticking your hand down someone's pants and not caring what you find\""
],
"score": 3
}
|
ELI5:Who is responsible for bringing in a special prosecutor to investigate the White House's ties to Russia before, during, and after the election, and why is it taking so long when there seems to be a new call to action mutiple times a week?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5x1i3z
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deejn93",
"comment_text": [
"A special prosecutor who is engaged to investigate a federal official (such as the president) is appointed by and on the sole initiative of the attorney general. In this case, it is Jeff Sessions who was appointed by, can be fired by (and is politically dependant on) the president.",
"That conflict of interest should be your answer as to why nothing is being done."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deepwbj",
"comment_text": [
"The rules were slightly different back then in that the AG asked the Supreme Court to pick a person whom the AG would then appoint aa special prosecutor. That's why the SP was not someone whom the Clinton's would have chosen themselves. ",
"However, the reason that the AG ever requested a SP at all is that the Clinton's both separately and publicly asked the AG to do so. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deep8bp",
"comment_text": [
"So how did Bill Clinton end up being the target of a (blatantly partisan) special investigator? Wasn't that Congress's doing?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deeq3wz",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks very much."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deelpvr",
"comment_text": [
"The person who would call for a special prosecutor is the Attorney General; currently Jeff Sessions. He would essentially be calling for an investigation into himself and his boss, so he's obviously not going to do that."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: How exactly was Russia allegedly involved with the Presidential election and what did they do?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5x2pha
| 187
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.86
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deetgfh",
"comment_text": [
"The allegations claim that hackers working for two Russian intelligence agencies broke into email systems belonging to the Democratic National Committee as well as email accounts of other Democratic figures, such as Hilary Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta. The emails they found were then released through Wikileaks, an organization that specializes in sharing secret information. The release of information was carefully managed, both in terms of timing and content, in order to create a series of news stories that presented Hilary Clinton and the Democrats as dishonest and untrustworthy. By calling attention to insecurities in Democratic email systems, they also supported one of the key talking points of the Trump campaign, which was that Hilary Clinton had compromised national security by running her own email server while she was Secretary of State.",
"I think that's a neutral summary. It is a fact that some emails were stolen and then released to the media in such a way as to hurt the Clinton campaign. It has also been ",
" that this was done by agents of the Russian government. So that's what people mean when they say 'Russia was involved'.",
"But wait, there's more. There are also allegations that Donald Trump and key figures in his campaign are sympathetic to the Russians, or are being or could be manipulated by Russia (which is to say by Russian president Vladimir Putin). It's also claimed that Trump or members of his campaign were in contact with the alleged Russian agents responsible for stealing and leaking the information.",
"Going into all the details would take a long time. What is certain is that some key members of Donald Trump's campaign, such as campaign manager Paul Manafort and foreign policy adviser Carter Page, had strong links to Russia. Manafort worked for the former president of the Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, an ally of president Putin. Manafort also apparently arranged to change parts of the Republican party's official policy in a way that benefited Russia. Both Manafort and Page resigned from the campaign because of concern over their ties to Russia. More recently, other people close to Trump, such as his appointee for national security adviser, Michael Flynn, and attorney general Jeff Sessions, have been revealed to have had contact with key figures in Russian intelligence. In Flynn's case, he was obliged to step down as a result of this.",
"There are also allegations that Trump himself may be compromised by Russia in some way."
],
"score": 155
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_def1ibm",
"comment_text": [
"Also notably ",
"the Russians hacked the RNC, but they did NOT release those emails even though they could have.",
" ",
"So that would imply that they did (and, since it hasn't been released, still do) have leverage over the Republican party in general. The exact nature of it would still be unknown. Unless you want to argue that the FSB is so scrupulous and untainted that they would keep those emails private since the RNC is entirely innocent of any actions that could possibly be embarrassing. "
],
"score": 46
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_def8wnj",
"comment_text": [
"Read through the major comments in this thread, you can see clear bias on both sides. Remember most of the information here is based on ALLEGATIONS and CLAIMS, not hard evidence. Look at everything and form your own opinion, be open to new information."
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deet3un",
"comment_text": [
"Russian intelligence hacked the email of the Democratic National Committee, a private political organization. They selectively released, via Wikileaks, a trove of embarrassing but almost completely substanceless chatter that made the DNC look bad. The identity of the hackers as Russian is well established, and their connection to the intelligence service is generally accepted by security professionals. ",
"Here",
" is an article from last July making the case. The Washington Post reported on it through the fall, but no one seemed to care much as everyone assumed the Trump campaign didn't have a chance. ",
"This had a couple of effects. First, it likely depressed turnout in the general election for Clinton specifically from the young, mostly white, Left who supported Sanders in the Democratic primary because it showed that the DNC internally preferred Clinton, and this was spun as them \"rigging\" the primary for her (allegations which are false, although there were a couple improprieties which didn't change the outcome).",
"It also depressed Clinton turnout more generally because it was conflated in the popular imagination with the ",
" Clinton email issue, that she legally but unwisely used a private email server during her time as Secretary of State. Critics charged that this made her communications insecure, although as far as I know there's no evidence of that (while official government servers have been hacked several times). But since most people don't pay much attention to the news, they thought reports of hacked emails were referring to Clinton's State Department emails, and that these were put in public because of Clinton's carelessness. Neither of these things were true.",
"As for why, well, Russia and the Trunp campaign had a cozy relationship. Charitably, this is because Trump felt Russo-American relations had deteriorated under Obama. More cynically, there was an (unverified) intelligence dossier circulated (including to President Obama and the Trunp campaign before the election) claiming that trump is personally compromised by Russian intelligence because of his extensive business ties to Russia and an illicitly recorded sextape of Trump having a golden showers party in a Moscow hotel with a bunch of Russian hookers. (Yes really.) The dossier only came out publicly after the election, and again it has not been verified (although my understanding is that some of the claims in it have since been confirmed. Maybe not the piss play.)",
"The Obama Administration imposed economic sanctions on Russia in December as a response to the hacking. Trump advisor Gen. Michael Flynn had a phone call the same day with the Russian Ambassador where they discussed sanctions and Flynn implied that Trump would remove them once he were in office. (This is arguably treason -- by passing on secret information to Russia that reassures them the sanctions will come down, he undermines the purpose of the United States in implementing them in the first place.) Flynn then lied to the press about the content of the call. More specifically, the Trump campaign trotted out VP-elect Pence to deny the allegations in public, which means either Pence lied about the call as well or, what might be more likely (and which seems to be the Trump party line) that Flynn lied to Pence about them. ",
"Today's breaking story is that Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who as head of the Department of Justice is charged with investigating Trump's connection to Russian intelligence and improper contacts between the campaign/administration and Russia, also spoke to the Russian ambassador of at least two occasions. This despite testifying under oath at his confirmation hearing that he wasn't aware of any such contacts between Russia and the campaign and that he personally had no such contact. But unlike the Flynn call, which was recorded by the CIA, it's not yet clear if Sessions also improperly discussed sanctions at those meetings. (He says he didn't, if you find that denial credible.) The front page of the Washington Post has the story today if you want to read more about it. "
],
"score": 15
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deerbf1",
"comment_text": [
"There is supposedly evidence that Russia was involved in hacking the DNC. They released as much damning information from the DNC as they could to try and push Trump into office, as he could potentially be financially compromised by the Russian government. They could then influence Trump through coercion to work with their hyper aggressive plan to expand into new European territory.",
"Everyone should demand at least an investigation into this so we could move on from it, but there are people stonewalling. "
],
"score": 14
}
|
|
ELI5: How can cities refuse to work with Homeland Security regarding immigration issues?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5wy7u8
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
Hi, So I read that after being mislead by Homeland security who was conducting "gang" raids that were actually "immigration" raids, the city of Santa Cruz will no longer work with Homeland Securty. How can a city or state refuse to work with a department of the federal government? Doesn't homeland security have a jurisdiction over these issues? I am not trying to discuss whether we should or should not enforce immigration issues but whether states or cities can not comply with federal departments enforcing the issue.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedqf38",
"comment_text": [
"Cities (and states) are free to use their resources as they see fit. If they don't want to dedicate resources to help Homeland Security they don't have to.",
"They can't actively interfere with Homeland Security legally performing their duties, but they aren't required to help out if they don't want to. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedrdxf",
"comment_text": [
"How can a city or state refuse to work with a department of the federal government? Doesn't homeland security have a jurisdiction over these issues?",
"Yes. Homeland is free to take responsibility for the issue and the state cannot interfere. However, the state is also not obliged to help them do the operations.",
"In this case, Homeland was lying to the city to get the city police to do an immigration raid under the guise of a gang raid. The city pays for those police officers and they are able to dictate how they are used. ",
"The city cannot stop homeland from doing the raids, but the city is not required to provide it's own police force manpower. ",
"Most federal enforcement agencies rely heavily on state and local employees to do the actual groundwork of there investigations. The FBI for example has around 35,000 employees. SO that's agents, forensic people, administrators, everyone. It's estimated that there's over 1.3 million police officers in the US. So only a VERY small fraction of all law enforcement is FBI. ",
"All of homeland security, employs about 230,000 people. And they have a wide range of responsibilities so they're aerate many actual boots on the ground types of people who can do raids like this. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedrn7d",
"comment_text": [
"City and states are only required to enforce local and state law. While they can choose to help enforce federal law, and it is often in their interest to, they are not obligated."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedrw9s",
"comment_text": [
"You are correct. Homeland Security has jurisdiction. Therefore, it is their problem and they can figure it out. If the city or the state doesn't feel like participating, they can choose not to.",
"Look at it this way: The Mayor and the Chief of Police of a city determine priorities. If the Mayor decides they will devote 100% of their resources to writing traffic tickets and 0% to investigating illegal immigration, then they have the authority to do so. ",
"And why not? Why should they waste their resources doing a job the Federal government will do for them?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedrxwy",
"comment_text": [
"Yes, DHS has responsibility for these matters.",
"They often go to local law enforcement and say, \"Please call us at this number if you have a terrorist case, so we can bring our resources to improve the outcome.\" That number goes on a post-it note in the command center.",
"When they go to local law enforcement and say \"Please ask everybody you arrest to prove they are in the country legally, and call us if they don't have good proof so we can bring our resources and handle deportation proceedings.\", well sometimes that note gets lost or ends up in the trash can. It's not that DHS isn't responsible, it's just not something that the local LEO sees as needed to make their community safe."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: How do songs and personal photos/information leak?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5wyhxa
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedtfau",
"comment_text": [
"When the media reports a \"leak\" they almost always mean \"theft.\" A hacker finds a way to break into someone's personal computer or mobile device and steals the personal photos and information. I'm not sure why the media continues to call it a \"leak\" as if it were an accident.",
"Sometimes music or movies are leaked in advance, which would have to be examined on a case-by-case basis. It could be hacking or it could be some disgruntled employee doing it for their own reasons. ",
"Sometimes it is deliberate. For example, some test footage for the movie \"Deadpool\" was released as a way to generate excitement for the movie. Ryan Reynolds has all but admitted that he and director Tim Miller were responsible for the leak."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deduuvk",
"comment_text": [
"Not sure. There have been people arrested for violating hacking laws.",
"Might be worth a read: ",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_photos"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedxdel",
"comment_text": [
"If theres hundreds if not thousands of people with access to it, then by that nature theres at least a few that either couldn't give a shit, or actively want to fuck over who ever they're leaking from."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedupmh",
"comment_text": [
"Do you know if there are lawsuits about that?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedvbxw",
"comment_text": [
"There's hundreds, if not thousands, of people with their hands on any major movie or record prior to release. It doesn't take much creativity to figure out how it might be released to the public."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is jupiter considered a planet when it is basically just a big ball of gas without surface?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5x04nw
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dee6rbx",
"comment_text": [
"Because \"solid surface\" isn't a requirement to be considered a planet. The current classification is as follows:",
"(1) A \"planet\"1 is a celestial body that:",
"(a) is in orbit around the Sun,",
"(b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and ",
"(c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit.",
"Jupiter easily suffices. It's also fair to say it is more complex than simply a 'big ball of gas,' while there is no discrete boundary where air becomes 'ground' you would instead gradually transition to more solid resistance as you descended."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dee6uyg",
"comment_text": [
"You've got a and b. Don't forget C."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dee77s9",
"comment_text": [
"Also have to have cleared the local neighborhood of debris. This is why pluto is no longer technically a planet. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dee6u3h",
"comment_text": [
"So antything large enough round shaped and orbiting is considered a planet?:/"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dee7q6n",
"comment_text": [
"Is point c meant to exclude big rocks in a meteor belt?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why does the United States have such a large defense budget compared to other countries?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5wxp7a
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
Inspired by , I'd be fascinated to know why the defense budget of the US is equivalent to so many other countries combined, particularly considering we only have two border countries and neither has been belligerent to us in more than a century.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedlr0g",
"comment_text": [
"So, part of it is that the US does a lot of international defense. Many other countries who are allied with the US don't spend as much on military because they know we will do it instead on their behalf. Likewise, there are a lot of companies who make profit from the US having a large military operation, and those companies help pay for the election of lawmakers who then encourage a larger military..."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedqdk7",
"comment_text": [
"In part, it is because people like to make misleading graphs.",
"The US's GDP over 50% larger than China's, and larger than Japan, Germany, UK, France, and India combined.",
"While it is true that even when you adjust for GDP, the US is spending a greater proportion on its military, making a graph that compares absolute values is at best ignorant and at worst deliberately misleading."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedm5wq",
"comment_text": [
"Because we are imperialists and most other countries do not have enough power to even attempt it.",
"I'm not making a value judgment; it's just what our country does. Classically, imperialism was about indirect control of other territories in order to exploit their natural resources and manpower for the core country's prosperity. ",
"American imperialism has involved some degree of conquest and controlling far away areas directly, but American imperialism mostly is an economic imperialism. We don't care if we control a territory, as long as they abide by the international economic norms we created. But not every country ripe for economic exploitation (and sometimes cooperation for mutual benefit) liked the idea. So we use our military to force them. ",
"In Japan, we sent the Great White Fleet to intimidate them into opening their country to exports and imports. We've overthrown numerous governments and installed puppets or propped up dictators so long as the economic conditions remain good for American enterprise. We try to tamp down conflict in important regions, like the Middle East. We built up our military not only to prevent Communist internationalism, but because Communism was a direct threat to the more open economic ties we were trying to establish. ",
"The cold war played a large role in our big military, of course. As the opposing super power, we considered it our job to fight the Communists all across the globe, even if it was indirectly. We also needed a large military in the event of an actual war. We still have military bases in Europe and across the world to prevent wars we find bad for the economy, or at least make sure the right side wins. It doesn't always work. ",
"Whether you think our softer kind of imperialism has been good or bad for the world, I'll leave up to you. On the \"it's not so bad\" side, you can argue that this has indeed been on of the most peaceful times in history, with lots of advancement across the whole world. But you can point to a lot of bad things, too."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedns3f",
"comment_text": [
"Japan opened its borders for trade in 1853 when Admiral Matthew C. Perry went there and negotiated. The Great White Fleet didn't sail until 1907. If they're related in another way, I'd be interested to hear how."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dee24yy",
"comment_text": [
"Ah you are correct. I misidentified the name of his fleet. But they didn't just negotiate, they threatened and negotiated under that threat haha."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why do so many people recommend "no-kill" shelters for adopting a pet? Isn't it better to adopt from a "kill" shelter - you're actually saving a life?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5x309s
| 872
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.92
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deet9ts",
"comment_text": [
"Because if I went to a kill shelter with the wife, she'd realize all of the animals would die if not adopted, and my house would become a zoo..."
],
"score": 136
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deewa96",
"comment_text": [
"Looks like people recommend no-kill shelters because they have cuter animals. ",
"In all seriousness, thank you for this information and for shining some light on the subject. "
],
"score": 108
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deewa96",
"comment_text": [
"Looks like people recommend no-kill shelters because they have cuter animals. ",
"In all seriousness, thank you for this information and for shining some light on the subject. "
],
"score": 108
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deezsmk",
"comment_text": [
"My wife and I have volunteered as a cat and dog foster home for 15 years now, and have worked with half a dozen or so different no-kill rescue groups. ",
"Here is why I recommend people go to a no-kill shelter, and it has virtually nothing to do with the killing or not: ",
"Behavioral Assessment. First, we only pull dogs who have passed behavioral assessments regarding resource guarding, food aggression, dog reactivity, etc. So if you go look at an animal in a ",
" NK shelter, you know already that the dog has passed some sort of test. Doesn't make it foolproof, and I'm sure some/many NK shelters don't do this, but it definitely lowers the risk; most kill pounds do not have the time/money/expertise to do these behavioral tests. ",
"Stable temperament. ",
" NK shelters, particularly ones that foster, know the animal better. After we've already pulled a dog that is likely to have a better (read: safer) temperament, that dog will usually spend some time in our care. We have far more clarity on the nuances of the animal (is he/she better with a dog of the same sex or opposite or either? can he/she tolerate loud kids? is he/she happy to play chase with other dogs but gets aggressive when humped? is he/she likely to be the dominant or submissive pet? good with cats inside but not outside or not at all?). This means two HUGE things: you're more likely to get the right animal for you, and you're less likely to return it. ",
"Support. If you adopt a dog from me, I'm going to help you. All of the rescue groups we've volunteered for support adoptive families. If the dog is struggling to settle, or isn't learning something he needs to know (stairs are a hard one for greyhound adoptive families), I will come to your house and I will help you. At the foster home, the animal has already begun acclimating to living in a household, making it much easier for you as an adoptive family. ",
"Health. We're a private organization getting reasonable donations. Your dog/cat will come to you more healthy. It will already have been spayed/neutered so you don't have to put an animal through a major surgery and deal with the post-care of an animal that doesn't trust you yet. Your pet will not have worms. Or mange. Or heartworm. Or fleas. Or parvo. Government-operated kill pounds do not have this luxury. ",
"Returns. If the animal is not right for you, you have somewhere to return it and have peace of mind that you aren't sending the animal to its' death. This is relatively rare, because of the aforementioned points, but it does happen, and we're happy to take the animal back. There have been many times over the last 15+ years that I have taken back a dog from someone who wasn't quite right, and found them another one that was perfect for them. ",
"Getting from a kill pound vs no-kill shelter has nothing to do with morality and everything to do with it being a safer bet for an adoptive family. Of course, there are wonderful perfect animals that come from kill pounds; all of the animals in our NK shelter started out there. But for an adoptive family, you know more what you're getting than if you just go to a pound and pick one out b/c it is pretty. ",
"Kill pounds are vital; as another poster mentioned, there are twice as many cats and dogs in the US as there are homes for them. We'd have a lot less of a problem if we could legislate away the puppy mills and make it socially unacceptable to be a backyard breeder (or require people to be licensed to breed even their own pets); I have no problem with responsible/professional breeders. But we can't. So this country has to euthanize millions of cats and dogs every year b/c people can't be fucking responsible and it is better to euthanize an aggressive stray dog or a sick stray cat than to let it wander around outside spreading disease and causing fights, not to mention feeling unwell itself. "
],
"score": 99
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deewwdv",
"comment_text": [
"Close. Puppy mills is the term for it. "
],
"score": 61
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do alot of users assume all reddit users are male?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ww4do
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ded90x9",
"comment_text": [
"Women tend to hide their gender in social media because they fear that nut jobs assholes will attack them just for being a woman. When people can be anonymous, people can be really nasty to women.",
"So, you end up with a bunch of men and a bunch of ??? online. It becomes easy to assume the ??? are men."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedaegi",
"comment_text": [
"I don't think it's unreasonable, as of February 2016, 69% of redditors were male. Further, women don't often reveal their gender on the internet.",
"Finally, and I think this is mostly what you're seeing - in English, and this isn't a hard rule, the ",
" traditionally defaults to the masculine if you don't actually know the gender of the subject, as we have almost nothing in terms of neuter pronouns. \"It\", but that's considered offensive. I ",
" the use of \"he/she\" in a piss poor attempt to be politically correct as it still places significance on the gender come first, and \"she/he\" is labeled as feminism in a negative connotation. Using \"she\" as the grammatical gender is as bad as \"he\", and publishers ",
" use it to capture more female audience where a male audience is otherwise assured. I find it awkward because it's obvious. If you want to be gender neutral and politically correct, use 3rd person pronouns like \"they\", it at least encompasses \"he/she\" as you now went plural referring to two genders, and it covers gender identities for which there is no English equivalent without being offensive.",
"Edit: \"alot\" = \"a lot\", unless you mean \"to allocate\"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dedalrl",
"comment_text": [
"Remnant from Latin and some imicit logic derived from that.",
"If you don't know the gender, or it's a mixed group, you default to masculine in most cases. (There are some nouns with neuter or mixed versions, as well as occasions where you default to feminine, but the vast majority default to masculine.",
"There are remnants like this throughout all the romance languages, bits and pieces that don't really apply to the language as a whole but crop up occasionally (English has more linguistic genders than you'd expect but for the absolute majority of words, you've got none/one)",
"In this case, you see it like how a mixed group with a gendered name defaults toasculine, firemen, policemen, (which is why I get annoyed when people try to make an issue of this, you're perfectly allowed, and grammatically correct, to call 1 female police officer a police-woman, but policemen is correct useage when referring to a mixed group (you could also use neuter like officers, which is then a personal choice and most people opt for the shorter unless the longer is vastly clearer) making an issue of it isn't doing anything for equality, you're just trying to destroy part of your linguistic heritage)",
"See this rule? Uncertainty and/or groups default to masculine. So Reddit users forms a masculine group and Reddit user with uncertain sex forms a masculine singular, and Reddit user definitely male forms a masculine singular. Most people fall into the first singular (there's more people of uncertain sex than certain sex) and about half the certain sexes are male, so defaulting to make is the best option",
"The implicit logic is that if you refer to something by a title, it must show traits of that title. Ergo by calling an individual as male, we unconsciously favour male traits and presumptions over female to a minor extent, QED we assume users are male more often than female",
"After that it's sounding board effects and the actual user makeup which compounds ot"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ded8xtg",
"comment_text": [
"I don't think they do. The majority of gender probably comes from the subs that you are visiting. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ded9lgw",
"comment_text": [
"It used to be absolutely the case -- the vast, VAST majority of reddit users were men. The site actively worked to attract more female users, by changing the composition of some of the default subs, by cracking down on some of the less-savory portions of the site, by giving mods more power to stop bad behavior. ",
"Reputations die hard, and so people who started off thinking \"most redditors are male\" often still do. Well, ",
" redditors still ",
" male, just not as much so as before."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:Why do we shake when we're very afraid?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5wu1fh
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.68
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ded0fn2",
"comment_text": [
"The shaking normally doesn't come before afterwards. When you watch a movie, or maybe especially a cartoon, people shake when they anticipate something dangerous coming. But in real life, what happens is ie. you are a part of an accident with your car. You are not hurt, but you are very afraid that your child might be. ",
"Somehow, you manage to break up the door, unbuckle your child and run for 50 yards at full speed with that 10 year old child while the car is burning. Then you stop, and the police arrive and ask what happened and now they'll take care of you. THEN you start shaking.",
"So it's easy to believe that the shaking is because you are afraid, and to some extent it is, but it's more the adrenaline rush now going down. Depending on the amount of fear/adrenaline you'll start sweating and it also might be really hard to remember details on what actually went on.",
"I used to be a security officer in a bad part of the city, and from time to time we got in some hairy fights. I remember it took me 10-15 minutes to calm down enough to be able to give an accurate statement to the cops when I was \"coming down\" after a dramatic arrest. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deglubz",
"comment_text": [
"No problem, I was fascinated by this effect myself and asked my GP about it :) "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deglubz",
"comment_text": [
"No problem, I was fascinated by this effect myself and asked my GP about it :) "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ded0gz7",
"comment_text": [
"Which is also the reason why I did those types of work. Adrenaline rush is waay better than any drug I've tried when you learn to enjoy it.. ;) "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_decz0dk",
"comment_text": [
"When we're afraid, our bodies fill full of adrenaline - your sympathetic nervous system controls the part of your body which causes you to react quickly. The adrenaline causes your hands and arms to shake. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: What does the Westboro Baptist Church have against soldiers?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ws53k
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_decjipi",
"comment_text": [
"I thought they focused mainly on what constitutes as 'sin' in the bible."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_decjmil",
"comment_text": [
"Nothing exactly. They aren't a church so much as a group of lawyers which make a lot of money suing people for violating their freedom of expression or threats against them. To that end they pick the most offensive things to protest and the most inappropriate places to do so. Their aim is to provoke people into breaking the law and at that point they can file suit and extort money."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deck3b3",
"comment_text": [
"wtf? this whole time i thought they were a religious group. But would a judge side with them if they are assaulted while protesting a funeral? I mean they are instigating it."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_decl4o6",
"comment_text": [
"But would a judge side with them if they are assaulted while protesting a funeral?",
"Yes, freedom of expression is a right even when was is being expressed is distasteful or generally disagreeable. You don't get to just assault people you disagree with."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_deck03b",
"comment_text": [
"According to their 'Church,' they think the killing of soldiers is appropriate punishment from god for homosexuality. If you ask me, this is just linking something inflammatory to gay marriage without any actual correlation, which draws more attention to the church."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Who did people buy property from before anyone owned it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5lbk6z
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.71
|
Like when America was a new country and the population was much lower, and people found uninhabited land, did they just build a house on it and declare it to be their property? Could people just go to their neighbor and steal their land? There were property rights but how were they established and what determined who owned what land? Who could they buy land from before anyone owned it? Did the government own it?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbuezgf",
"comment_text": [
"Originally, people just headed into the wilderness and started using land. Sometimes they didn't mind of others shared it. Sometimes they used intimidation or violence or arguments to keep others away, so that gradually it became considered \"their\" land.",
"Over the years, occasionally an armed group would show up and kill people (or scare them off) and take over. So now it was \"their\" land.",
"The USA used both methods."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbuf4hz",
"comment_text": [
"Technically the government owned it. Often the government would give away the land for free to encourage people to immigrate and settle the land. ",
"Of course it wasn't always that cut and dry in an era where records were minimal at best. Often there were situations where land was already occupied and it came down to a choice. The government could acknowledge the ownership or forcibly remove people. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbuf3cv",
"comment_text": [
"At the basic level, yes. If you could hold the land it was yours. Eventually governments form and record who currently controls the land as the owner. For US expansion the government surveyed the new territories and then broke it up into parcels and had auctions or land grabs to get people to go settle the new territories. If you got out there and registered a claim you got that parcel of land. After that you could buy parcels from others and consolidate into larger holdings.",
"TL;DR: If you can hold and defend, it's yours anywhere. Until someone with a bigger rock comes and takes it away. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbuh93h",
"comment_text": [
"In Louisiana, we have something called Adverse Possession. If you possess and improve on a piece of land for 10 years without someone fighting you can petition to obtain ownership.",
"http://statelaws.findlaw.com/louisiana-law/louisiana-adverse-possession-laws.html"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbuojr3",
"comment_text": [
"We looked at buying a piece of land that was seized (?) by Louisiana for failure to pay taxes. The state's selling pieces off to help with the budget crisis so it would be a great deal. Problem is, if the previous owner, ect challenges your claim and wins, they can take the land AND the house we planned to build on the land. Yikes!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: With the advent of 3D printers could we, one day in the future, have life like statues of people and families in our houses instead of pictures?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5l9gyq
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbtz0ex",
"comment_text": [
"They have already started",
" building/printing houses. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbtz0ex",
"comment_text": [
"They have already started",
" building/printing houses. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbtycdz",
"comment_text": [
"I've actually joked around about printing marble like busts of myself and my family, not at a 1:1 scale, though I could do a decent size print on my makergear m2, it would be a very long print and with the level of detail over that long, chances of something going wrong with the print increase significantly. ",
"Another issue with this is scanning the person, though technically possible, right now the software to do so reliably and with good detail is very expensive. ",
"Tldr, possible but probably not feasible yet, give it another 5-10 years and people might be doing it"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbtzpld",
"comment_text": [
"You already can, you just need to hire a sculptor. Having busts or statues of your ancestors was a common practice in Ancient Rome, particularly among the patrician class."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbu0o6g",
"comment_text": [
"Side Note: 3D printing has been around since the 80's. The transition to \"home/personal 3D printing\" was the result of patents expiring. It's a shame it wasn't accessible sooner. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: What is the difference between Blu-ray and DVD?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5l600j
| 7
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.64
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbt66ed",
"comment_text": [
"Blu ray uses a different laser from the original DVD technology. ",
". ",
"Because of blue light's shorter wavelength, the grooves on the disk (which the beam reads) can be much smaller and closer together. With the ability to fit more grooves on the disk, way more data can be held."
],
"score": 28
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbt6bti",
"comment_text": [
"They use different technologies to encode the data onto the discs and use a different laser to read the data. This allows more data to be written to a single disc as each bit takes less physical space. ",
"The same way that CPUs and hard drives have shrunk over time. Look at this old hard disk, it's massive and probably had less than 10mb of storage on it, where now we get multiple terabytes in something the size of a small book. ",
"http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2743/4368314776_c8223ea75e_o.jpg"
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbt9lsl",
"comment_text": [
"The laser is actually ",
"violet",
"."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbt9tbv",
"comment_text": [
"It's actually ",
"250 MB",
", but your point still stands."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbtchaj",
"comment_text": [
"ray?\nayy fam"
],
"score": 2
}
|
ELI5: Why do people's accents sound different depending where they are from?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5l47se
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbsrg8f",
"comment_text": [
"Because the various places they're from were settled by and inhabited by people from different parts of the globe, so those local dialects sounded similar to where they were from. Over the years, they would develop their own localized slang/jargon that would break from their roots and would also be mixed in with the same process from other groups of people that have also settled locally."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbsrjsg",
"comment_text": [
"Username definitely checks out, thank you my friend."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbsrk0z",
"comment_text": [
"We know two things: every individual has their own unique way of saying each word, and that people who talk to one another eventually attempt imitate each other's way of speaking. Combine this with the fact that people form groups (i.e. tribes, neighborhoods, towns, cities, etc) you start to see a mass domino effect of imitation where friend groups adjust their language, pass it on to other friends, and parents passing it on to their kids. Change is inevitable in accents with that much dynamic"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbsrpzf",
"comment_text": [
"It's natural for things like languages to evolve over time. New phrases are created, words get shortened out of laziness, etc. So long as we're all living in close proximity, these changes will occur uniformly throughout the group. Spread out a bit though, and each piece of the dispersed group will evolve differently free of one another's influence. ",
"The actual development of the individual accents comes down to a combination of lazy speech (shortening words/phrases etc), and just natural variance, combined with people's tendency to mimic something they like. Think of it like that old game \"telephone\" where you repeat a phrase through a group of people and the final message is nothing like the starting message. ",
"Your parents teach you to speak, but you change it up a bit due to either personal preference or even speech impediment. The same happens again when you teach it to your kids, and so on, and so on. Meanwhile people pick-up on changes and variances in other people that they like. Enough people do that and we're starting to get a common dialect/accent. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dh50y6h",
"comment_text": [
"Ask this in a serious subreddit, not this shithole of amateurs who think they know more than they actually do."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is salt the most prominent spice?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5l23pj
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbsd9y6",
"comment_text": [
"Sodium chloride (table salt) is common and relatively easy to extract making it both cheap and plentiful. It enhances flavor allowing bland foods to take on new characteristics. But most importantly, salt is a very good preservative, which was extremely important before refrigeration. These factors combined to make salt one of the most important and ubiquitous spices in the history of civilzation."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbsda2k",
"comment_text": [
"Salt isn't a spice. It's a mineral that you need in small quantities to live. As such your taste buds react extremely fondly to the presence of salt. You don't actually need pepper in your food, it just makes it taste better."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbsewk2",
"comment_text": [
"This, and salt is a mineral that your body needs to maintain homeostasis (living). This is why our body occasionally craves salt and you oblige with a bag of popcorn or potato chips or what have you, and it hits the spot."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbsdfkw",
"comment_text": [
"Among other things, salt is obtainable in most regions of the world, unlike other spices that were originally located in specific isolated areas. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbsex16",
"comment_text": [
"Easy to find ",
" and essential for life. The latter characteristic makes it especially desirable, salt has some very important functions in the body."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why are a lot of people scared of dolls/mannequins, or other humanoid-shaped things?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5kzsyp
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrugit",
"comment_text": [
"For dolls/mannequins, it is called the uncanny valley. Basically, everything that tries to emulate a human being will have its flaws look monstrous to some people. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrujnd",
"comment_text": [
"Don't know enough about it to tell you off hand, but I can ",
"contribute"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrzqf4",
"comment_text": [
"To add to that, I've read that evolutionarily we are built to recognize faces very well so that we produce the most genetically sound offspring. This was especially important earlier in our evolution. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrxq2e",
"comment_text": [
"Take a look at a drill. Do you feel for this drill? No. That's because it doesn't have humanoid traits. But take a little android, or maybe Wall-E. Very cute. You like, because it's vaguely human, but clearly not. Then, the uncanny valley. These are the creepy robots with the synthetic skin. They look human, so human that they seem like humans with something horribly wrong, not just fakes.",
"Also, humanoid things have an association with being conscious/intelligent. These humanoid figures might seem different from just an inanimate object, they might seem more capable of harboring consciousness... or malevolence. (That's just my speculation, though.)"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbryco0",
"comment_text": [
"That can be a contributing factor to the fear of human-like robots, like that CB2 thing."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is cutting a sheet of paper a good test for the quality of a knife?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5kxyj3
| 5
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.61
|
Whenever I see a video detailing the quality of a knife, one of the standard "go-to" tests is cutting a single sheet of paper. To me, a knife would be more impressive if it cut through a much harder material than paper. Is there a reason that the paper test is a good indicator of knife quality? EDIT: Grammar
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrf8yz",
"comment_text": [
"It's not a measure of the quality but rather the sharpness. Paper is pretty flimsy and so when a dull knife is put to the edge it just flops over and doesn't get cut. However when a really sharp knife is put to the edge it immediately starts to slice so the paper don't flop over. "
],
"score": 15
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrgkts",
"comment_text": [
"You can sharpen a bad knife, made of poor quality steel to a fine edge, it just won't hold that edge long. ",
"Here is a video of a guy who sharpens a $1 knife to the point where it cuts paper extremely easily, and cuts a tomato into paper thin slice.",
" He uses a very expensive sharpening system and a lot of time, and the knife will be dull soon.",
"Any knife can take an edge, only a good one can hold an edge."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrfdls",
"comment_text": [
"As they said, my nice knives can slice a piece of paper clean through. It's sharp enough not to tear, and I don't need to \"saw\" at the edge to get it going- it just cuts. On the other side, my mid range knives need to saw the paper and there's some tearing. At the very end are my bad knives- old and only used for stuff that goes in puréed soups. The paper tears and flops before a clean cut can happen. \nIt's just to show how sharp the knife is without then dulling the blade. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrho8x",
"comment_text": [
"It's similar to the hair test. Paper, or hair, will bend away when pressed with a blunt edge. But a sharp enough edge can cut through the surface before it responds. I assume paper is more popular because we don't want to lose a chunk of hair every time we test our knives."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrz9qi",
"comment_text": [
"Paper is thin enough where it will flop when pressure is put on it. A dull knife when you look at it closely not only doesn't have the edge to cut but in many cases has little nicks and bends like a saw. Using a nicked blade when it hits that part no longer cuts but saws adding a horizontal pressure which would bend or tear the paper."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why do your hands smell horrible after touching stair railings but not after touching other metal objects?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5kx9m1
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.45
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbr9ir9",
"comment_text": [
"Because a lot of other people have touched those railings and they are absolutely filthy. ",
"You are smelling all the filth and bacteria everyone has deposited on it. Also a bit of rust from the moisture of all those clammy, filthy hands."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbr9k1p",
"comment_text": [
"Not sure what your talking about. Your hands shouldn't smell horrible after touching a railing. Depending on the material the railing is made of, human hands have a reaction to touching iron and cause a body odor smell as a reaction of the oils on your skin touching the iron. This is also common with certain coins."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrdce8",
"comment_text": [
"I'm young enough that I don't need to use the railing. I try not to touch dirty things if I don't have to."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrdndu",
"comment_text": [
"I am young, too. It is just force of habit for me. My mother always told me to hold on when I was younger so I just do it now even when I don't need to."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbrag22",
"comment_text": [
"You have never smelt your hands after climbing some steps in a building?"
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do we have urge to smoke, despite knowing it's not good for health
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5kuikn
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
So last night, I lit a cigarette again, holding it in my hand, thinking about side effects of smoking, and another drag, and so and so on until it's finished. Is their any contributing factors to this, or is it just human psychology?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqq6yn",
"comment_text": [
"We like putting things in our mouths, and we like the rush from nicotine, a highly addictive drug. We also like rituals associated with pleasurable activities."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqstyt",
"comment_text": [
"It's not just psychology - it's human biology. ",
"Our brains have nicotine \"receptors.\" These receptors are hard wired into our pleasure/reward center. The more we stimulate these receptors (using caffeine or nicotine) the more these receptors stimulate our pleasure center. ",
"We crave feeling good. If we stop our nicotine intake, our body demands that our \"feel good\" center be stimulated. Why? Because it has gotten used to feeling good on a regular basis. This causes us to engage in habitual behavior. We want that \"feel good\" feeling and will do what we can to get it. So, we will reach for our cigarettes to stimulate our pleasure center and get that feeling. ",
"You created a dependence by starting the habit. Now your brain demands that you engage in the behavior to satisfy its needs. This is why breaking a habit is extremely difficult. ",
"The biochemistry is far more detailed than this - but that is the general idea of it all. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqqi1o",
"comment_text": [
"Once your body is accustomed to having nicotine, it is stressful not to have it. Like withdrawal. Smoking eases this anxiety by providing the missing nicotine."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqqj1c",
"comment_text": [
"Tell me about it. I've quit a dozen times. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqsfad",
"comment_text": [
"Initially I thought you were joking, and your reply will end with penis"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: Why are all of Uber and Lyft's commercials aimed at getting people to work for them instead of use their ride sharing apps?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ktkb5
| 46
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.83
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqj7vl",
"comment_text": [
"From what I've heard they've had a hard time keeping drivers. No insurance or benefits and the pay isn't that great. So they advertise to get new drivers because the ones they have don't do it for that long or consistently. Basically they have more people requesting rides or wanting to request a ride than there are drivers. So they are missing out on a bunch of money. ",
"It's like if a store only has 10 gallons of milk but 50 people that want to buy the milk, the store is gonna go get more milk before they tell people to buy more milk"
],
"score": 41
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqij66",
"comment_text": [
"Their app is only useful to customers if there are drivers ready to drive... if you download the app and install, and see nobody available to drive you, then you'll never try it again. So best to build up the driver base first. Not all that different from a new restaurant building their location and hiring cooks and servers before advertising that they are open."
],
"score": 18
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqk18z",
"comment_text": [
"Reminds me of the classic multilevel marketing pitches: It's all about \"owning your own business\" -never mind that you earn pennies on the dollar or that there might not be much of a market for your business.",
"When the taxi stand is empty I'll look into driving for Uber. As long as the taxi stand has taxis sitting there then I have to assume that everybody who wants a ride has one already."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqlyox",
"comment_text": [
"Uber and Lyft get their profits ",
" the drivers. ",
"They've already disrupted the traditional taxi markets in big cities and college towns, so they now market to the people who ",
" because no drivers to take rides = no Uber ride = no income to Uber.",
"With high turnaround among other reasons, they always need new drivers. Don't get me wrong, driving Uber/Lyft is very much a seasonal job with \"in demand\" seasons and I have made some good money from it, but your your average person wanting to make easy cash - they're probably going to get frustrated from the occasional downs, or face some major expense that causes them to stop driving.",
"Me personally, I only drive during periods where surge is almost guaranteed - Big10 games, and during bar close on Friday/Saturday. That is it. It simply is not worth it otherwise."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqioe1",
"comment_text": [
"Yep. I'm guessing OP is in a new market where Uber and Lyft aren't well-established yet.",
"Initially they'll advertise for drivers and give them big incentives, then they'll give big incentives to riders, then once the ecosystem is jump-started they'll raise the prices."
],
"score": 4
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do some men find big bottoms attractive?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5ksvxq
| 2
|
Other
| true
| true
| 0.53
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqczm7",
"comment_text": [
"Bums actually go back farther than breasts, and some have even theorized that the reason human males are attracted to breasts is because they look like butts.",
"As to why ... you have to remember that 99.9% of our evolutionary past was nothing like today. I'm not just talking about missing electricity, I mean even something like walking upright. For millennia our ancestors walked around on all fours, and when you're on all fours and the person in front of you is on all fours, guess what you stare at a lot? And therefore, when you're looking for a mating partner, guess what you use to assess their viability/health as a partner?",
" Fixed misspelling."
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqdbjo",
"comment_text": [
"I feel that the easiest way to answer is to say that hip proportions are heavily associated with fertility in our brains. The wider the hips, the more likely a baby can successfully be birthed."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqeccp",
"comment_text": [
"Big butts is also an instinctual sign of fertility and health. A woman with wider hips would have an easier time in child birth and more likely to survive. The extra a fat also indicates that the woman is healthy and has the necessary strength to care a baby safely. ",
"Modern medicine has rendered almost all these things irrelevant but the instinct remains. "
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqdbe9",
"comment_text": [
"I trust a man that likes big buts. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqdbe9",
"comment_text": [
"I trust a man that likes big buts. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
|
ELI5: How can 3rd-party sellers on Amazon sell their products cheaper than their standard retail price?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5kqikl
| 17
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.86
|
I'm talking about how some sneakers are cheaper off Amazon than if you go to the physical stores or how Ralph Lauren polos are cheaper on Amazon than in Macy's. Do the sellers get the products straight from the source or are these counterfeit? And if they are, why isn't Amazon doing anything about it.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbptl05",
"comment_text": [
"Places like Macy's or JC Penny have a set profit they are trying to achieve with the products they sell. They buy shirts from Ralph Lauren for $10 (probably a lot less than this) and sell them for $25, making sure they get maximum profit to pay their employees, brick and mortar locations, etc. ",
"Places on Amazon don't have as many expenses and usually don't have a set profit margin they want to make on every product. This means they can charge whatever they want for the product. ",
"Amazon doesn't do anything about it because they get a set % of what these sellers are getting, and these sellers are doing well because they are undercutting the competition. "
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpty1u",
"comment_text": [
"Well it depends on the product, but usually you can buy a product directly or more commonly from a wholesaler to sell yourself. Wholesalers are basically the middlemen between manufacturers and retailers. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbq4owc",
"comment_text": [
"a combination of lack of expensive overhead that needs to be paid for, and Amazon's business model.",
"Places that have storefronts have to pay a huge amount in extra workers being hired to staff them, along with power bills, insurance, potential OSHA fines, and general property costs. All of those have to be offset in order to make a profit. This means they cut out the middlemen, so to speak. And doing so saves A LOT of money. ",
"Also, Amazon bites a lot of cost or profit potential because of how they are currently trying to destroy traditional market competition. It works for them because they have an insane amount of assets to fall back on, and because they are 'winning', so to speak, over traditional mega-market companies like Walmart.",
"http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2014/9/4/why-amazon-has-no-profits-and-why-it-works"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqcgi8",
"comment_text": [
"For some businesses, especially ones that actually run their own site, Amazon is a way to get attention by selling at a minor loss. I'll speak to specifically what I know in this instance:",
"First there is cost. I know it costs about 33 cents to make a pretty decent quality gift bag, one you buy at Walgreen or Target. I know that the retailer bought that bag for something anywhere between 45 to 60 cents (usually dependent on the volume ordered). And we know that those bags will ultimately be sold to you at about $3-$5 a bag.",
"So already there is a ton of profit built in. Instead, you drop that price down to a dollar on Amazon. Just at that, you're still making some money. But, as ",
"/u/jlitwinka",
" said, Amazon's seller central takes a cut of those sales. That is usually set when a retailer is creating their account, and highly dependent on the volume you push. Sometimes it is terrible, almost makes it not worth selling. An order for something that is a dollar or two might end up with a 25% fee. Then! You set up some shipping costs (if you self fulfill, meaning you get the order and you ship it out yourself). You want to make it attractive, but don't want to eat into your profit too much. So you take any loss for expensive orders (shipping is far away, they need it expedited, etc). ",
"So I mean, in this scenario I set up, the retailer is making no money. But it is often approached this way as a form of advertising. Everyone buys stuff off of Amazon. So you buy my bags, I loose money, but I ship it out with a nice little letter, saying that if you visit my site, we offer free shipping (but the product is more appropriately priced), I can give a discount or coupon, and we have a wider range of items on our site. ",
"If you're talking about something like a camera or technology, it gets a little different. To have TV's manufactured is also much cheaper than what you pay, but because it is a high-end luxury item, there is way more cost built into that suggested retail price. So there is a lot more profit to be made at retail, so you could loose more at the top to sell. ",
"And that is still all assuming that you're shipping out yourself. There is a whole list of new fees if you go the way of Amazon fulfilled, allowing your items to be applicable for Prime 2-Day shipping. Warehouse storage fee, return fee, you pay just to be able to sell, etc. And in that case, they make money off of quantity. Sell a lot at a little and you still make a lot. ",
" Source is that I do ecommerce marketing for a small import/export company here in the US, and this is how it was explained to me when we were getting into Amazon sales. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbptpvr",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks. I understood your explanation the most. Where do the 3rd-parties get their stock though? Does Ralph Lauren just offer their stock to any seller?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: What is dust and how does it get everywhere?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5kqipw
| 11
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.68
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpz1re",
"comment_text": [
"Primarily dead skin cells and dead microscopic insects such as mites.\nThe particles are so small that they float through the air until they absorb enough moisture to increase their weight enough to fall and settle.",
"\nIf you happen to catch a beam of sunshine coming into the house and view it at the right angle, you will see the particles in the air."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpz211",
"comment_text": [
"Dust is just a group of particles that come from soil, clothing, decomposed hairs, skin cells, etc. If you ever had a sunray coming through your window, and you stood off to the side and looked at the ray, you'd notice little things wafting about in the ray. You could look elsewhere in the room, and never see them. These are the dust particles, and theyre everywhere, just so thin and small that the light reflecting off of them is so insignificant that we can't really see them. Dust clumps/bunnies happen when these particles get attached to each other, which is very easy because they're super lightweight, they get pushed around by the slighest change in air current and as they move around, they pick up even more dust particles from the ground."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpywyi",
"comment_text": [
"Dust is any finely grained substance, including pollen, pollution, sand, dirt, and more.",
"Indoor household dust is made up primarily of shed skin cells from the humans who live there, and any animals kept as well.",
"Dust gets everywhere because as it's very fine, it's light enough to be picked up by any breeze, even just the air moving as we walk through the room. It takes a longer time to settle, and settles anywhere the air can get."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqcsoo",
"comment_text": [
"So we actually breath a lot of dust, or is all filtered in the nose?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbqfz2p",
"comment_text": [
"In a sense, yes. But just as easily as we breath it in, we exhale it. So we might breath in the particles you see, but theyre all so tiny that they get turned in snot/mucus or they get into our airways and we sneeze them out, overall it doesnt have any effects really"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is it ineffective to shoot a gun sideways?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5kobhp
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.44
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpfeiy",
"comment_text": [
"For starters, you won't be able to aim for crap. The ",
"typical handgun stance",
" is designed to position the gun so your eye can look straight down the barrel, and deal with recoil (we'll get to that). Ideally, if the ",
"sights",
" are aligned properly and the gun is a good quality gun, it will shoot more or less straight from the barrel, so if your eye is aligned with that barrel you ",
" be looking at exactly the point you're going to hit (or at least, trying to hit). When you hold the gun sideways ",
"there are no sights",
" (...",
"usually",
"...). Despite what Hollywood would have you believe, handguns are ",
" to aim well, and impossible with any kind of significant distance. When your target is actively trying to avoid getting shot, your adrenaline is pumping, other people might be shooting back at you, you need every single advantage you're going to get to hit your target. Even in the proper stance you have to practice to get good aim.",
"It's also less steady that way. It's much easier to lock your wrist with your thumb on top and keep the barrel aligned all the way through your arm. That way, the weight of the barrel is also aligned with your arm and pulling straight down on every part of the stance, transferring that weight throughout your body (another reason for the stance). With the gun sideways, the weight is pulling on two axes: one straight down in front of you, and one to the side (rotating your wrist inward). Guns are, generally, much heavier than you probably expect, partly just because of the nature of the materials (having a thick metal barrel that won't explode) and also to help absorb some of the recoil. It's somewhat difficult to hold a handgun steady and aim correctly, which, again, is what the proper stance is for: both hands to give you support and keep your aim steady. You can also stand sideways and hold a gun ",
"kind of like this",
" (but with a better balance and stance), which can give you better aim by aligning all the way down your arm, but at the cost of stability. It gets heavy holding a gun out like that for any length of time, especially if you're firing a larger caliber (and therefore heavier) gun.",
"Which brings us to recoil. ",
"You may have have seen this video before",
". Guns put a lot of force into the bullet, but Newton's laws teach us that a lot of force is also being put into your hands. The gun is going to go somewhere. Specifically, it's going to push the barrel up. If that barrel is aligned with your arms and your elbows, your whole arm is going to lift up, and if you've practiced, fall right back down. With a proper firing stance, you bring all the muscles in your arm to bear against that recoil, particularly your strong bicep (both biceps with the usual stance). The more the barrel moves off of your target after firing, the harder it's going to be to put it back on target. And remember that single axis I mentioned earlier? If the barrel moves more or less straight up, bending your elbows, you really only have to worry about realigning that same up/down axis, not left/right. The \"homie\" grip transfers all that recoil ",
" in the direction of the barrel, instead of straight up...and also up. Just like the difficulty in locking your wrist against the weight of the barrel to keep your aim steady before firing, it's a lot more difficult to lock your wrist against the recoil that way. The barrel is going to go all over the place, which means your aim is going all over the place, which means your aim is garbage. If your target is more than 10 ft away, if that, you better hope you hit them the first time, because you sure as hell are not going to hit them with a second shot unless you are very lucky. Given that you weren't very likely to hit them the first time anyway, odds are good you haven't accomplished much other than wasting bullets.",
"This is especially important because guns are ",
"somewhat less lethal than advertised",
", occasionally. When you're aiming at a person, you need to hit them somewhere that ",
" - no, not in the head, that's too small a target, too easy to miss. You're aiming center of mass, hopefully to hit at least a lung. It may not kill them, but it will slow them down a lot. Good aim is critical to hitting them where it will matter. Holding your gun sideways may get you a hit ",
", maybe, if you're lucky, but there's no guarantee you'll hit them in a vital area."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpf1dl",
"comment_text": [
"When you shoot a gun, you aim down the sight on the barrel. When you hold the gun sideways you can't do that. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpg4co",
"comment_text": [
"Well, sure, but nobody holds the gun at 90 degrees! 78 degrees is where it's at! "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpg4co",
"comment_text": [
"Well, sure, but nobody holds the gun at 90 degrees! 78 degrees is where it's at! "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpfa86",
"comment_text": [
"I guess you mean to ",
" the gun sideways, as in \"the stance made popular mostly by wannabe gangstas in TV series\".",
"Visual: If the gun has a sight, you want to use both eyes to establish line-of-sight to the target, so the angle pretty much dictates itself. If the gun does not have a sight, you still want to use the axis of the barrel as a reference.",
"Mechanical: It has been established over (literally) millions of trials that control of the gun is best when the axis of the barrel is a continuation to the line of your forearm. Has a lot to to with the anatomy of the shoulder, elbow, and wrist."
],
"score": 0
}
|
ELI5: why do drums sound good in every key without having to be tuned to different notes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5knk4i
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbplsiu",
"comment_text": [
"Because drums don't have \"notes.\" They are unpitched percussion instruments so that they don't produce sounds of specific frequency. The sound they produced is percussive and somewhat chaotic, and has little or no harmonic pattern. ",
"So people don't bother what \"note\" (or harmonic sounds) drums produce, they only tune the drums to achieve the best-sounding percussive sounds that goes well with the music."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbp95e4",
"comment_text": [
"Uhm. The very first thing I do with my drums is tune them. Every professional percussionist tunes their drums. They do not sound good, if they aren't tuned."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbp9xps",
"comment_text": [
"Yup. Majority of percussion instruments require tuning. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpnm7s",
"comment_text": [
"you didn't understand the question properly."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpbrj8",
"comment_text": [
"Yes I remember it took the drums forever to get in tune. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:Why do people get mad over reposts?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5knx08
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpbl1m",
"comment_text": [
"Too many reposts make people lose interest in the site/subreddit and blocks out actual OC. Most of the \"shit\" subreddits have this problem, TIL had to actually ban facts because they were reposted too many times. ",
"On top of stuff like claiming other people's work and basically lying for attention, Reposts usually catch up to places and make them lame. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpbkds",
"comment_text": [
"Cause it takes no talent to repost something someone else created but the reposter tries to reap the benefits of it. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpbm8o",
"comment_text": [
"Because they have too much time on their hands, and attach to much importance to reddit to realize that not everyone has seen the original."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpmrku",
"comment_text": [
"I agree with this. ",
"I admit if a repost is as ",
"/u/JohnTestiCleese",
" said minutes behind the first time it was posted that's one thing, but the thing is, the Internet is a big place, where many things are posted in many places. In reality very ",
" few things are absolutely brand new. I don't understand getting stressed out about it. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpr3ye",
"comment_text": [
"yeah, reposts of things already on the front page is a little eyeroll worthy (but it still doesn't make me mad as such), but otherwise...I don't care. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5 Those that don't speak English but can sing English songs perfectly, what is it about singing that allows them to form the correct structure of the words?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
5kn3lk
| 15
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbp4rvf",
"comment_text": [
"If you're talking about non-native English speakers being able to sing songs in English, take as an example the song \"Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious\". You can probably sing that word to the correct melody, right? Even though the word is nonsense. ",
"To someone who doesn't speak English, the words may be nonsense, but they can still memorize the correct sounds. It just takes repetition."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbp8uat",
"comment_text": [
"If you listen to foreigners closely when they sing in English you'll find that it's not even English words they're saying, rather just some similar sounding gobbledygook."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbp8b7k",
"comment_text": [
"We're memorizing sounds, not lyrics. You actually do it all the time - for example, tell me what the \"Lightning Crashes\" by Live is about. If you've been raised through the 90's/00's, you've probably sang it in your car a couple dozen times, you know the words, but do you know the actual meaning of the lyrics? Probably not until I just suggested you think about it. You just sing along by replicating the noises you hear. It's no different when singing a song in a language you don't know - just use your voice and mouth to make the same sound as what you're hearing. If you're using sheet music, you pronounce the sounds as best you can, in the tone indicated by the musical notations (seeing the note on paper triggers a memory of the sound ",
" that is associated with that symbol), trying to reproduce a series of sounds someone else arranged into what we call \"music\". And if you're good at all this and can consistently produce sounds accurately in a pleasing manner, you're called a singer. "
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbp7si0",
"comment_text": [
"Exactly, I can sing in German, Italian and Latin, without speaking any of them well. It all depends what hymns your church sings."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_dbpgahy",
"comment_text": [
"Like the infamous ",
"Ken Li",
" performance."
],
"score": 3
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.