q_id stringlengths 5 6 | title stringlengths 3 296 | selftext stringlengths 0 34k | document stringclasses 1
value | subreddit stringclasses 1
value | url stringlengths 4 110 | answers dict | title_urls list | selftext_urls list | answers_urls list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2mh9io | why don't us citizens vote directly on all legislation? | In lieu of voting for people who may or may not vote on the voter's behalf. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mh9io/eli5_why_dont_us_citizens_vote_directly_on_all/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm45ubt",
"cm45uuh",
"cm4643a",
"cm4cjlu"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"People would have to be voting all the time. Better to specialize.\n",
"Because we do not have the time to read all of the legislation that gets proposed at the local, state, and federal levels and make an informed decision on it. The winning side wouldn't be the one with the most merit, it would be the one with the catchiest taglines.",
"Bottom line? Because we aren't a Democracy, we are a Representative Republic.\n\nWe elect people to vote in our names.",
"Most of it is historical reasoning: America was founded as a representative democracy, primarily because the Founding Fathers didn't exactly trust the general public on being educated enough on every issue to vote. So they trusted them to vote on representatives who shared similar views, but would be educated enough to actually know what's best. Those representatives are then the ones who directly vote for laws.\n\nSecond reasoning is also important: under what system would people vote directly on laws? Switzerland does it, more or less, because their country is the size of postage stamp (apologies to any Swiss people) compared to the United States. This was more or less impossible for the better part of American history, considering the founding of America predated the internet, or even telegraph lines. \n\nIt's difficult even now; yes the internet may provide an avenue, but considering how we had trouble building a healthcare website, do you really think the government can build a website for voting?\n\nAnd then we run into the problem of actual legislation voting: legislation is more than the things we hear about in news (like the Affordable Care Act). There is important federal laws, but then there are state laws, but then there are individual counties within states too. Considering the dense amount of material that needs to be read and decided upon (ordinances, laws, taxes, amendments), it's simpler to divide each level by different government levels and have (informed and trained) representatives to decide for us."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
5r8nqk | what impact does calling state representatives have? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5r8nqk/eli5what_impact_does_calling_state/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd58q8l",
"dd59j33",
"dd5a25y",
"dd5a2cu",
"dd5c53w",
"dd5cifm",
"dd5f34d",
"dd5fw1r",
"dd5mpcg"
],
"score": [
67,
28,
8,
30,
7,
3,
2,
4,
4
],
"text": [
"Individually? Not a great deal. One voice isn't much when a representative is working with hundreds of thousands.\n\nBut a bunch of them? You'll get a response at minimum. To paraphrase Wayne Wheeler (the guy who got Prohibition passed) \"the primary desire of any American politician is to get and keep a job.\" If you make it clear that they need to play ball with you to get/keep their job... they'll work with you. ",
"It has more of an impact than you think, particularly if you are registered to vote in their district. A phone call or personalized letter (not a form letter) will at the very least be documented in their office. If several people call or write in (again, not a form letter from some organization on your behalf) on the same issue, then it really gets the representative's attention. Also, you would be surprised how easily you can get a meeting with your state representative by just stopping by their office during the session. They are reluctant to turn away a constituent who is registered to vote.\n\nsource: former staffer for a state representative",
"At the state level, it's pretty effective. I've had a.couple of instances where I reached out to my state rep and got a near immediate reply from a staffer with either direct help (direct line to EDD official) or empathy. Turns out, I wasn't alone on that latter one and she ended up speaking against a bill on the floor later that week. Get involved. Stay involved.",
"Let's say I'm running for office in Anytown, USA. I won my last election 5,200 votes to 4,800 votes. If 500 registered voters of mine call me up and say \"We want you to vote no on Bill No.123 or we'll vote for John Doe in the next election\", if I don't vote no on Bill No.123, I lose 500 voters, and run a risk of losing an election. The number one priority of a politician is to get re-elected.",
"A lot, actually. My Aunt worked for a State Representative and one of her jobs was to compile stats of calls received for the Congressman.\n\nIf there was a 'hot' issue then it was tracked closely. But even random 'one offs' were put into a general category like 'Veterans Affairs', 'Schools', 'Budget' etc. \n\nNow a days its almost all done online by signing up for a petition. I don't think a call is any more important than signing the petition online... unless you are donor or well known (for courtesy's sake).\n\nSign up for email notices from your Congressman and sign the online petitions that are in interest to you. I just did one last week and the results (over 5000 online signatures) were used to sway a decision on closing some state offices. We wanted them kept open for jobs. The cities that didn't have as many votes... well, they also don't have this specific office any more.",
"My first job was legislative aide in a State Rep's office. Most offices keep an excel spreadsheet tally of calls, letters and emails. The more calls/emails/letters the more attention the topic gets. Most of the time you will talk to an aide when you call the state office. \n\nUltimately these people want to get reelected and at the State Rep level the margin for victory is often in the low thousands. They really need you. \n\n\nLPT: If you want to optimize your influence corner your Rep in person. Face-to-face has a major impact and they will remember it. Handwritten letter or very personal typed letters also get more attention. Handwrite the envelope as well. Those cookie cutter letters you just sign your name to are better than nothing but the offices generally know that an organization is behind it and doesn't care as much. ",
"Most elected officials want to be elected again, either to their current office next time, or to a higher office. They need, at minimum, voters who aren't mad at them.\n\nYou can contact them in various ways, like calling, emailing, sending a letter, signing a petition, etc. Some of these require more effort than others. For instance, almost nobody bothers to call. That means that for every call they get, there are a lot of other people who care about that issue who didn't bother to call. So, your call might represent 500 people (aka votes), and you might get them to support what you want. If you send an email, the might only represent 5 votes, because it requires a lot less effort.\n\nThey also know that if you are motivated enough to call, you might be motivated enough to work for a campaign next election season, either for or against them. That matters to them.",
"They know that for every voter who calls, there are a *bunch* who feel the same but don't bother to call or write. Like seeing a mouse in the cupboard makes me immediately go get a dozen mousetraps. ",
"If you are not a notable person, with money to donate or influence over a bloc of voters, your opinion will essentially just end up on a tally sheet. X calls on one side of a subject, Y calls on the other.\n\nAny reasons you give for your opinion are typically ignored. If you're hoping to sway a representative based on the logic of your argument, you're wasting your time. Your argument will not be conveyed to them. \n\nThe tally itself is significant, however. Politicians take the total number of calls on an issue seriously as a barometer of how much their constituents care about an issue. And how many people call from each side is taken seriously as well. The call volume is also low enough (on most issues) that individual calls have some weight. At the Federal level, a few hundred calls on an issue to a congressman is extremely strong feedback. And while being 1 in 300 people might not seem like a lot of sway, that's a lot more influence than a vote holds. On less well publicized issues, as few as a dozen calls all on the same side can sway a representative to vote one way or another.\n\nIf you want to know what a call sheet looks like, [Borgen Project](_URL_0_) has a page encouraging people to call elected officials which includes examples of call sheets (This isn't necessarily an endorsement of the Borgen Project, I'm just linking to it for examples).\n\nI also saw a post on social media recently by someone named Mark Jahnke offering advice on how to make your calls as effective as possible. He claimed to have worked taking calls in a Senators office. I don't know him and can't independently confirm it, but his advice lines up with what I've found when calling representatives.\n\n > Friends! As some of you know, I used to work on Capitol Hill as the person in charge of all the incoming phone calls to my Senator's office. I have some insider tips to make calling your reps easier and quicker.\n\n > 1. Give your name, city, and zip code, and say \"I don't need a response.\" That way, they can quickly confirm you are a constituent, and that they can tally you down without taking the time to input you into a response database.\n\n > 2. PLEASE ONLY CALL YOUR OWN REPRESENTATIVES! Your tally will not be marked down unless you can rattle off a city and zip from the state, or are calling from an in-state area code. I know you really want to give other reps a piece of your mind, but your call will be ignored unless you can provide a zip from their district. And don't try to make this up; I could often tell who was lying very quickly thanks to the knowledge of the state's geography. Exceptions to this are things like Paul Ryan's ACA poll which are national.\n\n > 3. State the issue, state your position. \"I am opposed to ________.\" \"I am in favor of _______.\" \"I am opposed to banning the import of phalanges.\" I am in favor of a trade deal to lower the price of juice smoothies.\" That's it. That's all we write down so we can get a tally of who is in favor, who is against. It doesn't matter WHY you hold that opinion. The more people calling, the less detail they have time to write down. Help them out by being simple and direct. This keeps calls shorter, allowing more callers through.\n\n > 4. Please be nice! The people answering the phones on Capitol Hill already had the hardest job in DC and some of the lowest pay as well, and for a month now their jobs have become absolute murder, with nonstop calls for 9 hours every day. Thank them for their hard work answering the phones, because without them our Senators could not represent us!\n\n > What does this sound like?\n\n > \"Hi, my name is Mark, I'm a constituent from Seattle, zip code 98***, I don't need a response. I am opposed to banning the sale of blueberries and I encourage the Senator to please oppose implementation of any such ban. Thanks for your hard work answering the phones!\"\n\n > This is how I wish every caller had phrased their message. It makes it easier for the people answering the phones and takes less time and emotion than a long script. I know that you want to say why, but keeping it short and sweet helps the office answer more calls per hour, meaning more people get heard. The bigger the tally, the more powerful your voice.\n\n > Also, when you're reading off the same script as 100 other callers that day... well...they know what you're about to say, so you don't need to use the whole script for your opinion to be heard!\n\n > Pick one issue each day, use this format (I am in favor of _____ or I oppose ______), and call your 2 Senators and 1 Representative on their DC and State Office lines, and you'll be on your way to being heard.\n\nHope this is useful."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://borgenproject.org/call-congress/"
]
] | ||
2iqs86 | if electricity takes the path of least resistance, then why does a lightning strike appear to be jagged, and not a straight line? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2iqs86/eli5if_electricity_takes_the_path_of_least/ | {
"a_id": [
"cl4ky0a",
"cl4kycn",
"cl4kykw",
"cl4kz7n",
"cl4lafi"
],
"score": [
16,
124,
9,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Because the least resistance is not always a straight line.",
"Because it is taking the path of least resistance.\n\nIt's jumping from charge to charge throughout the air eventually ending up at the ground. If it was a straight beam then it would have to fight it's way through charges that it isn't attracted to.\n\nImagine the atmosphere like a crowd at a party. You are a bolt of lightning. It might seem like the easiest method is to go straight through the crowd, but in reality, you have to go at different angles to find the gaps between people that are easy to slip through, taking the path of least resistance.",
"U gave the answer yourself. Because it is taking the path of lowest resistance, not the shortest path. Also it is wrong to assume it has a target and trying to get a path like a navigator. It is more like a liquid on an uneven floor. It will flow and finally may hit something.",
"The air isn't a perfectly blended space. Some areas are slightly warmer, some areas have different humidity etc.\n\nLightning doesn't act in a way that gets it from A to B in the overall fastest time. It acts in a way which takes the best short-term option.",
"Path of least resistance does not mean the straightest path. If you apply an electrical current to a short, straight stone tube and a long, jagged piece of metal, it will use the metal because the composition of the metal resists it less. In the air, ions (molecules capable of being charged electrically, such as salt when it is submerged in water) are the stepping stones it travels along to get to the ground, and they may not necessarily be in a straight line. Plain old air is a poor conductor of energy, that's why Styrofoam ice chests work, because they're mostly air, thus preventing the heat (energy) from being conducted efficiently."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
3ji803 | how do scarecrows prevent birds from eating crops in fields? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ji803/eli5_how_do_scarecrows_prevent_birds_from_eating/ | {
"a_id": [
"cupeizo"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It mimics a farmer standing in his field. Crows (normally) have an instinct not to go near humans, as we farmers kill them any chance we get."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
2gcoz2 | what exactly are the 'toxins' people talk about getting rid of from your body? | So I've seen a few articles here and elsewhere on the net, as well as heard it mentioned by people I've talked to. Some people seem to talk about doing things or eating certain things to rid your body of toxins. What are they talking about, and is there any science behind it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gcoz2/eli5_what_exactly_are_the_toxins_people_talk/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckht4p7",
"ckht5rn",
"ckht6cz",
"ckht80f",
"ckhu1qr",
"ckhv309",
"ckhvpt4",
"ckhvqr5",
"ckhvqt1",
"ckhx2av",
"ckhx4fz",
"ckhxmm4",
"ckhxruk",
"ckhxu5n",
"ckhxw54",
"ckhy068",
"ckhy16p",
"ckhy97h",
"ckhys6h",
"ckhz5cd",
"ckhzt9e",
"cki0sm6",
"cki11ib",
"cki14am",
"cki1r1r",
"cki1wvh",
"cki2aji",
"cki384z",
"cki3lfa",
"cki42xp",
"cki43v5",
"cki4uq8",
"cki5fcu",
"cki5s39",
"cki6oc4",
"cki9fmt",
"ckib19p",
"ckic0o2",
"ckids3j",
"ckie62j",
"ckie659",
"ckif7pr",
"ckifair",
"ckig2f3",
"ckig4y5",
"ckig5xp",
"ckip29j"
],
"score": [
1656,
55,
396,
17,
97,
24,
120,
41,
10,
7,
19,
6,
11,
6,
11,
7,
50,
5,
4,
11,
3,
2,
2,
4,
7,
3,
10,
3,
3,
3,
3,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
7,
4,
5,
4,
7,
2,
2,
5,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"They don't even know. Most of those \"toxin flush\" programs are nothing more than diuretics with some \"all-natural\" alternative medicine added. The truth is that the word \"toxin\" just helps them sell their product to people that are scared of the word \"toxin\".\n\nActual toxins can build up in the body, but no OTC pseudomedicine will do anything about them.\n\nEdit for people that are claiming that some all-natural remedies can help: Yes, they can have positive benefits. These benefits have nothing whatsoever to do with toxins. It's telling that of all the people who replied here claiming that \"toxin\" removal is real and solid science can't even answer OP's question - what are the toxins? Name them.",
" > is there any science behind it?\n\nPseudoscience only. Anytime you hear anyone say \"toxins\" with relation to food or household products, look extra-hard at their credentials. It's possible that they are talking about something actually dangerous, but in those instances they will generally name the specific toxin involved - dioxin, lead, DDT, etc.",
"\"Toxins\" is a marketing term used to sell a product. Under most circumstances, there are no specific toxins that the product could possibly remove. The next time that someone makes that claim, ask them what toxins specifically the product removes. Chances are good that the will not be able to tell you.\n\nTwo important exceptions: \n\nActivated Charcoal - used by EMS personnel to absorb poisons from the stomach and digestive tract after accidental consumption.\n\nMedicines for heavy metal poison - prescribed by doctors to remove specific heavy metals from the blood stream in an individual afflicted by heavy metal poisoning.\n\n",
"They are nothing. Unless they say exactly what they are removing from your body, it's bullshit. If they made a claim that it removes \"substance\" then they are making an actual claim and of course there would be no scientific evidence to back up that claim and they would be shut down.",
"Read \"Bad Science.\" The author gives a thorough and understandable explanation of the ridiculousness of this concept. And he's not some AMA kook or anything -- he takes on Big Pharma, bad medical research, dietitians, homeopathy... if that range doesn't make him unbiased I don't know what would!",
"It's nothing more than a scam the whole shit. You have organs for real toxic cleansing.",
"It easy to bash the term \"toxin\" because it is very general and has historically been used to exploit consumers with health anxiety. However, numerous organic and inorganic compounds clearly exist which are toxic to the body, and toxicology is the discipline concerned with this subject matter. \n\nWe are exposed to toxins on a daily basis: many pesticides irreversibly inhibit acetylcholinesterase which has been linked to neurodevelopmental problems in children, and acrylamide which is in potato chips and coffee is a potent neurotoxin and carcinogen. We are also exposed to lead and mercury which is toxic at any dose, and higher serum lead levels in children have been linked to intellectual disability. \n\nIn principle it is possible to enhance the clearance of toxins. For example, in medicine, chelation therapy is used to facilitate the clearance of mercury and lead in severely poisoned subjects, and people who are less severely poisoned have used alpha lipoic acid and other mild sulfur-containing adducts to chelate and facilitate elimination of heavy metals. ",
"By definition toxins are poisonous substances created by living cellsor organisms. \n\nThis term, however, is usually misused and abused by quackery and is a red flag. If you want to know about flushing toxins or other toxicants from your body research the liver. ",
"They don't exist. Your liver and kidney and bowels will get rid of all the toxins that need removing. You can't remove toxins by drinking a \"detox\" potion or getting acupuncture or putting stuff on your feet.",
"Similar question: about 10 years ago, when I did Atkins, I heard about fat holding excess 'toxins.' When I lost weight, of course I felt a lot better, but was there any release of stores of poisons or hormones when I shed all the weight? ",
"The trend for ‘health’ products that use ‘toxin’ or ‘detox’ in the name is a case of a legitimate medical term being turned into a marketing strategy – all designed to treat a non-existent condition. \n\nIn a medical setting, detoxification is the removal or neutralization of dangerous levels of drugs, alcohol, or poisons, like heavy metals from a body’s systems. Most often the term is used to refer to the management of the medical complications associated with withdrawal from a chemical dependency. Detoxification treatments are medical procedures provided in hospitals when there are life-threatening circumstances – they are not casually selected from a menu of alternative health treatments, or pulled off the shelf in the pharmacy. \n\nThe use of ‘toxins’ by alternative health providers is simply the co-opting of a bona fide term to give legitimacy to products and services with no real benefit; while confusing consumers into thinking they are based on science. Lack of scientific literacy among the general populous is a problem to the extent that allows cynical corporations to take advantage of consumer’s belief that anything scientific-sounding is proven to work.\n\nThere is no credible evidence that any available detox kit will help you ‘remove toxins’ from the body, ‘prevent’ chronic illness, ‘enhance’ the immune system or any of the other claims that the manufacturers ascribe to them. Most manufacturers refuse to even define what a ‘toxin’ actually is or provide a list of so-called toxins that a particular kit will remove.\n",
"Cash it removes cash from the body and that's about it",
"I used to work for an internet marketing company, and one of our biggest clients was a colon cleansing product. It was basically metamucil mixed with some sort of binder. You drank a ton of the stuff while fasting, it solidified into a mold of your intestines, and you'd shit it out. I guess people thought it was clearing their system out, casually ignoring the stuff they'd been drinking",
"Skeptoid did a good episode on this topic. Citations and references are at the bottom.\n\n_URL_0_\n",
"The toxins are your hard earned money, and these flush programs will easily remove them. ",
"Chiropractor here. We take a lot of shit because a large part of what we do is a more natural approach to healthcare. Let me say this.... If someone uses the word \"toxins\", run the other way. They are full of shit and don't know what they are talking about.\n\nThis is code for, \"there is no research or science behind what I do.\"\n\n",
"I think they are mostly composed of money. ",
"They are trying to flush money from your pocket.",
"I've found a great toxin flush program. It's called letting my liver and kidneys do their jorbs.",
"made up bullshit.",
"Buzzwords. Nothing more, nothing less.",
"1) Alternative medicine that works is just called medicine. \n\n2) If you're interested in flushing toxins out of your body, just keep breathing. Your kidneys and liver do it for you. You don't need a juicer or a paleo, no GMO, gluten free diet. ",
"\"Toxins\" could mean drugs (pharmaceutical or not) or free radicals (which contribute to aging). Really if you just maintain a healthy liver and kidneys and drink a lot of water you should be fine without buying into products. It makes sense that if you are drinking a lot of water your kidney can filter more drug out of your system faster. ",
"I am just going to say this up front. Toxin flushes are a gimmick. Your body will flush the shit out on its own, the only thing *you* need to do is not reintroduce \"toxins\" back in, by the way the use of \"toxin\" here is grossly misappropriated. You aren't flushing toxins at all, else you would actually be sick. The other problem with these things is that they can cause \"hyponatremia\", when you are constantly urinating and then rehydrating, you might just piss out all of the sodium in your body and then you are in trouble.",
"Toxins that hipsters want to get rid of is actually being replaced by the attention they seek. \"I'm cleansing this week\" whats funny is most of my hipster friends don't drink smoke or do drugs but need to cleanse allthe time fr thier vegan paleo fad diets. ",
"They are nothing. Do you really think the human body would just store substances that are detrimental to it? You get rid of toxins everyday.....in the toilet.",
"The toxins most articles are referring to are normally exhibited either as small greenish strips of paper found on and about your person, or as numbers in an electronic banking statement. \n\nSeparating you from these toxins is the primary aim of cure purveyors. ",
"All of all the stuff (much of it imaginary) that's supposed to magically disappear if you buy their product.",
"I think they mean money",
"TL;DR: People are stupid.",
"Apple seeds. You should always smoke some cigarettes after eating them. ",
"Thetans. You need to rid your body of those nasty Thetans.\n",
"Lies. The \"toxins\" are lies.",
"The thing about these \"toxins\" is that, since they haven't been named or proven by science, a lot of people think it's all bullshit. But hell, a lavender and epsom salt foot soak feels and smells really nice, so whether it's drawing unknown toxins out of my body or just pampering me, I like it. \n\nPeople who really believe in these toxins are often frowned upon and especially made fun of on reddit, but as long as what they're doing isn't harming anyone, that placebo effect is awesome for them.",
"Toxins people talk of are things like petrol and gasoline toxins, plastics and other ingredients that are easily absorbed into the bodily (usually unknowingly). These toxins which could be from rotten or bad foods are detoxified through two phases in the liver. Very complicated to explain further in depth however most people tend to be very good at one but rarely good at both. \nIf you get a lot of fruits and veg, eat more protein, if you eat a lot of protein, eat more veg and fruits.\nRange of other things help detoxify the body but usually the simplest strategy works.\nEat clean. Drink plenty of water. Exercise. \nA healthy body is a well functioning body. ",
"Aside from /u/stochassticpuppy, this thread is depressing. It's like a bunch of people feel qualified to answer this question because they are fed up with snake oil.",
"The \"toxins\" they're getting rid of is your money. ",
"Nothing, in 99% of cases, the person using the words 'toxins' has literally no idea what they are talking about. \n\nMost toxins make someone actually physically sick and it's obvious.",
"Basically, your hard-earned cash.",
"figments of their imagination",
"There aren't any. Detox plans merely sell books and products to people who want to believe they are in on some sort of secret \"THEY\" don't want you to know about. You don't need to help your body detox. Your Liver, Kidneys, Intestinal tract, and Skin are all filters. The idea that you need to help your body rid itself of toxins \"has no basis in human biology.\" ( Frank Sacks, MD, of the Harvard School of Public Health)\n\n\nTHEY is government, pharmaceutical companies, doctors, the man, hospitals, just whoever",
"Most toxins and toxicants are things that a normal liver, kidneys, and bowels, and skin (which is also an organ of elimination) can deal with - at least well enough so that you feel healthy and fine. Inevitably we are all exposed to toxins or toxicants that the human body can have trouble removing on its own. Some of us (not uncommon at all) have genetic deletions in Glutathione S-transferase genes which help rid the body of certain environmental toxins and heavy metals. And there are many, many other genes and environmental factors that are involved in the detoxification of the human body.\n\nAnother particularly important one is the Apolipoprotein-E 4 genotype. People with this genotype have greatly increased odds in developing Alzheimer's disease. Interestingly enough, this gene is heavily related to the ability to bind certain heavy metals out of the body.\n\nThis isn't to say that heavy metal chelation will work fix Alzheimer's by any means. But I think the question still remains that since the APOE-4 genotype greatly increases Alzheimer's risk, how much of a role do heavy metals play in the pathogenisis. There is some evidence showing that chelators of iron, copper, and aluminum can help Alzheimer's.\n\nSo while the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's remains unclear, there is a connection - or at the very least a correlation with genes that can play a major role in heavy metal toxicity.\n\nAnd there are some genetic diseases that are recognized to cause toxicity. Wilson's disease, for example causes copper toxicity, and hemochromatosis causes iron overload. These, fortunately, can be managed, but the consequences these syndromes (especially among untreated individuals) can be extremely detrimental.\n\nThere are many examples of what toxins and toxicants can be, but yes, the stuff they spray on your fruits and vegetables can absolutely toxic - especially for the agricultural workers that work with the chemicals. But even exposures to trace amounts of chemicals can have detrimental effects as is the case for BPA toxicity. I don't know what kind of effects life time low level organophosphates have on the body as I don't know of any good studies that have examined this.\n\nOrganophosphates in particular, were designed as a nerve agent. They were designed as a military weapon to debilitate and kill people. This isn't some sort of conspiracy theory, but a fact. However, low levels of these type of substances work as an effective pesticide. And there are genetics that are heavily involved in susceptibility of organophosphate toxicity, so a toxic dose for one may not appear to harm another. There are other routes of exposure to organophosphates besides produce. A malfunction of a plane engine for an example can trigger an aerotoxic event and cause aerotoxic syndrome in the passengers and pilots. This can cause neurotoxic symptoms such as seizures, chest pain, breathing difficulties, and even a a feeling of intoxication.\n\nOf course, there are likely people walking around with mild organophosphate poisoning. Because symptoms can be vague such as Fatigue, palpitations, and tightness in chest, I believe it's reasonable to believe that some of the people who are truly toxic from some type of organophosphate exposure are being misdiagnosed with things like anxiety disorder or other psychiatric disorders because of the potential overlap in symptomology. We also don't routinely screen or rule out toxicity in our society, and the tools we have are fairly poor. So in my opinion, since toxicity isn't generally screened for unless int he case of known acute exposures, it's easy to turn a blind eye and say that this toxicity stuff is a much of nonsense. Patients that suffer from these toxicities are likely labeled with other diseases, syndromes, or psychiatric disorders.\n\nThere are so many othe great examples toxicities you can get naturally. A couple of serious ones off the top of my head are harmful algal blooms (which can cause massive fish die offs and harm humans as well) and Ciguatera poisoning (from fish). The people that acquire these are likely never diagnosed unless there was a known exposure.\n\nThat all being said, it is my belief that toxicity is overdiagnosed in alternative medicine and underdiagnosed in conventional medicine.\n\nI personally think that environmental toxicity will be increasingly recognized in all fields of medicine within the next couple decades or sooner as tests are refined and improved. Depending on the type of toxicity, symptoms can be really be anything ranging from systemic nervous system and cognitive dysfunction, psychiatric symtoms, or dysfunction of very specific organs such as the liver and kidneys.\n\nUntil then, I believe we will continue to see an increasing number of psychosomatic patients and patients diagnosed with functional somatic syndromes.",
"[This reminds me of a satirical post I made almost a year ago](_URL_0_). This guy's wife refused to disbelieve in shit like toxins and magnet therapy and bullshit like that. I pulled some crazy shit out of my ass, and apparently... *she really wanted to try it!!!*\n\nClearly I need to write a best seller of ancient Slavic gypsy remedies for the woo-woo crowd.",
"If anyone is interested in this, I heartily recommend Bad Science by Ben Goldacre - it goes into great detail both hilariously and scientifically to prove that from homeopathy being complete horse shit to the major scams and misuse of data by big pharma, there is a lot of bad science that goes on today. ",
"South Park explains it in [Cherokee Hair Tampons](_URL_0_).",
"My liver does a pretty good job cleansing my body of toxins on a daily basis.\n\nPeople forget that they body does a damn good job of taking care of itself. Or at least trying to.",
"I have a kidney disorder, so I am hyper-sensitive to toxins. For me, mold is enemy #1. When I am exposed to mold, I swell up like a balloon. Most people have no idea how much mold is in food. Mushrooms are a mold. So is cheese. So is yeast. So is anything fermented (unless its been distilled to remove mold). Examples of food that I cannot eat include: yogurt, beer, wine, soy sauce, fish sauce, anything made with vinegar (i.e. ketchup and mayo and mustard), canned meats, smoked or cured meats, dried fruit, and the list goes on and on. The food molds are very mild toxins and most people can filter them out just fine. But if your kidneys are weak, not so much. I won't even get into the environmental molds that you breathe in. They are even more abundant than food molds -- some are mild, some aren't. \n\nToxins can be absorbed through the skin, such as getting a bit of gasoline on your hands while fueling your car, or getting a bit of bug spray on your hands while spraying an ant trail or getting a cleaning product on your hands. There are more toxins out there than can ever be listed. A toxin is basically anything that doesn't belong in your body that should be filtered by your liver/kidneys and you can be exposed to them in many different ways.\n\nYes, toxins can get stored in your fat. Years before I was diagnosed with kidney problems, I was on birth control pills. They were a strong pill and my period completely went away. I went off them in hopes of getting pregnant. After a year off them, my period was very light -- as in a pantyliner on my heavy day. Someone suggested that maybe the birth control hormone was still stored in my fat. I did a detox diet -- 2 days of only raw fruits and veggies, three days of juice fasting and 2 days of raw fruits and veggies. From then on, my periods were normal, so the detox diet really did eliminate all the extra stored hormone. In retrospect, there may have been a connection between my current kidney problems and not naturally eliminating all the excess hormones back then. Kidney problems apparently can start years before any symptoms show up. \n\nI read a lot of medical stuff and the only thing that I have seen that has \"real\" science behind it for \"detoxification\" is fasting. Your body goes into a different mode. It starts recycling old cells to make new cells. Your body seems to know to take the damaged, bad cells first (i.e., the ones contaminated with toxins or damaged by toxins or mutated cells, etc). So a lot of toxins stored in the fat will be eliminated during a fast. \n\nTLDR: Toxins are very real and all of us are exposed to them in abundance, though most people can eliminate them naturally. The only \"detox\" program is fasting.\n\nEdit: Added TLDR and this related comment that doesn't really fit anywhere above: Another food toxin that is hard for the human body to eliminate is hydrogenated oils. They tend to get stored in the fat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4083"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.red... | |
eofr2h | why is it that whenever i see a dead cockroach it’s always upside down? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eofr2h/eli5_why_is_it_that_whenever_i_see_a_dead/ | {
"a_id": [
"fech2gr",
"fech6cq"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Many insecticides will cause random muscle spasms. So as the insect is dying, their legs are randomly punching the ground, which eventually flips them, and they no longer have the muscle control to flip themselves back over.",
"Cockroaches are powered by hydraulics so to speak. As long as their alive, the hydraulic fluid (blood) pumps through and keeps everything moving. Once they die, and the fluid stops moving, everything begins to contract, especially the legs, and as they contract they \"flip\" the insect over."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
5l8tvn | lethal injection contents and effects | What is administered to death row inmates facing the death penalty and how does it kill them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5l8tvn/eli5_lethal_injection_contents_and_effects/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbtuq2m",
"dbtzovo",
"dbub9vz"
],
"score": [
14,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Most states use a combination of 3 drugs: Sodium thiopental (or pentobarbital since 2010) is used as an anesthetic to induce unconsciousness, pancuronium bromide (Pavulon) to cause muscle paralysis and respiratory arrest, and potassium chloride to stop the heart.\n\nThe first injection is sodium thiopental a barbiturate. It is not a painkiller but dampens the central nervous system so that the pain is undetectable.\n\nThe second injection is used to induce muscle paralysis which causes respiratory arrest since the diaphragm is paralysed which stops entry of air into the lungs.\n\nThe last drug disrupts the hearts electrical signalling resulting in a cardiac arrest \n\nEdit: After the first and the second injection the intravenous is flushed with saline a substance that helps the drug enter the bloodstream more easily ",
"In states that use the 3 drug protocol, all 3 are administered in doses that should be lethal. After the condemned inmate is on the table, an IV containing saline is started. Saline solution is purified water with a little salt added so it matches the salt level of the liquid part of blood. It's used all the time in hospital settings for many, many reasons. In lethal injections it is used as a \"placeholder\" to get the IV flow started, and also to ensure the condemned's veins can handle an IV. (Some people have difficult veins to \"hit\". Long term IV drug abuse and some medical conditions make it worse.) The IV line trails off into an opening in the wall into an adjacent room, where the actual executioner throws a series of switches to adminster the lethal doses.\n\n* First drug is a quick acting barbiturate, or more recently, it may be an anaesthetic, because the barbiturates are becoming harder to obtain. Barbiturates are heavy duty sedatives that should cause unconsciousness quickly. A lethal barbiturate overdose depresses breathing until it stops, much like a heroin overdose. Originally, sodium thiopental (aka sodium pentothal) was the preferred drug used, but it has become increasingly difficult to obtain. Most states now use pentobarbital (aka Nembutal), but this is also becoming more difficult to obtain for executions.\n\n* Second drug is a paralytic, normally pancuronium bromide. It is essentially a very powerful muscle relaxant, that surpresses movement in all the skeletal striated muscles, including the diaphragm, but not the heart. (Different kind of muscle.) This prevents the condemned from moving or struggling, which would probably happen even though they're completely unconscious. Eventually, it kills by asphyxiation, which is not quick.\n\n* Third drug is potassium chloride, which stops the heart. Potassium chloride is extremely painful, both while being administered (it burns), and when it hits the heart. (Hence the sedative/anaesthetic, and the paralytic, because the condemned would involuntarily jerk and writhe even if they were completely unconscious.) But, it is the quickest of the three to be lethal.\n\nSome states use a single drug protocol, which is a misnomer, because there can be 3 drugs used. The barbiturate is administered via IV, followed by lethal doses of Versed (an anaesthetic) and Dilaudid (an opiod pain killer) given intramuscularly, if needed. So far 8 states (Ohio, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Missouri, South Dakota, Texas, and Washington) have used the single drug protocol.",
"Ironic that hanging or firing squad are probably quicker and no less traumatic, but we're civilized and do it with intravenous drugs because it's more sanitary. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
8lyiu9 | can solar sails be used to steer and turn like normal sails, or does the light always push it directly away from the sun? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8lyiu9/eli5_can_solar_sails_be_used_to_steer_and_turn/ | {
"a_id": [
"dzjgun2",
"dzjnqzy"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Solar sails cannot be steered in the same way as a ship's sails because with a ship it relies on friction against the water to redirect the incoming force. By the use of rudders and the shape of their hull the incoming wind pressure can be directed to move the ship in a different direction.\n\nHowever a solar sail might be able to use an oddity of refraction to generate what is called \"optical lift\". This generates an apparent force perpendicular to the incoming radiation pressure, an effect which could be used in conjunction with normal solar sails to steer a spacecraft. Research is still ongoing.",
"The direction of the momentum transfer depends on the angle of the mirrors. If the mirror is angled, then it will be pushed at an angle. The direction is normal (perpendicular) to the mirror's surface. [Picture](_URL_0_)\n\nEDIT: fixed image link"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Sail-Force1.gif"
]
] | ||
1pdv9m | why is for example abbreviated ie? | When I was a kid, I always abbreviated for example as "eg" which isn't in the word but at least it sounds like the word. I later found out that you are supposed to use "ie" which doesn't make any sense. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pdv9m/eli5_why_is_for_example_abbreviated_ie/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd1b9ol",
"cd1be4r"
],
"score": [
11,
10
],
"text": [
"It stands for \"id est,\" which is latin for \"that is.\"\n\nAnd e.g. is not short for example; it stands for \"exempli gratia.\"",
"As Salacious says, it is from the Latin.\n\nHowever, i.e. does *not* mean \"for example\". It means \"that is\". There is an important difference.\n\nAn example is one of many, e.g. \"Think of an even number, e.g. four\". Four is not the only even number, it is an example of an even number, therefore e.g. is correct.\n\nWhen saying \"that is\", it is not one of many, e.g. \"Give it to the OP of this question, i.e. choboy456\". Choboy456 is not an example of the original poster. He *is* the original poster. He is the only original poster, so i.e. is correct."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
8f0dzg | why do older video games require fewer ports to be forwarded than newer video games? for example, cod: waw released in 2008 requires only one port to be forwarded whereas the newest cod requires nearly one hundred on pc | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8f0dzg/eli5_why_do_older_video_games_require_fewer_ports/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxzlcfi"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Network engineer here. A few things. I should say I've never had to forward a port for a game. Make a hole in a firewall, but not port forwarding. As to port usage. Gaming networks have both gotten more complicated with game using separate internal apps for different processes. Things like voice comms, gaming networks, updates, etc. It used to be a game was an independent program, now it is many programs tied together. Also some game programming has gotten sloppy and bloated. Programmers used to strive to make the most of the smallest amount of data. Now with basically unlimited bandwidth and storage things skyrocket."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
82q88a | what exactly do developers do when they "optimise" an app to reduce stutters/lag? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/82q88a/eli5what_exactly_do_developers_do_when_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvby3db",
"dvbydft",
"dvbyt1o",
"dvbz0yv",
"dvc6qht"
],
"score": [
3,
9,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Remove dependencies that are not being used. Removing code that generally take large amounts of processing power etc.",
"Could be dozens of different things.\n\nMost commonly it is things like:\n\n* turning off or removing services that are not needed\n\n* moving long requests (e.g. \"go retrieve this data from this remote server\") to the background so the UI remains functional\n\n* identifying pieces of code that are taking a long time to run and making them faster",
"It's a vague term that, unfortunately, means exactly what it sounds like it says. They need to go through the software and figure out the things that are making it slow & then discover how to speed them up, eliminate them or push them into the background. There's no single solution or approach that's going to work all the time.\n\nSure, you might have tools that help. A *profiler*, for example, is a common tool to automatically figure out what parts of your program are using up time/resources but actually fixing things doesn't have any one size fits all solutions.",
"It depends on what sort of application we are talking about and why the stutter or lag exist. In games, for example, the most common issue is areas with too much detail, too many objects, too many polygons per object, too many or too large of textures, and so on. Optimizing in this case is removing things that don't add much to the scene. \n\nIn other sorts of applications, stutter in particular is often cause by garbage collection. Some languages require you to manually allocate and deallocate storage space for objects, data or code. Other languages do it for you, but knowing when something is truly not needed any more is difficult in that case. The language sets up a periodic routine called \"garbage collection\" that looks through allocated memory for things that have nothing left using them. The system deletes those things, frees up the memory and in some cases, compacts the memory by moving other objects around to make larger free chunks. Optimizing in such cases may involve changing the way memory is allocated and deallocated, or tuning the parameters of the garbage collection to make it more efficient.\n\nFinally, there is just plain inefficient code. A program often spends a lot of it's time in loops, doing something over and over again, millions of times. Saving even a millisecond inside a loop can significantly speed up the program, as that millisecond is multiplied by the number of times the loop repeats. So much optimization effort is spent looking at loops, specifically the innermost loops and optimizing there, perhaps by taking things out of the loop that don't really need to be there.\n\nThe main tool for optimization is called a profiler, and it basically tells a programmer how much time is spent in each part of the code, so the programmer knows where to look to save the most time.",
"Software developer here,\n\nMost developers inexperienced with optimization will focus on algorithms, the part of the code that does the doing. It's simple, do less work and get the same result. This can be done by analyzing and reducing what we call algorithmic complexity. In the big picture, an algorithm with a lower algorithmic complexity is likely going to be faster than one with a higher complexity.\n\nThat doesn't tell the whole story, of course. Give me your worst algorithms, and I can make them as fast as your fastest algorithms just by rearranging how your data is organized in memory. I've seen bubble sort (arguably the worst sorting algorithm ever devised) outperform a quick sort (one of the fastest and most efficient sorting algorithms ever devised). The crux was that the data was small, and organized inefficiently for the quick sort.\n\nA computer is a tiered structure of memory, with a CPU on top. Most of what we do is write code that shuffles data up and down the tiers. At the top is small and fast memory - it's not just fast because of what it's made from, but *that it is small* and physically close to the CPU; and at the bottom is bulk storage that is also slow, because it's physically far away, and because magnetic storage necessitating physically moving parts (a platter will always spin slower than an electron can travel down a wire) has a much higher density than clusters of transistors. So a lot of optimization comes down to solving the problem of how do we get data through the system efficiently?\n\nDevelopers also use a program called a profiler to measure the time the code takes to execute, to identify the slow spots so we can concentrate our effort where it's going to see the most benefit.\n\nAs for network performance, you want to send as little data as possible, which might include data compression, and you want to batch your messages. Each message on the wire has headers and footers, extra data, that has to be generated, and that takes time, and it makes for extra communication, so if you can afford to wait, you might generate a bundle of data that can all be sent together."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
7ds0bz | how does one become witty? why are some people more witty than others? does it come down to training? can it be trained by socialising a lot and reading books? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ds0bz/eli5_how_does_one_become_witty_why_are_some/ | {
"a_id": [
"dpzyvij",
"dq015pk",
"dq01g77"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I believe that it mostly comes down to genetics, but environmental factors can also come into it. Wit is linked to high intelligence, which makes sense as it occurs when you hear someone say something and you quickly make a joke at the expense of that person or in a way that you know will make that person/your audience laugh. If people were to practice being witty, for example making jokes every time someone said something, then sure it could be ingrained in them, but again it mostly comes down to genetics. Either that particular gene runs through your family, or it doesn't and you learn it from others.",
"Can witty be taught or learned? It definitely can be improved upon. To start your education, my young disciple, you'll need to start with some classic movies and sketch comedy shows. Marx Brothers and Monty Python would be good to watch. Read some HITCHIKER'S GUIDE TO THE GALAXY. Study CANDIDE. \n\nAvoid TV shows where it's all about one-liners and joke set ups because that will make you as popular as your drunk uncle doing armpit farts at the Nuremberg trials.\n\nThe key to improving is to risk failur...fail..ure...hmm, failure. You have to find a safe place to practice the growth of your wit no matter how socially painful you feel doing it. Toastmasters is club that teaches public speaking and can improve your confidence. Or you can find an improv class that can help you do the same. Both would be safe environments to work on your skills. If you're lucky if you have a group of mates that love to have a few larks, and you can practice with them. But to improve wit you must speak to others and get immediate feedback. You have to find out what works for you among your peers. Good luck.",
"It's definitely a trained trait, it's exactly what improvisation theaters do! Mostly it comes down to knowing your audience, and the confidence to speak freely. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
279feu | why does it seem that pizza ads always have specials on medium pizzas? | The fast food industry tends to lean toward "larger" sizes and portions so why does it seem like Pizza Hut, Papa Johns, Dominos etc. mostly advertise pizza sales for medium sizes?
Their coupons are primarily for 2-3 medium pizzas with multiple toppings. Why aren't there more ads for Large or X-Large pizzas? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/279feu/eli5_why_does_it_seem_that_pizza_ads_always_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"chymvzx",
"chymyav",
"chytvcn"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The cost of total ingredients for a medium pizza is probably significantly lower, so they stand to make more money selling that size",
"I'm pretty sure it's because cheese is ball-crushingly expensive. \n\nAlso, the trend in food is not always toward larger. Look at the rise of mini soda cans, 1 liter bottles, and 100 calorie packs. They have immediate appeal by being cheaper than their full size cousin, even if the math works them out to be more expensive in the long run. And some people would just rather have smaller portions, or they hate having leftovers around.",
"I'd guess that \"specials\" are used to get customers to come to the store or to call in an order who might not otherwise. And I'd bet that it's relatively easy to up-sell people from a medium to a large or very large pizza. They probably up-sell enough to cover a good portion of the price reduction for the \"specials\" on mediums."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2d3dhl | how do unexploded ww2 bombs get buried under anything? | Shouldn't they just litter the surface since they came from the sky? What are the steps that causes a bomb, falling out of the sky, to get buried under buildings, streets, railways, etc? Did somebody at some point have to bury it? How do you build over a bomb? Why did nobody see them? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2d3dhl/eli5_how_do_unexploded_ww2_bombs_get_buried_under/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjlnjh7"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Bombs essentially are steel canisters that are filled with explosives. They are hard and heavy. \nThis is necessary for different reasons.\n\n* The bomb should not explode by getting shaken when the bomber flies through turbulences. So it has to be sturdy\n\n* The bomb should not explode when the bomber is hit by gunfire from fighter planes. So it has to be even more sturdy.\n\n* The bomb shall fall into a building, breaking the roof and several floors so the building explodes from the inside. Else the building will just be shaken by the blastwave, receiving little damage.\n\nSo the bombs are really hard and also shall go into hard stuff before exploding. This is also true for the ground. The bombs practically sink into the ground after falling.\n\nWhen the bomb has sunken rather deep and the explosions of other bombs throw soil and rubble on the small hole where the unexploded bomb has sunken into the ground it can become impossible to find the bomb by only looking at the ground."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
acz9vx | how are things like minimal drinking age, age of consent, etc. governed and enforced in international waters or on an airplane? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/acz9vx/eli5_how_are_things_like_minimal_drinking_age_age/ | {
"a_id": [
"edc2s58"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They in general don't apply to international waters, and with airplanes it is based on the airline policy and they either go by where the airline is based or go off of what airspace they are in. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
2eyf6w | why do we feel so groggy when first waking up, despite sleeping for the purpose of restoring energy? | Just something that's always been on my mind. We sleep in order to 'refresh' our bodies, yet waking up the next morning is always such a horrible task, even when getting sufficient sleep hours. Is there any science behind this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2eyf6w/eli5_why_do_we_feel_so_groggy_when_first_waking/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck469kg"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It has to do with timing. \nDuring sleep, you cycle through deep sleep and shallow sleep. If you wake up or are woken during a deep sleep phase, you will feel groggy. But if you wake during a shallow sleep phase, where you are already almost awake, it will be much easier to wake up and feel refreshed. Some people time when they go to sleep to wake up at a certain time when they will be in shallow sleep. [Here is a link to a timer](_URL_0_).\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://sleep-calculator.com"
]
] | |
3zpeb1 | how does the box tops for education system work? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zpeb1/eli5_how_does_the_box_tops_for_education_system/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyo1ki1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I got some responses to your question when I asked about them: \n\n > \"Both of my kids schools take them. They get 10cents back each. It doesn't sound like much but it adds up to 5k a year at my daughter's school. Enough to fund a one hour after school art class for a semester\"\n\nand\n\n > \"They're a major source of revenue for the place I used to teach at.\"\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/chicago/comments/3p51fe/teachersparentsschools_is_there_anyone_that_could/"
]
] | |
1tee14 | why is it fun to annoy people? | Why are some people assholes? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tee14/why_is_it_fun_to_annoy_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce73nmg",
"ce77fce"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"You should edit this post and ask why some people are assholes",
"It’s not.\n\nIt hurts me as much as that person. Often even more.\n\nSource: Empathic me."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
cw1zq1 | what would happen if you liposuctioned 90% of all external fat a 400 pound obese man has? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cw1zq1/eli5_what_would_happen_if_you_liposuctioned_90_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ey7vpby",
"ey7w4sl"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"I think part of it has to do with just the kind of trauma such massive amounts of sudden tissue loss would do to your body. Fat cells need oxygen too so your fat stores have blood vessels running through them. I imagine part of the problem would be the massive amounts of blood loss and vascular destruction you’d be doing. Any tissue loss of that amount could easily result in a patient going into shock and dying very quickly. Though beyond that I’d also say that any operation that would even remotely come close to removing 90% of the body fat from a person that large would require so many incisions at so many different areas you’d be at a huge infection risk. This is partly because body fat isn’t all stored in the same spot. You have subcutaneous fat (the kind you can grab and squeeze relatively easily because it’s just below your skin) and visceral fat (the kind that is deep to your muscles and surrounds your internal organs). Very obese patients have a lot of visceral fat so it would be very dangerous to try to scoop a bunch of it out from around your organs. Going back to infection risk, if you let bacteria in that visceral fat, they are right next to the organs so it could easily become a huge problem.\n\nEdit: just saw you clarified “external fat” but the point is that a significant amount of the fat an obese person stores is not external but that deep visceral fat. To get to that fat to do any sort of 90% level massive fat loss operation would require getting to that fat.",
"You can have them eat nothing but vitamin pills and water for a year [(456lbs to 180lbs)](_URL_0_), which has the handy benefit of training them not to want sugars and processed foods, as the relevant gut bacteria die within a couple of weeks (that guy was 196lbs five years later). Liposuction would be less useful even if physically possible."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.sciencealert.com/the-true-story-of-a-man-who-survived-without-any-food-for-382-days"
]
] | ||
589czk | what prevents us third-party candidates from organizing a debate hosted on youtube? | It boggles my mind that they dont even try to use the power and ease of access of the internet to break the Two-party stranglehold on the media. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/589czk/eli5_what_prevents_us_thirdparty_candidates_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8yiqbj",
"d8yiu5h",
"d8yklpy"
],
"score": [
11,
11,
3
],
"text": [
"Nothing prevents it. But if they held such a debate and it drew little attention, they would lose both credibility and moral authority. \n\nComplaining that someone else is failing to give them exposure gives them a platform, while standing up and trying to host their own debate would run the risk of having to test their popularity.",
"As others have said, few would watch it, but people would potentially hear about it second hand through the media - and that's not really that good for the candidates, because their arguments don't always hold up that well to scrutiny. The reality is, all most people would know about it would be that, according to Fox News, CNN and MSNBC, Gary Johnson forgot what Aleppo was, Jill Stein struggled with the fact that vaccines don't in fact cause autism and both of them put forward economic plans based primarily on magic beans.",
"Considering they'd never be able to draw the Rep/Dem candidates into the debate, what would be the point? The only people who would watch a debate between third party candidates would be the people who were going to vote for third party candidates to begin with. The media wouldn't care, meaning most people wouldn't care either."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2dna05 | how does this ice bucket challenge actually benefit the als community? | So from what is gathered you have the option of either donating money to ALS or dumping ice water on yourself. So with many people choosing the latter option it seems to me that ALS is getting shortchanged.
Edit: finally got nominated. Made sure to donate as well as take the challenge. Also posted the link with my video so other people can donate as well. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dna05/eli5_how_does_this_ice_bucket_challenge_actually/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjr44zj",
"cjr46ch",
"cjr46jf",
"cjr4me8",
"cjr6l6i"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I suggest contacting the relevant non-profit organizations and asking them. \n\nDo you have a personal problem with the challenge? ",
"It brings awareness. How many people are now more aware about ALS and are making donations to finding a cure? You're still \"supposed\" to donate even if you do the ice bucket challenge. ",
"Lots of people are donating, too; one ALS foundation has indicated that the ice bucket challenge is breaking all their established donation records for this period (normally one of the slowest of the year).\n\nYou just *see* the people actually taking the ice water.\n\nObama, for example, got called out and wound up making a donation.",
"Overall, it increases awareness for ALS. The benefit of that awareness isn't easy to measure, but I'm sure it doesn't hurt. \n\nThen again, it's also a massive waste of fresh water.",
"The idea of the challenge is if you do the challenge you send them $10, if you don't do the challenge you send them $100. In both cases you send the challenge on to more people. Getting everyone in the US (which takes a surprisingly small sequence of challenges) to send a charity $10 is a huge amount of money. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
3n4gf0 | non-american here. what exactly is 'hippie' and what defines if a person is hippie? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3n4gf0/eli5_nonamerican_here_what_exactly_is_hippie_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvkouwx",
"cvkr6re"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Well the hippies were a counterculture back in the 70's and they basically were for peace and antigovernment. LSD , marijuana and recreational drugs were also big at this time and the hippies were known for using such drugs. Now, hippie is more of a stereotype used to refer to this kind of mentality, appearance, and drug use. For sure, there are still some true hippies out there",
"The left-wing, anti-establishment subculture which existed mostly in the late '60s and early '70s. They embraced pacifism, environmentalism, free love, drug use, and eastern mysticism. Accurately or inaccurately, popular history holds that most of the original hippies \"sold out\" and became Reagan conservatives in the '80s.\n\nHippies still exist, but they're much less common now. People who embrace the hippie lifestyle in more modern times are sometimes called \"neo-hippies\". In some rightish circles, \"hippie\" is used as a derogatory term for someone who is perceived to be too left-wing, carrying the connotation that they have a naive understanding of the world."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
19ockn | how is it that bittorrent seems to have outlasted fully-decentralized p2p clients like kazaa and gnutella? | It seems like bittorrent websites are still going strong, whereas clients like LimeWire, KaZaa, and other fully clients P2P clients are still standing. I realize bittorrent websites don't actually host the files, but I would think that they'd be easier targets since they require a static web server to host the search function (whereas the non-bittorrent p2p clients spidered the search through the users). | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/19ockn/eli5_how_is_it_that_bittorrent_seems_to_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8pv0i7"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They don't necessarily require a static web server. Piratebay, for example, exists on dozens of servers spread around the globe. If one goes down, another takes over. The entire contents of a tracker website is tiny too; all of the magnet links on the Piratebay only adds up to about 90 megabytes of space and it's also available as a torrent so you could have your own personal backup of the whole website if you wanted.\n\nThe biggest disadvantage P2P clients like Gnutella, etc. have is the inability to read or leave comments for particular downloads; in other words there's no user moderation in play. Anybody could share something malicious disguised as something legit and it becomes difficult to tell which is which. If you did that on a bittorrent tracker you'd see comments left from the first few who downloaded it warning people to avoid it. You might even see the page it was hosted from get pulled so nobody else can download it before it became a pandemic. The only reason people use P2P software like this is because it's easy to use; you might ironically say \"idiot proof\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
234yyy | why were the us marines only deployed in the pacific? would they not have been useful in operations husky, torch and overlord? | I have not heard of any Marines being used in the landings in Europe. Surely they would have been useful there instead of just regular infantry? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/234yyy/eli5why_were_the_us_marines_only_deployed_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgth3rg",
"cgtitck"
],
"score": [
3,
10
],
"text": [
"Marines would have been more successful at a beach landing, but there was only one beach landing on D-Day (more or less, if you group it together). After D-Day the Allied forces had to fight inland, which was more suited towards the Army. \n\nIn the Pacific, the troops had to go \"Island Hopping.\" They would deploy from ships and land on the beaches, fight to the death over little scraps of sand for a few days, then board the ships again and move on to the next island. There were a lot more beach landings in the Pacific Theater than the European. ",
"Eisenhower asked for Marines after the invasion of France. He was denied.\n\nThere aren't that many Marines, compared to the Army. In WWII, the Marines had about 600,000 in service. The Army had about 7.3 **million** in service.\n\nMarshal and the Joint Chiefs determined that it would make more sense to keep the Marines concentrated in the Pacific rather than split the focus of their leadership across two theaters. It allowed the Marines to focus their training on the Pacific campaign and streamlined their logistical systems.\n\nThere were certainly a lot of beach assaults in Europe in WWII beyond Normandy. The US Army landed in North Africa, Sicily, the boot of Italy, halfway up the Italian peninsula, and in the south of France (the last took place about a month after D-Day in Normandy). Churchill wanted landings in Greece and the Adriatic and probably would have been game for a go at Norway too.\n\nEisenhower didn't ask for the Marines because he needed forces to take beaches. He wanted Marines because they have a reputation as ferociously effective assault troops, and after the Battle of Normandy, he knew that the rest of the campaign in Western Europe was going to be typified by assault warfare until the German will to fight broke."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
u6ueo | what are trigger warnings and why are they suddenly everywhere? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/u6ueo/eli5_what_are_trigger_warnings_and_why_are_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4ssyp2",
"c4st8zi",
"c4styaj"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Trigger warnings are warnings for ideas, visuals, sounds, or specific words that can \"trigger\" a emotionally negative memory for people. \n\n\nSo, for example, you're on reddit and you're reading something about rape, it might have a trigger warning prefacing the thread to warn people who have been raped that this is what this thread is about. To warn them about the content.",
"They're suddenly everywhere because social justice movements - particularly feminism - have grown in presence on the Internet and TW's are commonly used by them.\n\nSpecifically on Reddit, I'd say most of them come from SRS.",
"This idea is that if someone has had a traumatic experience, talking about certain things can \"trigger\" unpleasant memories of that experience. People are now asserting that we should be sensitive to other peoples triggers, and either warn everyone something might be a trigger, or avoid talking about triggers entirely.\n\n < opinion > \n\nThis attitude is counterproductive and leads to abuse for several reasons:\n\n* You have no idea ahead of time what my triggers are. If I was beaten by a hockey stick as a child, talking about hockey might bring up traumatic memories. You can't anticipate that, but I can guilt trip you about not being sensitive to my triggers.\n* The expectation is that the entire world should accommodate my personal problem by not talking about hockey, rather than me dealing with it myself.\n* You only have my word that it is creating traumatic memories...maybe I just don't like hockey, and using my background as an excuse to turn the channel\n* It plays right into the drama queen...\"look at me, I'm damaged, and the cold cruel world continues to poke at my wounds\".\n* It prevents frank discussion of serious topics. 2X banned posts from a rape victim empowerment movement because of the whole trigger thing.\n\n < /opinion > "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
3nnos6 | why do people who pursue the arts as their career traditionally make very little money? | Musicians, painters, poets, writers...
Throughout history, 99% of the people who have a passion for these things end up broke by the time they die. The other 1% makes it big, and become celebrities. Why does this trend occur? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3nnos6/eli5_why_do_people_who_pursue_the_arts_as_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvponum",
"cvpoq22",
"cvpq6mb",
"cvpqtwm"
],
"score": [
3,
9,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"I think you answered it. 99% don't make it big. Think of it like opening a tire shop, but your tires are not really as good as big-O's or you have no customer base. It still costs the same to make the tire...but who would buy it? \n\n\nI have a dancer friend in NYC. Her shows get 20-50 people. Gotta rent the venue, advertise, practice, then repeat. If she had 10,000 people show up, it would be awesome! But why see her if you can see some one you know is amazing? So they hope and try very hard so that the 20 turns to 50, the 50 to 1000 etc...until they make it big. ",
"How much demand is there for a poet or painter, compared to a lawyer or doctor? ",
"Luxury vs necessity. I'm a photographer, photography straddles the line between service and art, but its still a luxury. You won't starve without images. You need to have a doctor to live a healthy life. ",
"As a successful art school graduate who makes good money in my field of choice...\n\nThe biggest problem is that there's too many people trying to break into the field. There actually are a LOT of art jobs- way more than most people think. It's estimated that there are about 10 million creative professionals in the US alone. That's 10 million stable jobs, not 10 million openings, mind you. The openings make up a fraction of that number, and the number of art school students is WAY larger than the number of actual openings in creative professions.\n\nWhy are there so many students? It's a complex question to answer, but I think the shortest answer with the biggest impact is just that the \"art school industry\" as one might call it is bloated and exploitative. Art schools are growing WAY faster than the creative industries- I've heard all kinds of reports about how many art schools have literally tripled, quadrupled, even quintupled their enrollment in the past twenty years. Even really well respected schools are exploding in size.\n\nThe result of the art school bloat is too many graduates for the number of available jobs. The supply of available laborers fucks up the negotiating power of people working in the industry. Why pay a mid-level graphic designer $80K/year (not unheard of 15 years ago) when you can literally hire three desperate recent grads for $25K/year each? \n\nThe situation is also exacerbated by the fact that China and South Korea have put a big emphasis on arts education in the past 30 years, meaning that (increasingly), many American companies are outsourcing to Chinese and Korean firms who can do more work, and do it cheaper."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
341kw9 | what is the interaction between my pencil graphite and my paper that allows me to mark the paper? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/341kw9/eli5what_is_the_interaction_between_my_pencil/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqqco6m",
"cqqezl9"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Graphite is stacked sheets of carbon. When you drag the pencil along the paper, you sheer off a few of the sheets and they stick to the paper. ",
"The paper is very rough, the graphite is very soft. It's exactly like writing on the sidewalk with a piece of chalk. The graphite is stuck to the paper, but you can wipe it off. This is useful for drawing/sketching, so you can lightly pencil the paper and use your finger to smear the graphite, for shading.\n\nThis was demonstrated to me as a young boy. A teacher had pencils hanging by different things. The pencil wrote on paper, kinda wrote on other stuff, and wouldn't write on glass. The idea was that the material had to be rough enough to scrape the graphite off the pencil."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
5gh6lk | how do cassette tapes play different sounds on different sides, given that the tape is just moving the other direction? and why aren't vhs tapes double sided in the same way? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5gh6lk/eli5_how_do_cassette_tapes_play_different_sounds/ | {
"a_id": [
"das756a"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Cassette tapes actually have four tracks written on them - Side A Left and Right, then Side B Right and Left. The reader only sees the top two tracks, and so flipping the tape changes the side that's played.\n\n_URL_0_ \n\nIn that way, twice as much information can be stored in a small container.\n\nVHS tapes were designed to play a movie in one go. (Imagine having to flip the tape 1/2 way through.) "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Audio/imgaud/tape8.gif"
]
] | ||
3v1wpj | how the hell is this bee still alive? | Okay so about two months ago there was something buzzing in my lamp. Take a look and there was a hornet in there. Weirdest part? His leg is stuck in between the socket and the lightbulb. I could see him pulling and all to no avail.
Well I'm afraid of bees so I just figured... shit... he's trapped, I'll just let him bee (hahaha). After a week, he shuts up and I forget about him. Great. Dead bee in the lamp... right?
Except... no... the bee just woke up and he's buzzing in the light again and still stuck just like he always was.
How? Like seriously... what? I would've figured that ~2 months with no food, and after not moving for a month or more, he was dead.
Edit: **MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!** I got a stick and smooshed it. The bee was like the goddamn terminator, though. Squished him in the lamp - that just freed him and made him angry. Had to squish him two more times to get him to stop. Then I burned the body and flushed it down the toilet for good measure. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3v1wpj/eli5_how_the_hell_is_this_bee_still_alive/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxjloro"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Well you see, wasps and hornets are sustained less through food than they are through acts of evil committed in the world around them. They thrive on bitterness, depression, resentment, and the like. A minor act of malevolence within a few miles can keep the vile creatures alive for several days; your neighbour cheating on their spouse could easily have resurrected it from the dead."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
1mzau8 | how does "old faithful" erupt so consistently | Also I wouldn't mind someone explaining how guys era work in the first place. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mzau8/eli5_how_does_old_faithful_erupt_so_consistently/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccdzpq9"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"[It doesn't](_URL_0_), at least, not anymore. The 1983 Borah Peak earthquake set the schedule off balance, and another in 1998 really changed things up. \n\nGeysers are fed by underground rivers that lie above a pool of magma. After an eruption, the water begins to fill back up and the pressure increases. Pressure causes the water to be superheated (over boiling temp, like a pressure cooker ^hello ^NSA!) by the magma and, like a volcano, the turbulent pressure brings it to the surface. When it reaches the surface, the pressure inside drops, which causes the superheated water to become volatile. It vaporizes and shoots out of the geyser like a rocket. \n\n[Mythbusters](_URL_1_) has an example of superheating that offers a pretty neat visualization."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.geyserstudy.org/geyser.aspx?pGeyserNo=OLDFAITHFUL",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_OXM4mr_i0"
]
] | |
atcnvh | if psychosis is caused by excess dopamine and depression is caused by low dopamine, how do people end up with psychotic depression? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/atcnvh/eli5_if_psychosis_is_caused_by_excess_dopamine/ | {
"a_id": [
"eh0aqro",
"eh0dj8b"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"It's not nearly as simple as just dopamine levels. There are links, but no guarantee that dopamine levels directly and or solely influence either psychosis or depression. Multiple neurotransmitters likely influence both. Serotonin being low is often linked to depression and it has been observed that medications that increase available serotonin help those with depression. Low dopamine is more often linked to ADHD and ADHD medications typically raise dopamine, but not all of them do.\n\nIn addition, you wouldn't label or diagnose someone with psychotic be depression, but rather \"depression with psychotic features.\" ",
"At the neural level thinking about things in terms of \"neurotransmitter levels\" isn't really helpful - it's more helpful to think about specific neurotransmitter systems and activity of brain regions. The brain is insanely complicated so whenever we talk about the neuroscience of mental illness, pretty much all of the major neurotransmitters will be involved. \n\nFor psychosis, there is abnormal dopamine activity in the prefrontal and mesolimbic dopamine systems (going from the brainstem towards the part of the brain closest to the forehead) For depression, there is abnormal dopamine activity in parts of the limbic system (deep in the middle of the brain). Thus when looking only at dopamine, psychosis and depression are anatomically distinct(ish) and so it is conceivable that both could occur.\n\nThe bigger picture is that other neurotransmitters like serotonin and glutamate are involved in both mental disorders and that interactions of psychotic and depressive behavior are probably influenced by these interlinking systems."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
1m7b0g | why do we call it halloween, when we are actually recognizing about 90% of the customs of samhain? | All Hallows Eve has nothing to so with the themes of modern "Halloween".
Also, how do you pronounce Samhain? The rest of the Internet is conflicting. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1m7b0g/eli5_why_do_we_call_it_halloween_when_we_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc6fpr1",
"cc6jxm7"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm not sure about the rest of the question, but Samhain is pronounced \"sah-win,\" \"sow-in,\" or \"soun\" (sound with no d). Wikipedia often has pronunciation \"guides\" like \"saʊn,\" and you can mouse over each letter to see how it should sound.",
"It's similar to the monotheistic takeover of other pagan holidays, such as Yule (Christmas) and the spring solstice (Easter), which was done to ease the conversion of pagans into early Christianity. And it's pronounced Sa-wain (or at least my coven pronounces it that way)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
ms3mz | i know it differs from country to country and state to state, but can someone help me understand the insanity defense used in law? | LI5 | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ms3mz/i_know_it_differs_from_country_to_country_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c33eah9",
"c33f7cy",
"c33ijf5",
"c33eah9",
"c33f7cy",
"c33ijf5"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If you can prove that a crime was committed due to a mental illness(well, certain ones), then it's thought that you can't really blame them for their actions, so it would be immoral to punish them in prison. For example, if you see someone with severe autism on a bus, they will do things that it is unnacceptable for unaffected people to do, but it's excusable because they have autism. Likewise, if someone started attacking blonde haired people on the street because the unicorns will bite his knees of if he doesn't, the state often believes that care homes are a better place for him that a jail cell.\n\nThere's a stereotype in TV and movies that you can use the insanity defense to get away with murder, but the alternative is often worse (for a non-handicapped person). Rather than spend, say, 10-20 years in prison, you will likely spend the rest of your life in a care home.",
"The essence of law is that you can be punished if when you committed a crime you 1) knew what you were doing and 2) knew what you were doing was wrong. The insanity defense essentially argues that at the time of the act, one of these was not true and therefore you cannot be held responsible for the crime.",
"It's mostly to do with proving that you have the mental competence to understand why you're being put on trial. If you have some sort of mental disability or illness and it can be proved that you were unaware of your actions, you can't be tried (this is speaking for the US, in general, I can't really comment on other countries). \n\nUsually, if insanity is accepted as a viable defense - it is more often than not *not* accepted - the person who committed the crime will be sent to a mental institution or hospital. The goal is to get them to the point, if possible, where they can understand the crime they committed and the charges brought against them. Once they reach that point, they will be put on trial for the crime, and may yet serve time in prison. Obviously, with some mental problems - say someone was mentally retarded, which is a mental disability that can't be made 'better' with medications or therapy - you can't ever get better. There's a likelihood that you will spend many years, if not the rest of your life in some form of mental care (depending on the crime, of course - I am going on the assumption that the crime this theoretical person committed was something serious like murder). \n\nFor example, a man with schizophrenia commits a murder. The police catch him and arrest him. It is determined that hey, this guy actually has a mental illness and has not been treated for it after the doctors examine him. At his trial, his lawyer can say 'we're pleading insanity because it turns out that my client has schizophrenia and at the time he committed the murder, he was not being treated and didn't have the mental capacity to know what he was doing was wrong'. If the judge accepts this defense, he can rule that the man has to go spend time in the state mental hospital, where he will get treatment for his illness (in the case of schizophrenia, this usually means finding the right medications). \n\nThe court can then monitor the situation. Let's say the man reaches a point after a couple of months where he is on medications that make him stable and able to understand that he committed a serious crime. At this point, he can be put on trial as a mentally competent adult. If the court still finds him responsible for his actions, he can be sentenced to jail. \n\nSo when TV shows portray using insanity as a defense as a 'get out of jail free' card, they usually get it wrong. \n\n\nAnd I could have some of the details wrong because it's been the better part of a decade since I was studying criminal justice in college, but the gist should be accurate.",
"If you can prove that a crime was committed due to a mental illness(well, certain ones), then it's thought that you can't really blame them for their actions, so it would be immoral to punish them in prison. For example, if you see someone with severe autism on a bus, they will do things that it is unnacceptable for unaffected people to do, but it's excusable because they have autism. Likewise, if someone started attacking blonde haired people on the street because the unicorns will bite his knees of if he doesn't, the state often believes that care homes are a better place for him that a jail cell.\n\nThere's a stereotype in TV and movies that you can use the insanity defense to get away with murder, but the alternative is often worse (for a non-handicapped person). Rather than spend, say, 10-20 years in prison, you will likely spend the rest of your life in a care home.",
"The essence of law is that you can be punished if when you committed a crime you 1) knew what you were doing and 2) knew what you were doing was wrong. The insanity defense essentially argues that at the time of the act, one of these was not true and therefore you cannot be held responsible for the crime.",
"It's mostly to do with proving that you have the mental competence to understand why you're being put on trial. If you have some sort of mental disability or illness and it can be proved that you were unaware of your actions, you can't be tried (this is speaking for the US, in general, I can't really comment on other countries). \n\nUsually, if insanity is accepted as a viable defense - it is more often than not *not* accepted - the person who committed the crime will be sent to a mental institution or hospital. The goal is to get them to the point, if possible, where they can understand the crime they committed and the charges brought against them. Once they reach that point, they will be put on trial for the crime, and may yet serve time in prison. Obviously, with some mental problems - say someone was mentally retarded, which is a mental disability that can't be made 'better' with medications or therapy - you can't ever get better. There's a likelihood that you will spend many years, if not the rest of your life in some form of mental care (depending on the crime, of course - I am going on the assumption that the crime this theoretical person committed was something serious like murder). \n\nFor example, a man with schizophrenia commits a murder. The police catch him and arrest him. It is determined that hey, this guy actually has a mental illness and has not been treated for it after the doctors examine him. At his trial, his lawyer can say 'we're pleading insanity because it turns out that my client has schizophrenia and at the time he committed the murder, he was not being treated and didn't have the mental capacity to know what he was doing was wrong'. If the judge accepts this defense, he can rule that the man has to go spend time in the state mental hospital, where he will get treatment for his illness (in the case of schizophrenia, this usually means finding the right medications). \n\nThe court can then monitor the situation. Let's say the man reaches a point after a couple of months where he is on medications that make him stable and able to understand that he committed a serious crime. At this point, he can be put on trial as a mentally competent adult. If the court still finds him responsible for his actions, he can be sentenced to jail. \n\nSo when TV shows portray using insanity as a defense as a 'get out of jail free' card, they usually get it wrong. \n\n\nAnd I could have some of the details wrong because it's been the better part of a decade since I was studying criminal justice in college, but the gist should be accurate."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2uefyp | why do technologies advance so much faster in wartime than in peacetime? | Shouldn't people have more flexibility and ability to work better at peacetime? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2uefyp/eli5_why_do_technologies_advance_so_much_faster/ | {
"a_id": [
"co7nk33",
"co7nk9a",
"co7nnjm"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In peacetime governments are much more relaxed about their need in technologies, so they do not put as much effort on production of advanced and practical technology. In war time, especially total war when whole economy is participating, and the whole war hangs on these technologies that you see much more pressure and much more motivation to produce new technologies. See project manhattan.",
"There's a lot more money spent by the government on technology during war time.",
"When money is put into developing technology there is no guarantee that it will produce a workable result. During war time countries try all sorts of ideas, some work some don't. Because of this money is poured into ideas which may win the war and many more ideas are tried. The result is that many workable ideas emerge at the end. \nIn peacetime governments are reluctant to spend money as freely. It is doubtful the exploration of space would have progressed as fast if the cold war had never started."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
7ug5so | why do non-english speaking countries have so much english on their packaging and marketing? | It seems like English is everywhere. Even in music, the language will switch from Korean (KPOP as an example) to English for the chorus. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ug5so/eli5_why_do_nonenglish_speaking_countries_have_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"dtk2lyi",
"dtk2m46",
"dtk2tta",
"dtk3j5u",
"dtk3n8r"
],
"score": [
10,
3,
2,
5,
5
],
"text": [
"English-speaking countries are so economically powerful, mainly through influence of the United States, that most countries include English on their products so that tourists or international customers can read them.\n\nInterestingly the dominance of English in international business is so great that if someone is going to learn a second language in order to do business overseas it will almost certainly be English. The result is that English is an expected common skill which only reinforces its dominance. For example someone from Germany doing business with someone from France will likely result in them speaking to each other in English, as the German probably doesn't know French and the Frenchman probably doesn't know German, but both likely understand English to some extent.\n\nSo when a company is considering what to put on their package to make it accessible to non-native speakers it will almost always be English.",
"It’s easier. Seriously, it’s the same reason the US puts a Spanish translation on to most products. If you expect a large amount of customers to speak a certain language, then it’s simpler to have that language on the package.",
"English is one of the most-spoken languages on the planet. Any marketed product, including music, should appeal to the largest market possible to maximize profits. That's just good business.\n\nTo not include English in your product would just be silly.\n\nAlso, one could argue that English on non-English products is a side effect of ever-present globalization and westernization of non-White countries.",
"In the case of Asia (I would say Japan and Korea because I'm only familiar with these 2 countries), adding English can be a marketing strategy not so much as to make the product practical (because foreigners can understand it) but rather to make it cool and trendy and add a strong image of internationalization for the brand. It's very common to have ridiculous commercials with a Japanese man or woman purposely screaming in English or in Japanese with a strong English accent to make it seem more \"trendy\" or \"global\". \nBeing able to speak English with a good accent is a sign of high education (mostly because it means you have been overseas and you have lived there, you/your parents were successful enough in business to live/be sent overseas, you probably nailed the English tests to get into a good uni and, of course, you know about the \"global world\") and is used as nauseam to promote universities or English schools. Same for fashion, makeup and the like, but way less often for food.\nBut it's not only for English. Like they would add some grammatically impossible French on products like chocolates or fashion items for people to associate it with Paris/romance when they target 30-40 year old females. ",
"English is the language of international business. Well-educated people tend to learn English. English speakers can get better jobs because they speak English. Speaking English is a status symbol of sorts. So brands use English in packaging and marketing to associate their products with the positive cultural status of English. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
f74hkv | [statistics] can someone explain these misconceptions about confidence intervals? | Some of the most common **misconceptions about confidence intervals** are:
* “There is a 95% chance that the true population mean falls within the confidence interval.” *(FALSE)*
* “The mean will fall within the confidence interval 95% of the time.” *(FALSE)*
While I do know the true definition of confidence intervals, I wonder why the above are not true? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f74hkv/eli5_statistics_can_someone_explain_these/ | {
"a_id": [
"fi95usl"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Confidence intervals are calculated from samples of a population, centered around sample mean of interest and ranging up or down from it by the standard deviation scaled by the confidence level. Every sample produces a different mean/SD, and thus a different interval. If you calculated all possible sample CIs for some population, the proportion of them that would contain the true population mean somewhere in the CI would be the same as the confidence level (e.g. calculating a 95% CI for every possible sample - > 95% of the resulting CIs would contain the true population mean). So then the statements given would not be true for any given sample CI, as you would not have any capacity to judge whether a given CI is among the 95% (or whatever confidence level) or not based on that single sample alone."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
bxzok2 | why is it rude to call my aunts/uncles by their first name? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bxzok2/eli5_why_is_it_rude_to_call_my_auntsuncles_by/ | {
"a_id": [
"eqavpdp",
"eqavvvj",
"eqaw397",
"eqawf05",
"eqawsz6",
"eqaxovp"
],
"score": [
8,
7,
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Just social standards. Depends where you live, I call certain relatives by their first name and others by their relation",
"I’ve always called my aunts and uncles by their first name. Seems strange to address them any other way?",
"We use titles to imply respect. Older generation family members like parents, aunts, uncles, and grandparents are typically given the respect of a title, while same or younger generations like cousins and nephews don’t get the same obligation of respect. \n\nIt’s a time honored tradition in many families, but it’s certainly not universal.",
"Perhaps they consider it disrespectful because using first names negates their “position” or “station”. Maybe they think first names should be reserved for peers. \n\nHowever, since it’s no skin off your nose, it might be more considerate (and far less confrontational) to simply address them in the manner they’d like. Unless they’re asking for “Master” or something...",
"Probably just what they were raised to do so extend that expectation to you. In other words it is traditional.",
"The answer is, because *their* aunts and uncles told them the same thing. They were raised to address their elders a certain way, so that is the treatment they expect now they are the elders.\n\nThis isn't universal. Most people that I know call their aunts and uncles by their first names, sometimes with Aunty or Uncle in front."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
vbtb3 | the us federal reserve's "operation twist" | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/vbtb3/eli5_the_us_federal_reserves_operation_twist/ | {
"a_id": [
"c534dld"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Treasury bonds are IOU's issued by they US government--they are the national debt--and they are largely considered one of the safest investments around, because they are backed by the full faith and credit of the US government. If people think the economy is going to hell, they like the safety of treasuries.\n\nIn general, when demand for any bond (including Treasuries) is high, the interest rate on them is low, because lots of people are willing to lend money, so the bond issuer doesn't need to pay a high interest rate to attract lenders. \n\nThe Federal Reserve buys T-notes, because by doing so they drive down interest rates on the bonds, hoping that if they get them low enough some investors will say, \"screw this, I need to make more money than I can with treasuries, so I'll take the risk and invest my money someplace else in the economy.\" But, there is a limit to this: the lowest the interest rate can go is zero, and buying more bonds after you push the rate to zero won't make it go negative. The Fed has already bought so many T-notes that the rate for intermediate-term notes is basically at zero.\n\nThe goal of Operation Twist is to sell off some of the intermediate term bonds that the Fed owns, and use the money to buy long-term bonds. If it works, the rates on the intermediate bonds won't go up, because they'll still own so many that rates will stay near zero on them, but buying long-term bonds will push down rates on those bonds, which are not quite as low. Then, the theory goes, this reduction in rates on long-term bonds will filter out into the broader economy as some investors look for alternatives, and will push down interest rates in the private sector."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
31lfa9 | why is oil black but when in contact with water it makes rainbow-ish effects on the surface? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/31lfa9/eli5_why_is_oil_black_but_when_in_contact_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq2ochl"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Thin film iridescence.\n\nA thin film of oil rests on a surface. White light (containing all the colours of the rainbow) hits the surface of the oil. Some light gets reflected on the top of the film. The other light passes through the oil and reflected off the bottom surface of the oil and then exits the oil.\n\nThen the process of constructive/deconstructive wave interference happens. If two light waves are traveling at the same \"cycle\", light is produced (this is constructive interference). If this \"cycle\" is not the same, the waves essentially 'cancel' each other out and this is called deconstructive interference. Remember how some light gets reflected off the surface of the oil and some at the back? Those light waves will now interfere with each other; how they interfere depends on the thickness of the oil (we're talking nanometres here).\n\nThe reasons why you see colour is due to which wavelengths are being canceled out and which aren't. The part of the oil that looks blue in that moment is because every wavelength except blue is being canceled out due to deconstructive interference (similarly, the wavelengths that produce blue light are in constructive interference).\n\nThe reason why oil looks black in large quantities is because oil happens to absorb most wavelengths in the visible light spectrum. No light = black."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
79a31j | why does lightning emerge from a cloud as a single bolt? why not from the whole surface area of the bottom of a cloud? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/79a31j/eli5why_does_lightning_emerge_from_a_cloud_as_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dp0c88o"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"So there is a static field that does emerge as a whole area. But the thing is air does not conduct electricity. So it results in just a static field.\n\nWhen the field is strong enough, the air undergoes what's known as [dielectric breakdown](_URL_0_), basically, the air stops becoming an insulator, and starts becoming a conductor. What happens in a cloud is there is a large static field in cloud, and the strongest spot on the field is where the air becomes conductive, the charges then move down that conductive path, towards the ground. That makes the largest static field the area near the already conductive spot (it's also closest to the ground). The process repeats until it connects to the ground, and then the charges flow between the cloud and ground until they are equal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_breakdown"
]
] | ||
bettbd | where do birds go at night? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bettbd/eli5_where_do_birds_go_at_night/ | {
"a_id": [
"el8k9lg"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"Nocturnal birds go out and paint the town. Diurnal birds return to their nests, burrows, tree-holes, or whatever their habitat is."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
ca0pc5 | why do some cultures love capsaicin, and some absolutely hate it? where did the enjoyment of spicy foods come from? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ca0pc5/eli5_why_do_some_cultures_love_capsaicin_and_some/ | {
"a_id": [
"et4wuj7",
"et4xlce"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"In warm climates, food will rot and turn rancid a lot faster than in cold climates. In order to keep food longer, as well as to hide the taste of rot, spices are added to food. Spices that include capsaicin, such as chilis, are especially effecting for slowing rot. So the cultures in hot climates had to either deal with spicy food, or die, leading to an association between spicy food and edible food.",
"I'd say the enjoyment of it comes from the endorphin release triggered by capsaicin. It also enhances other flavors if you can learn to handle the pain. I eat a lot of spicy food so I'm used to it, but when I eat something *exceptionally* spicy, I will actually get high for a while and break into giggles like I've smoked pot. Great feeling. Just don't rub your eyes, because you'll be crying, and those capsaicin fingers are not welcome in eyeballs. My dumb ass has learned that multiple times."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
3lg7j4 | why after drinking energy drinks do you get a phlegmy throat? | I talked to my friends about this and they experience the same thing and I can't find anything about it anywhere online.
It doesn't apply to usual carbonated drinks because this doesn't happen with them. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lg7j4/eli5_why_after_drinking_energy_drinks_do_you_get/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv607rw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"My throat doesn't get phlegmy at all after drinking energy drinks... Do other people experience this?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
aw60ys | what is pan-nationalism? | a quick Google search didn’t bring up anything of substance on the topic.
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aw60ys/eli5_what_is_pannationalism/ | {
"a_id": [
"ehkafit"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Essentially pan-nationalism holds the nationalist belief that a nation is the fundamental unit for human life. But unlike what many people think of when they think of nationalism, pan-nationalism does not correspond to established boundaries. Pan-nationalists believe that nations are essentially clusters of ethnically and culturally similar groups. And so they would create a nation based on that. \n\n\nSo an example would be the pan-germanic movement. There are many cultures that speak german, share cultural ideals with german people, etc. such as Austrians, German-speaking Swiss people, and others who may or may not identify as German. A German pan-nationalist would desire to create a new nation-state based on these divisions. In real life, pan-germanists wish to establish a nation-state called *Großdeutschland* (Great Germany). \n\n & #x200B;\n\nSo in essence, pan-nationalists wish to create nation-states around the perceived cultural and social similarities of a given cluster of people. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
1n64yx | the potential significance of amd's mantle | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1n64yx/eli5_the_potential_significance_of_amds_mantle/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccfpnoo",
"ccfr64g"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"They said at their conference last night that the potential was 9x the performance. Probably the devs can also save time and money porting from consoles.\n\nedit: [more info](_URL_0_)",
"I'm not too clear on the technical significance, but as far as business goes:\n\nPresently, developing a game for multiple systems (consoles, PC's) requires rewriting large portions of code to be compatible with the different graphics hardware and operating systems. As the PC, PS3, and 360 all have different hardware, there's a significant amount of code to be changed. Both of the new consoles (PS4, Xbox One) contain AMD GPU's. With Mantle, developers could (theoretically) write just one set of code for all major systems (at least as far as graphics drivers are concerned). That minimizes work, and entices developers to favor AMD technology over DirectX which nVidia uses. If developers favor a certain technology and optimize their games for AMD, gamers will in turn favor AMD as well. Large scale adoption of Mantle means a larger market share for AMD.\n\nAs an analogy, it's kind of like language. You can have your book translated into every language, or you can publish it in the most dominant one and force everyone else to learn it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.anandtech.com/show/7371/understanding-amds-mantle-a-lowlevel-graphics-api-for-gcn#Aa67A2sOwWg8AthR.16"
],
[]
] | ||
9wc1km | how are producers and actors in drug documentaries allowed to either posses, partake, and/or film something illegal? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9wc1km/eli5_how_are_producers_and_actors_in_drug/ | {
"a_id": [
"e9jjk6a",
"e9jjnxh",
"e9jk3i3",
"e9jk4oh",
"e9jks3t",
"e9jktj1",
"e9jl9ki",
"e9jldar",
"e9jllrd",
"e9jlsek",
"e9jma8x",
"e9jmb1v",
"e9jncws",
"e9jpu2i",
"e9jrm1o",
"e9jrri6",
"e9js79e",
"e9jskvg",
"e9jtc3o",
"e9jxhvb"
],
"score": [
2428,
1659,
376,
138,
6,
83,
184,
9,
8,
310,
3,
24,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I mean, at least in the U.S. possession of a drug is what is charged. A video of a green or white substance isn't enough proof to press charges.",
"no, because they could just as easily be faking it with something that isn't illegal\n\nsame reason comedians like jim jefferies can talk about doing coke. just because you said you did it doesn't really mean anything",
"I often wonder about this. Like if there's a news clip about someone being charged for child pornography they'll often do a shot of a blurred out monitor with what look to be naked bodies on it. Like how are they allowed to film that monitor? They must have unblurred footage of it. Unless the police makes the clip and blur it out before they hand it to the journalist.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nEDIT: Sorry about the slight change of subject. I didn't see the word \"drug\" in there at first, so I thought you were simply asking about any documentary involving illegal activities.",
"Journalist can not be forced to reveal the identities of sources. The people that film and produce never commit a crime, and the person committing the crime remains confidential. Lots of them are just fake though. ",
"In many cases, they’re interviewing people who went to jail for their involvement with drugs. You’re welcome to talk about doing drugs once you’ve already gone to jail for the actual crime part of it.",
"In most jurisdictions, generally speaking you don't have to report a crime. E.g., if you passed by a junkie on the sidewalk doing drugs, you wouldn't *have* to report it to the police (I'm guessing almost everyone would just keep on walking). There are some exceptions to that (mandated reporters) but they typically don't involve drug use.\n\nWhen the documentary is released, the police could choose to open an investigation based on what they saw. If things were really serious, theoretically they could subpoena the documentary-maker the provide them with names or raw video footage or testimony or whatever.\n\nIt would be a big hassle and I'm guessing most police departments wouldn't really give a shit if some random person did drugs in a documentary, unless there were more serious crimes involved.",
"Journalistic freedom.\n\nJournalists are allowed to report on reality, and have some confidentiality to protect the industry.",
"Been watching \"Snow on tha Bluff\"?",
"What I don’t get is how a celeb/documentary presenter can break into that inner circle..... yet law enforcement can’t! ",
"We need an AMA with Vice's legal team for this.\n\nTBH I'd like to see how some of these guys get away with buying arms in black markets and stuff.\n\nOr even how Hamilton Morris handles the legality of his Pharmocopia series.",
"I'm not sure what you mean by \"actors\" in \"documentaries\". The presence of one often precludes the other, unless the actors aren't acting.\n\nLike if you interview Johnny Depp is a documentary, he's actually an interviewee, not an \"actor\" per se.\n\nMaybe I'm just confused.",
"You might find this interesting. It addresses the issue of confidential sources and whether testimony can be compelled.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n > The issue of whether or not journalists can be subpoenaed and forced to reveal confidential information arose in 1972 with the United States Supreme Court case Branzburg v. Hayes. Paul Branzburg was a reporter for The Courier-Journal in Louisville, Kentucky and wrote an article about the drug hashish. In creating the article, he came in contact with two local citizens who had created and used the drug. Because their activity was illegal, Branzburg promised the two individuals that he would not reveal their identities. After the article was published, Branzburg was subpoenaed by a local grand jury and ordered to reveal the identity of his sources. Branzburg refused and cited the provisions for freedom of the press from the First Amendment of the Constitution, in his defense.\n\n > The case eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court, where the court decided in a five to four decision that the press did not have a Constitutional right of protection from revealing confidential information in court. The court acknowledged, however, that the government must \"convincingly show a substantial relation between the information sought and a subject of overriding and compelling state interest.\"[2] While this ruling did not set a precedent for journalistic rights in court, it did define a more stringent set of requirements for when a journalist could be subpoenaed in court.\n\n > This ruling was limited in nature, did not set a clear federal precedent regarding journalistic privileges from revealing confidential information, and thus has been interpreted and cited differently by courts over the years. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals, for instance, has gleaned a qualified First Amendment privilege from the Branzburg decision. In Riley v. City of Chester, the Court held that a reporter's right to protect his sources from disclosure could be overcome by a party who, by a preponderance of the evidence, demonstrated that he has made an effort to obtain the information elsewhere, that the only access to the information sought is through the journalist and his or her source, and that the information sought is crucial to the case. 612 F.2d 708 (3rd Cir. 1979).[3]\n \n\nIMHO, a free press is paramount, outweighing other legal consideration. It's in the First Amendment of the Constitution after all. Forcing testimony or evidence from newsgathering creates a chilling effect that infringes on the right of a free press. The public will be worse off if journalists are prevented from reporting on issues due to legal liability. \n\nIf you agree, let your legislators know. Seems like a national shield law could be possible.",
"I believe that there's a special unwritten clause of trust between journalists, the police and criminals, where journalists don't give info to the police in order for future criminals to trust documentary camera teams. In many cases, the information which these documentaries provide to the general public can be more productive than the arresting of the criminal themselves.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nAlso in some extreme cases, journalists are blindfolded and taken to a location in secret to avoid giving the location away.",
"Essentially, if it is real then their activities would be considered illegal in the moment, until proper media credentials were presented. ",
"They don't really have any protection, but it's not really good policy to prosecute in some of these cases because of the implications on freedom of speech/press. Reporting does absolutely contribute to and act as the catalyst for prosecution, but the priority of prosecuting drug users who appear in documentaries is likely just going to be pretty low on lots of these cases. You might also end up with venue problems if the documentarian doesn't disclose the location of the person. For crimes, you need to prosecute where the crime actually occurred. If no one knows where it occurred, you'd have to figure out the location through other means like potentially subpoenaing the documentarians, which a lot of prosecutors might not want to do. I think you'd also have potential evidentiary problems. ",
"Burden of proof is on the prosecution. The documentarian doesn't need to prove the video is a fake, the prosecution needs to prove a crime occured.",
"I'm not seeing an actual answer to your question. Just a bunch of people regaling you with memories of illegal activity of their own.\n\nIt's called Reporter's Privilege - _URL_0_",
"So beyond all these answers about the legality of journalism, it would be a nightmare to prosecute. \n\nDiscovery channel isn’t directly making these shows, they get bought from a production house. \n\nIndependent producers, find a fixer who the finds OG A willing to be filmed. Maybe the producer gives the camera to the fixer, and then collects the footage. Maybe it’s another outside crew. Then on top of that you may never get a real name of OG A.\n\nSo if you’re law enforcement, you have to sift through not only lawyers, but layers of people who may be truly anonymous. You have to find jurisdiction, gather what would be entirely hearsay. \n\nThey can interrogate the discovery executive all they want, it doesn’t mean they know who, or how, or what they filmed. \n\nBut let’s say you do, and you find out it was a fixer. Well this fixer doesn’t have a real name, they didn’t work with them, they haven’t seen the safe houses, they gave the camera OG A to film by himself.\n\nSo by the time you go through the networks lawyers, the production lawyers, the crew lawyers, unions, maybe you get a name of OG A. Who is now either dead, moved or out. ",
"UK here, and talking about factual (documentary).\n\nBefore we do anything we have to complete a legal document outlining what / why. Essentially we have to have justification for why we're about to go undercover and buy drugs or whatever.\n\nEssentially this will amount to it being A) in the public interest to show and B) the only way we can gather the evidence.\n\nThe fact of the matter is if we buy the drugs, then immediately get caught by the police we have zero legal protection.\n\nIn the UK the Crown Prosecution Service (Similar to DA) will decide whether it's in the public interest to prosecute - our lawyers, who were well up to speed before any crime is committed will (hopefully) have already got some great arguments about why we shouldn't go to jail. \n\n\nIn terms of contributors using substances, as a drug user there is little public interest in prosecuting. It's just not worth while using all the resources on convicting someone who is mostly only damaging themselves. ",
"In reenactments they arnt real drugs. In the real footage documentaries, the person in possession of the drugs almost always has a mask covering their faces, the producers and filmers are never actually in possession of any drugs, just filming it and talking to the people that are in possession of the drugs."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shield_laws_in_the_United_States"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporter's_privilege"
],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
2bdy6y | if i contract ebola, and survive, am i now immune to ebola? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bdy6y/eli5_if_i_contract_ebola_and_survive_am_i_now/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj4dan5",
"cj4debk",
"cj4hdhk"
],
"score": [
3,
28,
2
],
"text": [
"Your immune system has a really good memory of things it has seen before; if you've already beaten Ebola, your body knows how to find it and fight it the next time it comes around. Symptoms of being sick are usually caused by the trial and error process of your body figuring out the best way to fix the problem - after you beat it once, your body has the answer to beat it again. So maybe minor symptoms, but you probably won't even notice. Ninja edit.",
"for that particular strain of Ebola, yes more or less. There are multiple types of Ebola. Plus, like all life, it is constantly evolving. So it is possible (but unlikely) to survive Ebola only to later contact a different type of Ebola and die horribly from it. ",
"Have there been any recorded instances of a human being simply immune to Ebola and/or serving as a non-symptomatic carrier, like an African version of Typhoid Mary?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
2a2pqr | why do people give expensive art to museums? | If you have paid a huge amount of money for art (paintings, sculptures etc) why would you give them to museums? What do you gain out of it? Does the museum buy it at a lower cost? Thanks all. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2a2pqr/eli5_why_do_people_give_expensive_art_to_museums/ | {
"a_id": [
"ciqwbag",
"ciqwc1f",
"ciqwcfn",
"ciqwdyp",
"ciqwe9e",
"ciqyidp"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Charitable donations are able to be written off on your taxes at the end of the year - it's basically like selling it without paying tax because the government will give you a good portion of that money back when you file taxes.\n\nSide note: Some people are just nice also and figure it's art for the public. Also there is a cap on how much you can write off for charitable donations.",
"Some of the art is only loaned temporarily. Some of it is donated as a tax deduction. Some of it is donated so that the person who donated it can gain some kind of prestige or status. \n\nSome of it is donated just because someone had enough money and wanted to secure the art piece and ensure that it could be shared with others.",
"If it's a donation, the value of the painting will be accounted for when paying taxes. Basically, they will pay less in taxes that year, because they donated something.",
"The art is often just on loan to the museum for display, it is still owned by the buyer. The general idea is that a great piece of art would be a shame to lock up in their house somewhere; better lots of people get the chance to see it. Also it would tend to increase the value of the art, as years later when it is back in their foyer it might be recognized.",
"While some art museums do indeed pay to purchase pieces (thus improving the museum and the attendance thereof), what you're asking about is donations of art.\n\nThe \"why\" can be complex; if you're the actual artist, it can be a way to get your pieces shown - though galleries usually charge for that privilege, and museums often won't put just anything on display. If you're someone who, as you said, paid a great deal for the piece, the reason for donating it can range from wanting other people to be able to see and enjoy it, to improve your public image, or to avoid others obtaining it. Further, their might be tax intensives to do so; I don't know the tax codes of the rich and the famous, so I can't say.\n\nAnd, of course, sometimes people just like doing things for others; altruism feels *good*.",
"I have my art work set to be donated when I die. Simply so others can enjoy it. I am selfish now because I want to see my few pieces daily but when I croak, I feel as if the public should have full access."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
3mwra9 | motion capture. how does it work, and why use it? | I've read the Wikipedia article about Motion Capture, but I still don't quite understand why people continue to use it, so I think maybe I'm not understanding it on some fundamental level.
Do you just scan the person's body in while it's moving and drop textures on like a sheet? Or is it more involved?
And why do that instead of rigging something in Maya? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mwra9/eli5_motion_capture_how_does_it_work_and_why_use/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvit876"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Suppose you want to make video of a horse jumping from one cliff to another, what are your options? \n\n* Have a horse jump over a real cliff, and hope it can make it safely. \n\n* Have a horse jump over an obstacle in front of a green screen, and merge the scene together.\n\n* Capture the motion of a horse jumping over an obstacle, then use CGI to make an animated horse that looks natural by capturing the movement of the different joints in the legs, the arching of the back and head, etc. \n\nThen the animated horse can be made to jump over obstacles that a real horse can not."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
3gcxd3 | what happened to make egg prices skyrocket? | Or is it just where I live? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gcxd3/eli5_what_happened_to_make_egg_prices_skyrocket/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctwye0n",
"ctwyf9k"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"There is an ongoing epidemic of chicken flu in the US, which had forced many producers to kill much of their stock in order to contain it. Eggs are now being imported from abroad.",
"_URL_0_\n\n > Egg prices in the US nearly double after outbreak of avian flu \nMore than 49m chickens and turkeys died or were euthanized in 15 states as flu virus spread to midwest farms"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/16/egg-prices-in-the-us-nearly-double-after-outbreak-of-avian-flu"
]
] | |
6seqli | how exactly do un peacekeeping forces (the deployed troops) ensure peace? | Couldn't unrest still persist even after their mandate is complete, and another conflict still take place? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6seqli/eli5_how_exactly_do_un_peacekeeping_forces_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlc5dly",
"dlcarif",
"dlce837",
"dlcgeh4"
],
"score": [
2,
12,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Well, the idea is that a political settlement will be reached at some point, allowing the peacekeepers to be withdrawn.",
"It doesn't always work, but the idea is based around a show of force. Essentially, the idea is that by having a large (sometimes larger than indigenous forces) peace keeping army in place, then whatever factions are warring will think twice before taking certain actions. Essentially, it means that for fear of what ever retribution might be brought down on them by the peacekeeping force, should any of those peacekeepers be injured, keeps the indigenous fighters from taking risky actions which might make things worse. ",
"It actually depends, as UN Peacekeeping forces conduct different types of missions nowadays. There is the concept of the \"holy trinity\" in UN Peacekeeping: consent, impartiality and minimum use of force. The holy trinity was developed in the beginning stages of peacekeeping, when everything was improvised along the way as Dag Hammarskjöld, the UN Secretary-General in the 50s-early 60s was part of developing it.\n\nIn a \"traditional\" peacekeeping mission, the peacekeepers are there as an impartial third party force in order to ensure the peace is being kept as there is ceasefire, or peace negotiations taking place. UN peacekeeping forces are always made up of countries who volunteer their forces, and the host country consents to their presence. The forces are in no way allowed to take sides, and normally are only allowed to use force in the case of self-defense. This is the way they would ensure peace in a traditional operation. \n\nBuuuuuut - many operations are not as clear cut as the model of traditional peacekeeping is based on, and so the actual peacekeeping is not always thought of as very successful due to a limited mandate or restricting rules of engagement. Rwanda is probably the most well known example of this.\n\nSidenote: \"Shake Hands with the Devil\" by Romeo Dallaire is a really interesting read on what went wrong in Rwanda through the eyes of the force commander of the mission _URL_0_\n",
"A UN Peacekeeping force is not a deterrent in itself, usually not even well enough built to protect themselves. The value of the UN Peacekeeping force is that if you attack it, you are declaring war on nations with Very Wide Bilateral Agreements. So for example some rebel group in an African country wants to make some noise and be recognized as powerful, the local government is stretched thin, and there is that base a few hills over there of UN Peacekeepers; The rebel group isn't stupid, attacking the UN group is declaring war on 20 countries represented in the group, and everyone those 20 countries are allied to namely the USA, Britian, and France. \n\nNot all UN Peacekeeping forces are created equal, most can barely protect themselves. Some usually backed by the USA or France (Foreign Legion) are able to wage war on a level no small (or midsized) country wants to tangle with, never mind the rebels. \n\nI'm not a fan of project peace by being a target, but it works for the UN most of the time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/215758.Shake_Hands_with_the_Devil"
],
[]
] | |
dy7zxy | how did people get enough food in pre-historic times | I know that we've cultivated fruits, veg and berries to grow bigger and more nutritious over time, but how did people survive with so much more exertion and less beneficial foods. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dy7zxy/eli5_how_did_people_get_enough_food_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"f7z4ttz",
"f7z516v",
"f7z6tsg",
"f8015kr"
],
"score": [
23,
4,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Until 12,000 years ago, essentially all humans got their food in the wild from hunting, gathering, and fishing.",
"Weren't as many people in pre-historic times so there wasn't as many mouths to feed. A forest could sustain a small tribe. Plus, they were nomadic and hunted for food.",
"Something to remember- hunters gatherers lived very uncertain lives. Food supply was inconsistent and plenty of communities perished. Weather and climate played a huge role.\n\nAsking today how they got enough food, the answer is simple: many times they didn’t.",
"They spent more time getting food. Imagine taking all the time you spend on reddit, driving your car, or playing video games, and imagine spending that time getting food instead."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
5m3x12 | what's so special about artesian, spring, or purified drinking water? isn't distilled the most pure form chemically? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5m3x12/eli5_whats_so_special_about_artesian_spring_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"dc0pe4k",
"dc0pxxs",
"dc0u0wv"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
6
],
"text": [
"It's not that they're pure, it's because the waters are supposed to taste better and are said to have certain health benefits because they contain different vitamins and minerals. Some people are also afraid that purified water (and to a greater extent tap water) has certain dangerous chemicals.",
"what makes any variety of water, particularly bottled, \"special\" is mostly marketing and partly dissolved minerals that change the taste compared to distilled.\n\n",
"It's not about purity, it's about the source.\n\nSpring water is water from a spring, a place where groundwater naturally seeps up to the surface.\n\nArtesian water comes from an artesian well. Basically, someone digs a well into a pressurized pocket of water and it shoots out like a big fountain."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
34eibf | the difference between real, reactive, and apparent power (electrical). | I have some electrical engineering background and I somewhat understand the math behind the 3 but I have never grasped the "real world" application of these terms. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34eibf/eli5_the_difference_between_real_reactive_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqtvrfp",
"cqty3v0"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"This is not real explanation, but look at this picture (picture is worth 1000 words), it sums it pretty well!\n\n_URL_0_",
"Real power is power that the source machines (generators) produce and resistance or other machines (motors) consume and transform into heat and motion. This power is flowing from the source to the load and then being removes from the system. \r\r\rReactive power is power that is being absorbed and then released by inductance and/or capacitance, known as reactive loads. For part of a cycle the source supplies power to this, then for the other part or the cycle the capacitance/inductance releases this power. The net power consumption is zero, the power never leaves the system, it just cycles back and forth between reactive load and source. While this power may be cycling, it still takes current and voltage to exist, so it does indeed manifest itself in a real way. \r\r\rNow apparent power is just how much power you would think is there if this was DC or resistive AC. You measure the current and voltage, and that's apparent power. It's what power appears to be consumed/produced. The thing is though, all this current and voltage could be all real power being consumed, or reactive power being cycled, or a mixture of both. They both take current and voltage. You don't know the real power from the apparent power alone. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://i.imgur.com/9AvIfIN.png?1"
],
[]
] | |
2idd2g | how does wifi allot itself between devices in a residence? | Yesterday I was playing Clash of Clans on my iPad while streaming Sopranos on Apple TV and my roommate came and yelled at me because he was playing Counter Strike and his ping was 400 and climbing. It just got me thinking about how the router allots wifi between devices and on what basis. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2idd2g/eli5how_does_wifi_allot_itself_between_devices_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cl14m4m"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The band width is evenly divided out amongst connected devices. So say you have a 10Mb wifi connection. If you have 1 device connected you get 10Mb. If you have 2 devices and they both download they both get a max of 5Mb. This keeps going. Quality of service and giaranteed throughput on your wireless router can change that but by default that is how it works. Oh and usually the router speed drops to the lowest capable device. Meaning if you have an N device and some old B device hooks up. You all get B service."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
53xjk0 | why do dairy products in their raw state spoil quickly at room temperature, but when baked into things like cake, they are stable at room temperature or higher for days? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/53xjk0/eli5why_do_dairy_products_in_their_raw_state/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7x4le9",
"d7xr1ii"
],
"score": [
127,
11
],
"text": [
"The bacteria in dairy products is primarily what causes them to go bad; when you bake it into a cake the bacteria die from the heat and the reduced availability of water restricts their growth, even if they did survive the heat.",
"In addition to being sterilised by the baking heat, many baked goods such as cake are super sugary, and at that concentration sugars retard bacterial growth. Think about how jam never moulds. This is why bread will mould at room temperature faster than a cake."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
1ph7hg | the x-men film timeline. | I'm a fan of the films but haven't read any comics. Can someone please explain the (broad) timeline of the films in a way I'd understand? In particular:
- How is Xavier back in DOFP if he died in X3?
- Why doesn't Logan recognize Xavier and Eric at the end of The Wolverine? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ph7hg/eli5_the_xmen_film_timeline/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd2945j"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"He does recognize them at the end of the Wolverine. He knows immediately what the floatign coins means, which is why he turns to try and strike Magneto. When Xavier shows up, he asks how it is possible because he knows Xavier is dead. As to how Xavier lives/lived, we don't know, and it is implied it will be explained in the new movie.\n\nTimeline:\n\n1. X-Men Origins: Wolverine\n2. X-Men First Class\n3. New X-Men movie (part in the past)\n4. X-Men (X1)\n5. X2\n6. X-Men: The Last Stand\n7. The Wolverine\n8. New X-Men movie (part in the present)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
6z1565 | if cats can't taste sugar then why do many popular cat food brands add it? | Like Whiskas. Also why does my cat go mad for the sugary brands? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6z1565/if_cats_cant_taste_sugar_then_why_do_many_popular/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmrorcy",
"dmryhjp"
],
"score": [
19,
2
],
"text": [
"Sugar is not only about sweetness in flavor. It's also a quick and ready source of carbohydrates: energy.\n\nWith that said:\n\nNot all cat foods contain added sugar. In fact many don't but some certainly do. It's a cheap and lazy way for manufactures to boost certain nutrition label figures to make the catfood look more healthy on paper than it is in your cats stomach. \n\nCats don't need added sugar. They really don't need any sugar at all. But the empty calories from the sugar are like cat cocaine. They give your cat an energy rush that will keep 'em coming back for more. Makers know this and know if you don't have all the info you will be prone to buy your cat sugared food because you think it's what your cat prefers. Avoid the cheap brands that add sugar and make sure kitty is fed well even if you need to spend a few more tuppence.",
"Does anyone know how sure the science is that cats can't taste sugar? My cat is 'meh' on meats and her dry food, but absolutely loses her mind over cookies, cake, frosting, Yogurt, any candy, ice cream, etc. (I do not purposely feed her these, she goes to great lengths to beg them or steal them). I also used to have a cat that loved fruit. If you were eating a banana she would climb up you to take a bite. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
7lcwif | why do certain lawns keep their grass green through the winter and others turn brown? | There's an office building near where I live and the grass around it is green all year (I live in Dallas, TX). A golf course near where I work has brown grass now. I'd figure a golf course would want to do what ever the office building does to keep it grass green. Is it a particular breed of grass? Or exceptional lawn care? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7lcwif/eli5why_do_certain_lawns_keep_their_grass_green/ | {
"a_id": [
"drlampf",
"drlbhq0",
"drlecy9"
],
"score": [
2,
9,
5
],
"text": [
"It could be exceptional lawn care, or the grass could be dyed green. That's actually very common. Go take a close look and see if it's brown grass with green stain on top.",
"Mostly it is that there are different types of grass, some GCs overseed in the fall and spring and change between types that can take the cool and the heat - esp on the fairways and greens. Also some more hardy - or versatile grasses are not that good for golf courses.\n\nAfter that it is largely about watering - and feeding, gets expensive for the > 100 acres of a typical GC.",
"There are different kinds of grass, most commonly bermuda and St. Augustine in the Dallas area.\n\nI have a neighbor who plants winter rye grass to keep his lawn green year round. It grows in winter and dies in the spring. Per my neighbor, the dying rye grass serves to fertilize the grass coming in. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
8qyjoq | heating vs cooling in space | I understand, individually, why and how humans would freeze in space (aside from any solar radiation) and why a computer would overheat in space, but I guess not entirely, because I don't fully understand why this has different outcomes.
I'm guessing that because a computer generates more heat, and faster, than us, that the lack of convection leads to it overheating. However, humans would lose heat faster than they can generate is, especially since they would be actively dying and cellular processes would be stopping.
But that's just a guess. ELI5 please. Thanks. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8qyjoq/eli5_heating_vs_cooling_in_space/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0n31lh",
"e0n47ey"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Both a human and a computer would overheat in space\n\nWhen you're first exposed to the vacuum, any surface moisture would evaporate and may freeze due to the sudden temperature drops from evaporation, but after that you're making 100 W of heat and not radiating away nearly that much until you're very hot\n\nNASA is far far more concerned about keeping astronauts and satellites cool than about keeping them warm. Making heat is far easier than getting rid of it in space",
"Heat is transferred in three ways:\n\n* Conduction - moving between two objects in contact\n* Convection - hot fluid moves away from an object and is replaced with cold fluid (or vice versa)\n* Radiation - heat energy is converted into light and flies away\n\nIf you are in a vacuum, the only way to get rid of heat is through radiation, which as most temperatures is also the slowest. Even if it is very cold, if you have a constant source of heat, it will have nowhere to go and you risk overheating.\n\nA human in space would also lose heat slowly. In fact, they would lose heat at about the same rate their body produces it, so you could last hours, even days if you were adrift with sufficient oxygen and pressurization. One caveat, if you adrift due to rapid decompression (i.e., blown out an airlock), the expanding gases around you would rob a lot of heat from you, to the point you could be flash frozen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
3ce7gs | why do a lot of people(might be subjective) think keanu reeves is a bad actor? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ce7gs/eli5_why_do_a_lot_of_peoplemight_be_subjective/ | {
"a_id": [
"csup6z5",
"csup9gs",
"csupj8u",
"csuqo4q",
"csuquva"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
2,
5,
11
],
"text": [
"It's subjective. Keanu Reeves has no facial mimicry. Each and single of his expresions, stares, faces, even sound, speech, etc.. is same, and it gets dull.\n\n[My super scientific sources](_URL_0_)",
"I feel so torn when it comes to Reeves. I like him but I agree with Gladix 100%\nIt feels like he plays the same character in every movie. ",
"He doesn't seem to have a broad range of emotion. Every character he plays is kind of the same guy. He doesn't have a comedic bone in his body.\n\nWith all that being said, he seems like a genuinely good guy off camera. I just don't think much talent is there.",
"To best understand this, I think you should watch the recent film \"John Wick\". The first 20 minutes, essentially, rely entirely on Keanu's emoting for drive. The rest of the film is an action film. Focus on those first 20 minutes, if you can.\n\nNext, for comparison, watch \"A History of Violence\", starring Viggo Mortensen. Similar film, less action and more emoting.\n\nThe writing and direction in each film is different, to be fair, but I don't think anyone who has seen both would conclude that Keanu is as talented an actor as Viggo in terms of raw conveyance of emotion.",
"His range of acting is said to be really limited, you generally know the general sense of his characters before going to a movie.\n\nPersonally, I think he is the person for those roles. No one plays his type better than he does. I can't imagine anyone else has Neo, I know other actors would have their own variation, but his lack of emotion in acting in a virtual world run by machines captured the feel of that works for me."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrbKuOaVF3k"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
25adcc | why does my face scrunch up when i'm lifting something heavy, even though my facial muscles are (seemingly) irrelevant to the completion of the lifting task? | I've noticed that when exercising or straining or otherwise efforting with various muscle groups, my facial muscles will involuntarily flex and contort -- even if the muscle group doing the work is nowhere near my face -- and it takes a concerted effort to relax my facial muscles. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/25adcc/eli5_why_does_my_face_scrunch_up_when_im_lifting/ | {
"a_id": [
"chf9vpk",
"chfb9hw"
],
"score": [
4,
5
],
"text": [
"I think its something to do with managing blood pressure and maintaining a rigid frame. God the faces I make while deadlifting are absurd",
"[Here's a very good answer](_URL_0_) Credit goes to to Toadkiller_Dog"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lkpof/eli5_why_do_we_make_funny_faces_when_we_lift/"
]
] | |
2jf3hu | what is that taste in your mouth right before you throw up (when you're sick)? | I'm just now getting over the stomach flu, and about ten seconds or so before I would throw up, I would always get a strange taste in my mouth.
I used this taste as a signal to get to a bathroom. Is this my body's way of warning me, or are there other reasons this happens? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jf3hu/eli5_what_is_that_taste_in_your_mouth_right/ | {
"a_id": [
"clb2s14",
"clb3fm7",
"clb464k",
"clb4h0d",
"clbaq7o"
],
"score": [
108,
4,
51,
15,
2
],
"text": [
"It's saliva collecting in your mouth to lubricate the oesophagus and mouth, protecting it from the stomach acids you throw up.",
"Your body releases a type of bile that makes you vomit. That's what you're tasting. This is also why smelling other peoples vomit makes you want to vomit as well ",
"The pH of gastric acid is ~2.0 which can cause damage to the esophageal lining, the oral mucosa and teeth. Our bodies produce a protective layer of mucous along the digestive tract which has a pH of ~8.5, weakly alkaline. Additionally, our saliva is normally weakly acidic in nature (pH ~6.8). Prior to vomiting, chemical signals are sent to various trigger zones in the brain which prepare us for the event. One such signal induces the salivary glands to produce large amounts of alkaline saliva which coats the mouth to protect it from the acid of the stomach contents. Additionally, large amounts of alkaline mucous are produced along the esophagus to protect it as well, making it difficult to spit out those last bits of \"yuck\" after you're finished. \n\n*edit--read edit below. Typical resting pH of saliva is ~6.8, weakly acidic. This changes to become more alkaline as flow rates increase",
"Usually I taste rum and coke in my mouth before I puke. Haha",
"Now I know why the precursor to hurling is my mouth watering...it's the body saying, \"run and get a bucket, 'cause here it comes!\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
21e71s | the life of pi [spoilers] | I don't get it.... was the whole movie a metaphor? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21e71s/eli5_the_life_of_pi_spoilers/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgc7lab",
"cgc7ro2"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If you read the novel, you find out right in the beginning what the book is about(I'm not sure if it's in the movie). The narrator says it's a story to make you believe in God. Think about it. It's a story about an Indian kid names *Piscine (pissing)*, who gets stuck on a raft with a tiger, eats its poo, finds a magic island, and washes ashore? I remember reading it that there was a suspension of disbelief. If I could think \"It is not impossible for for a kid to be names pissing.\" or \"You could totally survive on a raft. With a tiger,\" then why can't I believe in God?\n\nEdit: Also getting stuck with the nickname of Pi. Seriously. For an Indian kid. Because it's better than the alternative.",
"The kid couldn't handle what really happened to him, so he made up a story that he found more beautiful. Since no one else can prove which story is the right one, he suggests we should just pick the one we like the best. And similarly since no one can disprove God we should just choose to believe in God because it's the most beautiful story.\n\nI imagine Richard Dawkins was screaming at the screen at this point."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
ltkbt | the difference between investment banking and sales/trading divisions in the bigger firms like goldman sachs/ jpmorgan. | All of my friends are business majors and are applying to these internships, but I'm having trouble telling the difference between their programs. Help me reddit :) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ltkbt/eli5_the_difference_between_investment_banking/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2viowg",
"c2viowg"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"If a company wants more money to buy stuff (equipment, real estate, inventory), they can go to a bank and ask for money. That is mostly done through loans (debt) or equity (shares in the company). The investment banking division will figure out how to provide money to the company, and at what cost. This is important because you need to know how much a company is worth if you want to issue new equity (you need to set a $ value for the new shares), and you need to know how risky it is if you want to lend it money (you need to know at what interest rate the loan will be paid out, more risky = higher rate). The client of the investment banking division is the company.\n\nOnce the investment banking division has done the number crunching and knows how much money (and it what form) the company will get, the sales and trading division will make sure it can raise the money. So if the bank decides the company needs to issue shares, the sales/trading division will sell those shares to inviduals (people) or institutions (mutual funds, pension plans, etc.), take the money and give it to the company (after keeping a commission). The same goes for loans (on the market they are called \"obligations\"). This division will also act as an intermediary in regular market transactions, where one person wants to sell a security (either equity/shares or loans/obligations) and another person wants to buy it. \n\n\n\n",
"If a company wants more money to buy stuff (equipment, real estate, inventory), they can go to a bank and ask for money. That is mostly done through loans (debt) or equity (shares in the company). The investment banking division will figure out how to provide money to the company, and at what cost. This is important because you need to know how much a company is worth if you want to issue new equity (you need to set a $ value for the new shares), and you need to know how risky it is if you want to lend it money (you need to know at what interest rate the loan will be paid out, more risky = higher rate). The client of the investment banking division is the company.\n\nOnce the investment banking division has done the number crunching and knows how much money (and it what form) the company will get, the sales and trading division will make sure it can raise the money. So if the bank decides the company needs to issue shares, the sales/trading division will sell those shares to inviduals (people) or institutions (mutual funds, pension plans, etc.), take the money and give it to the company (after keeping a commission). The same goes for loans (on the market they are called \"obligations\"). This division will also act as an intermediary in regular market transactions, where one person wants to sell a security (either equity/shares or loans/obligations) and another person wants to buy it. \n\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
ayn6bg | why is it that i couldn't recite most keys on a keyboard from visual memory, but if i imagine typing words out on a keyboard, i could tell you where each one is? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ayn6bg/eli5_why_is_it_that_i_couldnt_recite_most_keys_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"ei23k8t"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The part of your brain that knows how to move your fingers when you type can't communicate very well, it's buried pretty deep in you. It has to be in order for you to be any good at all. When you first start to type, you stumble around quite a bit and it takes a lot of energy. It's hard to express your thoughts disassembled to the individual letter, processed across your memory instructing your finger where to press the key. As you improve, it takes less and less energy, until one day you're able to sit down and type without even thinking about it, which is really quite incredible. It is relatively good at talking with the part of you that knows how to visualize yourself outside of yourself, and your brain can make that bridge with a bit of effort. And that visualization works with memory and language and so on and so forth. We end up having to daisy chain a bunch of ways of thinking together in order to access the part of us that knows what the keys represent"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
45yylo | if planes generate lift by using an air foil and having a certain angle of attack then how do birds generate lift? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/45yylo/eli5_if_planes_generate_lift_by_using_an_air_foil/ | {
"a_id": [
"d014whg",
"d014x7g",
"d014xdh",
"d01530t"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"They flap their wings. Planes, as you may have noticed, do not generally do that, because it's inefficient for the kinds of engines we have today.",
"Birds and airplane wings generate lift the same way. The shape is curved on the top and less curved on the bottom. That makes the air flowing over the wing move faster, reducing the air pressure. Angle of attack is a secondary element in lift, more important for rigid wings like a planes and less important in a moving wing that generates life and thrust. You can watch birds vary their wing angle of attack if you look at a video of them gliding to to a perch and stopping on it. They tilt their wings at the last instant, spilling speed and popping their bodies up so they can fold their wings while landing.",
"Relatively large muscles to power their wings. Relatively low weight compared to aircraft (and other animals of similar size). Thus they simply have to push down with their wings to generate lift. Think of it like how you might use your arms to perform an underwater breast stroke.",
"[The same way](_URL_0_). While flapping does push air down (and lift them up), the flaps are designed to generate forward momentum. As they move forward when their wings are stretched out fully, they generate lift the same way a plane does. They also angle themselves into the wind and ride it like a kite, as well as catching thermal updrafts - columns of warm air that rise. They open up their wings to catch that warm air and ride it up. Once they're up high, they drift down, turning their height into distance, gliding forward and using the lift generated by their wings to stay up.\n\nSource: the Animorphs"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://askabiologist.asu.edu/sites/default/files/resources/articles/bird_feathers/bird_plane_compare.jpg"
]
] | ||
c81if9 | how does congress actually dispense funds? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c81if9/eli5_how_does_congress_actually_dispense_funds/ | {
"a_id": [
"esiy4lg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Questions about the US are generally better in r/askanamerican, or you could r/ask_politics."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
4wtez7 | why do rides make us more motion sick as we get older? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4wtez7/eli5_why_do_rides_make_us_more_motion_sick_as_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6a07to",
"d6a1vmj",
"d6a844x",
"d6a96e6"
],
"score": [
183,
100,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The fluids inside your ear become more viscous as you age, so they don't adjust as quickly to changes in acceleration/orientation. ",
"You have small hairs in your ear with fluid moving around them. If you keep very active like kids do (swinging, roller coasters) the hairs stay flexible. Grownups don't usually move around as much as kids do and the hairs get stiff over time. Fluid flowing over the stiff hairs has more of an effect on them than flexible hairs and you sense motion that much more, often making you sick. The good news is, like building muscle, you can make the hairs flexible again by doing more things that kids do. Go to the playground! ",
"For those (like me) that have gotten older and experience more motion sickness- try ginger root pills. They are simply ground ginger and work absolutely fantastic for me. It made going to the amusement park a doable thing and saves my life on airplanes. \n\nI started taking them after watching mythbusters and I wish more people knew about this!\n\n_URL_0_",
"Motion sickness is a very useful catch-all for not having to go places. I am 39 years old and claim 'motion sickness' every time someone suggests a drive to some location I am not interested in visiting. It's a great solution - I haven't had to visit some out-of-town shopping centre or tourist attraction in mover a decade."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://mythresults.com/episode43"
],
[]
] | ||
26kkmy | the pros for marijuana legalization | I've seen stuff here and there on reddit about weed legalization, but I still don't have a very clear picture on what the concrete supporting facts are. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26kkmy/eli5the_pros_for_marijuana_legalization/ | {
"a_id": [
"chrwfuc",
"chrwr0w",
"chrx45g",
"chry5lr",
"chry9hv",
"chrzc3p"
],
"score": [
12,
2,
15,
2,
2,
9
],
"text": [
"Most of the arguments for Marijuana legalization center around 2 points:\n\n1. Marijuana is less harmful and addictive than many legal drugs, such as alcohol.\n2. Keeping Marijuana illegal helps funnel money to violent drug cartels, instead of regulating it and funneling tax money to the government instead. ",
"Its easier to keep kids off of the stuff if its legal. Store clerks check IDs, dealers don't ",
"In one sense, the most powerful pro for marijuana legalization is that it restores a personal freedom that the government doesn’t really have a reasonable basis for denying.",
"The biggest pro... \nIllegal drugs cannot be taxed \nEnforcement has cost billions and accomplished nothing \nEverything in America is driven by the bottom dollar",
"If it's legal it can be taxed and regulated.\n\nThere is also a high cost associated with criminalizing it - people go to prison, which costs society in dollars as well as lost opportunity. Minor dealers who go to prison may be transformed into more serious criminals.",
"1) No wasting billions of dollars world wide on a drug war that doesn't work (There is demand there its not going away and it never will) - Can be spend saved money on rehabilitation\n\n2) Reduction of drug related crime - No ones shooting each other for a bit of weed when its legal\n\n3) Therapeutic value of Marijuana - Has some merit with cancer, epilepsy etc. plus probably more if the stupid draconian laws are relaxed and more research can be done.\n\n4) TAX MONEY!\n\n5) Reduction in prison population - Saves you tax dollars!\n\n6) Jobs - If its legal you need people to sell it!\n\n7) Possible reduction in Cigarettes and Alcohol usage (this is grasping at straws but possible)\n\n8) Liberty (most important) - You should be able to put whatever you want into your body its no ones business other than yours, providing you are not affecting others. - Obviously needs to be regulated like alcohol and cigarettes. e.g. No smoking weed while driving, operating heavy machinery etc."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2zf8qy | how do people with no knowledge or background in engineering, natural resources, etc manage to become elected to government positions in the energy sector? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zf8qy/eli5_how_do_people_with_no_knowledge_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpiczgg",
"cpid63u",
"cpiqqm4"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"People with a lot of money want them to be in those positions.",
"Being in a highly technical field within the military I see this all the time. The general idea is that these people can learn what they need to OJT, but they are placed their for their ability/potential to lead to mission accomplishment. People who understand what is going on (like enlisted folks) can only go so high since they are SMEs, while managers (officers) go on to run the business. I believe the same thing happens in politics.",
"For the same reason that Tim Cook can be the head of Apple while probably knowing little to nothing about how to make glass even though it's featured in virtually every product they make. People at the head of an organization are asked to manage people, not to actually do in the field work. They have people below them who are subject matter experts and know how to do the actual job but might now know anything about how to run a company."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
2rv22m | how do ratings work with online viewing and dvr? does watching a show on netflix or hulu affect how a network analyzes a show's popularity? | I know the whole ratings thing is really strange with the little boxes. But with the internet age, I imagine it's much easier for companies to get information and statistics about their shows.
Does Netflix count toward a show's popularity? Or is it only viewings on sites that show you commercials (because that revenue supports the network or... something).
**Basically I want to know what's the best way to support shows I like and encourage networks to keep them going?** | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rv22m/eli5_how_do_ratings_work_with_online_viewing_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnjjeed"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This is a very relevant question. Some networks are recently looking at online views (on their own services however, like hbogo) as part of their total views. \n\nwatching a show on netflix increases the netflix traffic, which in turn dictates how much netflix would be willing to pay network X for the show you just watched once the contract expires. Basically it's a delayed reaction, similar to buying a DVD (though DVD sales is what brought back family guy). \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
5qt38a | why has usa not included saudi arabia in their banned countries list? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5qt38a/eli5_why_has_usa_not_included_saudi_arabia_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd1vzky",
"dd1w771",
"dd1x8n0",
"dd263bx",
"dd27x4q"
],
"score": [
8,
16,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"No one can really know besides trump himself, but here are the facts. Of the countries that major Muslim countries not affected by the immigration freeze Trump's family has significant business dealings in most of them. Of the countries that are directly targeted by the ban he has no ties to what so ever.",
"Saudi Arabia is in fact worse than ISIS - you cannot survive in it if you are not Sunni Muslim, they probably killed more people for having \"wrong\" faith than ISIS. US are strong allies of SA because of money. Both work together to stabilize oil prices, both worked together to fight communism, both have investments in each other. Also there are indications that Saudi government was connected to 9/11, and not including SA in this ban just shows how stupid trump is and how stupid are those americans who elected him. ",
"Oil. It is a huge supplier and we have a ton of business dealings with them. This is a complex question with complex answers so it obviously goes way deeper than that. ",
"Simple geopolitics. In 1979 the Iranian Revolution replaced the Imperial State of Iran with the Shiite theocratic state of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which took no time in stating that it hated the United States. It also took no time in stating that it hated the Sunni Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Thus a cold war developed in the Middle East between Saudi Arabia and Iran. A cold war which the Saudis decided to ally themselves with the US. Thus when the US decides to ban people from the Middle East, they will include the enemy and not the ally.",
"Basically, Trump just took the countries that DHS had already designated and used them for his EO. Copied and pasted from another place this was written.\n\nPEOPLE, please just read the orders, themselves. They're quite illuminating. The only foreign country mentioned in this executive order is Syria. So how did the whole idea of a \"Muslim ban\" with \"seven countries\" come about? It was actually already in law and those countries were designated by the Department of Homeland Security prior to Trump taking office. He didn't pick them. President Obama temporary halted immigration from Iraq under the same legal provision just a couple of years ago.\n\nIt's incredible what one learns when one does one's own research.\n\n\"...to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days...\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
21mv3l | what is the baha'i faith? what do they believe? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21mv3l/eli5what_is_the_bahai_faith_what_do_they_believe/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgel21c",
"cgemfm2",
"cgep977",
"cgeqsq8",
"cgerp6v"
],
"score": [
16,
11,
4,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"I sort of look at it like Baha'i's are to Islam as Mormons are to Christianity. In a nutshell, Baha'i's believe that religious truth is revealed sequentially to humanity depending on what they're \"ready\" for. Much the same way that you teach math to children by starting with basic arithmetic, moving on to algebra when they've got that down, then geometry/trig and finally calculus, set theory and all the rest. Of course, like every other religion, they also believe themselves to be the final revelation of spiritual truth.\n\nsource: my wife was raised Baha'i.",
"Baha'is believe among other things in progressive revelation, that religious truth is revealed throughout the ages through a series of Prophets. The most recent, Baha'u'llah, established the Baha'i Faith. There will be other Prophets after Him, after the lapse of at least a thousand years since His coming, and Prophets shall continue to educate humanity for all eternity, as they have done in the past (roughly speaking every thousand years a new Prophet comes although this varies). Some past Prophets include Jesus, Muhammad, Buddha, Zoroaster, Moses, Abraham...A Major Prophet such as These are start a new independent world religion rather than simply a new sect as somebody such as Joseph Smith or Martin Luther did (who both started sects of Christianity) or whoever started the Hari Krishna movement say (it is a sect of Hindu). \n\nThe Baha'i Faith is recognised as an independent world religion even by its adversaries. This goes back to a court case in Egypt where it was ruled that the Faith is not a sect of Islam by the highest religious court in the country. \nFor more info see here: _URL_0_\n\nFor more info on the Faith try here: _URL_1_\n\nIt isn't a conspiracy or anything. What you will come across there is basically the same as what people who work at the Baha'i World Centre in Haifa consider to be the essential principals of the Faith.",
"The Baha'i Faith grew out of Islam in the late 1800s. The TL;DR of their beliefs are that God has communicated with mankind throughout all of human history, using various prophets (who are denoted as Manifestations of God, because they reflect his nature to other humans). These have included Adam, Abraham, Moses, Krishna, Zoroaster, the Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, the Bab, and the Bah'uallah, the founder of the Baha'is. They believe that every religious path is derived from God, with the differences explained as what was needed for that time and place. And, while the Bah'uallah is the most recent Manifestation, it is fully accepted that he will not be the last; another will come with a more complete teaching than his, then another, and another, etc.",
"The Baha'i Faith believes that all religions and nations are one, and that people of all ethnicities, cultures and belief systems should be treated equally. It was greatly ahead of its time, advocating equality of the sexes and education for young girls, encouraging women to remove their veils. Many of the early followers died for their beliefs, and in the land of its founding, Iran, believers are still persecuted. The Baha'is have no clergy, and democratically elect their representatives who form an international body, centred in Haifa, Israel. The moral code of the Baha'is is quite strict, forbidding alcohol and recretaional drug use, and enjoining the believers to various observances such as fasting once per year. \n\nThe mysticism of the Baha'i faith is deeply rooted in Sufi poetry, and imagery of roses, the song of nightingales, wine and the yearning after the beloved are all prevalent throughout the sacred writings of the Baha'i faith. The faith conceives of the physical world and the human experience as reflections of a greater world beyond this one, and of God's will and nature. God is seen as fundamentally unknowable and beyond the understanding of humans, but that a connection can be forged through sincere prayer, and that God may guide us through motivating us toward righteousness and through our sensation of his love. Baha'is don't believe in a literal heaven and hell but in an afterlife where the spiritual qualities developed in this life define our health in the world to come, where this world is seen as like the womb compared to the next life. It is only as physical, embodied beings that we can learn and spiritually develop, and the effect of this physical life is irreversable, but it is in the next life in which we truly live, and the vast, in fact eternal, bulk of our true experience will take place. Heaven and hell are seen as metaphors for nearness and distance from God, and being a good or bad person is seen as its own reward. The things of this world are likened unto dust, while the spiritual world is seen as much more valuable, such that people who behave selfishly or without morality are seen as short-sighted and harming themselves most of all.\n\nIt emerged out of the Shaikhi school of Shia Islam in the nineteenth century. The Shiite/Sunni split in Islam is about the successors of Muhammed, the Caliphs, and which of them were legitimate. There was a twelfth Imam, or Islamic leader, Ali, who was an in-law of Muhammed and a leader of the Shiah side of the split, who disappeared. The Muslims believed the Imams didn't die, but that they went into occultation, where they would communicate only through intermediaries, and then everntually come back. The Shaikhi school believed that certain prophecies indicated the twelfth imam was returning in the nineteenth century, and a leader, a teacher within this school, told his followers to go looking for the guy. They eventually found him, one by one, and he declared himself the return of Ali to each of them but said until all nineteen of these followers found him, that they had to remain silent. Eventually they were all gathered, after the death of their old teacher, and their new leader publicly declared his mission. He was duly persecuted by the Islamic government of Iran and the Ottoman empire, and one of his followers emerged to claim the leadership after he was executed. This follower claimed to be the return of Christ, and was known as Baha'u'allah. He prophesied various things, the fall of various empires and kings, and that the banks of the Rhine in Germany would be bathed in blood twice. Baha'i's believe that his prophecies were accurate, which some of them were, and that Armageddon, literally the battle of Meggido, a city in Israel, was the two world wars combined. They believe that this was the true collapse of the Roman empire, since the Russian, German and Ottoman empire had all drawn their legitimacy from claiming to be continuations of the Eastern half of the Roman empire, and the Kaiser of Germany and the Czar of Russia both drew their name from transliterations of Caesar. The Baha'i's believe that the beast of the apocalypse was the Abbasid Caliphate, the Sunni empire which had its last gasp as the Ottomans, and that the real battle between good and evil was the battle, at Meggido, between the Ottoman Turks and the British, as the Ottomans threatened to crucify Abdul Baha, the son of the prophet, if they got to him. They were defeated and the eventual defeat of fascism and empire after WWI and WWII is seen by the Baha'is as the dawning of a new age and the fulfilment of the prophecies of Baha'u'allah. \n\nThe Baha'i faith is broadly tolerant and openminded, but one sticking point is its intolerance of homosexuality. This is drawn from one line in the book written by Baha'u'allah, where, while discussing secual morality, he says he \"shies away from even mentioning the use of boys,\" which could have been a reference to pedophilia but has been taken as a blanket proscription of homosexuality. While other religions have found ways to become more liberal on this issue, the Baha'i faith, perhaps unfortunately, is still largely united under one worldly organization, such that almost all of its believers are registered members of this organization. In such a way, belief in the religion itself and membership in the organization are often conflated and seen as one and the same, such that those who profess some belief in the religion but may oppose some of the policies of the official international religious organization are seen as some of the chief enemies of the believers, who are urged to shun them. To remain a member of the organized religion is to be subject to some at times quite strict controls, especially with respect to publishing written material. The official leadership want to vet and censor anything written by the believers about the faith. This is because up to this point there has been no major schism between different factions, unlike in Islam or Christianity, and so the leaders are keen to keep it that way and to \"protect\" the faith from any such possibility. But it might be argued that they're really weakening themselves by stifling dissent and open discussion.",
"All these years my iphone has been auto correcting bahaha to Bahai... It's a real thing. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.bci.org/islam-bahai/SectIslam.htm",
"http://www.bahai.org/?gclid=CJPQk4nMtr0CFU0JvAodA4oAag"
],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
3rt2y1 | why exit wounds are larger | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rt2y1/eli5_why_exit_wounds_are_larger/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwr2au6",
"cwr5bgm"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > Exit wounds are usually larger than the entrance wound and this is because as the round moves through the body of the victim it slows down and explodes within the tissue and surrounding muscle. This slowing down of the projectile means that as it reaches the end of its trajectory it has to force harder to push through. This equates to the exit wound normally looking larger and considerably more destructive than its pre-cursor - the entrance wound.\n\nSource: _URL_0_",
"A bullet carries a huge amount of kinetic energy. As it impacts something it initially punches a neat hole.\n\nThe bullet then slows down as it tries to force it's way through the denser medium (flesh and bone), at this point it may distort, flatten and slow even more. At this point it is transferring a lot of the kinetic energy to the flesh in the form of a shock wave. This shock wave can stretch the tunnel the bullet is making up to 20 times the diameter of the bullet (for a fraction of a second). As the bullet exits it comes with this shock wave that has the effect of 'blowing out' the exit wound.\n\nPeople don't just have a 9mm hole tunnelled through them they have massive trauma from hydrostatic shock.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.exploreforensics.co.uk/entrance-and-exit-wounds.html"
],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock"
]
] | ||
6ayw3a | why does the body store unnecessary amounts of fat, to the point where humans can become morbidly obese? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ayw3a/eli5_why_does_the_body_store_unnecessary_amounts/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhigden",
"dhjgupl"
],
"score": [
33,
2
],
"text": [
"You have to keep in mind that access to enough food to eat yourself to death is a fairly modern thing to have. Of the billions of years of life evolving that led to us, it's only in the last few thousand or so that this has been possible.\n\nIf you don't have access to this much food, \"storing unnecessary amounts of fat\" becomes \"being able to eat more now and use it later.\"\n\nTaking that into account, the ability to store dense reserves of energy (fat), which also happens to help keep you warm, is an extremely useful survival tool. In fact, it's postulated that this is one of the evolutionary advances we have over other apes: a gorilla or chimp that massively overate like a person can would just die from it. Being able to \"stock up\" internally is one of the abilities that allowed our ancestors to migrate through areas that didn't offer enough food. The only other mammals that can put on arbitrary amounts of fat like we can and not die from it are aquatic (which also happens to be another situation where food can be scarce for long periods of time and staying warm is important). Don't get me wrong: all mammals have fat stores, but humans can put on several times our normal weight in fat alone, and most mammals can't do this.",
"Because our modern eating habits are an extremely recent event, on an evolutionary time-scale. Our bodies are still highly optimised for the eating habits of many thousands of years ago, when food was much scarcer and you were forced to take whatever you could find. This placed a huge evolutionary premium on saving and storing as much surplus energy as you could. \n\nFat provides a very convenient way to store a large amount of surplus energy; each 1g of fat stores around 37kJ.\n\nAs an aside, this is possibly why we generally view sweet and fatty foods as \"tasting nicer\". In an era when you didn't always know where your next meal was coming from, there was probably a big advantage in acquiring a preference for foods with a very high calorie content.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
evlwk4 | how exactly is unused semen reabsorbed by the body? | I know it's reabsorbed by the body but whatever I read that's all they say, they don't get into any more detail. I'm curious how that process actually works. Where does this occur? How long does it take? What exactly is occurring? Could this potentially cause cancer over time if it was happening frequently due to forcing the body to do something that is probably not that natural if the human body was functioning naturally in nature without societal reasons to keep the ejaculate in? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/evlwk4/eli5_how_exactly_is_unused_semen_reabsorbed_by/ | {
"a_id": [
"ffwg961"
],
"score": [
21
],
"text": [
"I assume you means sperm cells and not semen. Semen is ejeculatory fluid that contains the sperm cells. They're basically just broken down by macrophages (a type of white blood cell that eats germs and cellular debris) into their parts (proteins and whatnot) and those parts get recycled and reused. This occurs in the epididymis, which is where the sperm are made in the first place. No, it can't cause cancer. I have no idea why you think it's not that natural. It's *exactly* natural and *exactly* what the body is supposed to do. A healthy man (or person with testicles) will always be making sperm faster than they can use them, so some sperm will always be reabsorbed. That's exactly what's supposed to happen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
28ujph | why do viruses undergo evolution way faster than humans? | It takes certain species, like humans, millions of years to undergo evolution. How exactly do viruses undergo evolution so much more rapidly? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28ujph/eli5_why_do_viruses_undergo_evolution_way_faster/ | {
"a_id": [
"ciemdf0",
"ciemlh4"
],
"score": [
24,
11
],
"text": [
"Speed of evolution is linked to how quickly an organism reproduces. Viruses reproduce literally *millions* of times faster than humans; so quickly that we can observe their evolution.",
"They don't really evolve \"faster\" it just seems that way for three reasons:\n\n1.) **They're simpler.** Imagine you had a lego death star, one of those big, 10,000 piece things they sell for like $200. Then next to it, you have a lego \"car\" made by a five year old, consisting of 6 regular lego bricks and two bricks with wheels. \n\nNow, in both the death star and in the \"car\" you swap out three bricks at random. The death star is still basically the death star. Maybe there's a color out place, or a weird angle somewhere, but the overall effect is minor. The \"car,\" on the other hand, might be totally different: one of the wheels might be gone, or it might now look more like an airplane, or a double decker bus. \n\nSame things with viruses v. people. Even though there are mutations and changes all the time in both, minor changes in people are less likely to seems like \"evolution\"---in the sense of big changes in what the thing does. Also, with people we can accept more changes and still see them as being \"people.\" If a person were born with 20 toes, you'd still see them as a human being. If a virus was born with the ability to infect a new kind of cell, even though it might involve the same number of genetic changes as the toes thing, we'd classify it as a new species. \n\n2.) **Their generations are faster.** the unit of evolution in time is not years, it's generations. Although they replicate at different rates, depending on the kinds of cells they invade, it's much faster than humans. So while humans might have a generation once every 20 or 30 years, viruses might have a generation once every 20 or 30 minutes. At that rate, a year on the human calender would allow a virus to go through ~26,000 generations, equivalent to 100,000s of thousands of years of evolution for humans. \n\n3.) **There are a lot of them.** according to XKCD \"[the typical healthy human body contains about 3×10^12 viruses.](_URL_0_)\" By comparison, there are roughly 7x10^9 people on earth. Now, that 10^12 number is all different viruses, so it's not an exact comparison, but it give a sense of just how many organisms are in play here, all of them reproducing and potentially mutating. \n\n**TLDR;** There are a lot more viruses then people, the reproduce a lot faster, and they are so simple that small changes in their DNA are more likely to be seen as being \"evolution\"---meaning a change that profoundly affects how we understand the organism's functioning, rather than the more formal meaning under which both complex animals and viruses are evolving all the time---than the same changes in more complex animals."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://what-if.xkcd.com/80/"
]
] | |
bd9s43 | the difference, if any, in charges. are magnetic and atomic (proton, electron) charges the same? what constitutes positive and negative charges? is there any characteristic to a charge beyond the contrast to the other? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bd9s43/eli5_the_difference_if_any_in_charges_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"ekwts7e",
"ekx56e9"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"There are a lot of different charges in physics, and while we don't have an explanation of \"what charge is made of\", different types of charge *do* behave differently.\n\nFor example, electric charge only comes in two varieties: positive or negative. Color charge, which is the type of charge involved in the strong force, comes in six varieties: red, green, blue, antired, antigreen, and antiblue. So at least the electric and strong charges are definitely different.\n\nPositive and negative charges of the same type, though, are totally the same. Like you said, only the relationships between them are relevant. The sign itself could have gone either way.",
"*\"Elektron\"* in Greek means Amber. \n\nAmber, when rubbed with materials such as fur, gains a positive charge. That is, it becomes electrically charged. \n\nThis is known as \"Triboelectricity\" which in Greek means the act of rubbing amber.\n\nThis was described in written texts in the European Renaissance well before subatomic particles like electrons or protons were known. \n\nIt was discovered that other m materials like wood or glass tended to gain an opposite charge, and this was termed electrically negative. It was known that these two charges attracted each other and would tend to cancel each other out, or neutralize each other.\n\nThis is simply a matter of arbitrary convention. \n\nAmber was the first material to which the equivalent term \"electric charge\" was applied, so it was deemed to be positive"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
1rp41t | how do fat cells work? | When people have liposuction, a lot of the fat is extracted during surgery. But a lot of times you see people gaining weight back. Does the body produce new fat cells?
When you lose weight naturally through a change of diet and/or exercise, do fat cells shrink or do they disappear? So say a 300 lb person reached 180lb and was steady at that weight for a year. Would the fat cells disappear, or are they still there but "deflated" as there is less overall fat in the body? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rp41t/how_do_fat_cells_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdplmz1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Overinflated fat cells can undergo mitosis and make 2 fat cells, but apart from surgery, old fat cells don't just die, they stay there, deflated, until the person begins gaining weight again."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
2mg7eq | why can't high performance car engines be mass produced? | I was watching a documentary on GTR engines, and even though the car itself is mass produced, the engine is completely built by hand. "Every GTR engine is crafted by hand, high performance engines cannot be mass produced." Aren't machines supposed to be extremely accurate and error free compared to humans? Then why have it made by hand? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mg7eq/eli5_why_cant_high_performance_car_engines_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm3wqan",
"cm3y64k",
"cm41see"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Extreme accuracy and mass production are not quite compatible.",
"Saying it is made by hand is a selling point. \nThis is the production process for the GTR engine _URL_0_\nThis is the production process for a stock Ford EcoBoost Engine _URL_1_\n\nThey both consist of guys assembling engine parts by hand. Maybe the only difference is the GTR is just one guy, rather than several. Don't be fooled, that one GTR guy is paying his bills and waiting for lunch just like everyone else. No more care, and no super secret special process is in place to make the GTR hand made. It is just a nicely designed engine in nicely designed car, using perhaps better quality components, but made in a nice factory.",
"Car industry engineer here:\n\nThe main reason is profit. Our production lines are built in a way to account for error. Most of it is tolerance. Every part has a gap to the next. Think of cutting a piece of paper into stripes of 1 inch. You could use a scissor and do it by hand. You could use a machine, but every method has an error. No strip will ever be 1 inch but maybe 1.000001 inch. Machines are better at cutting but the blade will change over time and if you control every part by hand you can lower these tolerances. If your piece of paper is 1.5 inches cut it again. But why should you try to cut every part that precise, if you only want one that is between 0.9 and 1.1 inches? Produced by hand means that they check things more often not that it is actually done without machines. Lower tolerances mean more power. A typical 100PS car engine can have 90 PS or 110 PS. We only need to guarantee its close to it. \nThe real reason why it can't be mass produced is because a huge chunk of profit is the engine and gear shaft. I won't give you a number, but its produced for a few bucks a piece."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlJa_zoEM64#t=1252",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCTqquRud4c#t=15"
],
[]
] | |
fulqro | how does low litre engines make a lot of power? e.g 2.1 or 2.2 | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fulqro/eli5_how_does_low_litre_engines_make_a_lot_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"fmdgys2",
"fmdhhf0",
"fmdhqca",
"fmfhkjd"
],
"score": [
7,
5,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"An engine is basically an air pump. Push more air thru the engine and it can make more power. This typically involves turbocharging or supercharging, which compresses the air going into the engine.",
"Generally the way small displacement engines make a lot of power (compared to bigger engines) is that they spin really fast compared to the bigger engines. Horsepower is calculated by\n\n(Torque X RPM )/5225\n\nso the faster an engine spins the more power it makes, even if it makes less torque. Smaller engines have light rotating assemblies and are easier to balance, which makes them prime candidates for spinning a lot faster.",
"Small engines can make a lot of power in several ways.\n\nAn engine is, at the most basic level, an air pump. Each cylinder draws in air mixed with fuel, burns it to make power, and then pumps it out through the exhaust. The more air (with the right amount of fuel) an engine can pump through, the more power it will make. So the faster you run the engine, the more times per minute each cylinder pumps its air and fuel through it, and the more power it makes. You may have a tachometer in your car that shows how fast the engine is turning. You may have noticed that there is a red line that shows the limit to how fast the engine should be turned.\n\nThere are ways to make the engine able to turn faster, but they generally involve making the moving parts of the engine stronger. There is a lot more to it, but turning the engine faster is one way to make more power.\n\nAnother way is to force more air into the engine under pressure. This is what superchargers and turbochargers do. If the air coming into the engine is compressed to be twice as \"thick\" as it would without being pressurized, it will make about twice as much power.\n\nThose are the very basic ideas, but of course lots of smaller details, like making the fuel burn more efficiently, are just as important. It's a whole thing.",
"Smaller engines generally make more power per liter because they usually have smaller cylinders leading to more torque at higher rpms. \n\nShorter strokes mean lower piston velocities, which means less stress on the metal parts, and the expanding combustion can keep up with the moving piston (at really high rpms). Smaller bores mean combustion can complete quicker, also very helpful at high rpms. Since power comes from torque x rpms, it is best to have both (see [Inspectormac38](_URL_0_)'s answer below).\n\nAlso, you could have a lot of small cylinders, like a V12, for the best of both worlds."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/user/Inspectormac38/"
]
] | ||
426lix | what happens in our body if we took blood from an animal and injected it into our bloodstream? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/426lix/eli5_what_happens_in_our_body_if_we_took_blood/ | {
"a_id": [
"cz7yz0a",
"cz7zzxx"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"Presumably your body would attack that blood as foreign material, similar to if you were given an incompatible blood type. With a large enough dosage this can be pretty shitty, since your body can begin to form small clots throughout your blood stream, not ideal.",
"You don't even need animal blood to harm you. Incompatible *human* blood will do you just as much harm. Basically, your body wouldn't see it as \"blood\" and will try to fight it off. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
1sjisr | what are numbers? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sjisr/eli5_what_are_numbers/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdy78vm",
"cdy7gv0",
"cdya94u",
"cdybqs3"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"A concept created by humans to distinguish multiples of the same object.",
"What I mean is an all encompassing definition of numbers. One that includes imaginary, real, whatever the square root of an imaginary number is, and whatever other types of numbers there are.",
"There is actually a certain amount of philosophical debate about what numbers are. There really isn't a way to definitively answer the question. This video explains three different perspectives: _URL_0_",
"This may not answer your question explicitly, but, in my opinion, there is a misconception in this thread. \n\nNumbers were probably first used as tools to quantify commodities in the market place. “I will give you 29 apples for 3 chickens.” But numbers were never “invented” they were never “developed.” Perhaps the most profoundly beautiful idea about mathematics is that it has always existed and we are merely discovering it. We witness the bloom of pedals of the flower that has always been. Mathematics are discovered. In the same way, the Laws of Thermodynamics were created by man, but the laws of thermodynamics represent a physical reality of nature itself.\n\nSometimes I think about how funny it is that nature and the universe have existed for billions of years, following rules of math and physics we are just now discovering and describing. Hypothetically, if we are alone in the universe, this is the first time nature has ever been understood. At the very least, it could be the first time an honest attempt to describe reality has been made. It is almost as if the universe, in all its majesty and beauty, was getting sick of being unable to show off, “Can someone please admire and appreciate this!?” Then, 14 billion years after its birth, from the ashes of the earliest stars, consciousness arose in the gaseous film just above the crunchy surface of a stray drop of magma. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EGDCh75SpQ"
],
[]
] | ||
4wamna | why did television start becoming so much more cynical? | There's basically no more shows like Full House, Brady Bunch, Different Strokes etc. that basically show a happy family. Most comedies today are very cynical and feature lots of dark humor, like Family Guy, Always Sunny, you name it. Why did America stop enjoying light-hearted, family-style humor in favor of dark cynical humor? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4wamna/eli5_why_did_television_start_becoming_so_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"d65fzqk",
"d65ic1v",
"d65oc5v"
],
"score": [
18,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"(Upfront warning: \"why this social/cultural trend?\" isn't something you can give a concrete objective answer to, so I'm just going to summarise some popular opinions and analyses of this, and you should take it as \"Huh, so that's what was going on, those factors and influences make sense\" and not a 100% solved answer.)\n\n# New Hollywood and Cynicism\n\nWell, first I'd say that things just move in waves; styles come in and out of fashion without necessarily signifying a major cultural shift. The 80s through early 90s was the family sitcom craze. But earlier, in the 70s, MASH was the king comedy and it was *very* cynical and often dark -- how many half hour comedies featured mothers killing their children, suicides, explicitly political themes about the futility of a still-ongoing war? (MASH was about Korea but many of its points were criticisms about Vietnam.) \n\nWe can go down the rabbithole from there. MASH was a spinoff of a movie released at the height of an era called \"New Hollywood\" or \"The American New Wave.\" From the 1930s through to 1967-68, the US movie industry operated under a voluntary private censorship scheme called the Hays code that forbade depiction of sexuality (even couples sharing a bed to sleep), nudity, drug addiction, criticism or parody of religion, race mixing, profanity, disrespect to the President or the flag, sexual innuendo, socialist politics, police corruption, and a litany of other things. In '67-'68 when it collapsed everyone suddenly rushed to make movies about things that were previously forbidden, and for a solid decade there was a huge craze for gritty realism, social themes, sex, drugs, movies about homosexuals or prostitutes that would have been completely banned in the America of the past -- think Midnight Cowboy, think Taxi Driver, think The Godfather. \n\n# The 80s\n\nThis naturally crossed over to TV. Now TV didn't allow you to get anywhere near as raw and real, of course, but the trend was towards that sort of thing, and shows that were grittier, realer, sexier, or more socially aware were popular. MASH, with the cynicism and weariness of war; Charlie's Angels, with the sweaty women in their torn clothes cleaning each other in a lake; All in the Family, with its confrontation of bigotry and the ugly side of traditional values; Maude, the cheery sitcom with its positive depiction of (at the time) illegal abortion.\n\nBy '78, '79 this rush of freedom and grittiness had started to ebb away and the new craze that would dominate the 80s movie industry was beginning: the Blockbuster Era. Jaws came in '75 and Star Wars in '77; they were both huge crazes and got greenlit for sequels. Sequels were pretty rare until now. In the 80s, they *exploded*, and everything was getting a sequel. The industry moved to a new model: this in itself would be a 10000 word post but basically, by 1982, the industry had decided to start focusing on releasing a small handful of movies that appealed to every demographic, including kids and families, and do hardcore blitz marketing nationwide for them, as opposed to the old model of roadshow-releasing a larger variety of lower-budget niche things. This meant that movies became more family-friendly, and you stopped seeing stuff like Midnight Cowboy and Taxi Driver; now, outside of the new slasher flick craze, you didn't want to release anything people wouldn't at least take their teenagers to see.\n\nSo the blockbuster, hit-every-demographic thing was huge in movies, and as always what crazes appear in movies flow into TV a little later. At the same time, people were no longer amazed by the freedom of being able to make cynical anti-war movies with vigilantes and drug addicts. Happy Days (1974 - 1984) had been a success and though it was initially built around 1950s nostalgia, plenty of people liked it as a simple wholesome family sitcom. So shows along that vein started popping up more and more, and it was a refreshing change of pace from the previous grittiness and bleakness. The trend reached its height with the adorable child sitcoms popular in the middle-late 80s like Diff'rent Strokes (1986), Full House (1987), The Cosby Show (1984), and Family Matter (1989).\n\nWhy did that *stop* being the popular style? There are three shows virtually everyone points to as radically upending the TV world in the early 90s and totally reforming what people wanted and expected from comedies.\n\n# The Three Kings of the 90s\n\nThe first was **The Simpsons**. The Simpsons appeared in 1989 (for one episode) and became ***huge*** in 1990-92. Now remember that when The Simpsons appeared, animated comedy meant Scooby Doo or The Flintstones -- expectations were for a silly kids' comedy. But what you got was something quite grounded and oddly realistic, with stories about poverty and mental illness -- Homer attempts suicide three episodes in and it took only two months for Lisa to be diagnosed with depression -- that was somehow also a really warm and touching family comedy. It depicted fights and dead-end jobs and bitterness but it wasn't cynical and gritty, it was just *normal* and relatable. And the show became astonishingly massive, one of the most successful pieces of media of all time, TV or otherwise.\n\nThis had a massive effect. A hallmark of early reviews is people saying \"You'll sit down expecting some goofy cartoon, only to realise that every *other* comedy on TV is the goofy cartoon.\" It kind of 'shattered the illusion' of super-sweet adorable family sitcoms like Full House and made them look lame, cheesy, fake: you wanted a family comedy, but those weren't families, *this* is a family. The Simpsons' primary legacy was showing that cynicism and warmth didn't have to be opposing trends, they could be combined, as they are in real life. Its secondary legacy was proving half-hour 'adult' animated comedy as a viable format which is what led to South Park and Family Guy being greenlit.\n\nThe second was **Seinfeld**. Seinfeld's impact was a little more abstract. The weird conceit for Seinfeld wasn't that it was \"a show about nothing\" (it wasn't, really). It was that it was in many ways the *anti*-sitcom - not anti comedy, but anti *situation*. In a regular sitcom, the characters are people you grow to love, and the situations are these crazy wacky jams they get caught up in, often everyone learning a nice lesson at the end. Seinfeld was a show about four complete assholes living through totally normal banal situations and fucking them up due to their own neurotic pettiness and selfishness. None of the sitcom staples -- the harsh and nagging wife, the dumb but lovable dad, the charming ladies' man, the uptight nerd who lets loose -- are present. No one *ever* learns a lesson or improves as a person, no one gets insight, no one falls in love or gets closer together. There's nothing warm about it. Yet it's not cynical either. And it's not realistic. It's something else entirely. And Seinfeld became *huge*, and its influence was that comedians and writers everywhere started looking for more experimental comedies built around dysfunctional people in real situations, and everyone in the TV industry was pitching their show as \"the new Seinfeld\". The biggest example of this is Ricky Gervais, who was inspired by Seinfeld to write a show called The Office, which itself is probably the most influential comedy of the 2000s.\n\nThe third was **Friends**. Friends's... Friends'? *That show*'s impact was more cultural: it sparked the desire for a *cool* comedy. Family sitcoms weren't cool. The Simpsons was wildly popular, but it didn't make you *cool* to like it, it had no air of hipness or youth or modern fashion. Seinfeld certainly didn't. Friends did. The popular haircut for a while was called The Rachel. The show starred people in their 20s/early 30s, some of them sex symbols, and followed their relationships and sex lives; it had a youth appeal and a level of cachet that other comedies didn't have, but everyone wanted. After the incredible success of Friends, the industry was determined to leave behind sentimental family comedies and go for something a little more modern and cool and youthful. \n\nAll of these shows really exploded in popularity between 1991 - 1994 and reformed the TV industry in incredible ways, and they formed the 'new wave' moving away from the 80s sappy family comedies and into the new era.",
"What about shows like Modern Family? The Goldbergs? You're remembering the 3-4 shows from 2 decades worth of programming that remain popular today 20-40 years later",
"As mentioned by other posters, there are still many light-hearted family-style sitcoms. As there are so many shows on so many channels, it's easy to miss a few. Hell, Tim Allen managed to have another sitcom now going into its 6th season.\n\nSimilarly, you may remember shows those family-style sitcoms more, but there were cynical sitcoms back then too, such as Married with Children."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2r5em6 | can humans eat snow in a survival situation for dehydration? | Tried google and got conflicting answers, then watched a show and camels do it in the Gobi Desert. Wondering if Humans could do the same | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2r5em6/eli5can_humans_eat_snow_in_a_survival_situation/ | {
"a_id": [
"cncm7gp",
"cncmmad"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Yes, though it's better to melt the snow first, as if you're already having trouble keeping warm, the cold snow will take a toll on your body temperature.",
"while in technicaly you can, its strongly adviced not to, becouse your body will need to use energy to heat up the water in your stomach, boil it first, but if you really need to go for it, it will buy you time before help, but for long term surviving, its strongly suggested not to."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
21696v | how is all the background radiation, things like wifi, radio, cell signals, affecting me? what is it doing to my body? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21696v/eli5_how_is_all_the_background_radiation_things/ | {
"a_id": [
"cga085t",
"cga08tf",
"cga1lad",
"cga24i5"
],
"score": [
3,
15,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Probably not much, considering we get a shit-ton of background radiation from the Sun which is at a much higher energy and intensity and at worst you'll get a bad sunburn. We haven't seen life expectancies drop or specific health problems increase since the advent of radio so I doubt it does anything.",
"Mostly, it's giving your hypochondria something to cling onto.",
"Most of the radiation passing through your body does very, very little. Radio waves have wavelengths of around 3 meters, meaning they interact with your body very little; wifi and cell signals have wavelengths of around 4 inches, meaning that they can interact with the body, but they are so infinitesimally small in the amount of energy they contain that they really can't do much but push an electron around here or there, and wi-fi can't even do that, since the power of radio waves decreases exponentially with distance.\n\nNearly all of the day-to-day radiation you're exposed to, the background radiation, is like the snow you see on a badly tuned analogue television, random, low energy, nothing to see here. If it were all to suddenly become perfectly coherent (everything in phase), it still wouldn't have enough energy to affect more than a few atoms in the body.\n\nUV radiation from the sun or from tanning booths is FAR more dangerous, because it directly affects the bonds in our molecules, breaking them apart, damaging DNA and creating the potential for tumors. Same thing with the levels of radiation used in radiation therapy - they are targeted microwaves, designed to kill cells; but even then, ONLY at the focal point of the beam. Outside of its focus, the energy is too disbursed to do anything of note.",
"Nothing. Non-ionizing radiation does nothing to the bodies cells."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
2nkory | why is blowing better than sucking? | All jokes aside, why is the physical process of blowing more efficient than sucking? For example, if I have a plate with a pea on it it is much easier for me to manoeuvre it around the plate by blowing at it than by sucking, which would largely be ineffectual. My lungs and diaphragm are the same, so what changes? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nkory/eli5why_is_blowing_better_than_sucking/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmeff8a",
"cmeftit"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"In both cases, you have a volume of uncompressed air, a \"bottle neck\" (your lips), and a stream of compressed air.\n\nWhen you blow, the stream of air is outside. When you suck, the stream of air is inside. The air must move through the bottle-neck to be compressed, and only then could be efficiently used to apply force.",
"When you blow the airstream is straight and directional (laminar flow), the air not directly in front of your mouth is not appreciably effected. This means you can aim it at the pea, and by forming a bottleneck with your lips you can increase the flow velocity and have a greater effect.\n\nWhen you breathe in though, air comes into your mouth from all directions not just the air directly in front of you. This means that if there's something in front of your mouth, then more air will be coming in from the sides instead. Forming a bottleneck with your lips in this case will produce a hissing sound. This is because opposing airstreams are colliding to produce turbulence."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
13wy22 | the truth behind the whole 'nasa warp drive' thing... | for reference: _URL_0_
Is this really a thing? Don't toy with me internet. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13wy22/eli5_the_truth_behind_the_whole_nasa_warp_drive/ | {
"a_id": [
"c77w6se"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The Alcubierre Drive is what happens when you play around with equations - but when you do that, sometimes you lose track of reality.\n\nFor example, we know F = ma. But let's play around with this equation - what happens if we _apply a force_, but the _acceleration_ is in the opposite direction of the force? Well if we plug everything in that equation, we see that, sure, _it is possible_ - we just need _negative mass_. A solution exists for that equation, but it is not realistic.\n\nIt is exactly the same thing here: they played with Einstein field equations and plugged in the parameters for \"warp drive\", and found that a solution exists. However, like the above example, we need something with _negative mass_ (i.e., exotic matter) in the solution. That simply has no bearing in reality, as they don't exist.\n\nThe article just outlines a recent development that they found another solution to those equations using less exotic matter."
]
} | [] | [
"http://io9.com/5963263/how-nasa-will-build-its-very-first-warp-drive"
] | [
[]
] | |
dj1a9a | what happens during a chemical change in matter? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dj1a9a/eli5_what_happens_during_a_chemical_change_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"f406vut"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"All matter that exists is made of atoms at a very basic level; those atoms are held together by bonds. In a chemical reaction, some of those bonds can be either broken, new bonds are formed, or both, or even just slightly altered in position of the chemical structure of the matter. How the bonds of the atoms in matter are affected in those ways is what causes chemical level changes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
9d2dng | why does being too hot make one feel nauseous? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9d2dng/eli5_why_does_being_too_hot_make_one_feel_nauseous/ | {
"a_id": [
"e5ey4bq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When it’s hot your body will try to cool itself by sweating more. By sweating more, you lose fluids and sodium. If you don’t compensate enough, your blood pressure will go down. Because of that, less blood (with nutrients and oxygen) will reach your organs and brain. This results in feeling dizzy, nauseous etc etc "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
5ftqv3 | when a ceiling fan is spinning fast enough to be a blur, why can one see the individual fan blades when they move their eyes rapidly? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ftqv3/eli5_when_a_ceiling_fan_is_spinning_fast_enough/ | {
"a_id": [
"damzauu",
"dan1o1w",
"dan257x",
"dan4g7v",
"dan5vqk",
"dan7uq0",
"dan8g38",
"danafd0",
"danask8",
"dancubq",
"dancy6x",
"dandzrh",
"daneiq7",
"danh73b",
"danky91",
"dannvps",
"danqbvw",
"danqdex",
"danvm9d"
],
"score": [
27,
144,
1528,
10,
2564,
2,
123,
10,
3,
2,
2,
5,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"For a brief moment, your eyes are actually tracking the moving blade -- like a camera following a running athlete -- so for that moment you see it clearly again.",
"Actually explained like you're five: Your brain likes to fill in extra \"frames\" of what you see. This is why sometimes when you look at a clock the second hand seems to linger for longer than one second. Your brain makes up what is happening to help it make more sense.",
"There are two kinds of eye movement. \n\nOne is when you are focusing on and following something, so if the target or you are moving, you are still looking directly on the target.\n\nThe other, thats related to your question is when you are changing your target, like when you look from left to right. \nIn this case, you are not following anything, so the eye have to move the fastest way to the new position. Now in this situation, the interesting thing is that you actually cannot see anything, when your eyes are moving to a new position, you are temporarily blind. This is to make sure that you wont get dizzy or disoriented from the shaking. \nAnd to fill the gap of that blindness, your brain just freezes the last image you saw. And then you can actually see the details, like the fan's blade in the question.\n\n**TLDR**: when eyes move fast, you are blind, brain freezes last image, you dont see the blur",
"Latent images.\n\nYour eye 'stores' a still and 'remembers' it for the next second.\n\nThis is why when we watch a film, film film not video, it seems like motion to our brains instead of a series of still pictures.",
"The effect is called [Saccadic Masking](_URL_0_)\n\nWhen your eyes move very quickly (like trying to follow a fan blade), your brain temporarily turns off visual processing so that it doesn't see just a bunch of blurred images. It happens very quickly, so normally the gap in what you are seeing is not noticeable. But when the movement happens while looking at fan blade, your brain stores a quick picture of the blade not moving. This really fast eye movement is called a \"saccade\". \n\nA cool example (that I think many 5-year-olds would enjoy) is looking into a mirror, and looking back and forth from one eye to another. You can never see your own eyes actually moving, but somebody else watching can easily see your eyes moving back and forth. ",
"I have had this same question but about helicopters, when you're looking at a flying helicopter it looks like you can see blurred blades moving slowly.. I feel like the saccadic thing isn't really accurate because you don't have to move your eyes for it to happen..",
"Fun fact: There's a little switch on your ceiling fan you're supposed to toggle between winter and summer. It changes the direction the fan spins, blowing down or pulling air up as is appropriate to the season. I had no idea until our HVAC guy mentioned it.",
"I'm not going to explain is as Michael already did pretty well in this video:\n\n_URL_0_",
"I operate a fast printing press. The web goes 1000 to 1200 feet per minute and the web looks like a big blur but I can photos for a second and catch what the carton looks like but no details: we have a high speed camera for that. ",
"This Vsauce video explains a lot about this, super interesting watch: _URL_0_",
"Watch a digital timer tick down. Look away and look back - the count will appear to stick a bit longer - is that the same effect?",
"There are a couple things that are possible, 3 that I can actually think of at this time.... They are likely addressed but may not be explained as simply, or possibly not all in one go.\n\nOne is where your eyes move just right match the speed of the fan. This is like being in traffic and just same speed, relatively, the other cars are not going super fast. It's very difficult to track the fan all the way around, but you can swipe your vision across the fan and temporarily be in sync enough to see an image. I know this one was covered in one of the top answers.\n\nAnother way to manage this, is to do it in a dark room and use a strobe light, or blink your eyes really fast. The human eye can see things at some really high speeds, or rather, things with a short exposure time, but persistance of vision(how long an image remains/is processed by the eyes/brain) plus the constant steady stream of information means that things overlap and blur as you try to keep up with the speed.\n\nExample: Jet pilots have been shown to be able to identify the shape of a plane in as short a time span of approximately a single frame at 1/250 of a second, however, if you took 250 different shapes and played them in sequence for the same amount of time, one second for the whole sequence, it would register as only so much noise too much to keep track of, possibly just an amorphous blob that's oscilating.(all depending on the shapes).\n\nThirdly there is an illusion wherein the rate of of the fan spinning is near the time length of your persistance of vision. You probably won't see this with a ceilling fan but very often can with something like car wheels. This is actually commonly known as part of the wagon wheel effect(other parts cover strobing and such). At this point the rotating object can appear to be almost standing still or even moving in reverse, or slowly in either direction, all depening on how close things sync up.\n\nThere are some situations where you can incidentally run into something you can play with. On my PC I have sliders to control some of the fans, as well as LED lighting which I can dim and brighten. The LED's operate on a series of pulses where more equal brighter. By varying the fan speeds as well as the LED frequency, one can tweak the fans to where they run into that neat area where the spinning pattern doesn't move. A LOT of people have done the bending pencil under flourescent lights trick which works on the same principle. Oscilations or multiples of them line up and create different illusions.\n\nAnother one is real 60fps(frames per second) video of a Hummingbird in flight because their wings move at 50-60 times a second. If the hummingbird hits 60hz(hertz, the measurement for frequency of oscillations) .....at 60fps a Hummingbird's wings moving at 60hz, in perfect theory, won't appear to move at all. They do in video in actual practice abit because the birds don't sustain a 60hz frequency, it varies, so it can look like not smooth motion or blurred as you'd see in real life or 30fps, they kind of disappear here and reappear there.....\n\nA strobe light and a spinning object(tire, wagon wheel, wood spinning on a lathe, etc) both with matching frequencies, the object will appear to be perfectly motionless, in theory, though often it comes up looking like it's just vibrating due to minor differences.\n\nHope some of this helped or was at least interesting to some people.",
"Besides the Saccadic Masking, it's also simply a question of focus. When you focus on the object behind the fan, that's what your eyes are paying attention to - the fan blades pass so fast they'll be blurry. But when you move your eyes, panning your vision along with the fan blades, it's like following a fast moving car with your eyes. The scenery in the background, behind the car/fan blade will be blurry, but the moving object stays in focus and hence nicely visible.",
"So-called light cannons were a thing in amateur astronomy years and years ago. On cloudy nights at star parties the usual no white lights rule would be broken, participants would aim their camera flashes into the focusers of their telescopes, projecting the lights across the observing field for significant distances. It looked really cool. I built a light source from a police strobe light, powered by an aviation strobe power supply (think big honkin' capacitors) and a deep cycle battery. It was VERY bright. I'd mount it at the focuser of my 5\" refractor, and fire it around the neighborhood and up into the sky. When shot skyward, you'd swear you could see the pulse of light moving upwards, like a special effects shot in Star Wars or the like. Of course the pulse was moving at light speed, so no movement should have been visible, but darned if it didn't look like you could see it zooming up into the sky! ",
"Follow up question: Is this the same effect as optical aliasing? For example when it appears that the rims of a tire spin \"backwards\".",
"Your eyes can see and track things that move at high speeds, but it's the slow communication between our brains and hands that limit that practical usage of this ability. Which is why a simple thing like learning to play catch is cumbersome because we \"catch\" too soon or too late. We end up training our visual acquisition to \"time\" just right to catch things.",
"If I play my (acoustic - does that matter?) piano with the ceiling fan on, the sound gets wavy, almost like a Leslie speaker on a Hammond Organ. Am I crazy?",
"Fun fact: I have [amblyopia](_URL_0_) and astigmatism. Nobody believes me, but when I look at a given LED light, I can actually see each individual flash the LED produces when making light. LED's aren't static like incandescent lights are. They flash very rapidly and my stupid eyes can pick up on that. Kind of annoying actually. ",
"so im able to 'shake' my eyes really fast. i dont know how i do it i just do, but one cool thing is when i do it im able to see single frames of fast moving objects, like maybe 10-15fps.\n\n i can look over at another vehicle on the highway at 70mph and can clearly see their rims 'freeze framed'\n\nim pretty sure this is just my eyes are moving at the same rate that the wheel is spinning so theres no movement relative to each other."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saccadic_masking"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/nNBTLbw1_2Q"
],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/nNBTLbw1_2Q"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://nei.nih.gov/health/amblyopia"
],
[]
] | ||
862lc3 | how does a tv station measure viewers so precisely (analog & digital)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/862lc3/eli5_how_does_a_tv_station_measure_viewers_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"dw1u4op"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Traditionally it is done through sampling, and is thus not that precise. Nelson boxes were built into some TVs, or were attached to them and they would send data to a central hub telling people what you watch. You generally knew if you had a Nelson box. \n\nIn modernity it is easier. Every Cable company knows what you watch and when you watch it so they can give that data out if they choose, and for those that watch on websites or apps the channels know the same thing. The only people that are kind of hard to track are the tiny population using antenna. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
rk4fb | the top used internet browsers and how they're different. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/rk4fb/eli5_the_top_used_internet_browsers_and_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"c46h5ol",
"c46ifbe",
"c46k9us",
"c46n3oz"
],
"score": [
14,
12,
10,
3
],
"text": [
"As you may know, internet pages are written with HTML and various other languages. A nice analogy is to consider a web page as a museum. Let me explain.\n\nThe HTML is the architecture of the building itself. It's the building blocks of the page that tell you what things are and what they do. Using HTML, you give the browser data about what the page actually contains.\n\nCSS is the paintings, or galleries, or whatever makes the museum appealing. CSS makes web pages look good. Without CSS, most if not all modern websites would look absolutely horrible. Just like a museum would just be a big empty building without its exhibits.\n\nJavaScript is the museum curators. They let the guests experience the museum, and customize their experience. Similarly, all the interactive elements of websites (show/hide buttons, upvotes, etc) are JavaScript. \n\nPHP is the workers of the museum. They keep everything going behind the scenes. PHP runs on the server and updates things like databases, just as a worker would change the museum (put in new exhibits, build expansions, etc).\n\nNow, how does this relate to browsers? Well, a web page is just a file full of code. It's the browser's job to display this to you, the end user. In the early days of the internet, there wasn't much to display. Especially before CSS, most pages looked the same no matter how they were displayed and fairly bland. However, now, there is new technology; CSS3 has nice gradients, for example, and HTML5 has video and audio elements (you have probably seen Youtube's new HTML5 player at some point). The browsers have to update in order to work with these new forms of old technology, and they don't all do it the same. Most browsers don't even support all of it, and there's a website (I can't remember it now) which will tell you what browsers support what facets of HTML5 and CSS3.\n\nTL;DR: They all display pages differently and support different web technology.",
"Please don't shoot me, but I'd say Wikipedia's [article](_URL_0_) is fairly informative for this topic.",
"Today, they aren't all that different. But back in the day...\n\nBasically the world would agree to something. Like \" < strike > A WORD < /strike > \" should display as ~~A WORD~~.\n\nAnd then Microsoft was like 'Fuck this party, < strike > should make a section ignore all padding rules, blink like a disco ball, and shit on a bible.'. Thus was born IE6. \n\nThen, Satan got jealous, because IE6 was way more evil than he was. So he went back in time and invented Hitler to restore his dominance over all things evil. \n\nThen came along Firefox, who was like that dude nailed to 2x4's, and was all 'Welcome to awesomeness'. And people rejoiced. They could view websites as the authors intended, instead of how Microsoft thought they should (which, it turns out, was shitty and without JPEG transparency). \n\nAnd then about 70% of the world quit using Internet Explorer. \n\n**The END**.",
"After Netscape died, IE had almost no competition and Microsoft took the opportunity to do... pretty much nothing with it for years as it got more and more outdated. IE is probably fine now but it's playing catchup and nobody trusts it. It also used to do a lot of things in nonstandard (or outright buggy) ways so web developers hate it.\n\nIn the later days of Netscape they started an open source project called Mozilla which was the foundation of the last couple of Netscape versions. Firefox is a stripped down and improved branch of that project which was a big deal because IE was both dominant and stagnant in the early 2000s. Firefox has a lot of support for plugins and customization.\n\nChrome has fancy Google magic, is part of evil Google world domination plot. It's more minimalistic than Firefox and has been pretty aggressive about technological improvement.\n\nSafari is only a major browser on one platform obviously and isn't really exceptional for much right now except that it fits in with Apple design and interface conventions. Interestingly, Chrome is based on Apple's (open source) WebKit, just as Safari is."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_browsers"
],
[],
[]
] | ||
86zv63 | why different regions have different plug types? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/86zv63/eli5_why_different_regions_have_different_plug/ | {
"a_id": [
"dw94e66",
"dw94ogz"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"In short, it could be worse. Various groups were formed to agree on standard types. These groups were mostly regional, ie. North American companies agreeing to use one type. British (and British-influenced areas like India) agreeing on different type.\n\nYes, patents were involved. And of course, companies don't like to pay for other peoples' patents, so that was one driving force for compatible standards.\n\nAnd of course, regional groups that decide standards often try to improve on other groups' standards. The UK type is believed to the be safest and much harder to accidentally pull out than the simpler, 2/3 prong US style. (Although in my mind, this comes off as national pride.)\n\nYou can see the same thing with computer ports. Look back to the 80s and you can see joysticks and drives used all sorts of types.\n\nThank God for USB.",
"Before each country/region standardised on a format, you had a bunch of different people working on the problem, each of them designing their own outlets. Competing designs had competing patents on them, and people tended to prefer the designs produced locally. It wasn't until the 1950s that standardisation, and then consolidation, efforts started.\n\nReally, though, it wasn't until maybe the last 20 years that travelling abroad became common to the point where dealing with incompatible plugs became a common issue for the \"common people\", so it's never really been a big problem."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
3sfnal | how come the iss doesn't have a straight orbit? | _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3sfnal/eli5how_come_the_iss_doesnt_have_a_straight_orbit/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwwrm81",
"cwwrmrt"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"That *is* a straight orbit. The ISS just doesn't orbit directly over the equator, so the path *looks* curved when plotted on a flat map (because flat maps are distorted). If you look at the orbit around a spherical globe, you can see that it's a circle that is tilted in relation to the equator.",
"It does have a straight orbit (well circular, but I know what you mean). That curved line is just what happens when you draw that circle on a map. Look at the dividing line between light and dark on that map too. We know that's definitely a circle cutting the earth's surface into two halves, but that comes out as a curve on the map too."
]
} | [] | [
"http://iss.astroviewer.net/"
] | [
[],
[]
] | |
7gk85r | if oxygen is necessary for combustion, what would happen if you tried to burn a piece of paper, with a laser, while it was inside something like a vacuum chamber with no oxygen present? | Would it actually burn? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7gk85r/eli5_if_oxygen_is_necessary_for_combustion_what/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqjp933"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"It would not burn properly. This is similar to how charcoal is made, actually -- some chemical reactions still happen, but not the main oxygen combustion."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
8r085v | how far away do you have to be to survive a atomic bomb? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8r085v/eli5_how_far_away_do_you_have_to_be_to_survive_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0nf8me",
"e0ngqw3",
"e0nlnj8"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Atom bombs have a power difference of about 100000 times between the smallest ones and the biggest ones.\n\nSoooo, far enough to be safe is somewhere between 1 and 250 km from ground zero",
"There are a few nuclear bomb map simulators like this one kicking about that might be of interest. \n\n_URL_0_\n",
"This depends on several factors:\n\n* First and foremost, the explosive power of the bomb. Nuclear weapons come in a lot of sizes, ranging from the \"destroys a few city blocks\" (the smallest, subkiloton weapons) to the \"destroys entire metro areas and then some\" (the Cold War multi-megaton weapons). If you're imagining the attack coming from North Korea, Russia, China, or a nuclear terrorist, the answers in size could range from a kiloton to several megatons, with current arsenals. So you have to pick a scenario.\n\n* Second, the height of burst matters. A ground burst puts way more intensity near ground zero, but does so at the sacrifice of the more medium and light damage. An airburst has a wider range of medium and light damage, but sacrifices on heavy damage done. A ground burst also produces considerable fallout, which extends the range of danger. So again you have to pick a scenario. A terrorist weapon would be a groundburst, but a state can pick depending on what they are trying to accomplish.\n\n* Third, where people are, and what they do, matters. At some levels of damage (the heavy damage zone) your chances of survival are pretty low no matter what. At those levels of blast pressure, heat, and radiation, the expected fatalities are in the 90% range. However in the medium and especially light damage zones, chances for survival increase quite a lot based on whether people are inside a building or outside, and inside more rugged buildings (e.g. reinforced concrete or steel) versus more flimsy ones (e.g. brick or wooden houses). If people know an attack is coming (if they have warning), they can go into even more protected areas like basements. That doesn't guarantee survival but it increases the odds, in some cases by a lot. And if the weapon was set off in a way that produces fallout, understanding that and how to take shelter from that can save a lot of lives — in simulations r[un by the US national labs in the last few years](_URL_0_), the number of preventable casualties from fallout range in the hundreds of thousands to the millions. \n\nYou can use [NUKEMAP](_URL_1_) to play with different scenarios and modern-day or historical weapons. For these purposes you can consider 1 psi to be light damage, 5 psi to be medium damage, and 20 psi to be heavy damage, given my descriptions above. \n\nSo the short answer is: there is no simple, single number here. I suppose you could get very conservative and pick the largest bomb you could imagine being realistic and pick the area outside of the fallout and blast range. But that is really the highest value possible; depending on the scenario it is likely wrong."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/"
],
[
"https://fas.org/irp/agency/dhs/fema/ncr.pdf",
"http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/"
]
] | ||
2q8mv5 | if the atmosphere is 78% nitrogen, that must mean that the air we breathe is mostly nitrogen, right? so do our lungs take in nitrogen with no side effects or do they "filter out" the nitrogen to take in the oxygen? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2q8mv5/eli5_if_the_atmosphere_is_78_nitrogen_that_must/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn3v69v",
"cn3vijw",
"cn41xgv",
"cn43au8",
"cn45ipq"
],
"score": [
2,
72,
6,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Our lungs take it all in and, yes, the desired oxygen is allowed into the bloodstream through the filter that is the alveoli. The blood also sends out its waste CO2 during the whole process. ",
"Our lungs take in whatever is in the atmosphere, a special compound in our blood called hemoglobin (the one responsible for making it bright red) reacts with the oxygen. Nitrogen (N2) is an inert gas, we breath it in, a little bit of it is absorbed in our blood but for the most part doesn't enter our bodies.",
"Our lungs do take in nitrogen, but our bodies can tolerate it at typical atmospheric pressure without suffering any ill effects. However, at high pressures such as those seen at depth, extra nitrogen is forced into the blood, which accumulates and produces a sedating/anesthesizing effect similar to the nitrous oxide gas that dentists and anesthesiologists use. This is called \"nitrogen narcosis.\" ",
"Our lungs just balance the gas we breath with the gases dissolved in our blood. We use up the oxygen so balancing takes oxygen from the air to the blood but we produce carbon dioxide so balancing makes it flow out. We don't do anything with nitrogen so it pretty much stays balanced all our lives.",
"The answers to questions like this were always unsatisfying for me when people just say \"Well N2 doesn't get taken up as much by your blood\". \n\nThat's fine, but WHY!? What do you MEAN *less reactive*? \n\nThe explanation involves some chemistry (at least second year knowledge) to get the full understanding and I'm going to skip the redox chemistry because no one enjoys learning it, but I think there is still a lot of amazing science to appreciate behind this stuff! \n\n**What do we mean by stability/reactivity of N2 vs O2**\n\nWhen we talk about stability and reactivity, what we basically mean is that the universe is a crazy place where almost anything can happen, however there are some probable ways in which it will arrange itself based on a set of laws that we have done a pretty good job of figuring out thus far. These statistical likelihoods are the reason why we exist, because if all of a sudden we switched a knob to say that nitrogen was more reactive than oxygen with hemoglobin, we would all die pretty fast from asphyxiation. So when we say that nitrogen is more stable, it means its more probable to stay by itself as an N2 molecule than 02. If you're a curious person, your next question will be *why*, which is great, but I'll explain that later.\n\n**Why lungs?**\n\nWhen you breath in, your muscles are increasing the volume of your lungs and decreasing the pressure inside them. Particles tend to go to the place where there is less of themselves, so they rush into the low pressure area inside your lungs. Your lungs are basically a wall of cells that are so insanely thin they allow gasses to pass right through them and diffuse into blood. This is exactly what N2 and O2 do. The next thing that needs to happen is these gasses need to bind to something to stop from just exiting back out the way they came in, this is where reactivity becomes important. If N2 bound to heme at the same rate as O2, then your cells would have N2 delivered to them, which would be pointless because N2 doesn't do the same things O2 does to generate energy in the body. So by oxygen being more reactive with heme, it guarantees it will be picked up and hitch a ride around the body where it will detach where needed.\n\n_URL_3_ quick video that summarizes what I said, it uses a lot of anatomical and physiological terms but ignore the pointless big words and just watch the animation. \n\n**So what makes oxygen better at this than nitrogen?**\n\nNow we get to the original question. There are 2 main reasons, I'm not sure which is more important, so I'll start with the one that involves pictures.\n\n*Shape and structure.*\n\nThis is the most obvious explanation, the molecule has to be the right shape in order to react with heme, so lets start looking at the structures of everything. First we will start with hemoglobin, because its a fucking clusterfuck and will give you some appreciation as to why shape may be important. [hemoglobin is a monster of a molecule](_URL_4_)\n\n[Now if we convert to a ribbon diagram to get rid of all those individual sticks you see, and zoom in on heme (the actual part O2 binds too) we can get an idea of where the important bit is.](_URL_8_)\n\n[Now I've pasted a stick diagram next to the heme molecule, so hopefully the rest of this explanation is slightly more intuitive](_URL_5_)\n\nNow that we can see how heme is arranged, we should look at O2 and N2, pay particular attention to the slightly yellow spots in [this diagram](_URL_7_) and how N2 has more probability to have its electrons arranged in a straight line, where as O2's electrons poke out at angles. [This means that when O2 binds it sticks out at an angle, compared to other straight molecules](_URL_0_).\n\nWhy is this important? Well remember that clusterfuck picture of hemoglobin with all the molecules? Well when O2 binds with the Fe(iron) atom in heme, the other end of the O2 molecule sticks out and is at the right angle to bind with one of the other molecules that is in the hemoglobin clusterfuck, this second bond secures O2 in place. N2 on the other hand points straight up and misses the bonds with the hemoglobin clusterfuck all together, so it is less stable and more likely to leave than O2 is... so statistically speaking O2 will bind in this spot far more often than N2 would. This is why I mentioned probability in the first place, N2 could bind there, its just a stable molecule by itself and will not get locked into place... so there is not much reason for it to stick around. \n\n[Here is the stick diagrams demonstrating the correct configuration of O2(red) over N2(blue)](_URL_2_) I drew in some legos on the right to make it seem a bit simpler than the stick diagrams. Just picture it as a lego structure you built. \n\n*Oxidation and reduction*\n\nThis is where we have to dumb things down pretty hard. Basically electrons move around, O2 is less stable because of the way its electrons can move about when it binds with the Fe on iron.\n\n[This image shows how the electrons move about, its pretty hard to explain without getting way past a 5 year olds level so just thing of it as making the previous thing I talked about easier](_URL_6_)\n\n\n**[TL;DR:](_URL_1_)**"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://employees.csbsju.edu/cschaller/Reactivity/oxygen/ORO2CN.png",
"http://theintelligentnest.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/sf-child-playing-with-shape-toy.jpg",
"http://i.imgur.com/hQ4X00J.png",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXOBJEXxNEo",
"http://i.imgur.com/ymagTc... | ||
92ot70 | how do restaurants that sell extreme portions of food for a very low price (like a giant slice of pizza for a dollar) stay in business? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/92ot70/eli5_how_do_restaurants_that_sell_extreme/ | {
"a_id": [
"e378g8d",
"e378kcq",
"e379164",
"e37b01r",
"e37c07q",
"e37czzj",
"e37o079"
],
"score": [
61,
12,
14,
31,
7,
34,
2
],
"text": [
"A lot of fast food places pritty much break even on the main food (burgers chicken ect) but make almost all profit on pop and Fries (think how cheap potatoes and cola are) ",
"I believe in the restaurant industry in the USA food cost is only 30% of expenses, this makes large portion sizes a cheap option in gaining customers.",
"The food is cheap enough that they still sell it at a profit despite the large portions. Pizza for instance is extremely cheap to make, the chains that charge you $15 or more for a full pie are ripping you off. ",
"If a store like Costco is selling food for that cheap, it's because they are luring people into the store with that, and not trying to make a profit on it. \nJust like you'll see Target selling 12 packs of coke for $2, they use that as a \"loss leader\" to get customers into the store where they hopefully will leave with tons of other items.\nHowever you won't see Dominos or Pizza Hut doing that, because they need to have their pizza turn a profit every time. ",
"Our local Chinese place is like this. You eat as much of your food as you can and you still manage to fill up the entire to go box. Even my uncle who is > 600 pounds couldn’t finish his food. I would guess they can do this because they have so few employees. This place is always packed. They have 2 waitresses, a hostess, the owner, and 2 cooks. It’s the same people all 6 days they are open. You order your food and it’s out in 10 minutes every time. They run a tight ship around there. ",
"$1 pizza gets dad in the door, thinking his family of 5 is going to eat for $8. Mom lets kids order pop, at $2.50 each. Mom doesn't want pizza, orders a panini at $7.25. And wouldn't a few salads be nice? $8. And desert. $8.\n\nNow it's $42, plus tip, for $1 pizza.",
"Dough is cheap, we give away house bread for free even though it takes three trays of dough, 25 cents of flour and dough for free makes a big impression on people "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.