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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
bpzlwt | why does nasa have to wait until 2024 to land on the moon? | Why can’t we start that mission today? Don’t we have the knowledge from the Apollo missions to get us there? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bpzlwt/eli5_why_does_nasa_have_to_wait_until_2024_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"enzaqhe",
"enzbm1f",
"enzbwus",
"enzd8s2",
"eo0vjhu"
],
"score": [
3,
27,
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Knowledge, yes. Technologies and methods have potentially changed, though. They will also want to put together studies to be conducted to make it worthwhile to return, and they will want to test systems to make sure they are capable of fulfilling each leg of the journey prior to any launch. \n\nIn this case, it *is* rocket science :\\",
"We don't have any sort of rocket that can travel to the moon and back. We don't have a vehicle that can detach from that rocket and land on the moon. Takes a LOT of time and money to design and build those. Even 2024 seems way too soon. That's only five years. \nPlus, all the guys who worked on the Moon missions are long since retired or dead. We need to train all the current guys so they don't screw this up and get someone killed.\n\nThe technology we used to go to the moon and back in the 1960's is all completely outdated and would be of no use. It's like someone saying they want to build a modern racecar by studying a Model T. \n\nPlus we have no astronauts who have trained for anything like that. It's not something you can learn as you go. Takes years of training because if something goes wrong, you don't have anyone but yourself to fix it. Plus even a delay of a few seconds in failing to react could spell your doom. Space is very unforgiving.",
"Knowing how to doesn't mean you have the machines to do so. Would you trust your life to a 50 year old space module? No...you'd build a new one. Want to find a factory to build one? Guess what....nobody is making them. So you gotta find engineers and machinists and software programmers and make sure certify it safe and to spec? Every single component like your life depended on it.",
"We have the knowledge and the design drawing for stuff that was used in the Apollo missions. \n\nWhat we do not have is the same manufacturing line and manufacturing teknologis that we had back in the 1960s. The development took years and part of that is to set up the production facilities. The way that we build stuff today is not the same as we did back the so some manufacturing metods that was used on Apollo is not used today.\n\nThe documentation for exactly how things was manufactured is not that good and specific of how it was done it not that well documented. The plans and how to make it is not the same.\n\nYou could likely recreate the Apollo program today in a few years if you got the money. The program costed adjusted for inflation in 2008 $163 billion and it would be even more today. The program today have a budget of $21 billion so the project is to do it fore less money and create a more advanced and capable lander but at a slower rate.\n\nIt would cost billion so create the Apollo rockets and it is not cost efficient.\n\nA more recent example of restart a manufacturing line is for the F-22 here production was ended in 2011. The estimation is 2016 to restart the production os over $10 billion in 2018 [according to this](_URL_0_). For that is a lot of manufacturing tool in storage but they do not exist for the Apollo program-",
"I'll add that the safety standards are significantly higher now than they were in to 60's/70's. I'm sure we could build exact replicas of the rockets and capsules from the Apollo program that are \"capable\" of making it to the moon and back, but finding an agency to sign off on it or an astronaut willing to board it would be borderline impossible. \n\nCall me skeptical, but designing and building an entirely new launch and landing system in 5 years....I don't see it happening. The original launch date for the James Webb telescope, established in 2011, was October 2018 and the new launch date is March 2021. That's a 2 1/2 year delay and a 10 year construction period for an **unmanned** launch that will be aboard a European rocket that has been flying successful missions since the early 2000's and is recognized as one of the worlds most reliable rockets. \n\n\nAnd before anybody brings up the Space Launch System(SLS) that we are currently building, it is already 3 years behind on construction, $7 billion over budget and in jeopardy of being scrapped altogether because of severe safety issues."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20633/exclusive-heres-the-f-22-production-restart-study-the-usaf-has-kept-secret-for-over-a-year"
],
[]
] | |
9ienkh | how are vitamins absorbed into the body? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ienkh/eli5_how_are_vitamins_absorbed_into_the_body/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6j4f09",
"e6j86ve"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Correct me if I'm wrong because I'm no professional\n\nAfter you eat, the food goes into your stomach and the hydrochloric acid and enzymes break down the vitamins and nutrients. Then the digestive system takes the nutrients and it goes into the bloodstream. The remain waste is \"extracted\" (that's when you shit). ",
"This is a pretty complicated topic, but the simple answer is that it is slightly different for each Vitamin. 'Vitamins' are just important molecules that we need for the cells in our bodies to work. Generally speaking we cannot make them ourselves and therefore we need to get them by eating them. All of the 'Vitamins' we need are a massively diverse range of different molecules, and thus the way we absorb each of them and handle them in the body is slightly different. \n\n\nWater soluble vitamins like the 'B' Vitamins and Vitamin C are absorbed by specialized proteins that sit on the edge of the cells in our intestine. They recognize that specific molecule and absorb it into the cell, and then into the bloodstream.\n\nFat soluble vitamins (A,D,E, and K) dissolve in digested fats and are absorbed the same way we absorb digested fats. 'Fatty' molecules are cool because they can pass through cell membranes (Which are also made of 'fatty molecules') without needing a special protein like before. They can pass straight into the intestinal cells where they are packed into reusable packages called 'chylomicrons' and transported to the liver to be further processed, either via the blood stream or the lymphatic system\n\n\nSome Vitamins are even more complicated like 'Vitamin B12'. This needs to be bound to a special protein called 'intrinsic factor' that is produced in the stomach, but isn't absorbed by those specialized proteins until all the way at the end of the small intestine. This is kind of interesting in medicine, because either stomach problems OR problems with the end of the small intestine can cause big problems with B12 deficiency."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
70yqum | why do we use ours mouth and tongue to show affection? like in kissing or other sexual acts | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/70yqum/eli5_why_do_we_use_ours_mouth_and_tongue_to_show/ | {
"a_id": [
"dn6wzlz"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The act of kissing, at least while human society was still developing, allowed us to trade bacteria and help our mates create resistance to disease and infections, which they would pass on to their children. \n\nAs for sexual acts, they likely developed as as a means to get around deflowering in strict religious societies. Instead of having regular sex, which would be seen as sinful and evil, we have fellatio and cunnilingus, which was a convenient loophole."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
a15b3m | why do people who usually wear glasses look very different without them even though you can see through their glasses? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a15b3m/eli5_why_do_people_who_usually_wear_glasses_look/ | {
"a_id": [
"eamsgdc",
"eamslko",
"eamurlm",
"ean6a23"
],
"score": [
14,
5,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"I personally have a fairly strong prescription (I am near-sighted) which makes my eyes look much smaller through the lens. The opposite is true for far-sighted people, their lenses distort in a way that the eyes look bigger. The stronger the prescription the more it happens. And then there is the issue with the frames, once you are used to the person with them you sort of stop focusing on other features around them.",
"Most people who need to wear glasses all the time have lesser vision. Meaning that they need stronger lenses than other users. Depending on correction their eyes will be bigger or smaller. And some frames also hide users eyebrows. It might not be 100% true but that's what I always focus on when I look at myself in the mirror when taking off my glasses and seeing that I look way different.",
"In addition to what features they may cover (eyes, lids, brows etc) they also have the effect of artificially changing the appearance (not the actual measurements though) of the head proportions, simply by where they sit on the face, how wide they are etc.\n\ne.g. if you look at someone with a small set of lenses that only just covers the eyes, and doesn't obscure the sides of face leading back to the ears, then when they remove their glasses you are likely to get the impression that their head is narrower than with glasses on. \n\nAlternatively for people who wear larger lenses, that may stick out past the side of the face it artificially narrows the face to most observers, and when they remove the glasses the impression to most observers is that the face appears wider than it used to\n\nit's kind of the same optical illusion that makes the moon appear larger near the horizon, or what's known as the *ebbinghaus illusion*. In this illusion a shape surrounded by small objects appears larger than an identical shape surrounded by large objects \n\nthe *apparent* change in facial proportions can make people appear very different\n",
"Frames. You can't see through the frame. And your face will look different if you were to wear the frame with no optics.\n\nThen it's like in optical illusions. Adding lines over a shape can make the brain interpret the shape differently."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
5dzo81 | why does toothpaste induce a stinging sensation on the tongue during the first rinsing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5dzo81/eli5_why_does_toothpaste_induce_a_stinging/ | {
"a_id": [
"da90e95"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Operator error? That doesn't seem to happen to me."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
2e0nof | why do some plants produce edible parts? wouldn't that be harmful to the plant, by animals eating the plant? | What I mean by being harmful to the plant is animals eating the plant. Why would plants evolve to a point where they produce edible parts (for example, cucumbers) and animals would just eat the plant? Sorry if that is confusing, if I have to elaborate more I will. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2e0nof/eli5_why_do_some_plants_produce_edible_parts/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjuwn87",
"cjuwohn",
"cjux7cn"
],
"score": [
8,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Many plants spread their seeds by having an animal eat the fruit (such as cucumbers) and depositing the seed elsewhere, along with a fresh steaming pile of fertilizer.",
"Quite a few plants get around very effectively because animals eat them and crap out the seeds elsewhere, allowing them to spread.\n\nAlso plenty of the food crops we have today didn't exist before human agriculture, they were artificially selected into being what they are today specifically for sizable edible portions. \n\nIt takes very little time at all, relative to natural evolution, to get a new plant species from artificial selection. In just the past few years, for example the Carolina reaper pepper was bred into existence to be the hottest pepper in the world.",
"A lot of the answers here focus on seed spreading, but having some edible parts serves another useful purpose: If you have some nonessential organs that are edible paired with essential organs that are not, animals will naturally spend their energy eating the edible parts and avoiding the inedible ones. Since the edible ones aren't necessary to survival, this works out to the plant's benefit. This is a basic tolerance adaptation for plants."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
dj58zq | asymmetric cryptography | Hello everyone,
I'm currently trying to understand the system behind asymmetric cryptography or public-key cryptography.
I know how it basically works, but so far I'm not really understanding it in depth.
The metaphor I stumpled mostly upon ist the one with the lock and the key. A sends out his public key - the lock - which, as soon as it is closed, can only be opened with the key that A keeps - or be decrypted with his private key.
My problem with this metaphor is, that from my understanding, you don't "lock" something inside a box - like a letter in plain text - but rather "transform" the words in the letter in some gibberish which doesn't make any sense until you "transform" it back.
So for me I explained it to myself like a math equasion: You have a simple number and transform it into a long term with variables, that only you have the values for.
But how is it possible
\- that you can give out a public key, which is not decryptable without the private key, but still encrypts the message in a way it can be perfectly decrypted by the right key without knowing it?
\- that you can't decrypt it with the knowledge of the public key? If it has enough knowledge about the private key to encrypt something for it, shouldn't it be able to also decrypt it?
& #x200B;
Maybe I'm on the wrong track with thinking about this like a mathematical problem. If so, please let me know. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dj58zq/eli5_asymmetric_cryptography/ | {
"a_id": [
"f41c86n",
"f41chfe"
],
"score": [
5,
4
],
"text": [
"The lock analogy is an analogy, that's not how it works (which is actually the case with all analogies).\n\nSome problems in math are easier than others. If I have two numbers A and B, the best algorithm for multiplying them to calculate C is much easier than the best algorithm for factoring C into A and B. This isn't a \"secrecy\" thing, it's a property of mathematics. Knowledge of mathematics could change, and in reality quantum computers might actually change our understanding of the best factoring algorithms.\n\nYou're right to think of this as a math problem, but the analogy doesn't have enough fidelity to do that wort of analysis.",
"You're right that it's a math problem--the key and lock metaphor is just that, a metaphor.\n\nThe basic idea behind all public key cryptosystems is this: You have a message M. I give you a public key k, and you do some math to M using k, making it unreadable. I have the ability to reverse your math with my private key d and get M back, but it's really, really hard to calculate d if all you know is k.\n\nThe most well-known public key cryptosystem is called RSA, so I'll use that as an example. It's one of the simpler cryptosystems, but the math still isn't going to make sense if you're not familiar with number theory, so this is an oversimplification.\n\nYou have a message M that you want to encrypt. Think of M as a number. Even if it's a long message full of text and images and video and whatever else, it's all just 1s and 0s--just one really big number in binary.\n\nSince M is a number, you can raise it to a power, M^k. This encrypts the message--turns it into another number and makes it impossible to read without decrypting it. If I want to decrypt it, I have to raise it to another power, d = k^-1 , because (M^k )^d = M^kd = M^1 = M.\n\nSo I choose k to be the public key and tell everybody, and calculate d, my private key, and keep it secret. Everybody can encrypt messages with k, but nobody knows d so nobody can decrypt them.\n\nSo why can't anybody else just calculate d? I mean, it's just k^-1 = 1/k, right? Well, like I said, I've been oversimplifying.\n\nWe're not doing normal arithmetic, we're doing what's called modular arithmetic. I'm choosing a number n (which is also part of the public key), and whenever anything gets bigger than n, we're dividing by n and taking the remainder.\n\nSo, as an example, let's say M is 6, k is 2, and n is 10. M^k (mod n) = 6^2 (mod 10) = 36 (mod 10) = 6--the remainder you get when you divide 36 by 10. (This is just an example so you can see how mod works--k=2, n=10 is not a valid choice of numbers for RSA).\n\nBut n isn't 10. It's a really big number, the product of two really big prime numbers that only I know. Because of certain properties of modular arithmentic, it makes d = k^-1 (mod n) really, really hard to calculate unless you can factor n. And n is going to be really, really hard to factor.\n\nAnd when I choose n this way, it also turns out that for any M < n, you get a unique M^k (mod n), so it's reversible. So when you want to encrypt M > n, you're actually going to split it into smaller chunks and encrypt those separately.\n\nIt all relies on certain properties of modular arithmetic that aren't really ELI5. If you're interested in all the details of the math, look at the Wikipedia page for RSA."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
5ib0df | why do local american news outlets seem to focus on negative stories? | Watching the news last night, it was 10 minutes of who they are looking for in robberies, who shot who, etc.
Towards the end of the broadcast they have a "feeling better" segment about kids donating to homeless. If you did not inundate my head with all these crime stories I would not need the "feeling better" segment. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ib0df/eli5_why_do_local_american_news_outlets_seem_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"db6puge",
"db6pxjr",
"db6t4am",
"db7b98e"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"There is a statement about journalism- \"blood sells\", and quite honestly American eat it up. Think about what type of TV programs that are usually in the top 10, and you will see that many involve violence. They want to draw people to tune into their show and what the big headlines (usually some type of violence) are brings them in. Then a person is more likely to keep watching through the rest.",
"Unfortunately, default humans are drawn to negative stories way more than positive ones. I think it's because our brains start firing to find solutions to them, their causes, warning signs, etc and engages us, whereas a good story doesn't trigger that kind of activity. So the answer to your question is to get more revenue. There was even a newspaper that vowed only to publish good news stories and after initial fanfare and praise, sales died off and they went out of business.",
"News outlets are just like any other business, they will do whatever they can to boost their revenue. Revenue comes from advertisements and advertisers will pay more to be on news outlets that have the most viewers, so that they can sell their product. So essentially, news outlets will produce news that will bring in the most viewers, or to put in another way, they have to figure out what will sell the best. \n\nWith that in mind, you have to look at what people want to watch. People are drawn to stories about drama, crime, sad stories, etc. Just like TV shows. If you take a nationwide poll asking about sex scandals in politics, I guarantee you will find that the majority of people \"hate scandals.\" But every time there is a scandal, news ratings skyrocket. ",
"Another thing to consider: Negative news being used as a means to control the population. There are two books that discuss this:\n\n*\"Fearless\" by Gavin de Becker\n\n*\"Media Virus\" by Douglass Rushkoff\n\nThey suggest that in this time of terrorism, the news media itself are the \"true\" terrorists by keeping the public in a state of fear by showing mostly negative news. Both are interesting reads."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
c5o4ru | how does talent work? like, why is someone good at singing while someone else is good at drawing? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c5o4ru/eli5_how_does_talent_work_like_why_is_someone/ | {
"a_id": [
"es2xhbe",
"es30x3i",
"es34vow",
"es35a8z"
],
"score": [
12,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"People do have different genetic abilities that aren't hard coded skills. Someone who is good at music in general probably has slightly better hearing than normal which helps them to recognize pitch. Great chefs are often super tasters, which means that they are much more sensitive to taste. Athletes would have better gross motor control that allows them to get better at sports than most people.",
" > people that are just naturally very talented at drawing or singing. How does that work? Is it embedded in your DNA?\n\n & #x200B;\n\nNot according to the book [Peak](_URL_0_) by Anders Ericsson. Check it out. He's the researcher behind Malcom Gladwell's popular \"10,000 hours\" concept. He's done actual research and his main conclusion is that something called \"deliberate practice\" along with coaching and well developed mental representations are the keys to mastering a talent, not any kind of natural gifts.",
"Nature vs nurture. It’s mixed but I have to side more with nurture. Otherwise, I would give up before ever starting to learn anything new. Why even attempt if I wasn’t born with it. Talent is the product of curiosity, not just hours spent doing something. IMO, If you don’t enjoy something enough to make practice one with enjoyment, you will never be able to dedicate the hours to become talented at something. A singer will express themselves through singing (alone or otherwise) same as an artist does with drawing. This whole time they are practicing, but their brain translates these actions as normal and necessary as breathing because they find enjoyment in it. When you ask these people - “Wow, your good! How do you do it?”. They tend to discount all that practice they do all the time - “I don’t know”. You translate this reaction to be natural ability and the person carries on with singing or doodling (unconscious practicing), ironic.",
"In every merit-based system, only a few % of people will be at the top level by definition.\n\nTo be at the top you need to have everything to be just right.\n\nGenetics for talent, genetics to put work (characteristics like Laziness/workaholic is genetic and environmental), proper environment(friends, family and connections) and proper nutrition in developmental age. \n\nMost successful people are \"Lucky\" to have good genetics for talent and genetics for hard work and a proper environment.\n\nRandom guy who trains a lot vs a guy who trains a lot also with right genes, the random guy will always lose.\n\nIt is just unfortunate biological reality like the height of a person"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.nateliason.com/notes/peak-anders-ericsson-robert-pool"
],
[],
[]
] | |
8cqghu | how is bios installed on a motherboard? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8cqghu/eli5_how_is_bios_installed_on_a_motherboard/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxgy7rc",
"dxgybt0",
"dxhdg5c"
],
"score": [
4,
33,
3
],
"text": [
"There is a chip that contains the BIOS, similar to a ROM. It is connected to the board. Sometimes a board can contain more than one BIOS.",
"There are special memory chips on the motherboard that contain the BIOS. In ancient times, these were actual ROMs, read-only memory chips. That's too hard to maintain, so today most mobos use flash memory, like in a USB drive or camera card, to store the BIOS. That way you can do a firmware update with a special program rather than screwdrivers.",
"How is it physically installed? Well at the factory they hook it up to a computer that loads it onto the motherboard, Im not sure how they do it now but back in the day they used to do it through the keyboard port. Once loaded it was stored on a chip like flash memory that you can carry on your keychain but physically attached to the board. Maybe someone can answer how they do it now, I assume they do it via the USB ports now. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
4bsnco | why can't we eliminate political parties? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4bsnco/eli5_why_cant_we_eliminate_political_parties/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1c0wv1",
"d1c1wgu",
"d1c1xj5",
"d1cf8ea"
],
"score": [
4,
37,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You certainly can, depending on your country of origin. In the United States people are generally guaranteed the right to free association. You'd have to overturn that first, which is a tall order.",
"Political parties? People will always congregate with those who agree with them. It's just useful to have a label for your affiliation.\n\nThe two-party system? [Duverger's law](_URL_0_). In first past the post and similar systems, you inevitably trend toward a two-party system because of the spoiler effect.",
"Organization and numbers. If you want to pass something in today's day and age, let's say an Prohibition Amendment, you do not have the ability to influence 300 million people in the United States of America. The first thing you would need to do is identify like-minded individuals. You can get everyone that you know into a room and then say: \"Let's go vote it into place.\" But you have no power to make that vote occur, you are simply a citizen, not an elected representative; besides there is a constitutional system through which to make changes to the law of the land.\n\nYou read up on the matter and then run for office in an effort to be able to influence as an elected representative. But, if ninety-five percent of the population does not care about your stance on prohibition, you will not get elected. You tack on another concept you are vehemently for: \"Women wearing pencil skirts to work.\" Now, you have 10% of the population. You add on more and more policy programs until you have the votes and coalesce the concepts behind a party name. But now you need to organize and get people out to vote on election day.\n\nYou canvas doors, but you do not have the time nor money to canvas the 800,000 constituents that make up your representative's district. So, you have to hire someone to print up campaign materials, how do you pay for it? Can you pay for it, well the party system has the ability to provide you funds and volunteers to distribute the materials.\n\nThe political parties ebb and flow on issues, the problem that we run into with our system here in America is that the government is such a behemoth that the parties can say they will fix everything for everyone once elected.\n\nThe good news is that the parties have ups and downs, which shake them up. Look at the Democrat party a few years ago saying that gun control was no longer part of its political platform.\n\n*edit: Needed to add in party formation reason.",
"I live in the Northwest Territories in northern Canada. For our territorial government we do not have political parties. All candidates run as an independent, the elected members select a premier (like a governor) and then elect 6 ministers. The premier and ministers form the cabinet and the other 13 members form the \"official opposition\". The executive council basically runs the show, but if at any time the regular members don't like what's going on they can all team up to select a new cabinet.\n\nIt kind of works, but it can also be very easy for the cabinet to play different rivalries off each other to get what they want. It also means that candidates can really run on whatever they want and you can't really hold them to account.\n\nFor instance pretty much every candidate in my riding ran on \"fiscal responsibility\", \"increased transparency in government\", \"responsible infrastructure investments\", and \"reducing the cost of living\" so it turns into a popularity contest.\n\nCosts of living didn't go down? \"I worked hard to reduce the cost of living but the cabinet (or other members) didn't think it was a priority\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law"
],
[],
[]
] | ||
4hq38k | how come some ftm trans grow full beards yet some men cannot? wouldn't a male body be more likely to grow a beard than a female body with hormones? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4hq38k/eli5_how_come_some_ftm_trans_grow_full_beards_yet/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2rhz6w",
"d2rihqy",
"d2rk02t"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"It's not a \"female body with hormones\". The hormones MAKE it a male body, which allows it to grow a beard. I suggest reading up on just how HRT works.",
"There are 2 main things that determine your facial hair--genetics and hormones. Genetics also determines hormones, but taking HRT bypasses that by giving you hormones your genes aren't coding for. So most men and FTM people have sufficient hormones to grow a beard. So the key determiner of what the beard looks like comes from what your genes have to say about your beard. Some genes code for a large amount of body hair, including a very full beard, others code for no beard at all in certain populations of humans. If a FTM person has the genes for a lush beard, then taking testosterone will result in a lush beard. If a cisgendered male with a slight beard takes testosterone, it won't change the beard because he already has the full extent of a beard that his genes code for.",
"There are a couple things that affect facial and body hair growth.\n\nOne is testosterone, and the other is how sensitive your hair follicles are to testosterone.\n\nEveryone can carry the genes associated with dense facial and body hair. But most of the time, female bodies don't have enough testosterone in them to activate these genes.\n\nThis is why men who were castrated as children back in the day never grew facial hair as they aged, and why female bodybuilders who use steroids often will.\n\nWhen trans men start taking testosterone supplements, that causes their body to go through most of the changes associated with male puberty. That includes stimulating the hair follicles on their face and body to ramp up production. If their family background includes a lot of hairy men, chances are their body will start producing hair on a similar level.\n\nBut if your family background includes a lot of smooth faced guys, chances are you just don't have the genes responsible for telling your hair follicles to respond to testosterone."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
5wjr3r | how can an ultrasound tech confirm the sex of a female fetus? | Me and my wife just learned the sex of our unborn child and we were told it's a girl. I understand that a tech can confirm a male by the confirmation of a penis, but what can they see to confirm a female? Is it based on the fact that they didn't see a penis? And if so, how often are they wrong about that? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5wjr3r/eli5_how_can_an_ultrasound_tech_confirm_the_sex/ | {
"a_id": [
"deam1s4",
"deanab8"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"I looked it up. They do not just look for absence of a penis they look for the labia to confirm a baby girl ",
"They look for a \"3-line sign\" that would indicate a labia, but this is only possible if the fetus is in the right position. But...It isn't just what they see, it's what they *don't* see. Namely, a penis. Lack of a penis is a pretty strong indicator that you're having a girl. I doubt there've been any empirical studies on how often they're wrong, but it isn't very common with today's technology, I'm sure."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
e8a0uy | why do some women have a bloated stomach post-pregnancy? like the baby got out, isn't it supposed to flatten? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e8a0uy/eli5_why_do_some_women_have_a_bloated_stomach/ | {
"a_id": [
"faa0qam",
"faa1cb2",
"faa2arv"
],
"score": [
17,
11,
5
],
"text": [
"Women also put on fat in their bellies to help protect the baby during pregnancy. It takes a little bit of time for that weight loss to occur. You also have the fact that it takes time for the abdominal muscles to build back up and go to their normal place and during that time they will look slightly bloated as the muscles are not structured normally.",
"It’s not so much bloating as it is skin being stretched out. The uterus also has to expand several times it’s normal size to fit a baby and it doesn’t just shrink back down immediately after birth. It can take a month or two for the uterus to return to it’s normal size.",
"Diastasis recti. Mommy pooch. The stomach muscles separated. \n\nProper exercise can fix it, but many woman, dealing with a newborn, are also sleep deprived, and many get post partum depression, as well. It makes motivation for exercise go away."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
2cwww0 | how the eye converts light into an electrical signal to the brain. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cwww0/eli5_how_the_eye_converts_light_into_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjjux7u"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Light enters your eye and strikes your retina. Your retina is covered in a number of photoreceptor cells. Inside these photoreceptor cells are proteins, which absorb photons that strike them. These proteins are susceptible to differing wavelengths of light, hence able to provide the brain with a cue as to the types of colors represented. This absorption results in a structural change in the protein, which institutes a complex series of biological changes that generate nerve impulses which are conducted through axons to specific regions of the brain which ultimately builds an image.\n\ntldr: The photon changes the shape of a protein, which triggers an electrical response."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
1z73h0 | how come when i add butter to a hot pan it melts, but when i add pancake batter, it solidifies? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z73h0/eli5_how_come_when_i_add_butter_to_a_hot_pan_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfr37fm"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Butter is mostly fat, and fat melts. Pancake batter contains egg, which has protein. When you heat protein it denatures and forms a solid."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
cfo3fy | why do pigeons not get dizzy when shaking their head. | You always see them shaking their head when walking, how come they don't get dizzy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cfo3fy/eli5_why_do_pigeons_not_get_dizzy_when_shaking/ | {
"a_id": [
"eubajsb"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"They're actually keeping their heads still while they're bobbing!\n\nIf you focus on their heads, between the bobs, their head and thus eyes are fixed in the same position while their body moves. When they move too far, they have to bob their heads to the next fixed position.This is to keep their vision still to detect any movement. If they moved their heads with their body, everything will blur when they move so they can't tell if the movement is motion blur or a predator."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
304hqh | how come we haven't found a way to get rid of hair follicles and not have to shave ever again? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/304hqh/eli5_how_come_we_havent_found_a_way_to_get_rid_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpp04t3",
"cpp0cef",
"cpp0us7",
"cpp18g0",
"cpp1mud",
"cppds3w"
],
"score": [
113,
44,
13,
5,
13,
3
],
"text": [
"I thought we did? Laser hair treatment?",
"There isn't really any efficient way to do it yet. At least none that are safe. Laser hair removal sometimes has permanent effects after a few uses, but that takes time. One illegal method that does work much faster is x-ray treatment, however, it exposes you to elevated risks of cancer and deformities. Another banned method is photo-dynamic therapy, which uses lighting to implant and activate certain toxic compounds into tissue (typically used to kill microbial cells). \nAside from that you have methods that are advertised as permanent, but may not really do the trick. Such as microwave hair removal, Transcutaneous, or electric tweezers. \ntl;dr: everything you want is either dangerous, illegal, or faulty",
"We should take unwanted hair follicles and implant them into people who are balding. Fair trade IMO :3",
"Electrolysis treatment and laser treatment together can burn out the follicles and remove the hair permanently. However, one reason this isn't done often is the same reason you don't see a tonne of vasectomies and tubal ligations instead of teenagers on the pill - people are squeamish about doing things which are permanent.",
"Unshaven I have a full blown cul de sac. That said, I shave my head at least twice per week, but I would rather hold on to my existing follicles because there has got to be some kind of legitimate hair loss treatment on the way. ",
"Because the powerful shampoo and razor blade lobby is repressing the technology."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
3ngcya | what creates that "crunchy" effect on your clothes when you hang them outside to dry? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ngcya/eli5_what_creates_that_crunchy_effect_on_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvntlg8",
"cvnwxil",
"cvo03ar",
"cvo0htk",
"cvo1jr7",
"cvo22dq",
"cvo28jl",
"cvo36hh",
"cvo4odr",
"cvo8fs4",
"cvol9jf"
],
"score": [
1765,
102,
10,
13,
27,
5,
3,
76,
2,
311,
2
],
"text": [
"When you take clothes out the wash to air dry, soap residue and minerals from the water in the fabric fibres can dry up hard and stiffen up the laundry.",
"Anything going from wet to dry will hold its shape. Imagine wet paper towel or wet sand for a sand castle. As it dries, it holds its shape and hardens. When wet clothes dry on a clothes line, it holds its shape and becomes \"crunchy\". It's only because we add fabric softener, add heat, and tumble wet clothes in a clothes dryer that clothes come out soft and pliable.\n",
"What's with the dried semen jokes?",
"I wonder if /r/askscience might be the better sub to ask. ",
"If I may piggyback off this... I've heard some people say that air drying your clothes rather than using a drying machine helps to make your clothes last longer. Is there any truth to that?",
"I would say it is similar to drying weed in a dry environment. Shit gets crispy. In humid areas, regardless of heat or wind the drying is a slower, less crispy. ",
"I'm curious about this as well, mostly because I find that if I dry my (cotton) clothes outside in the sun, they get really stiff.\n\nIf I dry them indoors with a fan, they get significantly less stiff.\n\nI suppose they could be getting slightly less dry inside, but I'm not sure that's it.",
"there was an encyclopedia brown story where he determined a kid had stole a towel because it was crunchy, but the kid said he just took it out of the dryer that morning.",
"OP, do you use liquid fabric softener in your wash cycle?",
"Soap powder scientist here: the reason is due to salt residues encrusted onto your fabrics. Most of the powder you wash your clothes with is salt (not the table stuff) and there's always some left after rinsing. If you leave your clothes to dry without much movement, these residues tend to crystallise (microscopic), and this is the stiff feeling. Switch to liquids, use fabric softener or use a more expensive detergent. This should help. ",
"The crunchy effect from hang-drying outside comes from hanging the clothes immediately after the clothes come out of the washer's spin cycle. The washer has just spun for all it's worth, using gravity to wring water out of the clothes. This means the clothes are stretched, twisted, and wrung-out when they come out of the washer. \n\nA machine-dryer's heat and tumbling will return spun clothes to a more normal state -- but when you hang-dry outside, you miss out on the heat and the tumbling, so you dry your clothes in their stretched/twisted/wrung-out state, so they end up crunchy.\n\nOne solution is set the spin cycle to a slower/weaker setting. This helps on my dryer.\n\nAnother solution is to machine-dry the clothes for 5 or 10 mins before hang-drying them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
3kiwrv | why is mars' core not molten anymore? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kiwrv/eli5why_is_mars_core_not_molten_anymore/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuxs76h"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because it is small.\n\nIt did have a molten core, even a magnetosphere but because it's small it lost heat faster. Small things have a larger surface area in relation to their mass than big things, hence when they cool down quicker."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
1yjo5i | what happens to objects that you breathe into your lungs? | If you were to breathe in like a bug while running outside, debris, or accidentally inhale some piece of food does it just chill in your lungs or do your lungs (digest?) it after a while? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1yjo5i/eli5_what_happens_to_objects_that_you_breathe/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfl3fqw",
"cfl6az6",
"cfl7k4q"
],
"score": [
11,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Most particles get trapped in the mucus of the respiratory system. Small moving \"hairs\" called cilia move somewhat like oars on a rowing boat transporting the mucus and anything trapped in it upwards to your throat where you swallow it. Coughing also transports the mucus upwards. Other particles get \"eaten\" by specialized cells, macrophages. Some particles will be digested, others will just sit there. ",
"Ideally the actions of cilia and coughing expel foreign bodies.\n\nEven if you don't cough out a bug immediately, I think the environment of the lung would cause it to physically break down and gradually be expelled. I don't think it would actually be absorbed, but I could be wrong.\n\nGenerally, you don't want anything like fine powder or dust in your lungs. Tiny fibers (eg asbestos) or grains (eg flour) that go deep into your lungs and cannot be expelled will, in the long term, kill you.\n\nEDIT: Because of the structure of the lung, something like a bug cannot go very deeply into it. The bronchi quickly divide into small structures. However, I surmise that it wouldn't feel that way to the sufferer.\n",
"I just happen to know someone who's child inhaled an M & M and had it surgically removed. The child initially showed no outward signs of having inhaled a foreign object into his lungs. Once inside the lungs, it just felt like a lump in his chest to him. The child did not have a coughing reflex. Breathing problems began to manifest after a week as there was significant mucous build-up in the lungs which was preventing his chest from compressing/exhaling. Because of its location, the lung was closed off and he was not able to get air into the lung which would have enabled him to cough up the M & M."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
alsq3u | why are you not hungry after performing excercise | This question is a mystery to me. Whenever I go for a jog or go to soccer practice I’m never that hungry. My intuition tells me that because you have used energy exercising, the body would require more food. My experience is that this is not the case. How can this be. Explain it like I’m 5 | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/alsq3u/eli5_why_are_you_not_hungry_after_performing/ | {
"a_id": [
"efgqu8j",
"efgr0to",
"efhk4l4"
],
"score": [
3,
19,
6
],
"text": [
"The short answer is that your body turns off the release of the hormone responsible for feelings of hunger following intense exercise.\n\nCould be an evolutionary response in the sense that you can't afford to feel hungry while running from an animal that's trying to eat you.",
"Your body has modes. While exercising or immediately following strenuous exercise, your body is dealing with the energy it has and is not focused on gathering more energy/food. A full stomach would only get in the way of the things your body is trying to do, so you don't feel hungry while exercising.\n\nUsing energy to fire the muscles to digest food, for instance, takes away some energy that could be going to fire the muscles in your heart, which is beating faster, and your muscles attached to your bones that let you run. However, after your body gets back to it's resting state, and realizes it has used a lot of energy for recently completed exercise, the focus switches to gathering food to get more energy, for the next bout of strenuous activity it could face, and you become \"hungry\". How quickly this happens depends on how fit one is, the body's resting metabolism, and how strenuous the recently completed activity was.\n\nHave you ever worked out so hard or ran so much that you threw up? this is the body's way of saying,\" I don't have time to deal with this right now, we need to get rid of everything in the stomach so i can focus on other things.\"",
"Don't know about you, but actually I am usually more hungry and do eat more after exercising."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
jcsrz | what is fanniemae and freddiemac, and how are they related? | Their names are really similar and they are in the same industry. Are they the same company? What do they do? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jcsrz/eli5_what_is_fanniemae_and_freddiemac_and_how_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2b2hfr",
"c2b2hfr"
],
"score": [
9,
9
],
"text": [
"They are companies that are privately owned, but sponsored by the government. They purchase mortgages from lenders. \n\nSay you get a mortgage on your home through Wells Fargo. Wells Fargo has limitations on how much money it can lend. As your loan sits there with Wells Fargo, it constricts how much they can loan. So they sell the rights to Fannie Mae, turns the loan into cash, which they can go out and loan money to other people with. You keep making your payments on the loan to Wells Fargo but it actually goes straight to Fannie Mae.\n\nFannie goes on to then package up hundreds of other loans and markets them as mortgage-backed securities and sells it to investors.\n\nIt's hard to explain because its so complex financially.",
"They are companies that are privately owned, but sponsored by the government. They purchase mortgages from lenders. \n\nSay you get a mortgage on your home through Wells Fargo. Wells Fargo has limitations on how much money it can lend. As your loan sits there with Wells Fargo, it constricts how much they can loan. So they sell the rights to Fannie Mae, turns the loan into cash, which they can go out and loan money to other people with. You keep making your payments on the loan to Wells Fargo but it actually goes straight to Fannie Mae.\n\nFannie goes on to then package up hundreds of other loans and markets them as mortgage-backed securities and sells it to investors.\n\nIt's hard to explain because its so complex financially."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
2y7iiy | why can drinking too much water make your muscles cramp when exercising? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2y7iiy/eli5_why_can_drinking_too_much_water_make_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"cp6yu6c",
"cp6zd2z"
],
"score": [
5,
10
],
"text": [
"I'm kind of guessing based off of a limited understanding, but your body not only needs water it needs electrolytes. If you drink too much water you can flush electrolytes out. If you don't replace those electrolytes then your body will not react well... I'm assuming the cramping is part of that. ",
"What causes cramps is loss of electrolytes. Drinking too much water can cause your system to flush out too many electrolytes, but it is not specific to drinking water while exercising but rather you drinking too much water in general. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
3i0y42 | where the superstition of walking under a ladder being bad luck come from? | Edit: *Where did the.... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i0y42/eli5where_the_superstition_of_walking_under_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuccqs9"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"It's dangerous for both you and the person who may be at the top of the ladder. Something could be dropped on your head or you could possibly knock over the ladder. Don't walk under ladders."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
3ou7aw | how do banks refund fraudulent purchases on your credit card? | Aren't the items unrecoverable once they've been purchased? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ou7aw/eli5_how_do_banks_refund_fraudulent_purchases_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"cw0hafn",
"cw0hd8d",
"cw0jirx",
"cw0khoh"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Correct, but most banks/credit card companies decide it's better in the long run to simply forgive (pay back) the fraudulent charge and maintain you as a customer than insist the debt be paid regardless and liekly lose future business with you.",
"The card company pays you back with their money. It comes out of their profits from interest and fees. They know a certain amount of fraud will occur, so they set their rates accordingly. A card without fraud protection could be slightly cheaper for the customer, but it would also be very risky. So, fraud protection is the norm. It's like a mandatory insurance that all card holders buy.",
"To add, in the US, there is a maximum customer liability of $50 dollars for fraudulent purchases. Anything more than that has to be covered by the institution offering the card.\n\nSince fraud is often much more than that limit, most companies waive the whole amount as a courtesy, knowing that it buys them gratitude from a customer, and even if they didn't waive it they would still have to pay all but $50. Tldr: in the US institutions only are losing $50 dollars by fully refunding fraudulent purchases. ",
"I'm in Canada, I'm under the impression the credit card charges the vendor back for fraudulent purchases."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
3y2c10 | why was the cold war so immediate and unavoidable between former allies after ww2? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3y2c10/eli5_why_was_the_cold_war_so_immediate_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy9vwxf",
"cy9wgmn",
"cy9x04q"
],
"score": [
15,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"We weren't allies, really. We had a common enemy. That's it. After that enemy was eliminated, we went right back to being enemies, only with bigger weapons.\n\nRemember, Russia was on the side of the axis before Hitler betrayed their agreement.",
"The US and Russia (then USSR) never liked each other. They only cooperated as allies because of common foes that was a bigger threat but as soon as the threat was gone they went back to not liking each other. \n\nThere were also the two world powers that survived the war with enough infrastructure and strong enough economies to step into the roles of Super Powers. That means they were competing for economic, political, and military influence around the world and often their interests came into conflict. ",
"The democratic capitalist ideology of the U.S., Britain, and France was always incompatible with the communist ideology of the Soviet Union. This problem could be ignored while they were fighting a common enemy, i.e. the Nazis. Moreover, Western spheres of influence and Soviet spheres of influence were far away from each other. But once the common enemy was gone and their respective spheres of influence were bordering each other, their incompatibility became obvious and insurmountable."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
73aves | how does a typical u.s. senate session work. | I have been watching C-span lately and I know what the senate can do, but each time i tune in they are not really voting on anything. Once a senator was just praising a local baseball league champion. Other times a senator was giving his weekly "global Warming exists speech". They don't tend to debate anything and yet they vote to suspend debates (as in Ajit Pais renomination). And most of all the seats of the senate seem to mostly be empty. What is the structure of a typical senate session and why do they keep asking for roll call or noting absences of a quorum so much.
Thank you. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/73aves/eli5how_does_a_typical_us_senate_session_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"dnoxmg6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Most of the Senate's work is done in committees, with a smaller and more manageable number of Senators. By the time something comes to a debate or vote on the main floor, 99% of the work has been done. So you're really watching a boring procedural part."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
aidbfb | dry-firing a bow is bad because with no arrow the "energy" has nowhere to go. mathematically it makes perfect sense but what is physically happening to the materials to cause this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aidbfb/eli5_dryfiring_a_bow_is_bad_because_with_no_arrow/ | {
"a_id": [
"eemvvhr",
"eenv8wj"
],
"score": [
13,
2
],
"text": [
"The Energy goes someplace, it's just not the right place. The bow designer designs the bow to put the energy into the arrow. With no arrow, the energy goes into the string. This moves the string too fast and too far. Then it \"rings\" back and forth too many times. All these excess motions eventually allow the energy that should have gone into the arrow to go into heat in the air around the bow. \n\nThe downside is that the excess motion causes excess wear.",
"The energy goes back into the bow, in a way the bow is not designed to handle. Things get tensioned when they’re not supposed to be tensioned. Things get compressed that are not supposed to be compressed.\n\nThis can crack the bow, and with things like compound bows can mash up the cams and connections. A lot of energy gets dumped into it very quickly, and can even make the thing “explode”/fly apart.\n\nThis is generally bad news for whoever is holding it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
684vwx | what causes states like new york to have such higher taxes than a state like tennessee? | Does it come down to wasted money? extra services? Made up by other non tax revenues? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/684vwx/eli5_what_causes_states_like_new_york_to_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgvowda",
"dgvqsch"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
"This is hard to explain, I have lived in NY my whole life. There is a ton of waste and lots of corruption for sure. It's also not working since it's the #1 flight state (people be leavin'). Also, NYC requires a lot of tax revenue to operate. ",
"The reason is that the voters of those states want it that way. Why there's such a big difference between the voters' thoughts in those two different states has no one simple answer.\n\nIn general, though of course not always, places with higher taxes tend to have better social services. New Jersey, which has the second highest combined tax rate in the country, also has the second best schools in the country. New York has more cultural venues, better transportation infrastructure, and so on, than Tennessee.\n\nNow, whether those things are worth the extra tax money is up to the individual, but it's disingenuous to say that the two things (amount paid in taxes and quality of public services) isn't related."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
1nqgx1 | what is the frame of reference in space? like what determines whether or not something is spinning or stationary or moving? | And if the Earth stopped spinning, would we feel like there's more gravity or if it spun faster would we fly off? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1nqgx1/eli5_what_is_the_frame_of_reference_in_space_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccl1egw"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
" > What is the frame of reference in space? \n\nThere isn't one. You just have to pick an arbitrary (non-accelerating) reference frame and consistently use it, and your calculation will come out correct.\n\n > Like what determines whether or not something is spinning or stationary or moving?\n\nSpinning can be ascertained from the reference frame of the object itself. This is because, in a rotating reference frame, fictitious forces (centrifugal force and the Coriolis force) arise, and can be detected. So you can tell that you're rotating without having to rely on any reference frame other than your own.\n\nBut \"moving\" and \"stationary\" are exactly the same thing, just seen from two different reference frames. In other words, an object is both moving and stationary depending on which frame you use, and both are equally valid.\n\n > And if the Earth stopped spinning, would we feel like there's more gravity\n\nA tiny, *tiny* amount more, with the difference decreasing the further you move from the equator (since your acceleration at the poles is not affected by the Earth's rotation).\n\n > or if it spun faster would we fly off? \n\nTheoretically, yes, If it spun quickly enough. But with that much angular momentum, the Earth would rip itself apart before reaching the point where it would counteract the gravity you experience on the surface."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
7ei091 | do bacteria have bacteria? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ei091/eli5do_bacteria_have_bacteria/ | {
"a_id": [
"dq51o86",
"dq5251z",
"dq5ugvf"
],
"score": [
21,
7,
6
],
"text": [
"Bacteria *are* bacteria.\n\nI am not sure what you mean by \"have bacteria\". Do you mean \"have bacteria on them\"? If so, bacteria often climb over each other and interact directly with one another. But they don't have tiny bacteria living on them, just like elephants don't have tiny elephants living on them.",
"If you meant inside of them, maybe yes..some bacteria eat other bacteria. Whats interesting is viruses. Many bacteria are infected by viruses which sometimes forms a symbiotic relation.",
"There are theories some of the complexities in our own cells (e.g. the mitochondria, you might have heard of them) are the result of one bacterium engulfing another and then both profited of it and kept on living like that, which is called the endosymbiosis theory. \n\nWhether a tiny bacterium can \"infect\" a bigger one and thereby be disadvantageous (i.e. making it \"sick\") seems therefor not unlikely. I have no sources to back that up, though. \n\nHowever, when bacteria infect an organism (humans, animals, insects, etc), it makes it sick by being inbetween the cells and releasing toxic chemicals. It does not actually go inside our individual cells.\nBecause a bacterium only consists out of one cell, another bacterium could not infect it in the same manner as it would one nog us.\n\nAs earlier mentioned, there are viruses that can infect bacteria, called bacteriophages (phage is another word for virus). They DO get into the cell of the bacterium. They're rather cool, because they can be used as an antibiotic when we humans have a bacterial infection. Though lots of that is still being researched.\n\nI hope this bis clear, enough. A five-year-old would probably not know what a cell is, so if I have to explain that, let me know :)\nOne a side-note: mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
4gydh3 | why do so many humans have an innate fear of the dark? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gydh3/eli5_why_do_so_many_humans_have_an_innate_fear_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2lttof",
"d2lu80v",
"d2lu8sv",
"d2lx6cc",
"d2lxk5r",
"d2lxkv1",
"d2m37d6",
"d2m4vq8",
"d2mgt0i",
"d2n09zq"
],
"score": [
31,
112,
2,
2,
2,
7,
6,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Someone posted something before on here, but it's not being alone in the dark that is scary to people, it's the fear of not being alone in the dark.",
"Because evolutionary biology. \n\nWe have shit night vision, and the rest of our senses are pretty piss poor as well by animal kingdom standards. If a leopard can sneak up on gazelle and impala (which have much better hearing and smell compared to us) with enough regularity to feed itself and even raise young, what chance do we have of detecting a supremely adapted stalking predator in pitch blackness?\n\nFor reasons that shouldn't be too hard to imagine, those primitive cave people who had a natural inclination against wandering around the savannah in total darkness were more likely to survive and produce offspring who shared their distrust of sensory deprivation in an environment rich with ATWEY^(Animals That Will Eat You). \n\n**TL;DR** Being afraid of situations that impair your ability to detect danger is a very good survival strategy. You will live longer and make more babies, who will inherit this propensity for jumpiness by virtue of genetics. Repeat this process enough and your species will eventually get fed up with it and invent the Nightlight. ",
"We were trained over thousands of years of evolution to be afraid of the dark because we don't see very well in the dark compared to a lot of animals and we used to live outdoors where there were real dangerous animals out there in the dark. ",
"Because they've stepped on Lego.\n\nMore generally - less the dark, more the dangers we can't see that the dark hides.",
"Oh, I don't see this one on here so I'll throw this out as well. Our eyes have cones and rods, which see colour and light/dark. In low light levels we lose the ability to see colour due to the energy of the photons not being strong enough to activate the right nerve endings. The light level can still be enough to see with the light/dark nerves though. The weird way our eyes are put together leads to our Rods (the light/dark nerve) having a wider peripheral vision than the Cones. In daylight we rely more on the Cones because the colour information means more from a ripe/not ripe food source point. What this means is that in low light, we can focus a ton more on things in the 'corners' of our vision. This is unsettling because now we're focusing on simple movements, but everything looks like it's jiggling a lot more. Maybe like one of those ATWEY's sneaking up on us.",
"Because we are hard wired to imagine dangerous things when we have no information to go after.\n\nThis was a good trait evolutionary speaking, those who werent afraid of dangerous things when they had no information to go after had more accidents so to speak. More dangerous predators got to them so they had less offspring then those who did imagine dangerous things everywhere.",
"As many others have pointed out, the ultimate reason is because of evolutionary biology. Being afraid of the dark is a behavioral trait that ensured better survival, seeing how many predators are nocturnal and we have, as /u/Gyrant put it, \"shit night vision\" & shit other senses (compared to aforementioned predators).\n\n*That being said*, we are an intelligent species and as such we have developed another interesting behavior: culture & the transmission of non-innate knowledge from one generation to the next. So, are you afraid of the dark because you're hard-wired to be so or because when you were a child you were taught (by the means of stories, etc.) that \"in the dark there is danger\"? Is is nature or nurture?\n\nProbably a bit of both.",
"I'm completely blind and have been for about 17 years. I don't get scared in the dark but I get scared when things are around me that I can't identify like bees and shit.",
"I got pretty used to being in the dark by working at an extremely rural camp with no electricity. Walking through the woods in the dark is so creepy, but I've gotten used to it because I know that *mostly* I won't come across anything dangerous to me. I love being in the dark now, my favorite is being in a wide open field on a moonless night.",
"There are a lot of bad critters out there that would like to eat you up, Fitnesscrowm. For a really long time, all of the people who have lived and had children like you were probably afraid. The people who weren't afraid of the dark didn't get to have kids because the monsters got them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
512zpw | how would my family adopting a vegan/vegetarian diet really affect the production of meat and dairy? | I'm not disputing the recommendation that we should all change over to help the environment, but am questioning how that would actually help anything. Whether me or my family eat meat ever again is not going to stop it being produced. The production is what harms the environment, so the harm would keep occurring no?
All that would change is that some meat that used to get sold would not get sold and go to waste, but that wouldn't stop it being produced in the first place? I believe it's the same with being vegetarian to protect animals. The animals are still slaughtered either way. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/512zpw/eli5_how_would_my_family_adopting_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"d78wcgc",
"d78x76c",
"d790tk8",
"d7950wq",
"d79chh9"
],
"score": [
27,
6,
10,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Supply and demand = not buying animal products means less demand for it and because of that, in the long run less product will be made. ",
"one family can create new opportunities.\n\nwe can comfortably assume that one family abstaining from meat will have a negligible DIRECT impact on the market... \n\non the other hand... purchases made by a single family can have very real impacts. it doesn't take much for your local supermarket/local businesses to make decisions about what products they offer. Offering Tofurkey products, opting to expand their Daiya inventory, or adding a vegetarian line of subs to their deli menu... the availability of affordable alternatives is made possible by your purchases - not by your abstinence. the impacts that your positive contributions have on the market are of much more value than simply abstaining from some shitty alternative.\n\nnever mind that individual action can collectively impact markets... our votes carry much more weight with our purchases than they do with our abstinence. create the demand for affordable alternatives that can have real-world impacts on consumer habits. make it easier for others to adopt the more ethical and sustainable alternative lifestyle. normalize the behavior and reward the decisions, personal and commercial. dollars don't just punish.\n\ni'm drunk. excuse the rant. good night.\n\n",
"Forgive me for the lengthy reply, but this is an issue that many people wrestle with (vegans and non-vegans alike) so I think it warrants some attention.\n\nI think the issue is that you seem to be looking at the problem from the top-down; of course one person is going to appear to not me making much of a difference if you're looking at the animal agriculture industry as a whole.\n\nTry looking at it from the bottom-up. Every time you don't eat an animal, you are potentially sparing one being a miserable existence and violent slaughter. This makes a massive difference *to that individual.*\n\nLet's imagine that you and I are kayaking on a huge lake and in the distance we see a large boat capsize. We get closer and realize that it has thrown a few hundred children in the water. We discuss what we should do and realize that if we go back to shore for help, they will all drown by the time help arrives. We can help, but we only have enough room to save one or two children. Should we leave because we can't save them all and saving one or two of them won't make that big of a difference, or should we try to save the one or two that we can? This could be extended to environmental causes as well; should each of us do what we can to lower our impact on the environment, or should we just feel free to spew greenhouse gasses and pollutants as much as we can since a single individual can't change the entire system?\n\nA similar situation is described in the boy and the starfish parable:\n\n > *One day a man was walking along the beach when he noticed a boy picking something up and gently throwing it into the ocean.*\n\n > *Approaching the boy, he asked, \"What are you doing?\"*\n\n > *The youth replied, \"Throwing starfish back into the ocean. The surf is up and the tide is going out. If I don’t throw them back, they’ll die.\"*\n\n > *\"Son,\" the man said, \"don’t you realize there are miles and miles of beach and hundreds of starfish? You can’t possibly make a difference!\"*\n\n > *After listening politely, the boy bent down, picked up another starfish, and threw it back into the water. Then, smiling at the man, he said, \"I made a difference for that one.\"*\n\nEven from the top-down, there are major and observable changes happening with the food industry, and these changes are happening at an increasing pace.\n\nJust 20 or so years ago, not many people had even heard the term vegan. Plant-based milks were scarce and you'd be lucky to find even simple soy milk. Faux-meats were virtually non-existent, except for the occasional lackluster frozen veggie burger. Vegan mayo wasn't even a thing.\n\nNow, in 2016, much of the developed world is aware of veganism. The markets have adapted as the demand for more vegetarian and vegan options has grown. Not only is soy milk available in almost every town, but many areas now have multiple varieties and brands of cashew milk, almond milk, rice milk, oat milk, and coconut milk. A vegan mayo has taken away so much market share from the major players that that it even caught the attention of the president of the American Egg Board, who called the product [\"a major threat to the future of the egg product business.\"](_URL_4_) The faux meat industry has grown from selling a handful of low-quality unappetizing product to a huge range of high-quality plant-based meats. Vegan substitute companies like Beyond Meat and Hampton Creek are attracting huge investors like Bill Gates. [Google even tried to purchase Impossible Foods.](_URL_6_)\n\nEven major fast-food and restaurant chains tout the fact that they have vegetarian and vegan options. Twenty years ago, this would have been unheard of. [Taco Bell regularly advertises their meat-free options](_URL_1_) and the fact that [they have menu items certified by the American Vegetarian Association.](_URL_3_) Wendy's recently announced a black-bean burger. Fast-casual burrito chains like Chipotle, Pancheros, and Moe's have begun offering sauteed or grilled tofu as a protein option right alongside their meat options. Even [White Castle has a completely vegan burger](_URL_2_). Blaze Pizza chain offers a vegan cheese option for every pizza. Most other chains have made an effort to include at least a few vegan or vegetarian options on the menu, even if it's just a simple veggie burger.\n\nThere have even been some completely vegan chain restaurants emerge with locations around the US, like [Native Foods](_URL_0_) and [Veggie Grill](_URL_5_). These thriving businesses would not have been possible just 20 years ago.\n\n[U.S. vegetarian food sales, which is a category that includes things like soy milk and faux meat and not simply produce, doubled between 1998 and 2003.](_URL_7_)\n\nIt's clear that the 18 million or so vegetarian in the US *are* having an effect on the industry.\n\nTL;DR: Going vegan or vegetarian can make (and has made) a huge difference.",
"Disclaimer: I am not vegetarian or vegan.\n\nYour family will have very little impact by themselves. But as part of a larger movement they may have a very large impact. Remember that even a group of a billion people is made up of individuals.\n\nYou are a drop in the bucket, but you cant fill the bucket without any drops.",
"My brother was vegetarian for some time and he told me an answer that made sense to me.\n\nHe said, it probably doesn't change anything if one person becomes a vegetarian, but he doesn't want to support meat production with his money. That's it. \n\nFor example, let's say you are moving to a country where you can buy slaves. You are probably against slavery and even though it wouldn't change anything if you don't buy one (There won't be more or less slaves), you still don't want to support that with your money."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.nativefoods.com/",
"http://www.businessinsider.com/taco-bell-attempts-to-attract-vegetarians-2016-8",
"https://np.reddit.com/r/vegan/comments/3nmqli/white_castles_veggie_sliders_are_now_vegan/",
"https://www.tacobell.com/feed/how-to-eat-veggie",
"https://www.washington... | |
3mohnn | going to the casino for first time | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mohnn/eli5_going_to_the_casino_for_first_time/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvgqwxw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In blackjack, make physical motions to signify whether you want to hit or stand. There's cameras in the ceiling that are looking for shady or cheating play, and they don't have microphones.\n\nSet aside your gambling budget, and don't go over that. Understand that with the exception of poker, every bet you make has a percentage against you. They don't pay you off at correct odds, and that's the charge for playing the game.\n\nPoker's different in that there's a percentage taken from the pot, to a maximum. Any money in the pot above that maximum is effectively a free bet. The table will have a card that has this amount, called the rake, on it, usually to the dealer's right. In California, the rake has to be known fully before cards are dealt, so it'll be a flat $5-7 per hand.\n\nEdit: One of the things you might want to do is go to your local library and see if they have Scarne's New Complete Guide to Gambling. It has all the major games from the 30s through the 70s; craps, blackjack, roulette, baccarat, etc, as well as side games like the wheels, and gives you the payouts and percentages for the time. Not a whole lot will have changed since then, so you'll have a good idea of the better bets to make."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
4b2fym | when tv shows use really good music from really unknown groups, how did they find it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4b2fym/eli5_when_tv_shows_use_really_good_music_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"d15j167",
"d15j77u",
"d15je20",
"d15m2np",
"d15m5x8",
"d15ueh5",
"d15v5ss",
"d15vskg"
],
"score": [
4,
5,
51,
12,
513,
3,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"There's really no one answer here. You can find artists from all over, whether they hold auditions, they look on YouTube, they look on Facebook, or any other media site. They can find them just by the producer/director walking into a club and liking what they hear. So yeah, there's no one answer. \n\nEdit: they can also have a hired person to create the music that way. ",
"Generally speaking, people who make tv shows tend to be artistic people and live in music hubs (LA/NYC) so they go to a lot of shows which are often headlined by indie acts. If they like the act then they offer a opportunity to that band.\n\nAlso another important reason is that using music from unknown group is a lot cheaper than using a known group. Unknown groups have zero leverage in negotiating contract terms so they can't force the other side to pay more or cause a legal headache to use their music. ",
"Their job is to look for this kind of music. No matter who you are, you're bound to find good indie or underground music if you work 8+ hours a day looking for it and producing it",
"I was in an unknown band for about ten years in the nineties to mid 2000's that had several songs played on various tv shows, indie movies, etc. All of those connections were made by either our management at the time or playing live shows in New York/LA and having music supervisors see us perform",
"Most TV shows have someone on staff called the Music Supervisor. It is their job to acquire the songs you hear on a show, negotiate their rights, etc. Sometimes there's a specific song the show wants for a scene, something real famous, but most of the time the producers/writers don't have the time to nitpick through and pick all their music, so they say \"we want an uptempo song here\" and the Music Supervisor goes to work.\n\nThe Music Supervisor is generally someone in the know about indie music (a lot of the shows that are produced in LA use the DJs from the highly influential KCRW radio station), whose job it is to find the hot new bands before they're hot. If a show has a certain tone or feel to it (eg Veronica Mars and its neo noir ambient soundtrack), the Music Supervisor will quickly get a handle on the groups that fit the show, and as the show builds traction they might even begin to get a ton of demo CD's from the various labels who want to increase their band's visibility by putting it on the hot new show. \n\nRecord labels know who the Music Supervisors on the tastemaking shows are, they develop these relationships as the shows license more music from them, so if a label has a new act they want to get out there they'll reach out pre-emptively and say \"hey, we got this great new act, here's their album, wanna put it on your show?\"\n\nThe other thing that might happen sometimes (although this seems to happen less and less these days) is that record labels will attach unknown acts to known ones. You want that Radiohead song that you love? That'll be 50,000 dollars, PLUS you have to use these 5 other songs from some of our up and coming artists in your show as well.\n\nSource: worked in the sound dept of a major TV studio for 4 years, saw this kind of stuff on the regular.",
"Met a guy the other day who told me he owned a record company. He was dressed normally and we live in a second rate UK provincial city.\n\nI just asked him if he was here in disguise and slumming it for inspiration.\n\nAnd he explained that the industry has changed since Napster and now his job is to place music in films, TV series, ads, jingles, corporate videos etc. So far, he has placed one of his artists on a Red Bull ad, and is talking to aforementioned Music Supervisor of the major TV channels and production companies.",
"Others describe the usual way it is done; with a music supervisor who is well versed in music. \n\nSome shows do it differently though. On Scrubs(one of the best soundtracks ever on a TV show IMO) Christa Miller-Lawrence(Drew Carey Show, Scrubs, Cougar Town) was the official 'Music Supervisor', but really the whole cast and crew took on the job with everyone bringing her new music they discovered, liked, and that might fit the episode in question. In the end it gives the soundtrack far more variety than would normally appear on a sitcom.",
"I thought Zach Braff chose the music for every TV show? "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
3h7r39 | why do so many people want the president of brazil to resign? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3h7r39/eli5_why_do_so_many_people_want_the_president_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu53vlb",
"cu55lk9"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Corruption charges against her party (not against her personally), with possible campaign financing using dirty money; this combined with a recession due to bad economic decisions and blatant lies during the presidential campaign (duh). No legal reason yet for impeachment, just public outcry.",
"She has a [single digit approval rating](_URL_1_)(8%). That is *really* bad. (GWBush's was [38% at its lowest](_URL_0_))\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.commdiginews.com/news-2/44s-approval-ratings-at-44-obama-and-bush-both-polarized-gallup-polls-19404/",
"http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/dilma-rousseff-brazilian-presidents-approval-rating-drops-to-just-8-per-cent-10445536.html"
]
] | ||
f3dg2v | how can they make “vegan meat” that’s made of plants taste and feel so much like real meat? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f3dg2v/eli5_how_can_they_make_vegan_meat_thats_made_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"fhi0uit",
"fhi87b4",
"fhikm53",
"fhipqbe",
"fhjxxaj"
],
"score": [
5,
20,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Chemist's found the molecule which makes both the smell and taste of beef. They manufacture/purify that molecule, and use it to flavor the plant products. The texturing is a different matter, which I dont understand either lol",
"vegan meat has been a thing forever and was just squishy soy. The recent really exciting thing is they have figured out that \"tastes like meat\" meant \"tastes like blood\" and someone figured out how to make yeast produce 'heme' which is the part of blood that tastes like anything. Mix that in with a little effort in making fats that feel more like animal fat than plant oil and you have some fake hamburgers that taste a lot like a hamburger.",
"Also, a lot of flavor that people associate meat with is actually plant spices used in those dishes. It doesn’t make it super difficult to replicate.",
"The real answer to this question is that they can't. My GF is vegan and I've tried all of these \"game changers\" not a single one comes even remotely close to the taste and texture of real meat.",
"Taste like real meat? I don't know what kind of meat you eat, but mine definitely doesn't taste like salty greasy rags.\n\nAs far as a fast food burger goes, sure, they taste similar. Then again, if you grab anything, up to and including play-doh add a ton of salt, smear it with ketchup, mayo and mustard and then bury it inside a bun, it'll taste similar.\n\nTry comparing a medium cooked half pound 80/20 meat burger to a vegan alternative and they will not be alike, at all."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
4vafwb | how are trigonometric ratios (sin cos tan) calculated/how do they work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vafwb/eli5_how_are_trigonometric_ratios_sin_cos_tan/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5wtube",
"d5wu5hz",
"d5wyxpk"
],
"score": [
5,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"There's a clue in the name. Trigonometry, the geometry of triangles! \n\nWay back when some people figured out that if you keep the angles of a right triangle the same, the ratio of one side to any other side will always be the same no matter how big the triangle is. \n\nSo if you draw a right triangle, the side opposite to the biggest angle (90^o for a right triangle) is always the biggest side, the hypotenuse. \n\nSo pick one of the other angles. The ratio of the side opposite the angle to the hypotenuse is called the sine, it's a function of the angle. \n\nCosine is the ratio of the adjacent side to the hypotenuse. \n\nTangent is the ratio of the opposite side of the angle to the adjacent side. \n\nHow they're calculated depends on some higher level math. Modern ways of doing it involve some hefty calculus to understand. \n\nThe ancient ways used before we had calculus are approximations and some of them were not sure how they were discovered. But the gist is you only ever need to know the sine function of an angle to know the cosine or tangent. You can prove this with some simple geometry to show the cosine of an angle is equal to the sine of the angle, plus 90^o . You can also show that the tangent of an angle is the ratio of sine to cosine. So if you can figure out a way to find the sine, you can find the cosine, and then find the tangent. ",
"The trigonometric functions are defined like this: look at the unit circle - a circle whose center is at point (0,0) and whose radius is exactly 1. Now, start measuring an angle A from the point (1,0) on the circle, counterclockwise. For example, if A=90° (see note ahead) then you reach the point (0,1), or if A=45° you reach the point which is halfway between (0,1) and (1,0) on the circle.\n\nThe X value of the point you've reached is defined as cos(A), the Y value is defined as sin(A), and the ratio between them is defined as tan(A) = sin(A) / cos(A).\n\nAs you can see, some values of cos and sin can be calculated using simple geometry - for example, if A=90° or A=0° then the values are obvious, and they can also be easily calculated if A=30°, 45° or 60°.\n\nNote: we don't actually use degree values like 0,30,45,60,90, but instead we use radians, which measure the distance walked along the circle - the length of the circle is 2\\*π, so for example 90° is a quarter of a circle, so we use π/2 instead of 90°.\n\nBut how do we calculate other values?\n\nTaylor series!\n\nGiven a function f(x) and some point a, the taylor series at point a is defined as this infinite series:\n\nf(a) + f'(a)\\*(x-a)/1! + f''(a)\\*(x-a)^(2)/2! + f'''(a)\\*(x-a)^(3)/3! + ...\n\nWhere f' is the derivative of the function, f'' is the second derivative, etc.\n\nThe question is: for which values of x does this series converge, and what is its relation to the original function f?\n\nIt turns out that for some functions (for example cos and sin), the Taylor series is equal to the original function. So for example if we take a=0 and x=0.5 we'll get that cos(0.5) = cos(0) + cos'(0)\\*(0.5)/1! + cos''(0)\\*(0-.5)^(2)/2! + cos'''(0)\\*(0.5)^(3)/3! + ...\n\nSince we know the values of cos(0), cos'(0) etc., we can see that cos(x) = 1 - x^(2)/2! + x^(4)/4! - x^(6)/6! + ...\n\nSin also has a similar taylor series, and so do many other functions.\n\nAs you can see, the terms of the taylor series become smaller and smaller (since the denominator becomes larger and larger). This means that in order to get an accurate estimate of the values of these functions, all we need to do is calculate just a few terms of the taylor series - the more terms we calculate, the closer our estimate will be. So we can say that cos(x) ≈ 1 - x^(2)/2! + x^(4)/4! - x^(6)/6! + x^(8)/8!, which is rather easy to calculate. ",
"_URL_0_\n\nThat whole website is worth exploring. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://betterexplained.com/articles/intuitive-trigonometry/"
]
] | ||
37peb0 | why can't people 'hack' bitcoins? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37peb0/eli5_why_cant_people_hack_bitcoins/ | {
"a_id": [
"cronygl",
"croo1yu"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"what do you mean by \"hack\"?",
"They have, 5 years ago someone gave themselves 186 billion bitcoin and the whole bitcoin economy had to be rewound by 8 hours to fix the bug that allowed it. It hasn't happened again since but maybe it could. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
67xqzm | how do people get infected with plaque? | Plaque is bacteria, right? If so, how is it that everyone has it in their mouths, even if they've had no contact with another person's mouth, even indirectly? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/67xqzm/eli5_how_do_people_get_infected_with_plaque/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgu1409",
"dguad7z"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Bacteria are everywhere. In your mouth, on your skin, inside your body, on your food, in the air... everywhere ",
"Plaque isn't just one bactera it is what is known as a biofilm. Layers and layers of diferent bactera and their extracellular matrixs. Pretty much any bactera can eventually form biofilms. Everyone has bactera on and in their bodies called their natural flora. Your natural flora bactera grow into the plaque on your teeth. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
1s89hv | what are those wooden stick things on bottles of honey, and how did they come to represent honey? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1s89hv/eli5_what_are_those_wooden_stick_things_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"cduwfd6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's called a honey dipper, and that's just what it's designed for. As to the advantage to using one of those instead of a spoon, according to a random guy on a Google Answers from 6 years ago:\n\n > Two words - surface tension. The grooves allow the honey (with a high surface tension) to be pulled in while they are horizontal, but flow out when they are vertical."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
3w442z | how do engagement rings work? | Kind of never learned that part when I was young.
So how is this process work? after a man gives a woman the ring, she carries it with her and then takes it off on the wedding day? do the couple go for ring shopping after the proposal to find a ring for the man? I've seen people put their wedding ring on both left and right hand, does it matter?
Thanks. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3w442z/eli5_how_do_engagement_rings_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxt6194",
"cxt644f",
"cxt68dp",
"cxt6im5",
"cxt7o36",
"cxt7v73",
"cxtdanv",
"cxtfgl1",
"cxu4a57"
],
"score": [
35,
9,
15,
45,
10,
9,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The engagement ring can be worn with the wedding ring or taken off and just have a wedding ring. Some people don't ever have engagement rings - my Mum didn't. I have and I will continue to wear it with my wedding ring when I get married. In the UK the rings are worn on the left hand.",
"The woman generally wears the ring on the ring finger of her left hand and continues wearing it throughout the engagement and marriage.\n\nThe couple can shop for a ring together, or the man can buy it himself. Men do not generally wear engagement rings.\n\nEngagement rings are a giant scam by the diamond industry and not a real \"tradition\" in Western countries. The practice didn't exist until fairly recently.",
"The engagement ring should be worn in the left ring finger WITH the wedding band. If your thinking about making a purchase, buy a set, so the engagement ring and wedding band will match. After she says yes, then the couple will go out and get the guy a band. The engagement ring should be worn closest to the hand, and then the wedding band next to it. \n\nTraditionally, if the husband dies, the wedding band and engagement ring will be switched to keep the wedding band 'closer to the heart'.",
"Short version: Do whatever makes the two of you happy.\n\nLong version: Emily Post documented the rules of polite society in the 1920s. It has been the standard of American tradition. For very formal couples or people with an eye to please their elders, this might be a useful read:\n\n \n \n\n > THE ENGAGEMENT RING\n\n > It is doubtful if he who carries a solitaire ring enclosed in a little square box and produces it from his pocket upon the instant that she says “Yes,” exists outside of the moving pictures! As a matter of fact, the accepted suitor usually consults his betrothed’s taste—which of course may be gratified or greatly modified, according to the length of his purse—or he may, without consulting her, buy what ring he chooses. A solitaire diamond is the conventional emblem of “the singleness and endurability of the one love in his life,” and the stone is supposed to be “pure and flawless” as the bride herself, and their future together—or sentiments equally beautiful. There is also sentiment for a sapphire’s “depth of true blue.” Pearls are supposed to mean tears; emeralds, jealousy; opals, the essence of bad luck; but the ruby stands for warmth and ardor: all of which it is needless to say is purest unfounded superstition. 10 \n > In the present day, precious stones having soared far out of reach of all but the really rich, fashion rather prefers a large semi-precious one to a microscopic diamond. “Fashion,” however, is merely momentary and local, and the great majority will probably always consider a diamond the only ring to have. 11 \n > It is not obligatory, or even customary, for the girl to give the man an engagement present, but there is no impropriety in her doing so if she wants to, and any of the following articles would be suitable: A pair of cuff links, or waist-coat buttons, or a watch chain, or a key chain, or a cigarette case. Probably because the giving of an engagement ring is his particular province, she very rarely gives him a ring or, in fact, any present at all. 12 \n > The engagement ring is worn for the first time “in public” on the day of the announcement. \n\n\n > BUYING THE WEDDING RING\n\n > It is quite usual for the bride to go with the groom when he buys the wedding ring, the reason being that as it stays for life on her finger, she should be allowed to choose the width and weight she likes and the size she finds comfortable. \n",
"If the engagement is over, state law decides who keeps the engagement ring.\n\n_URL_0_",
"In the west, engagement/wedding rings are worn on the left ring finger. In the east (which includes parts of Eastern Europe and Russia), the rings are worn on the right hand. It's really a cultural/social convention anyway, so whatever makes you two happy is what matters.\n\nWhen I proposed to my wife, I already had an engagement ring/wedding ring set. I wanted it to be a surprise for her, so I got her size from her sister and designed it myself. Shortly after I proposed we went to a store and picked out a ring for me.\n\nWe're American, so we both wear our rings on our left hands. She wears her engagement ring on the inside, her wedding band on the outside.",
"Engagement ring goes on moment of engagement. LEFT ring finger, unless betrothed does not have one. During wedding when time to place wedding ring on, engagement ring comes off, wedding ring goes on, engagement ring goes back on. Husband dies, Rings get moved to right ring finger. Dunno why...",
"Well, if you want a bit of history, here: _URL_0_\n\nShort answer, you can give whatever you want, it doesn't have to be a ring at all. The diamond ring worth two months salary is a marketing ploy.",
"I always wanted to know how to find out the right size for a ring. My girlfriend never wears rings, so she does not know her size herself. And I kind of cant ask her to get her size measured without ruining the suprise. \n\nIs there a formula to figure this out, or do I somehow have to take a string and wrap it around her finger while she is sleeping? I appreciate every idea"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/returning-engagement-ring-30198.html"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.americangemsociety.org/the-history-of-the-diamond-as-an-engagement-ring"
],
[]
] | |
1imkip | how does a ship made of steel float? | Being made of steel and what not. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1imkip/how_does_a_ship_made_of_steel_float/ | {
"a_id": [
"cb5wktf",
"cb5xs3l",
"cb5y6tc"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The shape. Shape it like a bowl, so that it displaces the water, and any material will float - concrete, lead, whatever. Shape the same material into a sphere, and it will only float if it's less dense than water (or whatever you're trying to float it in).\n\nOk, you can also get a sphere to float if it's very tiny. This is due to surface tension and isn't relevant to ships at all. ",
"It needs to displace more then its weight in water. A heavier material such as steel would have to have more internal volume then a lighter material such as wood.",
"In order to float it needs to be lighter than the water it displaces. That means the floating ability of an object is determined by its whole mass and its whole volume. The fewer mass is dsitributed over a larger volume, the easier an object can float. In other words it depends on the average density (mass per volume) of the object. \n\nThe trick to make a ship made of steel float is not to use a solid block of steel without an empty interior (which would not float), but just cover the volume with a rather thin layer of steel. Then the average density is much much lower than the density of steel and water and the ship can float."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
g2ghrb | if alcohol burns off during cooking why does the flavor remain? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/g2ghrb/eli5_if_alcohol_burns_off_during_cooking_why_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"fnl92g0",
"fnl9aj6"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Ethanol is basically flavorless. The flavor in alcoholic drinks is almost entirely produced by non-alcohol compounds that mostly remain when cooked.",
"You can talk about Alcohol in terms of something like Rum or Whiskey as a whole (more properly referred to as liquor), or you can talk about the actual alcohol molecules. The liquor has an alcohol percentage, such as 35% for Jack Daniels, which represents how many alcohol molecules there are in relation to other compounds.\n\nWhen you talk about the alcohol burning off, it's just the alcohol molecules, and not the whole liquor. The remainder is also what makes up the majority of the taste of the liquor as well."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
2sa88a | what is the median lethal dose (ld 50)? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2sa88a/eli5_what_is_the_median_lethal_dose_ld_50/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnnkkzh",
"cnnklz7"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"I believe it refers to the dosage of any substance or drug, which kills 50% of the people who take it. (the lethal dose is not the same for all people)",
"It's the dosage of a substance required to kill half of a test group in some set duration. \n\nAfter time Y, X amount of Drug Z will have killed 50 of 100 mice. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
a5sc3a | why are pillows considered good for sleeping when they bend your neck so that it's not parallel to your spine? | This is for when you sleep facing the ceiling. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a5sc3a/eli5_why_are_pillows_considered_good_for_sleeping/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebovki5",
"ebowm1k",
"ebp5hid"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Put it under your shoulders, not your head. \n\nAlso there are different pillow shapes for different sleep positions. \n\nReally though, they're just comfy. Plus there's always the cool side 😎",
"Most people sleep on their sides. I actually recently bought a bigger sturdier pillow with one blunt side since I'm rather tall and wide, and been sleeping way better since. My neck is now alligned with my spine when I'm sideways.\n\nFetal position ftw",
"Your spine isn't a straight line when viewed from the side, it has [natural curves](_URL_0_). The pillow is there to support your neck's natural curve forwards so it doesn't have to support the weigth of the head."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://mayfieldclinic.com/Images/pe-scoliosis-fig1.jpg"
]
] | |
2jutar | why the animals in the coral reefs are so colorful | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jutar/eli5_why_the_animals_in_the_coral_reefs_are_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"clf9uws",
"clfbp8e"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Theres a myriad of reasons, but the most well known one is simply to identify eachother. Coral reefs are so densely populated with creatures that theyve all evolved colors and patterns to distinguish themselves from one another. It helps find mates, school together for safety, and generally just avoid getting lost. Another reason is that a lot of fish like to blend in with whatever they live in. Clown fish have wavy stripes to help blend in with anemonies. ",
"One important factor that hasn't been addressed - coral reefs are often located in shallow clear waters. The light from the sun penetrates through the water, but most importantly all the colours are visible at this shallow depth. In deeper waters, certain colours cannot penetrate, and since that colour does not exist at those depths there are very few reasons for anything to be that colour or to be able to see that colour.\n\n[This image explains exactly what I am talking about](_URL_0_). And this [article explains the phenomenon in greater depth](_URL_1_).\n\n\"Let’s talk a little about absorption. Water has a huge capacity for the absorption of light – or more specifically, the different wavelengths of light. Water molecules vibrate, just as all things do that are made out of atoms. The vibration of water molecules causes absorption in the infrared part of the spectrum; 698nm to be specific.\nRed has a wavelength of 700nm, which is just on the borderline of the visible spectrum. This is why red is the first colour to disappear...You can even take this one step further, and use the colour red as your camouflage. This makes you invisible! Light in the upper ranges in the spectrum travel the shortest distance – a cloaking device so to speak. Red cannot even be perceived as red underwater...\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/04deepscope/background/deeplight/media/diagram3.html",
"http://www.scuba-monkey.com/why-is-the-ocean-blue-what-is-blue-exactly/"
]
] | ||
2is2hn | why do areas of purple 'noise' show up in my vision after looking at the sun, or during/after a headache? | Aura Migraine, but not quite.
Both eyes have completely the same spot blocked. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2is2hn/eli5_why_do_areas_of_purple_noise_show_up_in_my/ | {
"a_id": [
"cl4xhhv",
"cl50fgc"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"I want to know that too.\nMaybe i can add a question to that ELI5 topic: Why do i see lightning like things when closing my eyes and pushing/rolling them with my finger?",
"Your brain turns down a specific colour if it sees too much of it. Just like how you get used to a smell - the smell might still be there but your brain tunes it out so you can smell other stuff too. Back in school we'd use sports hall with old yellow lights and after an hour of being in there everything outside looked blue until our eyes adjusted again.\n\nOur brains don't need to be overloaded with a huge washout of the same colour so we get used to it to pick out new information. Maybe it was to help spot the ripest red fruits in a huge bush of slightly less fruits or something."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
tad5n | what is cosplay? specifically how is it different than just wearing a costume? | See title. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/tad5n/eli5_what_is_cosplay_specifically_how_is_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4kw7nr",
"c4kwrhl",
"c4kyybf"
],
"score": [
23,
5,
26
],
"text": [
"Cosplay is short for costume play. So it is not any different from wearing a costume.\n\nThat said usually a cosplayer will custom make their costume with often painstaking attention to detail so they are often of a very high quality.",
"Many are based off existing characters, some people roleplay what they are dressed as, many costumes are made by the person who is wearing them, and most do this for conventions rather than parties.\n\nFor instance, instead of wearing a costume of a robot on Halloween, someone makes and wears a costume of Optimus Prime to a convention. When people talk to them, instead of saying, \"Thanks, I made this myself!\" they may be in-character and say things like \"Autobots, roll out!\"",
"I'd like to explain this, as I have to often enough as a cosplayer. :P\n\n\nCosplay (short for \"costume play\") originated in Japan, and is a way of expressing one's admiration of a character from a manga, anime, movie, tv show or game. It goes beyond the realm of the typical Halloween costume in many aspects: craftmanship, personal experience, and role playing (in a sense, and I'll explain.) They are also comprised of many pieces, from head to toe, from wigs to accessories along with the main costume. \n\n\nIn regards to craftmanship, cosplayers range in levels from beginners to the elite master ranks. However, their goals are often the same: to be accurate to the character, to create a high quality creation, and to share it with others. :) Many (myself included) make their costumes completely by hand, or sometimes by using items found at thrift stores and such. A growing trend is buying prefabricated items (premade by another person) or even complete costumes.\n\n\nAnother intregal part of cosplay is personal experience (with a tie in to role playing for some). Many cosplayers do what they do to feel connected to the characters they are portraying, those around them who also enjoy the series or character, or even just for the companionship and time spent with friends (my number one reason!). When in costume, a cosplayer has 2 choices as well: to simply look like the character they are cosplaying as, or to act and become that character. This is where role playing can come into play. :)\n\n\nOverall, I would sum up my experiences and purpose of cosplay as such: I find it to be an amazing creative outlet through which I can create works of art for others to enjoy and admire. I love meeting new, interesting people through cosplay and I enjoy the quality time I get to spend with my cosplay partner in crime. :)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
3xexdd | the situation of the 3 nfl teams potentially moving to la | St. Louis Rams - San Diego Chargers - Oakland Raiders
How are the owners preparing to propose their moves?
What vote is taking place on Jan. 15? What combinations of the three teams could move? What happens to divisions or conferences if the Chargers and Raiders(both in AFC west) move to the same city? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3xexdd/eli5_the_situation_of_the_3_nfl_teams_potentially/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy45lar",
"cy46q6k",
"cy486ux",
"cy4aaz4",
"cy4l2bp",
"cy4r65f"
],
"score": [
2,
34,
4,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Whenever teams say this, it it usually a threat to get the city to build them a stadium or help them is some way.",
"Basically all 3 teams are looking for new stadiums. All 3 play in really crappy stadiums. The best way for a team to gain leverage and get public funding for a new billion dollar + stadium is to threaten to move to another city (LA in this case). \n\nIn the case of St. Louis, their owner Stan Kroenke(sp?) owns a large plot of land in the Inglewood area of LA where he has proposed to develop a multi billion dollar stadium both out of pocket and with public funds. They also have a stadium proposal in St. Louis made up of mostly public funding. Their owner wants to move to LA but can't until he gets approval from at least 3/4 of the NFL teams (which is what the January vote is for), at which point he'd probably stick his middle finger up to St. Louis and head for the greener pastures of LA. Should they move to LA, by themselves it would more than likely have no effect on the current NFL division alignment as they'd still fit in the NFC West.\n\nThe Chargers and Raiders are and interesting case. They're two long time rivals who have recently come together and more or less proposed to go 50/50 on a new stadium in Carson, meaning they'd share a stadium. The Chargers have a stadium proposal in San Diego but it's to my knowledge the NFL has rejected that and their owners (the Spanos family) has their eyes set on LA. On January 15 they'll more than likely request a move to LA, and like the Rams if they get 3/4's of the vote they'll be an LA team. The Raiders tho, are flirting with other cities (like LA and previously San Antonio) to get a new stadium in Oakland which Oakland has not budged on as they will not build one with public funds. In order to get out of their [literal shit hole stadium](_URL_0_) they'll up and move to LA, pending the vote. There will not be 3 teams in LA, if all 3 teams propose it's highly likely at least one will be denied, a high chance of it being St. Louis, as their city has proposed a [strong stadium proposal.](_URL_1_)\n\nShould the Chargers and Raiders both move to LA in a shared stadium it's likely one team would get \"traded\" to the NFC West in exchange for one of their teams (possibly the Seahawks who have AFC roots.) ",
"[John Oliver](_URL_0_) has a perfect video that explains it. Basically, sports teams generate so much money for cities that they have the power to strong arm cities into spending tax dollars on stadiums. When sports teams don't get their way, they threaten to move to LA, where they pay for teams' infrastructure. ",
"You'll want to spend some time at _URL_0_\n\nBasically the teams know that fan loyalty will let them strong arm politicians into giving them cash. Of course they can't just take cash, that would look bad, so they create complicated arrangements where cities build them stadiums or offer them tax holidays and such. At the end of the day it means your tax dollars are not going to pay for doctors, teachers, police, fire, transit, roads, etc, they are going to enrich private sports teams. And the worst part is that we are complicit, in that if a politician stands up for our best interest, we'll vote him out of office for the benefit of the people who own \"our\" teams.\n",
"Can't speak for all teams, but I'll give a big analysis of the Raiders' situation!\n\nIn Oakland, there are currently three professional sports team: the Warriors(NBA), the A's(MLB), and the Raiders(NFL). All three teams are located in the same complex lot. The Raiders and A's share the _URL_0_ Colliseum which is the last shared stadium between an NFL and MLB team in the country. It is also one of the oldest stadiums in the country still being used by professional sports teams. The Warriors play next door in Oracle Arena, which honestly is still an amazing venue for basketball.\n\nAll three teams are threatening to leave Oakland to various extents. The Warriors are basically guaranteed a privately funded arena in San Francisco just across the Bay; they are without a doubt a sure shot to leave. Both the Raiders and A's are threatening to leave Oakland if they aren't given new stadiums. However, Oakland plans to only build one new stadium on the Coliseum site whether it be for the A's or the Raiders, but no party involved is suggesting the stadium to be shared between both teams as with the current situation. \n\nTo make matters even more complex, Oakland's mayor is shutting down any stadium proposals that rely on public spending rather than private funds. This is trickier because Oakland is not like San Francisco and San Jose where private companies would jump at the idea of putting their name on a brand new stadium to house a professional sports team. With that said, it seems that Oakland is going to have to focus on maintaining one team whether its the A's or the Raiders. The Raiders have the proposal for a downtown LA stadium shared with Chargers already lined up in case Oakland doesn't build them a stadium. The A's have been trying for years to move to San Jose where a stadium could without a doubt be privately funded. However, the MLB has been blocking this effort because San Jose is a territory dispute that San Francisco has claim to (even though both San Francisco and Oakland are about equally distant from San Jose). This in itself is a topic big enough for its own ELI5.\n\nTL;DR- Oakland has 3 teams, and is loosing 1 for sure (Warriors). The other 2 share an old shitty stadium, and are demanding separate plans for new stadiums. Oakland doesn't have the money to keep both so will likely only keep 1.",
"last thing I read and heard is that the NFL want the Raiders to share with the 49ers, and the Rams and Chargers to share the Inglewood stadium "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/9393784/sewage-problem-puts-oakland-seattle-mariners-same-locker-room",
"http://www.athleticbusiness.com/stadium-arena/new-renderings-released-of-985m-st-louis-nfl-stadium.html"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcwJt4bcnXs"
],
[
"http://www.fie... | |
16v7k9 | how does the "cooldown time" on cracking your fingers and toes work? | like after I crack, I can't crack again for a while | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16v7k9/eli5_how_does_the_cooldown_time_on_cracking_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7znme2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Inside the joints of your fingers and toes is a liquid called synovial fluid. Inside this liquid is dissolved gas. When you crack your knuckles you are lowering the pressure in the fluid and causing the gas to come out of solution. This creates a bubble which almost immediately pops. This popping noise is the crack you hear.\n\nIt takes time for that gas to redissolve into the fluid of your joints again."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
37c7pd | why did qr codes seem to die out? they could have made things so easy if phone manufacturers supported them. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37c7pd/eli5_why_did_qr_codes_seem_to_die_out_they_could/ | {
"a_id": [
"crlesws",
"crlf42i",
"crlfjw7",
"crlfmia",
"crlpjn6"
],
"score": [
2,
26,
5,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"It's not something phone manufacturers need to support - there are virtually no smartphones out there that you can't install a barcode reader on. \n\nQR codes were (are?) a lot more popular in Asia than in the US. They just never caught on here because, well, I suppose people didn't see much point. You didn't get a lot of extra value from them, so people didn't bother. \n\nQR codes are still very widespread, though. They're just not very widely used. ",
"Partly it is because of the litigious nature of united states corporate information technology liability insurance and how US law handles intellectual property claims and patent law —\n\nThe company that holds the patent on QR codes, Denso Wave, is a Japanese company and has publicly asserted that they will not exercise royalty/rights for the use of their patent.\n\nThis public assertion is legally of very little worth to US corporations — if Denso Wave so chose, they could wait a decade or two while the technology gets integrated into everyone's hardware and operating systems, then sell the patent to a third party who would then pursue usage royalty payments from every manufacturer — and even every *user* — of the technology, who would then be legally liable for that royalty payment or for fighting the lawsuit.\n\nThis is a giant pain in the %^# , and is readily foreseeable by any and every corporation's intellectual property legal team(s) — many similar situations have occurred before, so much so that there is a term for it, called [_**submarine patents**_](_URL_0_).\n\nSo, if the IP is not explicitly released into the public domain or put out for use under one of the many reasonable licenses available or the corporation doesn't arrive at a licensing agreement with the patent holder *and their assignees*, then it's a giant lawsuit liability to include that particular technology in their official products. So they can't get liability insurance to cover that!\n\nIn the United States, at least.\n\nI absolutely adore QRCodes and all manner of automatable data entry/transmission schemes. I really, *really* wanted them to be widespread — and tried to do just that. The above is what I ran into when asking the same question.\n",
"Because most people feel like idiots standing in a public place, usually blocking traffic, trying to get their phone to read the thing properly. Also they are usually not at the right place. I don't want to access the web site where the sign is, I want to access it later. Its much easier to remember _URL_0_ than to read the QR code, wait for it to load (if there is a good connection), then bookmark it for later.",
"As a supporter (I have them on many marketing pieces, business cards, etc), they don't have much use. I've stopped just because it has no value at this point. It's available on all modern phones, it's not a matter of lacking manufacturer support.\n\nFor instance, the QR code on business cards goes to the company website, which is printed under the code anyway. 99% of people just type the URL into a browser, and the 1% who boot a QR program, take a picture, let it process, and get connected, didn't save any time. No value there.\n\nI tried making a \"v-card\" contact as a QR code for business cards. Scan and add to your contacts.\n\nAnyone who wants to do that would be much better off with a business card OCR program. Works just as fast, but supports all business cards, not just QR'd ones.",
"The answers in this thread are hilarious and only assumptions. They are used in thousands of business's daily. I work for one of Europe's largest pharmacy chains and they provide a vital role in data protection, safety and organization. Just because you don't see them stuck to every poster and lamp post, doesn't mean they are not being used."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_patent"
],
[
"xcompany.com"
],
[],
[]
] | ||
2seenk | if government surveillance isn't actually for counter-terrorism, what is it for? | Basically I'm wondering why the government would want to monitor my boring texts about weed and DOTA. If they're not actually doing it for the reasons they claim they're doing it, then what are the real reasons?
As a disclaimer I'm not saying I support it or that I think it's justified, I'm just trying to understand better the true purpose of surveillance programs used by governments around the world. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2seenk/eli5_if_government_surveillance_isnt_actually_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnonmgz",
"cnoq28a"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"The first thing to consider is \"Who is making the accusation/assertion that they are being used for something other than their intended purpose?\" Knowing who is saying or asking things, and why they're trying to ask it, is a big part of the motivation. As does anything they're using to justify the suspicion or the accusation.\n\nThat said, the general idea if such a thing were happening would be to uncover conspiracies, plots and other such large scale operations. For example, monitoring texts could be (hypothetically) help reveal details of a flow of illegal dealings, such as arms, drug or human trafficking. I'm not saying this justifies it, but rather, that there are other large scale black market operations that could be looked out for as well.",
"Surveillance is done now for the very same reason it has been throughout human history; control. Advertisers, governments and the blackhat community are not interested in your DOTA/illicit substance use just to get to know you better. They don't even really care what YOU do individually (most of the time), but rather the true value of this type of data comes true in aggregate. \n\nWant to know if a majority of the populace will tolerate a certain policy item? Want to craft superior/tailored propaganda? Want to gather actionable blackmail material? All are rendered trivial (relatively). \n\nThe very real threat from mass surveillance today is not from getting a knock on your door over some weed texts. It's that we'll all become trapped in a system that can spot dissent before it matures into a problem. It's from the death of new ideas thanks to oppression and self censorship. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
cz8txv | how das lactose intolerance work? | I get that my body can not digest milk sugar (lactose), but why does it cause diarrhea or other symptoms? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cz8txv/eli5_how_das_lactose_intolerance_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"eywsvq8",
"eywsz59"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"When your body doesn't process the lactose properly (by using lactase enzyme to break it down in a particular way) it travels through to your intestines, where your gut bacteria try to break it down.\n\nWhen your gut bacteria break down the lactose, they don't break it in the same way, and their method of breaking the lactose produces gas.\n\nThe gas triggers the other symptoms- causing bloating and pain, irritating the gut which causes diarrhea because that's your body's natural reaction to try and flush out the irritant, and so on.\n\nSo the problem is that, when someone with lactose intolerance consumes lactose, it's like instead of giving the job to the highly trained specialist employee, you hand it off the the intern, who tries their best but is way in over their head.",
"Lactose is a disaccharide made up of two monosaccharides glucose and galactose. (Disaccharides and monosaccharides are essentially just molecules of sugar!).\n\nIn order to be absorbed in the small intestine, lactose needs to be broken down first into glucose and galactose. \n\nThis normally happens thanks to the presence of an enzyme called lactase which is normally found on the inner wall of the small intestine.\n\nThose who are lactose intolerant lack this enzyme and are therefore unable to break lactose down into galactose and glucose. \n\nLactose carries on along the gi tract to the large intestine where gut bacteria breaks it down into glucose and galactose. Unfortunately the large intestine doesn’t have the ‘transport channels’ that are present in the small intestine that would allow for glucose and galactose to be absorbed from the gi tract into the blood.\n\nThis means that glucose and galactose remain in the large intestine and exert an osmotic force (kind of magnetic force) that draws water from the blood and interstitium into the large intestine.\n\nThe excess of water results in diarrhoea. The break down of the galactose into glucose and galactose results in gas, bloating and pain.\n\nHope this helps!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
28ppib | if we domesticated wolves into pet dogs, why can't we domesticate monkeys? | Why can't we domesticate monkeys to have as an everyday housepet like dogs or cats? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28ppib/eli5_if_we_domesticated_wolves_into_pet_dogs_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"cid845r",
"cid8paa",
"cid9xih"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Who says we can't? They've already domesticated foxes for user as pets",
"Dogs started domestication themselves first. By the time we got around to breeding, we already had a stock of animals that wanted to be around humans and could behave.",
"It took several thousands of years to get a dog.\n\nIf more time and dedication was put into domesticating monkeys, I'm sure it could work."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
6m4j57 | why do some chiles hit you right away, while others take time for the spiceness to develop? | When eating spicy foods, sometimes you detect the spice as soon as the food hits your tongue. Other times you don't feel the burn until after you've swallowed. What causes this? Does it depend on the type of chile or the amount used? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6m4j57/eli5_why_do_some_chiles_hit_you_right_away_while/ | {
"a_id": [
"djyuwev",
"djz0t8v"
],
"score": [
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Some of this is fat content (or otherwise structuring the capasin - the spicy molecules).\n\nThe fat keeps most of the spicy from hitting your tongue all at once, but is gradually degraded in the mouth, at which time you feel more spicy. Or is encapsulated in some kind of skin, which breaks in the mouth, releasing the spicy.\n\nAlso, some foods have other spicy molecules that behave differently. For instance Wasabi - _URL_0_ \n > Because the burning sensations of wasabi are not oil-based, they are short-lived compared to the effects of chili peppers, and are washed away with more food or liquid. The sensation is felt primarily in the nasal passage and can be quite painful depending on the amount consumed. Inhaling or sniffing wasabi vapor has an effect like smelling salts, a property exploited by researchers attempting to create a smoke alarm for the deaf. One deaf subject participating in a test of the prototype awoke within 10 seconds of wasabi vapor sprayed into his sleeping chamber.[22] The 2011 Ig Nobel Prize in Chemistry was awarded to the researchers for determining the ideal density of airborne wasabi to wake people in the event of an emergency.",
"Peppers get their heat from capsaicin. This molecule is more or less abundant depending on the pepper and how it was grown. \n\nHow the heat hits you depends on what you're eating with it. Capsaicin is an oil (fat, lipid, same thing? dunno). If you're eating oily foods with peppers it can disperse and the heat takes more time to hit. Also depends on what you're drinking. If you chow down on a raw pepper and chug water, good luck, that's gonna hurt as you're just spreading the oil about without dissolving it with other fats. If the heat gets out of hand hold a mouthful of (fatty) milk in your mouth. The capsaicin mellows out quickly.\n\nYou're right of course. Heat depends on the type of pepper and the amount used but results can vary wildly. A store-bought jalapeno is usually pretty mild but a home-grown jalapeno, starved of water and allowed to redden, will knock your socks off. Similarly, Tabasco Sauce™ is pretty mild but a red tabasco pepper straight off the plant will light you up.\n\nOnly mammals have nerve receptors for capsaicin. That's because herbivores grind up the seeds making them useless. Birds can eat peppers with no sensation and happily poop them out everywhere, spreading the species. These same receptors \"burn out\", i.e. they run low on those neurotransmitters. This is why people can become accustomed to heat that is unbearable to others.\n\nThe heat also depends on the part of the pepper you're eating or cooking with. The seeds and placenta (the white part the seeds are growing from) are the hottest. (OK, I'm fairly certain the seeds have little inside them but they're covered in it.) Start eating a raw pepper from the bottom up. You'll quickly see the proof. This can, in part, be attributed to the oil buildup in your mouth but starting a pepper at top is a wholly different experience than nibbling the bottom.\n\nI really like peppers if you want to know more. :)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasabi#Chemistry"
],
[]
] | |
6k0s7q | is there any actual benefit to natural diamonds versus cubic zirconia? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6k0s7q/eli5_is_there_any_actual_benefit_to_natural/ | {
"a_id": [
"djifd4v",
"djik98y",
"djilszl"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
15
],
"text": [
"Well you don't use cubic zirconia industrially the way you use diamond. There are much harder minerals available. CZ does have insdustrial uses as part of ceramics, jet turbines, etc, but not as a crystal like a diamond is used for drills or abrazives. \n\nCZ is a replacement for ornamental diamonds, and in that regard there's nothing the diamond can do the cubic zirconia can't do better, except for diamond's *perceived value*",
"Natural diamonds are much harder than cubic zirconia, so they are useful in industrial applications.\n\nThey also have a different index of refraction, so an \"ideal cut\" diamond will be a different shape than an \"ideal cut\" CZ, so a perfectly cut diamond can't be replaced by a CZ the exact same size and shape and look as good.",
"You know that a cubic zirconia is not an artificial diamond, right? It's just that in jewelry it can be cut to resemble a diamond, even though it doesn't have the exact same properties (eg. lower refractive index)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
4i4ay0 | a person is standing next to the san andreas fault line. what would they experience if an earthquake occurred at that moment? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4i4ay0/eli5_a_person_is_standing_next_to_the_san_andreas/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2uxihd",
"d2uy1n2",
"d2uyw0y"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Probably something like this - \n\n^rumble rumble RUMBLERUMBLERUMBLECRASHSMASH\n\n*Screams*\n\n*Oh god why, save us*\n\nOr at least I assume so.",
"3.0 just a little nervous\n\n5.0 wet pants from spontaneously peeing\n\n7.0 full on shitstorm in the pants",
"First, a minor point that \"the fault line\" isn't a true line, more of a volume. Faults go really deep and aren't perfectly vertical, so the actual centre of seismic activity might not occur directly below the part that looks like a fault at the surface. \n\nA lot of what happens depends entirely on the type and depth of earthquake. Is it a quick jolt and release of energy way down deep, or is it something that causes the surface to heave? Are there pre-quake warning tremors and aftershocks, or is it a quick snap-and-done?\n\nWhat the structure of the rock and soil is like changes things too, both down deep and at the surface. A sandy spot will react a lot differently than if you're standing on a massive slap of brittle rock plating. Where you're standing might stay perfectly intact and just get bounced around a bit, or covered by a landslide, or cracked wide open if that part of the fault shifts further apart, or turn into a massive sinkhole. \n\nFinally a 5.0 quake releases a hundred times as much energy as a 3.0 quake, and a 7.0 quake releases TEN THOUSAND times as much energy. It won't really make a difference if you're 5 meters or 50 meters from the fault's centre, earthquakes are big and usually deep.\n\nA 3.0 quake is sort of like a transport truck driving by you on the highway. \n\nA 5.0 quake will knock you off balance and jam stuff around. \n\nA 7.0 quake will really bounce you around though, and depending on the terrain stuff mentioned above, possibly kill you.\n\n[Some guy filmed how a simulated earthquake of various magnitudes affected a shelf in his house.](_URL_0_) Probably not perfectly accurate but gives you an idea."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bta1STQVsss"
]
] | ||
3azpcj | how do people hack the leaderboards of all the popular games, and why can't companies stop this? | It seems like the leaderboard of every mobile game I play is filled with unreasonably high scores. It ruins the feeling of achievement, and I don't understand why it can't be stopped.
Edit: I understand that my phone has to be able to send my score, but I can also bank and shop online without those being hacked. What's the difference? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3azpcj/eli5_how_do_people_hack_the_leaderboards_of_all/ | {
"a_id": [
"cshgusy"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"You can put all sorts of security in place on the server that scores are submitted to, but the game has to know how to pass all those tests to submit real scores. People can look at the game's code and work out what it would send to the server if their score was eleventy million. You can make it hard to work out and try to hide the important bits of the code as much as possible, but it always has to be possible to work out because your phone has to be able to work it out."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
4vjw6q | why jehovahs witnesses believe blood transfusions are against gods will? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vjw6q/eli5_why_jehovahs_witnesses_believe_blood/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5yzmsn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It has to do with their interpretations of the Bible. They see the blood as the part of the body that contains life and therefore getting other's blood put in you is taking a part of their life. I have quoted two sections of the Bible that refers to blood where the Witnesses may have gotten their beliefs from.\n\nLeviticus 17:11 says: [context: God is speaking to Moses] \"For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.\"\n\nIn Acts 15:28,29, a council of apostles and leaders sends a letter to gentile believers in other areas. In the letter is this statement: \"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
4ukq9d | why hasn't hillary clinton been prosecuted? how can she get away with what she has done with so much publicity on the matter? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ukq9d/eli5_why_hasnt_hillary_clinton_been_prosecuted/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5qgwxv",
"d5qgxga",
"d5qhaih",
"d5qjxvq",
"d5qkz7l",
"d5qqsk0"
],
"score": [
25,
3,
14,
3,
89,
2
],
"text": [
"I feel like the FBI's statement on the matter cleared it up pretty nicely. The crime she was accused of requires intent in order to successfully prosecute. \n\nBecause there is no evidence that she intended to distribute classified information, the FBI recommended no charges be filed.",
"Clinton has not been charged or prosecuted for anything because there is no evidence or not sufficient evidence to warrant laying charges. Publicity, in particular politically-motivated publicity, is not evidence.",
"She hasn't been prosecuted because the head of the FBI (who is a republican) said that what she did with the email was foolish, but not the kind of thing that (nonmilitary) people get prosecuted for. The justice department still could prosecute, but they said that they'd take the FBIs recommendation (before they knew what it would be). Especially since the justice dept works for obama, it is unlikely they'll go against the FBI recommendation and their own earlier promise to follow it.\n\nAs for any of the other bengazi or whatever else, basically despite a half dozen attempts the republican congress hasn't been able to actually find anything against her.\n\nSo the answer to \"how has she gotten away with it\" is that the authorities have found that ahe didn't do anything that she has to get away with legally.\n\nWhether the public thinks that is enough they get to decide for themselves in November.",
"Tl;dr of what others said: regardless of how you feel about what she's done, she didn't actually do anything that they can prosecute her for. \n\nIf you want mishandling of confidential data to be an offense worthy of prosecution in and of itself, gotta make a new law about it, for example.",
"This is very simple. Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State traveled the world continuously. She was frustrated that State Department email had to be viewed on a secure laptop versus her Blackberry device. She instructed her staff to setup a separate email server so that she could get her State department email on one device. She explicitly told them this was only for unclassified email to make doing her job easier. However, in 30,000 email, 22 highly classified email did end up on that server and another 2100 ended up being classified later. The FBI saw no reason to pursue charges because....\n\n- NO crime was committed. She violated a department policy (which others had violated before her).\n- There was no intent to commit a crime. Those emails that were classified and ended up on the server were accidents and not attempts at espionage. \n- Experts all state that the practice is NOT illegal if they mail being sent/received isn't classified. However, everyone knows that this is not a smart practice (which the FBI enforced).\n\nTo be clear:\n\nDid she do something wrong? Yes. She used a personal email server to communicate State department business with her aides primarily. \n\nWill she be prosecuted? No. The FBI has already made it's recommendation and the Justice Department has taken that recommendation.\n\nDid she violate the law? Possibly Yes. Sending classified emails to a private email server is illegal. However, did she know that these email were classified when they were sent is the question. She has admitted her mistake. \n\nCould she be convicted at a later date? Not likely. The FBI didn't have any evidence that she was trying to commit a crime. In their view, the email server was simply a question of poor logic. In her defense, they knew there was a precedence of other state department officials doing the same thing prior to her. In addition, the FBI didn't feel a conviction would be upheld because there is no evidence she knew the policy. Clinton didn't setup Outlook herself. She asked for it and someone delivered. Had one of her staffers followed state department policy, this wouldn't have happened.\n\nIs she getting away with something? Not really. Again, even the FBI admits it would be hard to convict her on anything as no criminal intent was exercised. She just wanted all of her email on her Blackberry. Furthermore, the fact is that as she is no longer Secretary of State and there is no evidence that any of these email correspondence lead to espionage or putting the US in danger, there is little left to be concerned about. The State Department has enforced this policy since Secretary took office. Moreover, it has caused some political damage as it looks questionable.\n\nWhy are we still talking about this? It's now a political thing. People only see a rule broken and no consequences. Furthermore, the talk about this fuels mistrust of her, even if all she was trying to do was make her life a little easier. The fact that she got \"off\" makes people subscribe to conspiracy theories that she used her power and influence to get out of trouble. In reality, FBI Director Comey is a former Republican and followed the law.\n\n\n\n\n\n ",
"\"Why hasn't Hillary Clinton been prosecuted?\"\n\nSimply because, after numerous Congressional hearings and an extensive FBI investigation, it was determined she had committed no indictable offense. In the opinion of James B. Comey, the head of the FBI, nothing she had done rose to the level of a criminal offense.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n**Edit:** Downvotes of disagreement or denial neither refute nor diminish the truth or accuracy of either the statement or linked article."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system"
]
] | ||
27098z | what caused the baby boomer generation to coddle millennials? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27098z/eli5_what_caused_the_baby_boomer_generation_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"chw5py0",
"chw61vk",
"chw64gd",
"chw78y8"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
11,
5
],
"text": [
"They had the money to do so. ",
"They always felt their parents were too strict and wrong. They had all the answers. ",
"I think there are a few reasons:\n\n1. the explosion of mass media for that generation made them aware of the bad things that happen in the world. If your small town had never had a kidnapping, you might not have known that kidnappings happened.\n\n2. we developed an understanding that the circumstances of childhood are related to the circumstances of adulthood. we imagined that if we raised our kids like the kids of the upper-class that they'd end up being the upper class. (and...we grossly misunderstood what the upper class kid's life is actually like).\n\n3. everything became based on fear. Politics, education...everything. We had so much we only thought about what could happen to take it away. Pre and immediately post WWII we were striving as a society to be something more and better. Then...we had it and we're fighting to make sure it doesn't get taken away. This has resulted in us being a society that _does not take risks_. We once believed that hardship enabled us to overcome obstacles. Now we believe that obstacles are a sign of doom.\n\nThat's what i've got!",
"Boomers also developed a tremendous ego/self-importance/narcisism. Everything they did was Important, and so everything they did had to be Just Right. That included all their 'stuff', which more often than not included their children."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
1tcodv | what is it about computers that allow us to double the speed every 18 months or so. does this occur\has this ever occured for other technologies? and if not, why not? | Just wondering why other technologies don't increase at the same speed. Is it a function of demand? Something inherent to the technology? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tcodv/eli5_what_is_it_about_computers_that_allow_us_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce6msze",
"ce6nvqq",
"ce6pj4x"
],
"score": [
12,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"This is due primarily to improvements described by [Moore's Law](_URL_1_). It was originally an observation. It has now become more of a self-fulfilling prophecy. \n \nAbout every 18-24 months, we can implement the same functions in a silicon integrated circuit \"chip\" as before but in 1/2 the silicon area. Since the circuit area is approximately related to the minimum feature size in both the X and Y directions, and Area = X times Y, this is similar to saying that ~ every 18 months the feature sizes are reduced by a factor of 0.7x. (0.7 x 0.7 = 0.49 .) In other words, a 30% improvement nets a 50% reduction in size. (Hard disc drives actually improve at an even *faster* rate.) \n \nKey to all of this is something called \"[Dennard scaling](_URL_0_)\". It turns out that when you make transistors smaller, they get faster. And if you do it right, a bunch of other things get either better or stay the same. So there's a big incentive to make transistors smaller, allowing us to put more and more of them on one chip, for a lower cost per transistor. (Unfortunately, Dennard scaling has probably ended.) \n \nIf they choose to, a company can keep the chip size large, and make it do more instead. That's what high-end graphics chips tend to do. And as they have more transistors available for their circuit to use, they also make changes to their \"architecture\" to try to be ever more and more efficient. And of course, people are also always working on ways to do things better even if they didn't have more transistors available. \n \n**How is this 30% improvement every 18 months accomplished?** By lots of research, experimentation and hard work by a lot of people in a lot of disciplines. Materials science, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, chemistry, optics, etc. all have a role to play to overcome the obstacles that arise from trying to cram more and more transistors into smaller and smaller areas. If it was just a matter of making the transistors smaller without changing anything else, it would proceed a lot faster. But every time you make the transistors smaller, it creates a bunch of new problems that were never solved before, or weren't solved to the degree that is now necessary. \n \n\n \nAll of this kind of improvement has to happen at every process \"node\" or \"generation\", and usually a lot of experiments have to be run to find what will work and what won't. Fortunately, over the history of semiconductors a huge amount has been learned, and so we just continue to build upon that knowledge. And because the industry creates more and more powerful computers, it can USE more and more powerful computations to help in this work. \n ",
" > Just wondering why other technologies don't increase at the same speed.\n\nWell a lot of them did. Or at least something similar. Metal ships, heavier than air aircraft, early electrical everything etc. \n\nBasically, a lot of the time we know more about science than we do about engineering. So someone invents a new 'thing', and suddenly we're apply to apply all this knowledge of science to the problem. When that happens things develop very rapidly, to build a 10 000 tonne ship or 20 000 tonne ship or a 50 000 tonne ship is not much different scientifically. All of the underlying material properties are the same etc. But we may not know how to build a shipyard that big, or may simply not have one and it takes time to build etc. \n\nVery early batteries and aircraft and metal ships sucked compared to their counterparts 10 years later. \n\nEventually you start running into limits of what you can figure out how to do, or what can be reasonably accomplished, or into areas where you need new science. Eventually we're going to be able to produce single electron transistors at around 5nm, at which point the quantum computing people better having something working, or we're going to be at more or less as small as things can get. That's kind of what happened to batteries about 70 or 80 years ago. We figured out lead acid and alkaline and... then it was very marginal improvements in energy density and reliability and so on.\n\nThe first aircraft flight was lower altitude and shorter distance than the height and length of a 747. Within 15 years there were aircraft that could travel about 1000-1500 Km and carry passengers. \n\nWith ships we know how to build absurdly big ones (and fast aircraft) but the economics of faster than sound planes, and exceptionally large ships make them niche markets. \n\n\nWith computers there are quite a few things we can do to make much faster microprocessors, but they are too hot to be safe for normal home use (or they require absurdly expensive cooling), which end up not being worth the cost generally. Imagine you could double the speed of your computer for 10x the price, that exists, but it's not a huge market. \n\n\nOnce the engineering hits the limits of science - the sound barrier, air resistance due to the atmosphere, making things too small etc. then everything becomes a slow incremental bit of progress until someone makes a new discovery, then there is more progress. And then eventually the economics kicks in an it becomes a matter of costs to drop enough for things to be worthwhile. ",
"The thing about computers that makes them unique from most other technologies is that faster computers give you the processing power to design faster computers. \n\nOnce upon a time, people did a lot more design work for chips. Nowadays, nearly all of it is done with software. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_H._Dennard",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_Law"
],
[],
[]
] | |
1l01q2 | how is whey protein "milk free" if it's made from milk? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1l01q2/eli5_how_is_whey_protein_milk_free_if_its_made/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbue0bg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When its advertised as 'milk free', it means that its free of the other compounds that are normally found in milk, particular [caseins](_URL_0_), which are the main thing that trigger milk allergies."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casein"
]
] | ||
1k0d1o | does the amount of money in the world stay constant over time? | So I've been wondering recently how money works on a world wide scale. Does it stay the same over time, but with changes in values between currencies. Or did we at one point have less "money" in the world, and so it has grown over time. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1k0d1o/eli5_does_the_amount_of_money_in_the_world_stay/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbk2be6",
"cbk2bme",
"cbk2chf",
"cbk2ecg",
"cbk2rtb"
],
"score": [
4,
6,
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Nope, money increases because central banks (like the Federal Reserve Bank in the US) can create money.",
"Governments take away and add money all the time. Sometimes inflation can be good so governments print more money. Other times its better take away a lot of money. ",
"Separate value from money. Objects have intrinsic value separate from cost. Glass is worth more than the pile of sand it came from. A car is worth more than the pile of elements used to create it. The value of the sum of all objects in the world has been increasing constantly throughout history, with small dips around all the major wars. Money is a way of dealing with the fact that nobody knows an object's real value (among other purposes). The *amount* of money really doesn't matter.\n\nBut to answer your question: more money is being printed than is going away. It's called inflation and the trend is that inflation always rises over the long term.",
"Money is just a stand in for wealth. We could barter for everything, but it is more efficient just to agree money is worth something, and use it instead. But it is alway backed by wealth.\n\nSo in that sense, there is more money, because we keep making stuff, and that stuff constitutes wealth.",
"I'm not sure what you mean by \"money.\" Printed money, like on paper or in a bank account? or wealth? the ability to buy things. don't confuse money for wealth. as far as money is concerned, the amount of money is always growing. the US prints more money every year and puts it into circulation, as is every other country. this causes inflation, or devaluing of currency. now, every currency is being devalued, so a lot of times the exchange rate stays stable between 2 countries (there are many factors that are in play with changing exchange rates). Where we see it is when we buy things. 20 dollars could buy you more 10 years ago than it can now. \n\nWealth, on the other hand, is a different matter. Wealth is subjective, but generally speaking, the amount of wealth in the world has gone up. you can make the argument that over the last 100 years, people have become \"wealthier\" because the standard of living has increased pretty much across the board. this is because of technology that allows people to be more productive. basically, production = wealth (in economic ideas). thats not to say that growth has been equal, some countries have grown faster than others, and at different rates at different times. but generally, the world is wealthier now than it was in the past"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
5yezjx | how are irrational numbers more infinite than rational numbers. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yezjx/eli5_how_are_irrational_numbers_more_infinite/ | {
"a_id": [
"depfep1",
"depguaf",
"depsecq",
"depv46i",
"deq4cq9",
"deqb90t",
"der18pi"
],
"score": [
2,
20,
2,
2,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nI find it hard to understand this.",
"First we'll note that the rational numbers are \"as infinite\" as the counting numbers. We can create a mapping between the counting numbers and the rationals by placing the rationals in an order like [this](_URL_1_) (and skipping any points in that sequence which repeat rationals we've already seen).\n\nSo now we want to show that the irrational numbers are \"more infinite\" than the counting numbers. Let us show first that the real numbers are \"more infinite\" than the counting numbers. For this we turn to [Cantor's diagonal argument](_URL_0_). Suppose that you think you've come up with some mapping from the counting numbers to the real numbers. I can always construct a real number which you missed. I'll make sure that my number differs from your first number in the first decimal place, and differs from your second number in the second decimal place, and so on. \n\nBut the real numbers are just the union of the rationals and the irrationals. If the real numbers are \"more infinite\" than the counting numbers, then either the rational or the irrationals must also be \"more infinite\" (or both). We know it's not the rationals, so it must be the irrationals.",
"First part is to answer how we determine when we have something \"more infinite\" than another. We do this by determining whether there is a one to one mapping between the two sets of numbers; if there is then the sets are just as infinite as each other. If not, then one set is more infinite than the other. To visualize a mapping, imagine you have both sets of numbers written done on two separate lines (i.e. 1,2,3,4,... on one line and 2,4,6,8,... on the other). You then draw a line connecting one number from first line to one number from the second line.\n\nA mapping is where you have a consistent set of rules to determine which numbers you draw lines between. A one to one mapping is a mapping that has two restrictions. First is that for every number in the first line, it is connected to exactly one number in the second line. Second is that for every number in the second line, it is connected to exactly one number in the first line. No more, no less.\n\nTo illustrate a one to one mapping, consider a mapping from the whole numbers (1,2,3,4,5,...) to the even numbers (2,4,6,8,10,...). I propose the following mapping: You take your whole number, multiply it by 2, then draw a line to the corresponding even number. So I'll draw a line from 1 to 2, 2 to 4, 3 to 6, etc. Here we can see that this mapping meets the conditions for being a one to one mapping. We know that for every whole number, there is no more than one line being drawn to another number. Since we know that we can always multiply a number by two, every whole number has a line being drawn from it. For every even number, you can divide it by two to get a whole number so we know that every even number has at least one line being drawn from it and since dividing a number by two won't give us multiple answers there is not more than one line being drawn from them. Since we have demonstrated that there is a one to one mapping between whole number and even numbers, we know that even numbers are just as infinite as whole numbers.\n\nNow for the rational versus irrational mapping. We can show that the rationals have a one to one mapping with whole numbers. Any set of numbers that has a one to one mapping with whole numbers is said to be \"countably infinite\". We do this mapping by stepping through the numerators and denominators. We step through the numerators by increasing them by 1 until the numerator is equal to the denominator. When the numerator is equal to the denominator, we increase the denominator by one and then reset the numerator to 1. There's some technical reasons why we don't have to worry about double counting numbers. This mapping works out to be a one to one mapping between the rational numbers and whole numbers.\n\nYou can search up any number of posts about why there is not a one to one mapping between the whole numbers and real numbers. Cantor's diagonal argument is the major key word to look up. Any set that has a one to one mapping to the real numbers is said to be \"uncountably infinite\". The irrational numbers are simply the real numbers excluding the rational numbers. For more technical reasons, you can show that removing a countably infinite set of numbers from an uncountably infinite set of numbers leaves you with an uncountably infinite set of numbers. Thus we say that the irrationals are uncountably infinite and therefore are more infinite than the rationals.",
"This is pretty roundabout way of discussing the difference, but I hope this kinda story is helpful.\n\nThere are few enough rational numbers that if you start going through them, one by one, one after another, you will encounter each of them only after finite steps.\n\nPhrased another way, no natural number is infinitely large. But they can be **arbitrarily** large. This is a really nice property to have, since non-infinite number of steps is such a big bonus. \n\nIrrational numbers come from our desire to talk about continuous lines as a collection of points. You know how line has length but individual points don't? In a way, that seems like it's 0+0+0+0+... = 1, right? Turns out the reason line can have length is that you have too many points for us to go through like that, one by one. If you only had countably infinite amount of points(countably infinite means the same amount as rational numbers, and it refers to how you can go through them one by one as described earlier, sorta count through them), you could prove the length was exactly 0 if the points themselves have zero width.\n\nSo irrational numbers need to be larger collection of points, otherwise our lines have length of 0. So we define real numbers to be those points that make up continuous lines, and irrational numbers are the points that aren't rational,. And turns out, we are sorta set if we just define real numbers to be possibly infinitely long decimal expansions, as long as they're smaller than some natural number.\n\nNext up is proving that there actually are too many irrational numbers. We know there are, because lines have lengths, but just to be sure, we prove contradiction follows from assuming we could pair up all real numbers between 0 and 1 with natural numbers.\n\nCantor figured out a really simple way to construct a number that's guaranteed to not paired up with anything, also between 0 and 1. Because this was supposed to be complete set of pairings, and we proved one real number on that interval was still missing, we've gotten contradiction and proven that such pairing is impossible.\n\nIt's called the diagonal argument. We basically take first digit of first number, change it, second digit of second number, change it, third digit of third number, change it, etc, and these changed numbers now form our new number. Because it's at some point different from every single number on that list, it can't be on that list\n\n 0.1111111...\n 0.1212121...\n 0.3423235...\n 0.4444444...\n\nSo our number would begin 0.2772... if we replaced 2 with 7, and all the other numbers with 2.",
"Blackbeard the pirate was a notorious pirate. He was a swashbuckler amongst the swashbuckliest swashbucklers of the sea. But as all mortal men must die, so did Blackbeard after years of raping and pillaging villages. \n\nOf course, due to all the raping and pillaging, Blackbeard was sent straight to hell where the devil greeted him and made a deal. \"Blackbeard, I'm a great fan of yours so I'll make you a deal. If you can guess the positive whole number I'm thinking, I'll resurrect you and you can do whatever you like. But you only get on guess a day!\" \n\nAfter some finite amount of days went by, Blackbeard finally guessed the devils number and was promptly resurrected. Many years went by and blackbeard pillage and raped and burned that which was not his again until again, as all mortal must do, he died. \"back so soon old friend? I'll make you another deal!\" said the devil. \"This time, if you can guess the integer (negative or positive) whole number I am thinking of, I'll let you go back to the world of the living.\" \n\nA finite amount of time went by until blackbeard finally guessed the right number. Oddly enough, it took almost twice as long as the previous attempt but hey, life is life. \n\nOnce again blackbeard ran amok, raping and pillaging and killing the people of the world. Until he died. Again. \n\n\"what a shame dear old blackbeard. I'll tell you what. One final deal. If you can guess the real (including decimal values) number I am thinking of, I will make you immortal! \"... Blackbeard thought about this for a while and realised he would never be able to guess the devils number. There were just an infinite amount of possibilities between 0 and 1 alone. He would never reach the values between 1 and 2.\" it's alright Satan. I've lived 3 long and hearty lives. I'll sit this last one out here in hell\" he replied. ",
"Say you have strings of beads, where each bead is either black or white. And actually, these strings of beads are *infinite*, they go on forever.\n\nCould you count all such strings of beads? In other words, could you assign the number 1 to one string, the number 2 to another, the number 3 to another, etc., in a way so that every possible string is associated with some number?\n\nIt seems like you should be able to do this. But you actually can't! And the proof is pretty simple.\n\nSay you think you've found a way to number all strings of beads. I say, \"ok, well I'm going to produce a string of beads that you can't _possibly_ have accounted for.\"\n\nI ask you what color the first bead on string #1 is. You say white. So I take a black bead and put it on a string. I ask what color the second bead on string #2 is. You say it's black, so I put a white bead on my string. I ask you what color the third bead on string #3 is. You say black, so I put another white bead on my string. Every time, I ask you about the Nth bead on string #N, and put the opposite color onto my own string.\n\nThe string I end up constructing is different from *every* single string of beads that you counted. It's different than string #1 (because its first bead is a different color), it's different than string #2 (because its second bead is a different color), it's different than string #3 (because its third bead is a different color), and in general, it's different than string #N (because its Nth bead is a different color).\n\nSo I've shown that it's not possible for you to give every infinite string of beads a number: no matter what, you'll have left some string of beads out. Which basically means that there are *more* strings of infinite beads than there are numbers.",
"First we need to understand \"more infinite\". You really mean that there are more irrational numbers than rational numbers. So let's tell 5-year-old you what \"more\" means. When one group has \"more\", it means that if you match them up one of the groups has left overs. \n\n\nFor example, your kindergarten teacher wants to know if your class has more girls or boys, so she tells each boy to hold the hand of exactly one girl, and each girl to hold the hand to of exactly one boy. If anyone is left not holding a hand, then you don't have the same amount of girls and boys.\n\n\nWe can do the same with a couple soccer teams. If each player from the red team can pair up with a player from the blue team, the two teams have the same number of players.\n\n\nIt gets interesting when the teams have an infinite number of players. Lets say the red team uses player numbers 1, 2, 3, 4... while the blue team uses player numbers 2, 4, 6, 8... Which team has more players? Are there more counting numbers or even numbers? The answer is that both teams have the same number of players. Red 1 stands by Blue 2. Red 2 stands by Blue 4. Red 3 stands by Blue 6, and so on.\n\n\nWhat about the yellow team that uses every rational number for their uniforms? (5-year-old you doesn't know what rational numbers are but that can't be helped.) I would need a picture to explain how it is done, but it is actually possible to pair all the rational numbers with the counting numbers.\n\n\nHowever, you can't pair the irrational numbers with the counting numbers. To understand why, let's pretend that we did manage to pair them up and then find an irrational number that didn't get a match. To make things simpler, I'm not even going to use all the irrational numbers. I'm just going to use the irrational numbers between 0 and 1.\n\n\nOk, I've made my infinitely long list.\n\n0- > 0.134154513453453451....\n\n1- > 0.523423234235342426....\n\n2- > 0.664522562652314341....\n\n3- > 0.500000000000000000....\n\n4- > 0.626573632533332416....\n\n\nNow, how can I find a number that is not on that list? I do it going along the diagonal and adding 1 to each digit on that diagonal (we treat 9+1 as giving us 0). You'll have to look carefully because I can't use bold.\n\n\n0- > 0.234154513453453451....\n\n1- > 0.533423234235342426....\n\n2- > 0.665522562652314341....\n\n3- > 0.500100000000000000....\n\n4- > 0.626583632533332416....\n\n\nNow, I create a number using those modified digits on the diagonal.\n\n0.23518.....\n\nI now have a number that is different by at least one digit from every number that was on the original list. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_du75Sk-uZc"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantor's_diagonal_argument",
"https://plus.maths.org/issue47/features/macgregor/diagram3.gif"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
33iwnr | would i get better gas mileage driving a manual car in a lower gear (higher rpm) or higher gear (lower rpm) | I have a 5.0 mustang and have been curious which driving style will get me better gas mileage or better for the car. seems a lot of the time i'm between gears! or does it not make a difference?
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33iwnr/eli5_would_i_get_better_gas_mileage_driving_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqlb5c5",
"cqlb9vk",
"cqlbl2s",
"cqlbnuk"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You want to keep your rpms low for best gas mileage. It's intuitive because your cylinders are firing more often at higher rpms, and the cylinders fire by igniting gasoline. This is why many automatics have an overdrive gear which allows highway cruising at very low rpm.",
"What I've been told is that it is best for cars when your RPM is between 1,500-2,250, not sure if this is accurate, and if it is, keep in mind there are always exceptions.",
"Get in the highest gear with the lowest amount of rpms you can and being out of gear coasting is the best. I use to coast as much as I could and it when I would do it for a whole tank I could see a big difference in my mileage, but it's hard to do because we are all is such a hurry.",
"Low rpm will give you better gas mileage. So once you get up to cursing speed, you should put the car in the higher gear you can for that given speed.\n\nThis is also why you get better mileage if you skip gears when accelerating. For example, accelerating in 3ed gear to your decried speed and then shift directly to 5th. Getting to the highest gear possible faster.\n\nAlso trying not to brake unnecessarily, instead engine brake. As your car uses no fuel at all when engine braking (if it's not a really old car)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2spk1t | what does an accountant do on a typical workday? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2spk1t/eli5_what_does_an_accountant_do_on_a_typical/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnrqw4c"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Accountants organize numbers and verify numbers. There are many types of accountants and they each to a degree organize (or verify) money to where it lawfully belongs, strategically belongs, and aesthetically belongs so that clients, management, gov authorities, or shareholders can easily interpret. The tasks performed include data entry, building budgets, forecasts, and other reports, keeping an eye on incoming and out going cash, verifying the financial information that has come from someone else, and as mentioned before organizing numbers. This includes working in excel, with some sort of accounting/tax software, and an incoming source of financial information (receipts, W2s, invoices, etc). \n\nSource: I've been a tax accountant, a financial statement auditor, and a bookkeeper. These are the three most typical accountants. Hated it all, it's not for someone with ADD. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
2r15hz | why don't truck and car companies (like ford) make new trucks with new technology that look like the older models everyone loves? | Inspired by this post:
_URL_0_
And this truck:
_URL_1_ | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2r15hz/eli5_why_dont_truck_and_car_companies_like_ford/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnbfdf4",
"cnbfgk9",
"cnbfjja",
"cnbfs4b",
"cnbh9e4",
"cnbhd7i",
"cnbhf7b",
"cnbk3eg",
"cnbk8op",
"cnbk9cd",
"cnbk9x6",
"cnbkc2s",
"cnbkl8w",
"cnbkmao",
"cnbkrzd",
"cnbkt3v",
"cnbkuo5",
"cnbl6f8",
"cnblhw3",
"cnblvwi",
"cnblvyr",
"cnblzc0",
"cnbmb1w",
"cnbmimm",
"cnbmqe1",
"cnbn20x",
"cnbo2fh",
"cnboi0w",
"cnbokuo",
"cnbonox",
"cnbozuk",
"cnbp032",
"cnbp4bb",
"cnbpfei",
"cnbpua4",
"cnbq8c5",
"cnbqvj9",
"cnbqyhh",
"cnbr88w",
"cnbrcak",
"cnbrgaj",
"cnbrj05",
"cnbrkcr",
"cnbrnqq",
"cnbrxza",
"cnbs68g",
"cnbsm6r",
"cnbsogc",
"cnbsr4d",
"cnbswd6",
"cnbulxc",
"cnbuwwj",
"cnbvizu",
"cnbwf8e",
"cnbwlan",
"cnbwtp7",
"cnbwvri",
"cnbwzyy",
"cnbx7ly",
"cnbxdxj",
"cnbxt6d",
"cnbxz9q",
"cnby9t0",
"cnbyjed",
"cnbyvh9",
"cnbz146",
"cnc007q",
"cnc07ex",
"cnc0r0e",
"cnc0vdy",
"cnc1ju8",
"cnc267b",
"cnc2a8s",
"cnc2l1o",
"cnc3dxg",
"cnc3f4l",
"cnc40x0",
"cnc4oc6",
"cnc5tp3",
"cnc6fxm",
"cnc73zo",
"cnc7mhi",
"cnc8htv"
],
"score": [
18,
12,
54,
720,
627,
136,
22,
63,
3,
1727,
5,
3,
14,
3325,
6,
29,
2,
2,
10,
11,
2,
2,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
4,
2,
3,
2,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2,
25,
2,
2,
2,
4,
3,
3,
13,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3,
3,
2,
18,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"And with better (meaning safer and lighter) materials with better GAS MILEAGE. (My 1990 Honda got better gas mileage than my 2012 Honda.)",
"It cheapens the love and ruins the nostalgia . Like watching your favourite movie, cartoon and tv show as an adult. ",
"Because not everyone loves these older models. There's sure a lot of people who do, but they are the minority here. It's costly and timely to open up a different production line for a different model. The company can also \"test\" what styles the majority likes so they can get the most sales. People tend to judge a car only by looks and horsepower anyway.",
"First things first, its important to note that the PT cruiser was an attempt to make a retro design into a modern car.\n\nHave you ever heard of the uncanny valley theory. Its used in robotics to describe a design that looks very close to a real human, but is just short of looking realistic.\n\nDesigns that fall into the category are exceptionally creepy. Its better for a design to look only vaguely human than to look almost human.\n\nI think that we can apply the same logic here. When designing the next model of truck, no matter how hard they try to stick to the old design, the designers will have to make changes to the appearance of the new truck.\n\nThe aerodynamics will have to be adjusted, the material usage will have to be changed, the frame has to be adjusted to fit the new drive train, pieces have to be altered to fit new safety systems, etc...\n\nIn the end, what you wind up with is a truck that is similar to the old and popular model, but is just different enough to turn away potential buyers, and that's what it all comes down to. \n\nWill people buy the new throwback truck, or will they pass it and go for the modern looking F-150 sitting next to it?",
"The same way there is a small group of diehards on internet forums who think a new Bronco would be the best thing Ford ever did. In reality, most people would never buy one. It's over. Things change. 40 years from now there will be guys that are the same way and want their 2014 f150 back because their dad had one when they were kids",
"Chevy sold the [HHR](_URL_1_) and the [SSR](_URL_0_) which were both coldly received. \n\nIn the end you cannot engineer nostalgia, it can only come through time. For example, think about a comic book. Superman #1, wow - what a piece of history. Now think about buying Superman #1 - the reprint, same words, same art, higher quality paper and staples, plus there are enough copies for everyone and their dog! Not quite as exciting. ",
"Actually do similar to it. Ford went back to the old mustang look on their 2005+ models. Not completely, but similar to it. \n\nTrucks however isn't very possible to do since the majority do not think the older models are attractive aesthetically. ",
"An underrated reason that they don't is that there's just no way they legally ever could. Those tiny little A-Pillars would never survive modern crash testing, that bumper would almost certainly flunk pedestrian safety standards, etc. By the time you updated the thing to the point where you could actually sell it, it would only be sort of reminiscent of the original design, at which point you either have something horrifically ugly like the PT Cruiser, or something that looks pretty decent but still doesn't really feel like the original, like the last few mustangs.",
"Because while people might like the aesthetic of older cars, in practice most people don't want to deal with the aerodynamic inefficiencies.",
"Safety regulations play a big part in it - new regulations are released annually that major manufacturers must conform to. Things like heights of bumpers/hoods, A/B/C pillar stiffness requirements, etc. Changes such as these prevent Ford, Chevy and every other big manufacturer from re-releasing older models with updated technology. \n \nThat said, custom auto shops have been doing upgrades to old models for decades. The idea behind these cars, commonly called restomods, is to take an old chassis and modify it to accept modern engines, suspensions, wheels, etc. The only real limit to how far you can take a restomod is how big your pocketbook is. \n \nEdit: Thanks for my first gold, kind stranger! \nEdit 2: This infographic from [Car & Driver](_URL_0_) does a good job of explaining how the EU/Asian pedestrian impact regulations have affected modern designs.",
"Volkswagen did this in South Africa with the Citi Golf - which looked just like the original Golf from 1974. My understanding is that this was a pretty big success for them - enough so that they kept the car in production from 1984 through to 2009. \n\nIt's a shame this never came to North America - I know I would've been all over it.",
"The Fiat 500, Mini, VW Beetle and tree E-Type Jag have all spawned new Cars which attempt to keep the retro styling but none of them are quite right. The Eagle E-Type is the most similar but it is several inches bigger in every direction and this is because of safety regulations forcing added equipment and special designs which just won't fit in the original shell. The reason they stopped doing the original Mini is because regulations from the EU meant that the old shell could no longer be legally produced. Of course these already big trucks would be more likely to have the space to meet the regulations for the crumple zones and air bags but there are also now regulations stating limits to the actual body shape to make it safer in the event that you hit a pedestrian. ",
"Nissan made a few attempts at this in the 90's.\n_URL_0_",
"Paraphrasing here, \"if I had asked my customers what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse\" -Henry Ford",
"People are missing that there are engineering / functional reasons why the old designs aren't used anymore: primarily aerodynamics and safety (though the space requirements within the front end of the car itself aren't insignificant, either). \n\nIt's less of a factor with trucks than with cars, but I know that in Europe there are actually pedestrian safety standards that need to be met - - that is, how well would a pedestrian handle being hit by the car at low speeds? Though the standards are just in Europe, because car companies like to sell the same cars worldwide, so they effectively apply in the US as well. Making cars safer for pedestrians generally involves lowering the front end of the car and raising the point at which the hood meets the windshield (allowing people to better roll over the hood, and creating a gap between the hood and the engine). It's a big reason why lots of cars have been looking more and more similar in recent years. ",
"Toyota actually just kinda did this with the re-release of the Land Cruiser 70: _URL_0_\n\nI think this is just for Japan though. I suspect the main reason is how much work would be involved to make a niche version for the US. Companies like Ford need to sell hundreds of thousands of vehicles to recover the costs of the R & D required to meet US safety standards. Imagine the work required to re-create your example in modern materials, incorporate crumple zones, air bags, updated electronics, crash testing, etc. etc. All that, to make an old-looking truck, while their competitors would be highlighting the latest and greatest badass aerodynamic designs. \n\nThat said, if there was demonstrated to be enough demand, they'd totally do it. My guess is that their market research has never supported the sales they'd need to keep investors happy. Maybe if Elon Musk bought Ford. :)",
"Look into restomod. People take new cars and put the \"shell\" if you will of an old car. From the outside it looks like an older model but has all the comforts and performance of a new car. ",
"Have you seen the [Corvette conversion kit](_URL_0_) that makes a C6 look like an old split window?",
"There is no really good reason why the styling couldn't be *exactly* the same and have the truck meet all emissions, safety, and until about 2020, fuel-economy standards. Getting an old design like that 66 down a highway at the stringent economy standards is going to be tough.\n\nTrucks are trucks. The frame, engine, and running gear in that truck is substandard in every single way. But, the envelope it's in *easily* fits a modern safety ladder frame, collapse zone, and modern engine. The modern motor would be LOST in that engine bay. That means this becomes the area for more crumple and firewall area, with electronics and the like.\n\nA skilled hobbiest should be able to put that body on any modern truck frame.\n\nEven the A-pillar mentioned below could be fixed. There is MORE than enough volume there to put in a an above-standard safety cage, the only reason modern a-pillars are so big is because of the hydroforming manufacturing and expenses and metallurgy. So for $5 more per unit, you could make a heavy piece there that fits in the same space.\n\nI'd say the primary reason is design. Both for the public and for the industry. *I* wouldn't choose that 66, at all. Mid-70s Ford hit it's truck peak, I'd say the 69 Chevy pickups were best. So who gets to decide? The F150 is, well, it's in a class all it's own. So Ford is not going to gamble THAT big, on a whim, when no one really wants to do this. Maybe Chev or Dodge could get away with it. But they won't try it.\n\nAnd industry. The design divisions, and the independent design firms, rely on Ford contracting out hundreds of designs a year for updates to the F150. Hardly any get incorporated, but that process is wedded to the industry and essentially they are keeping something alive in the off season for use when the time comes. The auto industry analysts know all about this, not me.\n\nPlus there are design cues for manufacturers. The BMW b-pillar. The (used to be) Jaguar headlights. American firms move designs much more rapidly than that, but still, even the Mustang or PT Cruiser share design cues with other models from the same manufacturer. That 66 shares *nothing* with any modern Ford. People in Dearborn would be going into spasms because of a model that looks that far out of place. \n\nbut if you had an off-the-shelf design from old, no firm needed. Designers can sit there and twiddle their thumbs. We can't have that, the CEO will have to hear about it every Sunday on the golf course. So it won't happen.\n\n",
"We have this in Russia, and before I get hammered for whatever - I have an UAZ-452 \"Loaf\" (УАЗ-452 \"Буханка\"), and it's a perfect example of an old (originally American) design that today is still being produced, just with modern technology. From 2011, the 452 is equipped with power steering, ABS, a four sylinder 2.7 (112 horsepower) gasoline engine with ECU and Euro-4 standard emissions. It's said to be the best 4x4 in Russia, apart from Lada Niva (due to it's weight). I drove it though the tundra of Murmansk in -42 degrees without a problem. Though it's loud and rather bumpy, it just works, for a price of USD 8000.",
"They have. What specifically are you looking for?\n\n* Plymouth made the Prowler (and later the howler which was friggin' sick) and many others _URL_1_\n* Chrystler made a truck called the SSR: _URL_0_\n\n* Also the HHR: _URL_2_\n\n* the VW Beetle\n\n* the camaro\n\n* the Thunderbird\n* the Dodge Challenger (sick!)\n* the Impala\n",
"The Icon Bronco is exactly what you're talking about, it's also really damn expensive.",
"My guess? There would be problems with aerodynamics, collision tests, MPG, ride, etc. It wouldn't be worth it for any auto company to undertake unless they were just updating the car, like with the Challenger.\n\nI'm sure there are companies that specialize in making replicas that could easily accomplish what you're looking for.",
"if they made a new mustang that looked exactly like the classic ones I would think people would buy the shit out of that car.\nThe lastest ones have been pretty close and they sold a ton.",
"I think for the price it would cost, one would just get an original. \n\nThink about it...",
"There's a lot of reasons. Most people don't want to drive an old looking car every day. I absolutely love classic cars but to the uneducated even if it's in great shape people think you're poor for driving one. This is the same kind of mentality that thinks a new 328I is the pinnacle of autos. you're dealing with the consumer culture that needs a new phone every year and owns 100 pairs of shoes. \n\nAnother reason is the whole point of owning classic cars is at the classic, they have history behind them. It's like buying merch at a concert versus buying it at Hot Topic, yeah it's a shirt but one is a memory of an experience and the other is trying to approximate that experience. \n\nThird is price. While you could spend millions on a 60's Ferrari you can just as easily build a bitchin Chevy Nova or Ford Falcon for $10k. Start with a cool but common (read not valuable) car and get to work. If you're lucky you can score a relatively rust free Nonrunning car for a couple grand. First off you want to rebuild the suspension and replace the drum brakes with discs in front. About 4K will get you a mild yet powerful enough crate engine & 4 speed auto. It is it hard to restore the interior of the car, all the parts exist and are readily available. Spend a couple hundred bucks get in the seats and headliner are you done professionally, and it's easy enough to either cleanup or replace trim, carpets and seatbelts yourself. Old auto glass can be polished and chrome parts can be re-dipped or replaced easily. Will it be reliable? Not like a new car. Efficient? Fuck no. But you'll love it. ",
"If they want the older model, they very often can buy the older model.",
"If Ford brought back the Bronco I would buy two.",
"I tried to find it, no luck, but a few years back I saw a video of an offset head on collision test between a modern BMW and I think a BelAir.\n\nFrom the outside, it looked pretty grim for both cars, with both front ends consumed. Interior cameras told a completely different story. The BMW dash kinda ripples and the air bag envelopes the dummy. The old Chevy's dash goes through the dummy and into the back seat. Eek.",
"A big factor that I haven't seen explicitly stated here is that a big part of what makes classic cars so desirable is rareness and nostalgia. If carmakers started putting out a lot of cars that look like classic cars, the rareness is gone and the nostalgia is, well at least not the same. Some of the allure is also in the mechanics of years past: carburators, distributer and all the other simple non computer controlled systems.\n\nAlso actual modern design consideration have a large impact on the overall aesthetics. ",
"Anything from the past will always serve a niche market. The masses just aren't all that nostalgic.",
"When some people buy a new car, they want everyone to know about it, that's part of the reason, it's also why some car owners get annoyed when car manufacturers change the look of their models back to back, it makes it easily noticeable that the car is an older model. A little about ego, and a little about \"hey look at this, I paid good money for it, so you better look\"",
"I would love to take an old car and upgrade everything inside. Modern radio, dials, engine, suspension, everything. Maybe someday.",
"A major issue is federal crash safety guidelines. That's why when Toyota rolled out the modern FJ they didn't just re-release the older FJ-40 and FJ-60s that everyone really wanted...",
"Ever seen a Porsche 911? Pretty much the same car since the beginning, just with the latest tech in each refresh.",
"Ford just re-issued the 64 1/2 -67 mustang body for restoration enthusiasts, it only comes in convertible.",
"Um they do but people like new and styles change.",
"People like the old stuff because there aren't 5 million of them on the road",
"I think another way to get to the thrust of the question is why aren't cars stylish anymore? It's the same in building design. You look at buildings in places like Hong Kong or Dubia and it makes me wonder- where is american creativity? It's all about the bottom line anymore- what can be done the cheapest and will bring in the most profit. Cars today are horribly boring. Look back at cars from the 40's, 50's 60's. They had some style to them. They spoke to their era. Today is totally snoozefest. ",
"Lots of really horrible answers here. No, really why don't they revisit some of the old styles more accurately. Ford tried it with the mustang and failed horribly(but sold alot of cars) Dodge did a pretty good job of it with the challanger. The camero got very close to the original look, but not close enough. The interest is clearly there for a new 65 mustang 70 challanger 67 camero. Why don't they just do it right. Make the outside look the same with modern engine and crumple zones. I personally would be first in line for a new 81 C10 chevy.",
"Just my opinion but I haven't read a response that explains the OPs question",
"Aside from the safety regulations, you have to take into consideration the evolution of the truck. Today's truck is nowhere near the truck produced 20+ years ago. Trucks were strictly utilitarian and used and abused as such. Some of these trucks had some looks, but the styling was absolutely secondary to the jobs they needed to do. I think the 1965 GMC Suburban is a work of art, but these were designed to work. This was the philosophy up until the early 1990s. \n\nDuring this time, gas was cheap, and people were looking for bigger vehicles. I still remember my father coming home and talking about work. He worked for GM and would always share with us their strategies. The big idea for truck platforms was designing them to ride like cars. They were trying to attract female drivers with friendlier rides and better interiors. Plus, the profit margins on trucks was astronomical. \n\nI have a Ram 1500 and it rides a lot better than the old Scottsdale we have up north. Besides, why would you want to design something around a vehicle that has nostalgia? I understand Mustangs, Challengers, and Camaros. There is nostalgia and history there for my father's generation. There are new buyers who can see the cool aspect of driving something vintage looking, yet modern. Trucks don't have that. They don't need it. The manufacturers don't care about it. \n\nTrucks today are luxury vehicles. Don't let anyone fool you into thinking otherwise. More millionaires drive the F150 than any other vehicle. Every Sunday, I hear Dennis Leary and his smarmy voice telling me about payload and towing capacity. This maybe applies to 10% of truck owners. You may haul the occasional piece of furniture, or tow a Seadoo trailer. The majority of us will never hump a pallet of bricks, or worry about the tongue weight of a skid steer on a double axle trailer. This could change in the future, and someone may build a truck inspired by a past model. I asked Fred Diaz this same question a couple years ago before he jumped to Nissan. He said that people are going to buy trucks because they're hot. This was on the heels of the latest Ram launch. Chrysler needed this truck to sell, and it did. \n\n",
"I'm surprised nobody has mentioned [Morgan Motor Company](_URL_0_), who are still pumping out gorgeous cars over a hundred years since they pushed out their first timber-framed beauty.\n\nSome current model eye candy:\n\n_URL_0_mmc/hiresimages.html",
"This video does a great job explaining some of the differences between the older and newer versions of cars\n_URL_0_",
"Metal costs...cars are made of plastic now when they used to be solid metal. That look of say a 50's chevy pick up isnt achievable with plastic, youd end up with something like the SSR truck that was hideous. ",
"Rolls Royce tend to be pretty good at doing this, just look at cars like the phantom: _URL_0_\n \nThen again, Rollers have always been a luxury product and they tend to have kept the same aesthetic throughout most of their cars in the same way that American muscle cars tend to.",
"Also not to forget aero. As gas prices become more and more expensive and emission standards get tougher, the focus in car manufacturing is moving towards building efficient cars. The best way to make a car more efficient is by making it more aerodynamic. Now it turns out the futuristic 30s art deco and 60s aero designs were pretty inefficient cuz we knew very little about aerodynamics back then. Now we know an aerodynamic car isn't really a pretty car. For an aerodynamic car you need straight lines with small frontal areas and fat sloping rear. Also the profile needs to be one smooth arc. A Porsche 911 despite its \"teardrop\" shape isn't a very aerodynamic car. The windscreen isn't sloping enough. A boxy Nissan GTR is more aerodynamic than a 911 cuz it has smaller angles to its profile. A Prius which is an ugly box is a very aerodynamic car. So the old 60s designs of protruding front ends, rakish windscreens, angular designs are very inefficient designs which really wouldn't fly to well with modern car manufacturers and standards. In the 60s the designers thought the Dodge Charger was a very aerodynamic car cuz of its long sleek profile. Turned out it had the aerodynamics of a brick with its big gaping mouth sucking up air like a whale sucks up plankton. Then in the 80s Lamborghini designed the countach thinking it was very aero only to later find out it had the drag coefficient of a wedge! Which is why now you see most cars sorta look the same. Kind of like the Tesla Model S. Tall hoods, sloping windscreen, high boot and as few lines and angles as it could be possible. It's all to achieve better aerodynamics!",
"I would think a 1964-1965 impala convertible would a great seller!",
"Because the very reason they are loved is they are old.\n\nThey are landmarks in some people's lives. But they aren't better designed, or safer, than new cars.",
"\"everyone loves\" is not the same as \"everyone buys\".",
"They tried. Chevy SSR. It bombed hard. The Ford thunderbird (convertible car) failed as well.",
"They have done retro version of cars inspired heavily by older models and they don't sell, people like looking at them no one wants to buy one, the exception was the mustang.",
"Retro styling may be popular with some, but it's usually unsuccessful in practice. For example, the Plymouth Prowler or PT Cruiser (though this one was arguably a success). Chevrolet even made a retro truck with modern amenities: the HHR. It was a retractable hardtop convertible with a Corvette engine. However, it was not a success, since it was completely impractical, partially due to its styling.",
"Toyota just did a 30 year anniversary release of the Land Cruiser. The design is inspired by the original model with a modern touch, I think it looks awesome _URL_0_.",
"Does anyone know if will I am's body swapped corvette comes anywhere close to modern safety standards? Since its basicly a shell layed on top of a modern car\n",
"From a Benz SLS to a Ford Raptor, you're telling me that designs are so hampered from safety regulations that they can't design cars to look like the old ones? That's bananas. ",
"Because they already tried something like that during the *retro* fad some years ago and that wore off rather quickly. [Here is what I am talking about.](_URL_0_)",
"Maybe I'm missing something completely, but the question seem to revolve around the pure looks of the car. Why are people talking about regulations/safety/old car physics/wtv?? If it's just the looks we are trying to imitate, why would it be a problem making our new old-looking car road safe?? ",
"On a similar note I wonder why car companies don't release a car that looks like a Lamborghini and has a prius engine. For god sakes who really cares about performance. There isn't a new car out there that can't go 100 mph faster than the speed limit on the roads I drive on regularly.",
"This is actually a trend that I am seeing more. Ford was actually toying with the idea of redoing the Ford bronco. Both the 60s, _URL_0_ and 90s models. _URL_1_ Not sure if either were or are going to be in production. \n",
"They do (or did), but not in the US. When I lived in Japan I noticed they made retro cars for the domestic market. There was a English 50s style one that had an enameled dash with bakelite looking switches, etc. This was like, 20 years + ago ",
"One thing is, the sheet metal work, like the pressed out body panels, are actually way more complex than anything they do today. I imagine it's a lot of things, but this should be one contributor. Look under the hood of a truck from the 50's or 60's and you will see some impressive sheet metal work on the fenders and such.",
"mustang, charger, and camaro are all retro looking cars. There would be a very very limited market for old style trucks and cars that look exactly like the originals. It wouldn't be worth setting up the factory lines because no one could afford the limited runs because you wouldn't have the advantage of mass appeal to lower the per unit cost.",
"safety and cost, you could not put a \"New\" 1965 mustand on the road as a manufacturer it just would not be able to happen NHSTA would probably go full retard at the idea. ",
"I would say the question is also true for cars because I would be one of the first to buy a '57 Chevy with a modern power train. I think the problem is that the market is too small.",
"Because the future of automobiles are in batteries, electric power trains, bodies with increased aerodynamic performance, and better crash safety. It would be a fools errand to try and shoehorn all of that stuff into an old design not meant to contain it.\n\nI love an old ford truck, but cars and trucks are getting ready to explode in quality, technology, efficiency, and performance, very soon. With automobiles, outside of rose colored nostalgia, the newer is stuff is getting so much better. Hell, 50 years from now, we'll all be in self driving cars, anyway.",
"I think they sorta did this with the PT Cruiser right?",
"Obviously we have plenty of reasons already mentioned, but here's a thought I had:\n\nReplicating an older model's design might be really well received, and might even sell well, but the new version of the old model will never become a collector's item like the original is. And while that doesn't directly mean buckets of money for the original manufacturer, it does create a kind of status for the company that they make great and memorable cars.\n\nIt's like the way fans of PlayStation and XBox criticize Nintendo for releasing the same goddamn Mario, Pokemon and Zelda game every few years. There is something to be said for favouring innovation over nostalgia. Sorry to compare it to video games again, but SquareEnix is very reluctant to remake Final Fantasy VII because they want to make something undeniably better than it before they give in to nostalgia. Can't say it looks like they believe that themselves, but it's what they've (or at least one guy has) said, so I'll trust they believe it.",
"The problem is that with what the consumer wants and what they actually ended up buying is very different. Take the street legal rally cars such as the Mitsubishi Evo and the Subaru WRX for example. The so called loyal customers insists on new exterior designs that looks more streamline and modern. However, when the styling changed, very few people bought the cars and all of a sudden they demand the old styling back. ",
"tbh that truck looks ugly compared to modern ford trucks\n\nand im pretty sure a minor population actually likes the way that car looks",
"ford is not smart enough to understand all fords need to look alike, bwm/audi know this",
"You think they can't design a good looking car? they sell us trends. Like the trend of bubly rounded econo cars, or high finned cars in the 70s. Basically, its a buisness move to keep you always interested in their newest model cars. It would be bad buisness if they sold you exactly what you wanted, people are vain, they'll act irrationally and want that 'new look' on the latest model.",
"I guess you mean like the [Eagle Speedster](_URL_1_) - [Pic](_URL_0_). \n \nBodied like a Jag E-type with an injection engine, abs, power steering, blah blah blah......... \n \nMakes for a very happy /u/scufferQPD!!",
"They *kinda* do this already.\n\nThe Mustang, Challenger, Camaro, Beetle, etc are all heavily inspired by the original. Granted, it's not the exact same car, but it's a compromise between the original design and modern tech.\n\nFor instance, if they made and all steel car like they used to, and *also* included the extra weight of the modern safety features (computers, air bags, side impact beams, etc) then the car would get pretty darn heavy and undesirable. \n\nAlso, there are new regulations that directly impact appearances. Like bumper height and material, height of headlights, addition of third brake light, etc.\n\nSimilarly, increases in performance have also had impacts on how the car looks. Cars now are lower, wider, and the wheels have been pushed further toward the corners. Higher tech materials can only take you so far. High tech design also accomplishes a lot.\n\nTall, narrow, unrelated tires also gave the cars a different look. Tire tech has come a long way. Wheels have gotten larger, tires shorter and wider.\n\nThese are the reasons why the new \"throwback\" models don't look exactly like the original.",
"Beats me. I think Ford trucks peaked at the 1985 F-150. It was big enough and could do about anything you wanted. If it WASN'T big enough, you got an F-250, which was the whole idea of different models. Why the F-150 got so fucking big, I don't know. But, they'd sell a shitload of bare-bones F-150's if they'd eliminate some frills and price them around 20-25k.",
"I work in automotive design so i can actually help here. \n\nThere is really nothing that is stopping a manufacturer releasing a model that looks like an old one, it was fairly common a few years ago but has since gone out of fashion. If you remember we had the Chevy HHR, SSR, Camaro and others like the Mustang, New Beetle, Ford Thunderbird, Dodge Challenger which all took design elements from the original models.\n\nThere are some safety regulations such as every parts on the front fascia needing to have at least a 2.5mm radius that means the thin chrome work that trucks used to have would have to look chunkier. Also things like the roof pillars are chunkier to house airbags and resist passenger cell deformation so certainly the windows or 'glasshouse' will look very different. \n\nHowever looking at your example i don't see anything that would legally prevent selling that truck, maybe the bumper over-riders and the thin A pillar (between the windscreen and side window). The light truck class of vehicle does not have to pass particularly challenging regulations unlike say passenger sedans and im confident as long as you engineered in modern features like crumple zones etc this vehicle could be sold again.\n\nThe only thing i could see stopping this from ever happening are cost and brand image. Firstly a manufacturer wants their product to come across as modern and cutting edge, to many even if you made this truck out of the most modern materials it would appear old compared to competitors. Secondly i see many panels that would require multiple stampings as the are quite deep, mainly the bonnet and the front wings and roof. If you look at modern mass produced cars hardly any have deep features like these anymore as they require more tooling and an extra process to make which costs more and takes more time. \n\nI got bored so i did a small sketch render with some of the changes i think they would have to make and the new panel lines it would have to make the stampings less insane _URL_0_",
"Because safety standards makes it difficult or even impossible to make cars look like this anymore. Same issue with muscle cars.",
"As has been pointed out in this thread, there's nothing really stopping the manufacturers from doing this, and they have been doing so with cars for more than a decade and a half.\n\nThe issue with trucks is that they are built and sold for work, often in fleets. Fleet buyers have an entirely different mindset than individuals. While it would be too much to say that construction companies and road departments \"don't care\" how the vehicles look, making a 2015 truck strongly resemble a 1965 truck wouldn't increase sales any. And in fact, given how quickly a work vehicle can become dinged and dented, the illusion that you're operating fifty-year-old trucks might become a bit too strong--and suddenly your company doesn't seem cutting-edge, but instead looks like it's being run with outdated equipment. So from that perspective, such a design could actually COST sales.\n\nTruck buyers more than any other segment are interested in functional improvement. They want trucks that will run efficiently and will hold up against abuse. If you're a manufacturer trying to project an image of ruggedness melded with a high-tech manufacturing ethos, you're going to come up with something that looks like what the new Ford trucks look like. They have a brawny look that suggests strength, a silhouette and some design touches that carry over from recent model years (to convey an evolutionary connection with the trucks that buyers are familiar with), but the kind of bold, forward-looking, futuristic creases and edges and angles that immediately communicate that this truck is thoroughly modern. \n\nThat's especially important to Ford since they're going all-in with aluminum instead of tried-and-true steel for some body panels and the bed. That, plus the engine management technology they're using, will enable their new trucks to get impressive fuel economy (which fleet buyers REALLY want) while still enabling the trucks to haul the same type of loads that the buyers are used to. Fleet buyers are an exceedingly conservative and practical bunch, and they don't go in for gimmicks.\n\n(FWIW, I think the new Ford trucks are hideous. I also detest that the domestics are no longer making traditional American vans but instead are fielding the European designs like the Sprinter and the Transit. But I'm not a truck guy anyway. I REALLY want a Challenger.)\n\n**tldr**; Trucks are sold mostly to fleets, and fleet buyers don't want \"cute,\" they want brute strength and operational efficiency. Making your truck look fifty years old won't win you sales orders to the power company or the lumber yard.",
"You're over estimating the demand. If they could make money from the idea, they would do it.",
"Because then you're left with shit boxes like the PT Cruiser",
"Chevy tried that once. It was called the SSR and it was hideous. What I want to see is a replica put out. No retro inspired bs, give me the exact same body with modern power. The problem with that is I could already buy an old truck and plop a new V8 in it for a much less than Ford or Gm could sell me one.",
"This does happen or did happen until recently. The best example is can think of is the Vw beetle Classic. Produced in Mexico until 2003. While not updated significantly it did receive small updates year to year but ultimately was stopped due to safety regulations. Similarly the Vw bus was until recently still manufactured in Brazil, they even changed it to water cooling instead of its original air cooling but lo and behold crash testing and safety caused it to stop being made. But adding a radiator to the front of the vehicle really detracted from the attractiveness of the vehicle. _URL_1_ so keep your fingers crossed that it comes back. In South Africa Vw (surprise surprise ...) kept making the same version of a Golf/gti called the citi Golf until 2009. _URL_0_ that had the same basic shape for 25 years with minor safety,emissions and other changes as it aged. \n\nSo companies can do it. But they more just never stop making the same vehicle and tried to modify it to conform to modern standards up until the government regulations shut them out. I for one wouldn't hesitate to buy a brand new Type 2 (Bus) and drive it here regardless of safety.\n\n\nTldr: some companies do, but only in 3rd world markets that demand them. \n\n",
"Engineer in the auto industry here! I can comment as to specifically why they won't make the next F-150 look like the '65.\n\nNo one would buy it.\n\nThe F-150 is the most sold new vehicle in North America for 32 years running. There is a fucking insane amount of money in that one model. Careers are made and destroyed over contracts for a single year of supplying just the test equipment for one tiny part for that one model. This is not a product that you fuck around with very much.\n\nThe market for retro-looking parts sits pretty well as it is. Aftermarket vendors make body kits or mods for people that want them. The demand certainly does not exist to put billions into making a model of vehicle that actually looks like they used to make cars.\n\nCompanies have actually done it a few times before, and you already know how poorly they did. They combined the retro look with a modern vehicle. \n\n[Ford Thunderbird](_URL_0_) and the [PT Cruiser](_URL_1_) are the *most successful* examples, and they both have... less than stellar reputations and sales records. The PT actually started really well, but faltered almost immediately as a flash-in-the-pan design.\n\nThat's the problem with novelty body designs. A boring-looking Accord will always sell, because there's not much to laugh at. A '69 Camaro re-release would be dynamite for three years, then become a joke."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.reddit.com/r/carporn/comments/2r0c26/1965_ford_f100_its_not_always_the_rarest_fastest/",
"http://i.imgur.com/a2eScr6.jpg"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_SSR",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_HHR"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.caranddriver.com/features/taking-the-hit-how-pedestrian-protection-regs-make-cars-fatter-feature"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.m.wikipe... | |
3t10sj | was "devil's advocate" a real game that could actually be "played" and if not how did the phrase originate? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3t10sj/eli5_was_devils_advocate_a_real_game_that_could/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx23vmc",
"cx23xeo",
"cx2d60v"
],
"score": [
15,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"The \"play\" in that phrase doesn't mean \"play like a game\". It means \"to play a role, like in a movie or in the theater (i.e. in a play)\".\n\nThe Devil's Advocate is a position in the Catholic canonization process, and is a person who is arguing *against* making someone a saint (which is in opposition to \"God's advocate\", who argues *for* making someone a saint). So \"to play devil's advocate\" means \"to take a purposefully contrary position that you may not believe in, just like the Devil's Advocate position in the Catholic canonization process\".",
"Wikipedia has an article to discusses the origin of the phrase. It's not based on a game but rather something \"playing the part\" of Devil's Advocate. The idea is that someone pretends to advocate for the opposite of the argument in order to see where its weakness are.\n\n_URL_0_",
"The \"Devil's Advocate\" was an actual position in the Roman-Catholic church. When the church was considering making someone a saint they would appoint a person, the Devil's Advocate, to argue against sainthood. This was meant to ensure that the arguments for sainthood would stand up to scrutiny. This person was, quite literally, advocating for the position of the Devil."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil%27s_advocate"
],
[]
] | ||
2ftqq2 | the political terminology of european parties vs american. | Like I see liberal in the US, but I was told they are nothing like Liberals of Europe. I see the Labor party, but are they like the Labor party in the US? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ftqq2/eli5the_political_terminology_of_european_parties/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckcqypg",
"ckcr2zw"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"TLDR US parties are more conservative than their Euro counterparts - because Jesus.\n\nBecause the US only has 2 major parties, both cover wide swathes of the political spectrum. The Republican party would encompass UK Conservatives and more right-wing nationalist or eurosceptic parties. On the whole, Republicans are more right-wing than Conservatives (on issues like nationalized healthcare, tax, defense, immigration). The Democratic party would encompass UK Labour and Lib Dem parties - those left of center. Again, on the whole, Democrats are more conservative than either Labour or Lib Dems. For both R's and D's, part of the skew conservative is support for big business and part is because of Jesus.",
"Each of these words can mean vastly different things and then once they get attached to parties, their meaning changes with the party's identity. \n\nFor example, \"conservative\" can mean: socially conservative, fiscally conservative, religiously conservative (with various religions possible), a preference for low risk, etc. \n\nLiberal can similarly apply to various concepts. \n\nLabour is another generic term. Typically it implies that you are pro-union, but unions behave very differently in different countries and they have very different histories. Labour, however, can also be against unions but in favour of laws that improve worker conditions. Labour can also be in favour of laws that increase employment levels, which is traditionally done by making it cheap to hire people (e.g. lower minimum wage, less paperwork, etc). Each of these meanings directly conflict with one another. \n\n\"Social\" is another word that we see a wide variety in. It can mean pure socialism akin to communism or it can mean capitalism with social safety nets on top (like welfare and public health care).\n\nNow, imagine that in the year 1900 we set up five parties, each called *Conservative, Social, Liberal, Labour,* and *Democratic.*\n\nOver the last hundred years, democracy is established and defined, so the Democratic party actually means nothing just by its name. It is now associated with other actions. \n\nThe Labour party decided that lots of unions aren't actually helping the situation, so now they focus on policies that create growth and employment while supporting some redistribution of wealth through social safety nets. (This is pretty much what happened to the labour party in Britain, and \"New Labour\" is pretty centrist). \n\nThe social party could actually become centrist or even right wing, provided that it supported a handful of safety nets, or it could effectively become a communist party. \n\nIn most European countries, \"conservative\" has become associated with fiscal conservatism (try to run a balanced budget and show a preference for smaller government) with a bit of social conservatism (damn immigrants!). In the USA it has become about social and religious conservatism, with a bit of fiscal conservatism thrown in. \n\n\"Liberal\" is one that actually has the widest variety. In some countries it has come to mean allowing people to do whatever they want with as little government intervention as possible. In the USA this is called \"Libertarianism\" and is considered to be on the far right. Liberal can also mean letting people do whatever they want *socially* and helping them do it through economic redistribution (big welfare state). This is considered to be on the far left in the USA. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
1dtd1z | [drawing] the concept of vanishing points and perspective | As someone learning to draw, I have difficulty getting my head around vanishing points, and perspective. I've read various books/articles, but I still don't 'get it'.
Let's say I'm drawing a house. What comes first on the page, the house or the VP(s)? If I just drew a house, without respect to the VP's, how would I derive the VP's? What makes the VP's extend off the page? These are the kinds of 'dummy' questions I have.
Can some kind soul break this concept down to an ELI5? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dtd1z/eli5_drawing_the_concept_of_vanishing_points_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9tne2b",
"c9tnk7c"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Vanishing Points give the illusion of distance in a 3D area. Instead of just seeing a 3d image you can use them to give a sense of distance.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nTry drawing these simple cubes to get an understanding for how they work.\n\nStarting with the left drawing:\n\n* Decide on a vanishing point. Anywhere works but for now, just copy that left picture.\n\n* Draw the front face of the cube. A perfect square. Again anywhere works, but something relatively close in relation to the vanishing point for this example.\n\n* Draw very light pencil lines from all four corners of the square connecting to the vanishing point.\n\n* Draw the back face. Another square. In the example, notice how the corners are each on those light pencil marks. You should now have a cube you can see through.\n\n* Darken the appropriate lines to make a 3D cube.\n\n* A common and simple picture to draw is of an simple rural highway. Vanishing point 2/3 up, centered on the page. Draw a road going off into the distance until it 'vanishes' in the distance. You can put a series of power line on one side that would also vanish eventually. Notice the doted lines get close to each other with distance...\n\n_URL_1_",
" > What comes first on the page, the house or the VP(s)? If I just drew a house, without respect to the VP's, how would I derive the VP's?\n\nFirst you need to do some rough sketches to 'find' the vanishing point. If you are going for perfect perspective, then you need to do a bit of trial and error to find the correct placement. \n\nThe first thing you need to find is the horizon line. This is where the ground meets the sky. The placement is up to you, you just need to decide how much ground and how much sky you want in your picture.\n\nThe vanishing point will lie on this horizontal line. You need to use your sketches to find the precise point, and expect to do some trial and error until it looks right. You need to find straight lines and right angles in your subject.\n\nConsider this example:: _URL_0_\n\nThe roof and the base of the house follow lines which, when extended, intersect the horizon at the vanishing point. If you extend these lines in your sketch and they do not intersect, then something is wrong.\n\nI guess the answer is to try and draw a house, then try and find the VP. All great art starts with loads of sketches and thumbnails. No one begins by defining the VP, they begin by making sketches and figuring out placement and perspective roughly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://mathworld.wolfram.com/VanishingPoint.html",
"http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gNlqrEcgQIA/T14CuoJcS1I/AAAAAAAAAAs/iDhoIa4nt28/s1600/desert-road-straight-into-distance-horizon-vanishing-point-through-Atacama-desert-arid-dry-rocky-barren-whispy-cloud-above-south-of-Antofagasta-Chile-1-AJHD.jpg"
],
[
... | |
zunvt | what is anti-matter/antihydrogen and what does it/do they do? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zunvt/eli5_what_is_antimatterantihydrogen_and_what_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"c67vqj5"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Anti-matter is matter that has the opposite charge as normal matter.\n\nNormal matter is made up of tiny particles called atoms. The core of an atom is made up of larger Protons and Neutrons, and has tiny electrons orbiting around it. Imagine our Solar system as an atom, this would make Sun like the core of the atom, packed with protons and neutrons, and the planets like the electrons. Protons have a positive electrical charge, while electrons have a negative electrical charge and neutrons have no charge at all.\n\nIn anti-matter, the charges are reversed, and we give them different names. Anti-matter uses negatively charged protons, which are called antiprotons, in place of protons, and uses positively charged electrons, called positrons, in place of electrons.\n\nNormal hydrogen has core with just 1 proton, between 0 and 2 neutrons, and 1 electron in orbit. Antihydrogen has core with one anti-proton, between 0 and 2 neutrons, and 1 positron in orbit.\n\nWhat makes anti-matter so interesting is that when it comes into contact with its normal matter counterpart, both the matter and anti-matter is annihilated, converting the mass of both particles into pure energy. To understand how meaningful that is, compare it the energy generated by a nuclear reaction. Each time an atom is fused or split in a nuclear reaction, at most a few neutrons are destroyed and converted into energy, but it still creates more energy than anything else we can achieve. When matter reacts with anti-matter, the entire atom is destroyed, instead of just a one or two neutrons."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
1orz1s | during the blitz of london and other major european cities how comes major landmarks where not destroyed? i.e. house of parliment, tower bridge, buckingham palace. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1orz1s/eli5_during_the_blitz_of_london_and_other_major/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccuz3d4",
"ccuzj6n"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"They took some damage, but it got repaired.\n\nThe bombs used in WWII were certainly damaging, but it wasn't too common for only 1 or 2 hits to take out a decently large, well built structure. ",
"First of all, you're missing a little bit of perspective. Many of the landmarks *now* are landmarks *because* they survived. Some of most iconic structures of Europe (save a handful of old churches / castles) were built during the late 1800s, and losing 50 year old architecture during the bombings then would not be as notable then as it would be now (as that architecture/style becomes rarer)... so some of the buildings that *would* be cool now are simply forgotten by history. See _URL_0_ for a list of some of the more notable losses.\n\nSecond, many key buildings *were* badly damaged and destroyed - but were repaired or rebuilt in their original image. I don't suppose you've ever visited the city of Munich in Germany? It was *badly* damaged in WW2, but the downtown area still 'looks' old - yet strangely new now. They simply made a conscious effort to keep the original feel of the city and built exact replicas of the old buildings (instead of opting for more modern replacements).\n\nFinally, remember that the worst urban destruction in WW2 was concentrated in a *few* cities.\n\nLondon suffered heavy bombing - but it didn't flatten the city, it created a few holes and tracks where the Brits then built a combination of new skyscrapers and reparied/rebuilt old stuff. It's really a big reason London is so interesting architecturally now.\n\nMunich was very heavily damaged, but completely rebuilt as it was.\n\nRotterdam was totally flattened by the Germans during the blitz, and Dresden and several other German cities by the Allies / Russians. Those cities opted to start from scratch and just build 'modern' cities that look like any American city now. Look at Rotterdam pictures before & after. It's nuts.\n\nStalingrad (now Volgograd) was also flattened, but was never heavily re-invested in. It's now a minor city.\n\nCities like Amsterdam and Paris were occupied by the Germans, but the cities are still totally intact because they surrendered to the Germans before the fighting made it there. Ditto with some of the other big cities like Prauge and Vienna. The Germans took them as prizes. Why would they destroy them if there was no resistance?\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_demolished_buildings_and_structures_in_London"
]
] | ||
30e9o2 | somtimes, out of nowhere, i feel really, ecstatically good. to the point that i feel like i love everyone and everything in the room, and they all love me. why does this happen? | It's made me wonder, at times, if I was secretly drugged or something and just didn't know it. I do have Major Depressive Disorder, so this is somewhat of a blessing to me. But it also has physical effects such as a pleasant feeling from the pit of my stomach all the way down to my pubic area and even my legs. What could possibly be causing this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30e9o2/eli5_somtimes_out_of_nowhere_i_feel_really/ | {
"a_id": [
"cprlry9",
"cprrfj8"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If you've been diagnosed with depression, it's not much of a stretch for you to be bipolar. You might try talking to your doctor about it.",
"Those are manic episodes. Talk to your Doctor."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
2ai0fm | how did the internet work before the world wide web? what was it? what could it do? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ai0fm/eli5_how_did_the_internet_work_before_the_world/ | {
"a_id": [
"civbj97",
"civbxy3",
"civfl8z"
],
"score": [
16,
11,
2
],
"text": [
"You can kind of think about the Internet as being the actual hardware, and the world wide web as what we run on it.\n\nThe internet is what we call the system to interconnect lots of computers over long distances. It's just the way that you can plug a wire into your computer, and someone else can have a wire in their computer, and between them they are connected indirectly throughs lots of other computers and you can pass each other data fairly quickly and reliably. What that data is doesn't really matter: It can be web pages, game data, instant messengers, file servers, whatever. This has been around in some form or another for decades now; in the early days it was mainly used by universities and government departments.\n\nThe world wide web is one system that uses the internet. Web servers host pages that can display various pieces of information, and can also link to other web pages. This makes it a quick way to put up information in a way other people can access passively when they want, rather than needing you to send data out individually to anyone who wants it. It's evolved a lot, and can do far more now that it was ever intended. Note that a lot of what you do online isn't on the web: again, instant messaging and online gaming are two examples that, unless you're doing them in a web browser, probably aren't done through the web.\n\nSo before the world wide web came out, the internet was used in primarily text-based ways. Email was about before the WWW, and so were text-based newsgroups and forums. In fact, you could argue that Reddit and sites like it are direct descendants of the very earliest types of internet services, just running on the web (and with a couple of decades of development and experience).",
"Some things you could do on the internet before the world wide web:\n\n\n* Email - the first email was sent in 1971 (see this article on [Ray Tomlinson](_URL_0_))\n\n\n* Chat - chatrooms existed prior to the world wide web\n\n\n* [Usenet](_URL_1_) - basically a big bulletin board system / forum. I suppose in a way kinda like Reddit, people create posts and people comment on them.\n\n\n* FTP - basically a way of uploading files to a server for others to download them (so exchanging files)\n\n\nIn short a lot of the same things were possible, but the internet was much more text heavy and less easily accessible.",
"The internet is just machines communicating with one another (at the most basic level).\nThe world wide web is the interface the general user interacts with. Simplified, this means the machines in the internet have information stored on them in a format that you access as a readable text or say a video with your browser. These are in general referred to as web pages. Links lead to other web pages on the same or different machines. The collection of these are called the world wide web.\n\nBefore the world wide web (which made it available to the public) the internet could do A LOT of things. For example, transmit scientific data or dramatically improve military communication, two of the purposes it wsa designed for. If you're interested there's a lot more [here](_URL_0_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Tomlinson",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet"
]
] | ||
3ijzzk | if it's so difficult for a fusion reactor to just break even, then why are they expected to someday be able to produce massive amounts of power? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ijzzk/eli5_if_its_so_difficult_for_a_fusion_reactor_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuh3swl",
"cuh40qg",
"cuh448w",
"cuhodia"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The sun works on fusion, so we know it's a good source of power.\n\nHydrogen is ridiculously easy to acquire compared to fissionable elements.\n\nThe result of fusing hydrogen is helium, not the scary radioactive wastes resulting from fission.",
"The reason we can't really produce any net-positive machines is because we're not good at making them. There's a lot of things you need to do to initiate and harvest energy from a fusion reaction, and we haven't found sufficiently efficient ways of doing so as to get more back than we had to expend to start with.\n\nOnce upon a time steam engines weren't really worth it either: it wasn't that steam was lacking is power, it's that we didn't have all the engineering details needed to make machines to harness it well enough established. ",
"So the amazing part of fusion reactors is they can make energy by combining elements. It is a difficult process to place things together that otherwise were OK apart, so extreme heat is needed. So, much so the stuff we want to go together needs to be contained. No ordinary container works at those temperatures. That is where \"magnetic bottles\" come into play. If you have played with strong magnets ever you have seen how difficult it can be. Now, we know this works because the sun outperforms them all and is using the same underlying reaction. We are just working the kinks out. The super cool and safe thing is, if a reaction leaves the reaction chamber, it becomes inert or safe. The out-performance comes as soon as it is totally controllable.",
"We know for a fact that a sustained fusion reaction puts out huge amounts of energy, all we have to do is look up in the sky. And we can even calculate precisely how much energy a fission or fusion reaction will produce, and fusion is more efficient, it outputs more energy, all other things being equal.\n\nHowever, making a *controlled, sustained* fusion reaction happen on Earth turns out to be a very difficult engineering problem. As far as we know, it requires enormous temperatures, and it's taking a long time to work out how to make all that happen.\n\nIt should be noted that there's no *guarantee* we will EVER be able to build a sustained fusion reactor that's smaller than a star. The engineering problems *might* be much tougher than we suspect."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
3mfucd | how the library of babel works | Link: _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mfucd/eli5_how_the_library_of_babel_works/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvemkub",
"cvepa0a"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"I just spent an hour playing with it. You probably found out about it from Vsauce didn't you? I don't think it can be explained any better than that. If you didn't, look up the last episode its at around 17:00 minutes. ",
"They developed an equation where you put in a number, or seed, (which is translated in such a way to organize it like an actual library), and it gives you a big set of numbers that is then translated into a page of 3200 random characters, and no two seeds will give the same page. This means that by putting different seeds into the equation, you can get a page that contains every possible combination of those 3200 characters, which is everything that could ever be written in english in 3200 characters. Because the equation also works backwards, you can put in a word, or series of words, and then it gets translated into a set of numbers, and the equation will give you all seeds (or pages) in which what you put in will appear."
]
} | [] | [
"https://libraryofbabel.info/"
] | [
[],
[]
] | |
3mp856 | tinder bots. how? more importantly: why? | These things are rampant. How they actually work is one thing I'm curious about. But more importantly, why in the world do they exist? Do they somehow generate revenue? Is it based on the number of clicks they get to their spammy links? Who in the hell are these gullible maniacs who click on their obviously spammy links anyway? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mp856/eli5_tinder_bots_how_more_importantly_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvgvgl6",
"cvgvh18",
"cvh276d"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Some get you to click on websites that they will make money off of, others could be from tinder themselves to encourage users to use the app.\n\nAs for how, I'm not sure what needs explaining. Take a random picture from a collection, add in some basic info any maybe a sentence for the bio and try to match everyone possible for spam. All automated by a computer.",
"Building a bot for a website or app is pretty easy unless the creators are actively trying to prevent you from doing it. Everything is just web requests that the servers can't tell *aren't* from really people with web browsers.\n\nWhy would you want bots on a dating site? The two obvious reasons are:\n\n1. Promote your porn/cam/chat/whatever website, penis pills, sex toys, etc. to a pool of horny single guys\n2. Try to find the suckers so you can start trying catfish/identity theft/scam them",
"Here is an actual way I used to make money back in the day. Craigslist has a section where \"Women meet Men\". I used to know a few sponsors that would pay me if someone signed up with a credit card to a dating site. I had a good relationship with those sponsors because I already sent quite a few sales thus they understood the nature of my traffic and didn't mind the source. This is important because often stuff like this generates complaints.\n\nSo anyway I started out making a couple of posts a day in big cities pretending to be a girl looking for a guy. Whenever someone messaged me (and I would get a TON of replies) I would simply redirect them to my dating site as if that's where my profile was. I had several approaches but the one that worked best was \"I'm stupid I don't know how to use computer, my pics and phone # is over there\". Anytime someone actually pulled out a credit card I got paid.\n\nAnyway long story short I went from posting once or twice in big cities to making about 100-150 posts a day in every major city. I had automated replies. I made an absolute killing until Craigslist figured out a way to filter all that trash out. \n\nThe answer to your question is. Those bots exist because they make $. Someone just like me figured out a way to monetize them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
3if51a | would the u.s. be able to intercept/defend against a nuclear missile strike? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3if51a/eli5_would_the_us_be_able_to_interceptdefend/ | {
"a_id": [
"cufvc1y",
"cufwusn",
"cufxipw"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"To a very limited degree, yes.\n\nThe US could conceivably shoot down a number of incoming missiles. That number is relatively small, likely less than 100. A nuclear strike by a rogue nation like Iran or N. Korea could possibly be defended against. A conflict with a country like Russia or China that can launch hundreds or thousands of warheads would be catastrophic. The primary defense the US or any nuclear power has against nuclear attack is the MAD doctrine. Everybody dies, nobody wins.",
"\"likely less than 100\" - /u/rhomboidus \nMy guess would be only a handful, ,maybe 20 or less could be shot down. However I'm fairly sure there is technology that could be used to shield against attacks that the general public is not aware of ( lasers and star wars stuff ). I think the time it would take from launch to detonation is very short even if an ICBM was launched from say Moscow to Auckland (New Zealand) would take 35mins or less for over 10000 miles or over 16000 kms. The MIRVs make defence against a mass attack almost impossible so the MAD doctrine is enough deterrent. Two thirds of USA nuclear deterrent is in SLBMs and the Russians have a similar strategy of MAD with their subs but probably around a third of their arsenal is in SLBMs ( I don't actually know the Russian statistic ). Anyway lets say ISIS launched a single ICBM from Iraq, it would be detected almost immediately and have over a 95% chance of being shot down. I would appreciate anyone in the military or other to confirm this opinion.",
"The only current possible missile strike on US territory would probably be North Korea, who have a delivery vehicle and nuclear weapon technology, though it is unlikely they currently have the capabilities of creating a nuclear warhead. Even if they did, their capabilities for delivery are very crude, have a limited range (they can't hit US mainland) and would be pretty easy to intercept with current publicly disclosed intercept technology and capabilities. \n\nOn the flip side, Russia could guarantee a nuclear strike on US mainland by using less than 1% of its strategically operational nuclear arsenal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
2092v0 | do planets like mars have valuable minerals that would be useful for us back on earth? if so, what would they be? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2092v0/eli5_do_planets_like_mars_have_valuable_minerals/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg0x4pl",
"cg0ynes"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Helium-3 (He-3) is a light, non-radioactive isotope of helium with two protons and one neutron. It is rare on Earth, and it is sought for use in nuclear fusion research. The abundance of helium-3 is thought to be greater on the Moon ",
"It depends on how differentiated Mars' internal structure is. Over 4.5 billion years the Earth has been rather effective in winnowing elements into useful ore deposits.\n\nSometimes this process is primary (i.e. magma), and sometimes it is secondary (hydrothermal fluids).\n\nIt's quite likely you'd see both types on Mars, but their distribution and concentration may be much different since terrestrial ore occurrence is largely controlled by tectonics."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
281x9o | why is it okay to pass legislation before anybody even knows it's contents? and how does it make sense? | I can't seem to wrap my head around the logic of passing laws before knowing anything about them. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/281x9o/eli5why_is_it_okay_to_pass_legislation_before/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci6kcnh",
"ci6kj9t"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"I don't understand your premise?\n\nThe House and the Senate get to pass whatever they want. Because having some other body restricting what they can or cannot vote on would screw up our relationship of power. \n\nI feel like you have something particular in mind but you haven't said exactly what it is. ",
"In Britain it is up to the public to know about legislation. Laws that have passed through the process will be put into newspapers for the public to read about. Then word of mouth applies after."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
38v54b | scientifically, how does the "high ground advantage" work in military tactics? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38v54b/eli5scientifically_how_does_the_high_ground/ | {
"a_id": [
"cry30pq",
"cry39w3"
],
"score": [
5,
7
],
"text": [
"in ancient times, having the high ground gave you the advantage, because your enemy would have to climb up to you, which would tire them out before the fight even began.... or your soldiers could come down from the high ground, using gravity's momentum to carry you down the hill, using far less energy than usual.\n\nIn midieval/modern times, having the high ground gave your archers/riflemen further range and better protection than those trying to take the hill from you. Because bullets and arrows drop over longer ranges, having a height advantage gives you the ability to shoot from much further ranges than otherwise able. That means if you take 2 cannons with the same exact range, and put 1 on the top of a hill and 1 at the bottom, the 1 on top would be able to hit the one on the bottom, while the one on bottom wouldn't be able to hit the one on top. ",
"In addition to what /u/lordderplythethird said, the high ground gives you both superior visibility and superior fields of fire. If I'm on a hilltop, I can see everything around me, and I can shoot everything around me too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
33f2tx | why have we evolved to only taste salt, sweet, bitter and sour? why were they the important flavors? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33f2tx/eli5_why_have_we_evolved_to_only_taste_salt_sweet/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqk9zj2",
"cqka671"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"We haven't. We can taste other flavors as well. The whole salty, sweet, bitter, and sour thing is a myth (one perpetuated by oversimplified education) but a myth nonetheless.\n\n[Here](_URL_0_) is a good look at how the myth got started and where the science takes us.",
"Because all of those tastes are important to survival. I'll explain each one:\n\nTaste | Reason\n-------|--------------\nBitter | Poisonous plants are often very bitter\nSweet | Sweet things have a lot of calories, which means that if you eat a lot of sweet things, you'll have a lot of fat to use for energy if needed\nSalt | You will die without enough salt\nSour | Warns us if food is rotten\nUnami | This taste is often forgotten, and is found often in things like meat, meat has a lot of nutrition, so its good to eat as much as possible of it.\n\nedit: I was wrong about sour, thanks /u/dumbest,\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15819485"
],
[]
] | ||
5t0f7z | how does us armed forces overseas deployment work? | So, this is really about 100 questions...
I obviously get the concept, but how does the US military execute it? How do we get hundreds of thousands of troops to a designated area in a short amount of time? What are the implications? What type of planning goes into it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5t0f7z/eli5_how_does_us_armed_forces_overseas_deployment/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddj67pd"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"As an Army vet --\n\nFirst, we train for it constantly, and actually test on it annually (at a minimum). When it comes to actually deploying, we loaded everything up on big ass USAF planes, and flew to where we were needed. \n\nThe major part of any US Military branch's mission is to get where the action is in a minimal amount of time, so they maintain readiness to do so. It's not like they are just lounging around, doing nothing until such time as they are needed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
7sjm0g | how do people get into very niche careers? (e.g secret service, cia, etc.) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7sjm0g/eli5_how_do_people_get_into_very_niche_careers_eg/ | {
"a_id": [
"dt59390"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It all starts off with having a clean background. Pretty much from high school and on. It’s very important especially if you are starting off straight from college. Most of the agencies CIA DIA secret service, etc... require degrees for most analyst positions. The background process is stringent to say the least, and only gets more strict when it comes to the privilege of what you’ll be doing. These backgrounds are repeated throughout the career every 5 Years. Most agencies are looking for people from a variety of educational backgrounds. It seems niche once you are in a specified field of work, but the folks they farm from are from all walks of life. The biggest factors are always going to be clean background, integrity, candor, dynamic personality, outside the box thinker, and of course reliability in many aspects, intelligence and cold equations although great have their place for different types of work within those agencies. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
5xqakv | why do people realize something about themselves that they need to change and know exactly what they have to do in order to change but do nothing about it? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5xqakv/eli5_why_do_people_realize_something_about/ | {
"a_id": [
"dek1vlx"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Most things that need to be fixed require a lot of time and effort before realizing the reward. In the meantime, you would be missing out on a lot of instant gratification type stuff that's been giving you pleasure.\n\nSo, understanding that I need to eat right, exercise and spend less money than I make is very easy to understand. But actually doing that stuff when you are not used to doing it is very difficult and it really sucks."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
1dak0o | why was bush a bad president? why is obama a good one? | This seems to be the general consensus, at last where i live, but i feel like Bush must have some redeeming and vice versa in regards to Obama. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dak0o/why_was_bush_a_bad_president_why_is_obama_a_good/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9ohcla",
"c9ohuq7",
"c9ohxsk",
"c9ol8dd"
],
"score": [
16,
10,
6,
9
],
"text": [
"Well... Income inequality has increased dramatically under Obama. His administration has also prosecuted less financial institutions than Reagen, Clinton, or either Bush. Obama has targeted more whistle blowers than all presidents **combined**. The Obama administration has become more secretive than the Bush administration ever was. He also (if you include drones) has hit more countries with weapons than Bush ever did - Libya, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan.",
"They are both bad presidents.",
"They are both terrible TERRIBLE presidents.\n\nBoth have catered to the Big Banks/Wall Street, the military-industrial complex, the medical-industrial complex, prison-industrial complex, continued unconstitutional wars, and shred many civil liberties of the United States.\n\nYeah. They're both BAD.",
"Because you hang out with liberals. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
35lell | how do google cars (and other self-driving vehicles) deal with anomalies (for example,a human directing traffic)? | I understand their being able to handle well-defined things like lane markers, street signs, traffic lights. But what about those situations we've all seen - construction directions with non-standard signs or a construction worker giving instructions, or a traffic officer superseding a traffic light, etc | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35lell/eli5_how_do_google_cars_and_other_selfdriving/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr5gso9",
"cr5hx3g",
"cr61c0d"
],
"score": [
57,
15,
2
],
"text": [
"Simple answer is they don't yet. Interpreting these kinds of events is a very complex rationalization process that they're working on but don't have a perfect solution for yet. \n\nLikely the places that will be the first to use them heavily will have special processes for detecting these types of anomalies. \n\nA simple solution could be a radio-signal that says to the car \"Hey, get your human to drive. Something unanticipated and complex has come up here\", or a map that the GPS system reads in real-time that points out any planned construction work going on and that can be avoided.\n\nAn advanced example might be giving signalmen a vest that has a radio-frequency ID tag (RFID) trigger to tell the car to stop or start driving. ",
"Presumably by pulling over and alerting the driver it has encountered a situation it cannot handle.\n\nThe first generation of self driving vehicles will likely require occasional human intervention. By the time we've worked out all the kinks, either the cars will be smart enough to figure these situations out, or there will be devices given to police and construction workers that allow them to direct traffic with these kinds of cars.",
"People don't think exact. We assign a probability to everything. \n\nWhen you are walking, what is the probability that the ground will be firm on your next step? If you are standing in a room with a firm floor you can calculate that the chances of a firm floor are pretty close to 100% even if your eyes are closed. This is a very educated guess calculated based upon your past experiences, but it is really still a guess. If you were on soft soil you would calculate a lower probability because you have had your feet sink in soft ground in the past. \n\nBack in the early 00's DARPA sponsored a challenge for self driving cars to drive across a desert. The first year none of the cars finished. Many of them failed in dramatic and comical ways mostly because all of the teams where thinking like you and tried to make the cars recognize pre-defined objects. \n\nWired did a full feature article about the people on one of the teams along with how they came up with some of the solutions to their early problems. [Wired Article -Meet Stanley](_URL_0_)\n\nModern self driving cars are using the same combinations of fuzzy logic and learning to deal with things that they have not seen before."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/14.01/stanley.html"
]
] | |
exrgpe | how is it that most individuals tend to avoid violence, but countries are at each other’s throats almost constantly? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/exrgpe/eli5_how_is_it_that_most_individuals_tend_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"fgbmxoc"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Competitive people are drawn to politics whereas the non-competitive avoid it. So the leaders of nations tend to be competitive, unlike the majority of the people in it. This competitiveness leads to conflict.\n\nAnd the leaders of nations do not have to be violent or suffer the dangers of violence when they have their countries go to war. There would be far less violence between countries if the leaders were sent to the front lines to actually do the fighting."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
4d7dof | why does skipping feel so natural? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4d7dof/eli5_why_does_skipping_feel_so_natural/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1ofwbt",
"d1oga6e",
"d1ogb8u",
"d1ogfz3"
],
"score": [
15,
8,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"26 y/o male here. I can haul absolute ass when I skip. It's almost effortless as well. I feel like humans may have skipped to hunt down gazelle at one point in our evolutionary time line. This is an educated guess based on first hand experience.\n\nEdit: typo",
"I just looked it up under 'Gait (human)' on Wikipedia and apparently you're right:\n\n\"Skipping is a gait children display when they are about four- to five-years-old. While a jog is similar to a horse's trot, the skip is closer to the bipedal equivalent of a horse's canter.\n\nComputational simulations of gait are performed using a physiological model of the musculoskeletal system, without assuming any particular type of gait; a computationally efficient optimization strategy is utilized allowing for multiple simulations. **The results reveal skipping as more efficient and less fatiguing than walking or running** and suggest the existence of a walk-skip rather than a walk-run transition at low gravity.\"\n\nI would not have expected that! I am definitely trying skipping tomorrow.",
"Skipping is jumping forward and landing. Whereas running is falling forward and catching yourself. So skipping feels easier and more controlled.",
"_URL_0_\n\nThis study goes into it. Their hypothesis is that skipping is an in-between state from quadrupedal and bipedal motion. It's more energy intensive than running though, which is why neither marathon runners nor sprinters skip instead of run. It's noted that kids start skipping around 4-5, so it *could* be better in some ways at that age of their physical development. \n\nTLDR: Skipping is an evolutionary throwback, which is why it feels natural. But it isn't better than running... except on the moon, apparently."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1689187/pdf/9699315.pdf"
]
] | ||
76ycwu | uv light in public conveniences. | Hello everyone.
I have a question. My local council have recently installed ultraviolet lights in all their public toilets.
Why do they do this? My mum (who was a nurse) told me it prevented drug addicts from injecting in the cubicles, but I know ultraviolet light is used in water treatment.
Why do they do that? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/76ycwu/eli5_uv_light_in_public_conveniences/ | {
"a_id": [
"dohk69j"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Your mum is correct. \n\nUnder UV light you can't see your veins to inject. It also works with blue bulbs I think but is more effective with UV.\n\nEDIT: Missed a word"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
aa0er7 | why nfl teams dont throw games for trades or draft picks | e.g. Browns throwing a game to let Pittsburgh into the playoffs for better draft picks, trade, cash or something? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aa0er7/eli5_why_nfl_teams_dont_throw_games_for_trades_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"ecnymf0",
"ecnzlp2"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"they do. but they have to be very careful about it because the NFL can fine the teams for intentionally losing games. Also, they could be sued in a federal antitrust lawsuit. the latter is unlikely but not unheard of",
"Firstly NFL does not allow teams to deliberately throw their game. If a team does not play as good as they should they can be fined or even be demoted. And secondly the goal of a team is not to win but to get more income. And the best way to get income is to get more spectators as this makes more people pay for tickets and more people will watch the advertisements which brings inn more sponsors. So playing an interesting game where you show your best can be much more worth then getting slightly better draft picks. Getting a worse draft can even help with your spectator numbers as people tend to want to see games against equal opponents."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
nth98 | why is alcohol a depressant? | Is it to due with the state of mind you're in when you take the drug. So you can have quiet drinkers in a pub that were depressed and then drank more, extenuating the depression? Whereas if you're going out to party, you're in a good mood and so it's magnified. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/nth98/why_is_alcohol_a_depressant/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3bss44",
"c3bu4zs",
"c3bub70",
"c3bss44",
"c3bu4zs",
"c3bub70"
],
"score": [
6,
4,
39,
6,
4,
39
],
"text": [
"There was a study where students given placebo beers still acted like they were drunk. So I guess the environment affects the effect a lot.\n\nEdit: [Found it](_URL_0_)",
"I used to be a mental health counselor at a detox. Did it for about 8 years. I used to show this video by father martin about alcohol. It's called chalk talks. It's probably the BEST \"explain like I'm five\" on alcoholism. \nI found him doing a different version on vimeo: [Chalk Talks](_URL_0_)\n\nThe part you're looking for starts around 29:00. But if you're interested at all, start watching at 7:40. This man is amazing and I honestly watched alcoholics start to UNDERSTAND what's going on with them instead of just know. If that makes any sense.",
"Good answers here, but I think the most important thing to understand is that the word \"depressant\" does not mean \"thing that makes you depressed,\" it means \"thing that slows down your brain, or at least certain parts of it.\" The words just happen to sound similar because something something etymology.",
"There was a study where students given placebo beers still acted like they were drunk. So I guess the environment affects the effect a lot.\n\nEdit: [Found it](_URL_0_)",
"I used to be a mental health counselor at a detox. Did it for about 8 years. I used to show this video by father martin about alcohol. It's called chalk talks. It's probably the BEST \"explain like I'm five\" on alcoholism. \nI found him doing a different version on vimeo: [Chalk Talks](_URL_0_)\n\nThe part you're looking for starts around 29:00. But if you're interested at all, start watching at 7:40. This man is amazing and I honestly watched alcoholics start to UNDERSTAND what's going on with them instead of just know. If that makes any sense.",
"Good answers here, but I think the most important thing to understand is that the word \"depressant\" does not mean \"thing that makes you depressed,\" it means \"thing that slows down your brain, or at least certain parts of it.\" The words just happen to sound similar because something something etymology."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1403295/"
],
[
"http://vimeo.com/10503911"
],
[],
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1403295/"
],
[
"http://vimeo.com/10503911"
],
[]
] | |
72lmz0 | when you have a cold, where does the infection reside? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/72lmz0/eli5_when_you_have_a_cold_where_does_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dnjixv0"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Well, the infection is, in short, where you feel the effects. I'll break it down:\n\n1. So if you get infected by influenza, it infects usually where it enters (your nasal and pulmonary epithelial cells which have mucous membranes that make it easy for the virus to enter). So the Virus starts infecting cells right there.\n\n2. Now your immune system kicks in, and that might take a couple days, because of some reasons (below are nkt all, but common ones):\n\n- the virus is sneaky and escapes detection by dendritic cells, macrophages, t-cells and so forth. There are various mechanisms to do so.\n\n-you have not encountered that type of virus before, so your immune system has to build a response first. That means recognize it as a threat, transport that info to the lymph nodes, where t- and b- cells are primed and have to proliferate, then they move out and attack.\n\nDuring this time, the Virus happily infects and migrates some more. \n\n3. The battle begins, all your immune cells kick into gear, killing infected cells. For that to happen, they need to get out of the blood stream and into the infected tissue. For that, they need guidance, for example Histamines or other messenger molecules, that form a gradient which the immune cells can follow. These are inflammatory mediators, too, which means they cause inflammatory reactions in the affected area. \nAlso, the epithelial cells lining your blood vessels are tight mofos, so that you dont normally bleed into your own tissue. These tight binds need to be softened, which leads to 'leakage' of cells (simply put) - this is why you get a runny nose when you have allergies, too. \n\nAlso, all this action generates heat, and if the infection is big enough, a lot of heat -- > Fever\n\n4. I said the virus infects epithelial cells. It can also infect migrating cells (ex. HIV infects migratory immune cells). Wherever these cells go, the Virus goes, too. This means a new locus of infection, and the battle begins - again. Only this time your body is already sensitive to the virus antigen and can fight it much quicker. That is why not every flu or cold leads to really bad pneumonia. IF, however the pathogen has already infected tissue in your loung, you will have the immune system fighting it there, leading to mucus build up (fluid mixed with dead cells), that makes you cough (this is not the only cause for coughing in all diseases, though!)\n\nTL;DR it depends on where the pathogen infects, how fast it infects, and how fast you fight it. Pathogens are usually first localized at point of entry, but can migrate to other places. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
2bhhf5 | why do i feel the urge to make strange gurgling noises when i stretch? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bhhf5/eli5_why_do_i_feel_the_urge_to_make_strange/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj5eoub",
"cj5eylw",
"cj5f465",
"cj5fabt"
],
"score": [
97,
18,
2,
12
],
"text": [
"This is my completely unscientific guess as a medical student- open to corrections!\n\nWhen you stretch, you unconsciously perform something called a 'valsalva manoeuvre' against your epiglottis. This is when you kind of breath out but close your windpipe so that no air can get out. It turns out this has a number of effects, mostly on circulation. Your cardiac output decreases, causing your blood vessels to constrict and your heart to beat faster to bring output back up. This is why after you stretch you sometimes get a brief palpitation.\n\nThe main reason that you might want to perform a valsalva manoeuvre, is that stretching will automatically otherwise expel air in the lungs. Contracting the muscles around you chest squeezes you like a boa constrictor, and unless you put a lid on it, you'll lose the breath you took in.\n\nSo basically, I would say you block your airway to stop you from losing your breath, but you let it trickle out slowly possibly to prevent overtaxing your heart (doesn't make a big difference, but who knows whether it gave our ancestors an advantage). That trickling sounds like a weird stretch gurgle.\n\nEDIT: Or, now that I think of it, it could just be that your unconscious valsalva manoeuvre isn't strong enough to contain the air being expelled by your mighty chest muscles. Who knows.",
"Wait until you get old! Every god damned thing involves grunting. Getting out of bed, up from a chair, into and out of the car, bending to pick up some trash. Jesus. You'd think I had a midget with a cold stuck in my neck.",
"Because when you engage in the primal act of stretching you connect with the inner beast in you who in turn wishes to be reconnected with all of nature and ascend to his planar form.",
"Because it feels good man"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
82zrua | what do consultants do and how do they make so much money? | Ive seen a fair amount of people say they've changed careers to become a consultant and they make more money than they did before. I just want to know what they do. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/82zrua/eli5_what_do_consultants_do_and_how_do_they_make/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvdzm4b",
"dvdzsar",
"dvdzzvq",
"dve05kq",
"dve2u8y"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3,
7,
6
],
"text": [
"Generally they come in and give ideas/assist in implementing improvements to a business. They make a lot of money because they have specialized knowledge in a field.",
"A consultant is a person who has extensive knowledge in a specific field or job. Companies will then hire the consultant for whatever particular need they have.",
"A company calls in a consultant (or a team of consultants) when they have a \"big question\" that needs to be answered, that they might not have the time or skills to answer for themselves. For example, \"if I open two new franchises across town, will I make money or lose money? How much?\" or \"What's the best way to advertise my new product? TV commerical? Radio ad? Facebook ad? What will get me the most sales for the least cost?\" That sort of thing.",
"\"Consultants\" are just freelance experts that a company or organization hires to provide advice or ideas about a particular topic. For example an expert on a specific drug used in a murder could be hired by the police as a consultant, or a productivity expert might be hired by a company to come in and provide suggestions about ways to increase productivity.\n\nConsulting can usually provide a fair bit of income because it requires you to be good/an expert in something and as an outside contractor companies tend to hire you to fix problems outside of their normal abilities (making you valuable to them). However this comes at the flip side in demand; since consultants' job is basically to fix a specific problem (and then to leave) consultants are often looking for new places with that particular problem, so their income can be a bit inconsistent compared to a standard salary job.",
"Consultant here. :)\n\nA consultant is kind of like a plumber You don't hire a plumber to hang out in your basement fulltime waiting for a drain to clog. Instead, you pay $80/hour for them to do the work when you need it. That might seem like a lot, but you are also paying for them to sit around and be available when you eventually need them, and not having to pay them when you don't.\n\nConsultants work the same way. Instead of having a specialist on staff full time or regular employee half-ass a job they really don't know how to do, you pay a premium for me to show up, do the job, then leave. The company wins because they are paying less money overall to get the job done at higher quality. I win becasue they can make a lot more money than if I was in a salaried position. \n\nSo why isn't everyone a consultant? At the risk of sounding immodest, you have to better than an ordinary salaried employee to pull it off. You have to have top skills to get people to pay top dollar, but you also have to be well rounded. There are plenty of brilliant technical people who lack the business, communication, and management skills to step into a brand new project, figure out what needs to be done, then do it. Sometimes half my job is to go down into some technical dungeon, talk to technical to the technical people, and then translate it into business for the business people.\n\nYou also have to be ok with a lot of job insecurity, and confident your skills and reputation can get you a job in a bad market. You might make twice as much, but you also might unexpectedly be out of work for 4 months.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
6qbkd9 | why are priests prone to the stereotype of being a pervert? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6qbkd9/eli5_why_are_priests_prone_to_the_stereotype_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkvzz7t"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's hard to go forever without sex/intimacy, and many people who had feelings they knew to be sinful (homosexual, attracted to kids) chose the priesthood as a way to run from their feelings or try to cure them. So when the feelings remain, and they're in positions of trust, power, and access to vulnerable people it opens opportunities to act upon those feelings and cover them up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
4zfuag | why didn't we start looking at the closest solar system for habitable planets to begin with? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4zfuag/eli5_why_didnt_we_start_looking_at_the_closest/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6vgyip"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"We did. Our ability to detect exoplanets is limited and gradually improving, and distance is only one variable that affects whether or not we're able to detect a particular planet. We had looked there before but weren't able to see anything out of the ordinary until now."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.