q_id stringlengths 5 6 | title stringlengths 0 304 | selftext stringlengths 0 39.2k | document stringclasses 1 value | subreddit stringclasses 3 values | answers dict | title_urls dict | selftext_urls dict | answers_urls dict | split stringclasses 9 values | title_body stringlengths 1 39.1k | embeddings list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2tneo8 | Why do animals sometimes break up fights between each other? | I've seen gifs of dogs breaking up cats from fighting, or on the front page more recently, some chickens breaking up rabbits.
Why do they do it? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"co0z9r4"
],
"text": [
"Because certain dog breeds are pacifists by nature. Just kidding, it's a show of dominance over both fighting animals by the animal stopping the fight. Basically the animal stopping the fight is saying \"the only fighting will be done by me, and only when I feel like it so sit down and shut up!\" It can honestly be several reasons."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do animals sometimes break up fights between each other?
I've seen gifs of dogs breaking up cats from fighting, or on the front page more recently, some chickens breaking up rabbits. Why do they do it? | [
0.02371782436966896,
-0.050769608467817307,
0.08882270753383636,
0.06752697378396988,
0.025899212807416916,
-0.013646985404193401,
-0.010419657453894615,
-0.048644520342350006,
0.11044587939977646,
0.0380314402282238,
-0.04331904649734497,
0.023089146241545677,
-0.07037670165300369,
0.0564... | |
3szkl1 | How come right when a wound or a scab is about to heal it becomes very itchy? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cx1swk6"
],
"text": [
"The physical stress of the skin stretching closed tickles the nerves that signal itching. Scar tissue being formed can also itch, due to its texture."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How come right when a wound or a scab is about to heal it becomes very itchy?
| [
0.023589475080370903,
-0.07122759521007538,
0.046134091913700104,
0.04144715145230293,
0.09301695972681046,
0.04044578596949577,
0.03853811323642731,
0.04201476648449898,
-0.028620876371860504,
0.05692005902528763,
-0.05222446471452713,
0.017650775611400604,
-0.02842206135392189,
0.1056328... | ||
1yicca | What exactly does it mean to be double jointed? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cfkry1r",
"cfl0d9b"
],
"text": [
"It is an awkward idiom used to refer to people with hypermobility/hyperlaxity. Meaning they can flex joints much further than the average person can.",
"No such thing as \"double jointed\" you dont have extra joints... just the ability to hyperextend the joint in question"
],
"score": [
18,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What exactly does it mean to be double jointed?
| [
-0.03900669515132904,
-0.015806257724761963,
0.023694980889558792,
0.013033674098551273,
-0.10546845942735672,
0.0082994494587183,
-0.016269637271761894,
0.07438448071479797,
0.013567894697189331,
0.0187548641115427,
0.04279166832566261,
0.12741217017173767,
0.023914512246847153,
-0.015816... | ||
2yng17 | Why is the standard of mass was named "kilogram" instead of just "gram" like any other units? | What's so special about unit of mass? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cpb6klh",
"cpb6ixj"
],
"text": [
"It appears on my limited research that gram was originally chosen as the base unit, but then it was decided to be too small so the standard unit was changed. And I suppose to keep it simple, instead of significantly changing the meaning of a word, a prefix was added.\n\nThis video goes over the history of Kilogram naming (Around 1:30)\n\n_URL_0_",
"The reason they used kg instead of just grams as the SI unit is mainly because grams would be too cumbersome to use in a normal day. Kilograms is a much more effective measurement as alnost everything in a normal situation can be measured in that scale."
],
"score": [
15,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMByI4s-D-Y"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why is the standard of mass was named "kilogram" instead of just "gram" like any other units?
What's so special about unit of mass? | [
-0.03098999708890915,
0.008935295976698399,
-0.019446510821580887,
0.040409866720438004,
-0.06805924326181412,
-0.046520356088876724,
0.00025625911075621843,
0.029920874163508415,
0.08476592600345612,
-0.006328515242785215,
0.0744963064789772,
-0.02756671793758869,
0.0006416747928597033,
-... | |
30wj05 | How does the US Air Force determine which aircraft(B-1,B-2,B-52,F-16,etc) a target needs to be bombed by? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cpwh2fn"
],
"text": [
"Mission parameters, cost, availability:\n\nThe F-16 has a smaller payload capacity than a bomber. It's also cheaper and easier to maintain. If a target can be destroyed by an F-16 within mission parameters, then use an F-16 instead of a B-52 which will burn more fuel, require more maintenance, etc."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How does the US Air Force determine which aircraft(B-1,B-2,B-52,F-16,etc) a target needs to be bombed by?
| [
0.06614433228969574,
-0.019176961854100227,
-0.08200719952583313,
-0.005346368066966534,
0.09291728585958481,
0.039752788841724396,
0.022933214902877808,
-0.06606034189462662,
-0.016334321349859238,
0.05413229018449783,
-0.04803556203842163,
-0.010589972138404846,
0.022347554564476013,
-0.... | ||
2jwn43 | How does a water softener work? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"clfrkf5"
],
"text": [
"So you need to think of water like a bus. It cruises along inside of your pipes occasionally picking passengers up along the way (Calcium and Magnesium mostly). Now Calcium and Magnesium are bad patrons. They leave a film on the bus and generally make things work less efficiently because of their disruptive nature. As you can imagine this makes it really hard for the bus to do its job (hard water). To fix this, we need to take those nasty passengers off of the bus. This is where our friend Sodium comes in like the enforcer. Sodium will walk into the bus and remove Calcium and Magnesium. Calcium and Magnesium give Sodium grief though, so he brings his friends resin and zeolyte along to help. They tie Calcium and Magnesium up, toss them out of the bus, and put them in a holding cell. When that cell gets full, we empty it out by sending Calcium and Magnesium to their new job bothering the people at the water treatment plant."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How does a water softener work?
| [
-0.13324254751205444,
-0.020558681339025497,
-0.003269535256549716,
0.014012505300343037,
0.046632811427116394,
-0.02368125133216381,
0.05442054569721222,
0.03551190346479416,
-0.017634958028793335,
-0.0502835176885128,
-0.03472500294446945,
-0.011408858932554722,
0.030110500752925873,
-0.... | ||
5q3toq | How are viewership figures calculated for TV Shows and are they accurate? | If I leave my Freeview box on but turn my TV off, does that still count as 1? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dcw2dfu"
],
"text": [
"Unless you are a household that participates in TV rating measurement (ie, having a Nielsen box to track usage in the USA), it does not matter what you do.\n\nA random sample audience is used to track statistics, and then that data is used to extrapolate nationwide viewership.\n\nFreeview sounds maybe like a UK thing, but it seems the UK does something similar:\n\n_URL_0_"
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,,-2697,00.html"
]
} | train_eli5 | How are viewership figures calculated for TV Shows and are they accurate?
If I leave my Freeview box on but turn my TV off, does that still count as 1? | [
0.0729985162615776,
-0.12299644947052002,
-0.0033561773598194122,
0.0006008482305333018,
0.003975857514888048,
0.051007188856601715,
-0.017672359943389893,
-0.024903560057282448,
0.10229647904634476,
0.044764310121536255,
-0.03327188268303871,
-0.014071213081479073,
0.0522146038711071,
-0.... | |
2fdchz | If our brain can apply "motion blur" to fast moving objects we see in real life, why doesn't it apply the same to high framerate video or other fast moving objects on a screen? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ck86p3u"
],
"text": [
"Let's pretend your eyes only register 5 \"dots\". When you don't see anything, you might see \"oooo\". If you're looking at a static object, you'd see \"Xoooo\". Something moving at regular speed would go \"Xoooo\", \"oXooo\", \"ooXoo\", and so on.\n\nMotion blur comes in when something moves across your field of vision faster than you can register it as a clear image. This means that rather than going from \"oXooo\" to \"ooooX\", you might get some half-seen stuff in the middle that looks like \"obbbX\". This happens because the sensors in your eyes are still transmitting a \"partial\" signal to your brain.\n\nWith video, there's never any in-between to fill in with a half-seen image. There's nothing to blur because the image directly jumps from \"oXooo\" to \"ooooX\" without ever being in-between.\n\nEven if you crank up the frame rates, you still never actually have intermediate images. At some level, you're expecting a degree of blurring and things that don't have it seem unnatural."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | If our brain can apply "motion blur" to fast moving objects we see in real life, why doesn't it apply the same to high framerate video or other fast moving objects on a screen?
| [
0.017455818131566048,
-0.12599770724773407,
0.02371658943593502,
-0.07440611720085144,
0.053358256816864014,
0.023373069241642952,
0.023856712505221367,
-0.03913808986544609,
0.07062433660030365,
-0.03764840215444565,
0.02676774188876152,
0.03026140294969082,
-0.07137961685657501,
-0.00657... | ||
26ea3m | How can tabloid magazines get away with making up embarrassing and shocking stories about celebrities? Isn't that considered libel? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"chq8gul",
"chq79mu",
"chq89vd"
],
"text": [
"It's libel if the claim can be shown to be untrue. If the claim is true, or cannot be proven false, it's not libel. And as /u/Melon-Tester says, there are ways of wording your article so it can't easily be proven false. Another trick is to make the claim in the form of a question: \"Did Angelina Jolie snort cocaine?\" You can then go on to state a few facts (it is true that Angelina Jolie turned up at an event covered in white powder) while omitting some others (such as the fact that it was actually a make-up malfunction), and you have successfully planted in readers' minds the idea that Jolie snorts cocaine without ever actually having stated anything false.\n\nOf course, if a publication does sail too close to the wind and is successfully sued, it just pays a fine which barely registers on its financial statement -- chump change to a major publishing empire -- and prints a tiny \"correction\" three months later in the bottom right corner of page 31 that nobody will read.",
"I think it's because they use vague terms such as \"source's claim Charlie Sheen is actually black\" they then basically build their bullshit article around that.",
"Some celebs ascribe to the adage that there is no such thing as bad publicity and don't bother. However, they do actually get sued and often settle out of court with gag orders all 'round. It's a cost of doing business. When I was young in the 70s, the tabloids were really raunchy and full of libel. That's why they seem to have switched to \"stars without makeup\" and \"stars with cellulite\". It's hard to sue over being caught at Starbucks with Morning Face or caught at the beach (especially the new mothers) with (gasp) celluite on the thighs or saggy baby feeding boobies."
],
"score": [
10,
4,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How can tabloid magazines get away with making up embarrassing and shocking stories about celebrities? Isn't that considered libel?
| [
0.007746569812297821,
0.01624310202896595,
0.032435689121484756,
0.03724680095911026,
0.08214963972568512,
-0.027795422822237015,
-0.007074968423694372,
-0.025882039219141006,
0.023768778890371323,
-0.004738212563097477,
0.00019795048865489662,
0.02322535775601864,
0.0914577767252922,
-0.0... | ||
8kpf36 | How can medical professionals test for evidence of a heart attack after it occurred? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dz9gxw3",
"dz9h71q"
],
"text": [
"They use something called an Electrocardiogram (EKG) to test for electrical signals from the heart, as well as drawing blood and testing cardiac enzymes which will show evidence of a heart attack.",
"It depends how long ago the heart attack was, but you can often measure levels of troponin and creatine kinase in the blood which may suggest damage to the heart muscle."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How can medical professionals test for evidence of a heart attack after it occurred?
| [
0.01443167869001627,
0.07838970422744751,
-0.01707124337553978,
0.050631601363420486,
0.07828745990991592,
0.010901127941906452,
-0.1053052693605423,
-0.0038308892399072647,
0.06594830751419067,
-0.002985846484079957,
0.030378298833966255,
0.001329466002061963,
-0.031370874494314194,
0.076... | ||
3iyt9y | What material does an electromagnetic wave exist in? | I'm struggling to understand how an electromagnetic wave moves? A water wave moves through water. A sound wave uses particles in the air. What medium does an electromagnetic wave move through?
Thanks. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cukugqm",
"cukuyhv"
],
"text": [
"No medium. Think of what medium a gravitational field moves through? It doesnt have a medium. A changing electric field creates a magnetic field next to it. That magnetic field creates an electric field next to it, and the energy of an EM wave travels through these self-creating fields.",
"The electric and magnetic fields are just models which work well for making predictions. They don't physically exist, in the sense that there really truly is a magnetic or electric field, but the universe sort of acts like there is one.\n\nAn electromagnetic wave consists of a huge number of photons. Basically, when they're in large enough groups, they act like what we call an EM wave.\n\nAn electromagnetic field is a representation of the interaction between charged particles, which actually interact via the same field which generates photons. When charged particles are far apart, they act like their behavior is governed by the electromagnetic field, but strictly speaking it isn't, since the electromagnetic field isn't a real thing.\n\nFrom a purely theoretical standpoint, in classical physics the medium for the electric and magnetic fields is called the \"luminiferous aether.\" Relativity proved that the aether doesn't exist, though. The closest thing the EM field has to a \"medium\" is spacetime."
],
"score": [
4,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What material does an electromagnetic wave exist in?
I'm struggling to understand how an electromagnetic wave moves? A water wave moves through water. A sound wave uses particles in the air. What medium does an electromagnetic wave move through? Thanks. | [
0.04644810035824776,
-0.09721376746892929,
-0.014805315993726254,
-0.018691683188080788,
0.03569231182336807,
0.0016178953228518367,
0.0666315108537674,
-0.01895778253674507,
-0.05855446308851242,
0.026399726048111916,
0.016918594017624855,
-0.057506125420331955,
-0.008603493683040142,
-0.... | |
265d95 | Why do we add up chances differently? (diminitive addition) | For example:
Think about throwing a dice 100 times, what are the chances of getting the 1? Well, 1/6. What are the chances of getting 1 in 100 tries? Normally, that would be 1 * 100/6 = 100/6, but NO. It goes somewhere around 90...something percent. Why?
*P.S: Sorry if i'm ignorant on this topic, I'm really not good in maths and I could hardly find any information about this on the internet* | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"chnt3xg",
"chnsnha",
"chnt5c6"
],
"text": [
"It's a little easier to do with coins. Suppose you flip a coin, there's a 1/2 chance you got heads. If you flip the coin, what are the chances you got heads on either of your two rolls?\n\nWell, we can make a little tree that shows the possible outcomes:\n\n first flip: heads tails\n / \\ / \\\n second flip: heads tails heads tails\n\nSo, there are four possible outcomes: heads/heads, heads/tails, tails/heads, and tails/tails. So, you have a 1/4 chance of not getting heads.\n\nIf you flipped a third coin, you'd have a 1/8 chance of not getting heads (do a little tree yourself if you're not seeing why). Four coins, 1/16. Five coins, 1/32. The chance of not having gotten heads goes down by a half every time you flip.\n\nWe can do the same thing with dice. When you roll a dice, there's a 5/6 chance you won't get a 1. Roll a second dice, your chances of not getting one goes decreases by 5/6, just like it halved with the coin. So, it's a 25/36 chance of not getting 1.\n\nIf you roll a dice 100 times, your chances of not getting 1 decrease by 5/6 100 times. We'd write that as 5^(100)/6^(100), which Google tells me is around .0000000012075 or so. So, there's a .00000012075% chance you *won't* get a 1, or a 99.999998792% chance that you will.",
"The odds of getting anything other than a 1 are 5/6. The odds of getting anything other than a 1 twice in a row is 5/6 * 5/6. Keep multiplying, and you should find that the odds of rolling anything but a 1 100 times in a row come out to be somewhere around 1x10^-10 or really fucking small in vernacular.",
"Let's make it simpler, what's your chance of throwing a 1 in two trials? Do you think it is 2/6? It isn't. Just count how many possibilities there are:\n\n(1, 1)\n\n(1, 2) and (2, 1)\n\n(1, 3) and (3, 1)\n\n(1, 4) and (4, 1)\n\n(1, 5) and (5, 1)\n\n(1, 6) and (6, 1)\n\nThat's eleven possibilities to have at least once a 1 on a total of possible different trials of 36. Thus, your chance is 11/36 which is a little less than 2/6."
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do we add up chances differently? (diminitive addition)
For example: Think about throwing a dice 100 times, what are the chances of getting the 1? Well, 1/6. What are the chances of getting 1 in 100 tries? Normally, that would be 1 * 100/6 = 100/6, but NO. It goes somewhere around 90...something percent. Why? *P.S: Sorry if i'm ignorant on this topic, I'm really not good in maths and I could hardly find any information about this on the internet* | [
0.01285304594784975,
-0.06277325749397278,
0.018144207075238228,
-0.007508352864533663,
0.008211074396967888,
-0.03422680124640465,
0.025529686361551285,
0.11874201893806458,
0.16345670819282532,
0.06627406924962997,
0.009566372260451317,
-0.0291004441678524,
0.003481830470263958,
-0.03657... | |
3dp58j | Why did people in places like Africa develop darker skin when black absorbs the most light compared to lighter colors? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ct7bia7",
"ct7bivu",
"ct7jcj1"
],
"text": [
"Dark skin is caused by melanin. When the sun hits your skin it gets absorbed by melanin and not by your skin cells. This is a good thing because if your skin cells absorb the sun it can cause damage that can possibly lead to skin cancer.",
"Darker skin has high concentrations of melanin which can help to protect against UV light and greatly decreases the chances of getting skin cancer. That's why people in places like Africa where they are constantly exposed to intense sunlight have darker skin.",
"\"They\" didn't develop darker skin as humanity migrated from Africa into Europe, the protection that darker skin gave from the the sun became obsolete (of a fashion) over thousands of years this became the norm, especially in northern Europe"
],
"score": [
7,
4,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why did people in places like Africa develop darker skin when black absorbs the most light compared to lighter colors?
| [
0.014241237193346024,
0.10576101392507553,
-0.03809751570224762,
0.13210102915763855,
0.027628561481833458,
-0.06012353301048279,
0.040562015026807785,
0.026845190674066544,
-0.0027438122779130936,
0.043889500200748444,
0.045441556721925735,
-0.13110646605491638,
-0.031453270465135574,
-0.... | ||
2tbw1o | When art is stolen, where exactly is it going? Who is in the market to buy art that is known to be stolen? Are pieces just passed around amongst a super wealthy and elite black market society? & once purchased, then what happens? | I have always wondered this, because so much art and lots of famous jewels are stolen and clearly someone is buying it without telling authorities. The question is who? And what exactly do they do with the pieces once they have it? It's not like they can parade it around. Does it become a family secret and heirloom? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cnxlk7c",
"cnxq3d8",
"cnxyjnw",
"cnxwld5"
],
"text": [
"It's often used as easily transportable collateral among organized crime groups. Barring total societal collapse, it will always be valuable, no matter its provenance.",
"The word \"stolen\" in art can refer to a many circumstances, such as: \n\n1) Art obtained by force, such as war or robbery/burglary\n2) Art that is plagiarized (copyright violations, licensing issues, etc)\n3) Art collected that was/is unknowingly stolen\n4) Art on loan that never gets returned on time... or ever (dicey)\n\nWithin this frame, you can see how even a museum or person could potentially buy a Mona Lisa fake (marketed as real) that was stolen 200 years ago. It would also be plausible that within the past 200 years, it went through the hands of many. PS, the Mona Lisa is a subject of hot debate between Italy and France - Italy, who wants it back, and France, who proudly houses it inside the Louvre.\n\nThose many could include, which helps answer your question more: \n\n1) Museums (mostly unknowing)\n2) Government organizations (like the Nazi regime)\n3) Individuals (the knowing or unknowing)\n4) Criminals (like other commenters mentioned below)\n5) Businesses\n\nAnd then used as: \n\n1) An attraction\n2) Money\n3) Blackmail/ransom\n4) Barter\n\nYou might want to look up the history of stolen art, all sorts of articles/books/etc. Just try a Google search for starters.",
"Watch the TV show \"White Collar\" if you haven't already been doing so. \n\nBut realistically, a lot of the \"stolen\" stuff is probably used for nefarious purposes sure, but honestly, it seems that a decent amount of it would likely go to collectors who are 1. Rich, and 2. Love certain things. \n\nLike, let's say you love a certain artist, and are an eccentric billionaire. Would you pass up a chance to own a real painting by that artist? There are probably people who would answer \"no\" = private collectors.",
"EDITED: This topic fascinates me, too. I have read a couple articles on the subject and somewhere I have written down a book on the topic. But, from what I've read, the answer is always the black market, wealthy people willing to buy rare illegal goods. Check out this NY Times article:\n\n_URL_0_\n\nExcerpt:\n\n Who is behind the 20 or more museum art thefts that take place in France every year? How do the thieves even hope to unload easily identifiable pieces by prominent artists? And, most important, are the country’s vaunted art institutions up to dealing with the maneuverings of what appear to be loose bands of professional criminals?\n\nIn the murky global black market for stolen art, France’s many museums are prime hunting grounds. While the number of thefts from French museums has fallen from a peak of 47 in 1998, an average of 35 museum thefts have occurred annually over the last 15 years.\n\nThey have prompted a wealth of conflicting theories that generally point the finger at a shifting underworld of diversified criminals who operate in fluid cells, share information about potential buyers and available art for sale, and carefully study their museum targets before striking."
],
"score": [
28,
7,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/world/europe/27iht-arttheft.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0"
]
} | train_eli5 | When art is stolen, where exactly is it going? Who is in the market to buy art that is known to be stolen? Are pieces just passed around amongst a super wealthy and elite black market society? & once purchased, then what happens?
I have always wondered this, because so much art and lots of famous jewels are stolen and clearly someone is buying it without telling authorities. The question is who? And what exactly do they do with the pieces once they have it? It's not like they can parade it around. Does it become a family secret and heirloom? | [
-0.04799868166446686,
0.07742094993591309,
0.01636599563062191,
-0.02584328129887581,
0.005601708777248859,
0.07606954872608185,
0.05762147530913353,
-0.04978074133396149,
0.05087844282388687,
-0.0368848517537117,
-0.004642432555556297,
0.06226267293095589,
0.0634554997086525,
-0.065835073... | |
1a38a8 | Can someone explain Linked-Lists in C to me?? | Sorry to add to all the CS questions out there. :/ | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c8toeig"
],
"text": [
"A linked list is like a treasure hunt. Every location you get to, you find a piece of candy and a clue as to where to go next."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Can someone explain Linked-Lists in C to me??
Sorry to add to all the CS questions out there. :/ | [
-0.06262188404798508,
0.023399680852890015,
-0.09244479238986969,
0.06214425340294838,
0.04950938746333122,
0.019372224807739258,
0.038580045104026794,
0.05290492996573448,
-0.042204469442367554,
0.030902009457349777,
0.03256165236234665,
-0.004187021404504776,
0.04198170453310013,
-0.0773... | |
2svmv7 | American Football Overtime Rules | Just to preface this, being British I usually watch one game a year (the Superbowl) so I genuinely don't know what I'm talking about. That said, I tuned into the last quarter of the Packers vs Sea hawks game and the overtime rules just struck me as unfair. Given both defenses were poor at the end of normal time, surely whoever wins the coin toss has an enormous advantage? Why is the other team not given a chance to also score a touchdown and if they do, it resets, and both teams get another go? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cnt9wsj",
"cnta2by",
"cnt9vhc"
],
"text": [
"> whoever wins the coin toss has an enormous advantage\n\nYES. This is a constant debate in the NFL. Rules were changed recently that if the first team to score only gets a field goal, then the other team gets the ball and can try to score, but if the first team scores a TD its over. Its controversial, but that's the game and that is just the rules. Previously, first score, even a field goal, and the games was over and done. The team who got the ball first was overwhelmingly the most likely to win.\n\nOT in the NFL is designed to reasonably and quickly end the game, not to be \"fair\".\n\ncollege football operates a very different and much more \"fair\" rules, but even that is quite controversial.",
"Yep, just watched it too. Sad day for Packers.\n\nAnyway, assume the packers did get a chance to have the ball and they ran it down close enough to kick a field goal but they're on 4th down now. They would have to try for a touchdown (or first down) since a field goal wouldn't win them the game. This isn't really fair to the seahawks because in normal play, they would have definitely kicked a field goal (or at least been burdened with the choice). \n\nAlso, under the given rules, there's less of a chance of the game DRAGGING on for a long time. Football is rough, tireing, and dangerous. You want to avoid the game getting to long.\n\nSure it's a little unfair, but I think that's the reason.",
"Basically, each team gets a chance to possess the ball unless the first team scores a touchdown. If the kick a field goal, opposing team gets an opportunity. If both teams have possessed the ball, and either didn't score or they matched field goals, the next score wins."
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | American Football Overtime Rules
Just to preface this, being British I usually watch one game a year (the Superbowl) so I genuinely don't know what I'm talking about. That said, I tuned into the last quarter of the Packers vs Sea hawks game and the overtime rules just struck me as unfair. Given both defenses were poor at the end of normal time, surely whoever wins the coin toss has an enormous advantage? Why is the other team not given a chance to also score a touchdown and if they do, it resets, and both teams get another go? | [
-0.0013751934748142958,
-0.02358439937233925,
-0.017044195905327797,
-0.06911187618970871,
0.1131775751709938,
-0.04508000239729881,
-0.028259310871362686,
0.014788111671805382,
0.1408943086862564,
0.044853001832962036,
-0.11200134456157684,
0.04197051003575325,
0.02029113471508026,
0.0175... | |
2auodr | Why's it so important to have intake ventilation for attic fan? |
I purchased an attic fan that attaches to a gable and blows hot air out. In the instructions, it said that under no circumstances should I operate the fan unless their is adequate intake ventilation, but it didn't explain why. What's the danger? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ciyxc9l"
],
"text": [
"When you turn a fan like this, you can definitely feel a pressure change in the house. It sucks fresh air through the ventilation aka windows into the house. Without proper ventilation, your fan will not work efficiently.\n\nI googled a specific danger example:\nTurning on a fan without proper ventilation can cause the fan to suck fumes into the house from appliances including water heaters and furnaces. These appliances emit carbon monoxide through exhaust vents that are close to the house, the attic fan, can potentially suck them into the house, so you are potentially filling your house with carbon monoxide if you do not give other avenues of fresh air.\n_URL_0_"
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.obhc.com/powered-attic-generators-danger-above/"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why's it so important to have intake ventilation for attic fan?
I purchased an attic fan that attaches to a gable and blows hot air out. In the instructions, it said that under no circumstances should I operate the fan unless their is adequate intake ventilation, but it didn't explain why. What's the danger? | [
0.08661511540412903,
0.042941100895404816,
-0.010246772319078445,
-0.050364620983600616,
0.020378610119223595,
-0.06135278567671776,
-0.01827227883040905,
-0.051284465938806534,
0.08679571747779846,
0.044028203934431076,
0.017447378486394882,
0.06327246874570847,
0.010277334600687027,
-0.0... | |
43f6ua | In films such as Horatio Hornblower from 1951 they have amazing live action sailing footage of old sailing ships. How did they make them so realistically? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"czhrvgy",
"czhr0kg"
],
"text": [
"They used real ships. :)\n\nEven today, there are a number of people and organizations dedicated to preserved old sailing vessels, and many ships of this type still operate, mostly for recreation or tourism, around the world.",
"according to the wikipedia entry for the movie \"captain horatio hornblower\" they filmed those exterior scenes on location using real boats and ships."
],
"score": [
14,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | In films such as Horatio Hornblower from 1951 they have amazing live action sailing footage of old sailing ships. How did they make them so realistically?
| [
-0.04143013805150986,
0.04069410264492035,
-0.01557201612740755,
-0.006847898475825787,
0.01850663498044014,
-0.0026614542584866285,
-0.10893373936414719,
-0.004617449827492237,
-0.06229407712817192,
0.014740122482180595,
0.006365617271512747,
0.00530138099566102,
0.00544676324352622,
0.05... | ||
1ay5xk | How colorizations work when people colorize black and white photos. | I see this [frequently](_URL_0_), and it's got me wondering: how do people do it? All I've got so far is that it's Photoshop, but...
1) how do they know they're coloring the picture correctly? I see variations in every colorized version.
2)how does photoshop know what colors to use?
3) can they be completely off?
Sorry, long explanation, but it's intriguing. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c91z1me",
"c91w7h7"
],
"text": [
"Basically, if you take a paint brush in Photoshop, guess the color that most accurately represents the skin tone, and lower the opacity (transparency), you can achieve colorization by painting over the image. Black and white photos have all the shadows, so it's just a matter of accurately guessing the appropriate colors and carefully painting over the image in the correct places. There are more complex techniques to get better results, such as changing the layer blending, but what I explained above is the basic idea.",
"1. Unless they have records, they don't.\n\n2. There's some tricks (grass is green, Shelly had blue eyes) but...it's mostly guessin'\n\n3. Yup. Perfectly wonderful, real looking colored photo of a man in a blue shirt. Shirt was actually green."
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.reddit.com/r/OldSchoolCool/comments/1ax9q5/my_dad_being_my_dad_i_miss_him/"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How colorizations work when people colorize black and white photos.
I see this [frequently](_URL_0_), and it's got me wondering: how do people do it? All I've got so far is that it's Photoshop, but... 1) how do they know they're coloring the picture correctly? I see variations in every colorized version. 2)how does photoshop know what colors to use? 3) can they be completely off? Sorry, long explanation, but it's intriguing. | [
0.03895851597189903,
0.06890793889760971,
0.005665884353220463,
-0.005682474002242088,
0.013146881945431232,
-0.023679757490754128,
0.05154623091220856,
-0.04520241171121597,
0.00007751754310447723,
-0.041212212294340134,
-0.053451064974069595,
0.04401622340083122,
0.08221781253814697,
-0.... | |
4etavz | Why is a wall of text an eyesore and difficult to read? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d234lp8",
"d234qen"
],
"text": [
"We have been conditioned since we started reading to understand passages better when they are broken into paragraphs. It gives a short mental break between two characters speaking, or when the theme transfers from one focus to another. \"Ah, the author has completed that thought and moved on to the next. Got it.\"\n\nA wall of text doesn't provide these clues. It's a giant mass of words. Sure, they may be coherent, even well written, but it makes the reading look like A HUGE CHUNK OF WORK, not a mix of short- and medium-length chunks that meld together to sustain a narrative.\n\n(Plus, reading's much easier when paragraphs are only a few lines. Makes it harder to lose your place in the middle of a page, particularly when a book or post is in relatively small font.)",
"Because it is much easier to lose your place when you are trying to read it.\n\nText that is properly spaced has multiple benefits. Firstly, it is easier to move your eyes from one paragraph to the next, since it is easy to see where one paragraph ends and the next begins, since a new paragraph ends the line of text earlier than the end of the space. This is useful to keep the paragraphs visually distinctive from one another.\n\nSecondly, it is easy to group text related to a single concept into a paragraph, since it makes an easy indicator for the reader to digest the concept he or she just read. If you don't have these logical breaks while you are reading, you have no way of easily knowing when it is \"safe\" to digest the information you just read, since without logical breakpoints, there is a good chance the very next sentence might have extremely important information that would be necessary for a full understanding, which you would be missing if you try to stop to think before that point.\n\nFinally, it is also true that some \"walls of text\" may be well-formatted, but are simply much too long for the amount of actually relevant content. For example, if someone wanted to voice some complaint about something, but spend six paragraphs going on and on about it or other unrelated things, a person reading it is going to get tired of trying to soft through it all in search of the actual point.\n\nIn this last case, it isn't the formatting that would make it a rough read, but the content and the ability to present the right content with the right formatting."
],
"score": [
4,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is a wall of text an eyesore and difficult to read?
| [
0.08462055772542953,
-0.017618918791413307,
-0.023514609783887863,
0.03804825618863106,
0.0005707179079763591,
-0.024284981191158295,
-0.009305178187787533,
0.048050422221422195,
0.09798061847686768,
-0.029165174812078476,
-0.01291600614786148,
0.08152458071708679,
0.01397070661187172,
-0.... | ||
jac26 | What is the Kaaba? Why is the rock so special? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c2agi9c"
],
"text": [
"IIRC, The Kaaba is a building said to have been built by Abraham and his son to house a rock from Heaven brought to him by an angel."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What is the Kaaba? Why is the rock so special?
| [
-0.03809204697608948,
0.11581522226333618,
0.026654072105884552,
0.06830321252346039,
-0.061882246285676956,
0.026048263534903526,
-0.032713908702135086,
-0.03515350818634033,
0.030929427593946457,
0.03440434858202934,
-0.025021011009812355,
-0.14407996833324432,
-0.02365286462008953,
-0.0... | ||
8gt520 | How do copyrights work exactly? | I often hear about how Mickey Mouse is in the constitution because his copy right is essentially the only one that continues on past when it was or is supposed to expire.
I think I heard that after a certain amount of time after someone who holds a copyright dies, the copyright is null and free game. But I feel like I see exceptions to that everyday.
And how do companies, like Nintendo for example, maintain a copyright through all these countries? Do they have to do it individually? Or do they not? Does the company hold the copyright and not the person who came up with it? Then does it stop when the company goes bankrupt or closes? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dyegle5",
"dyefrpk"
],
"text": [
"I'm an intellectual property lawyer so I'll do my best to keep it simple. \n\nIn the United States there are 4 major categories of intellectual property: trademark, trade secret, patents and copyrights (if you are curious I can explain the rest but I'll focus on what you asked). Copyrights are meant to give protection over creative works. So, books, movies, music and characters (among others) all get copyrights. This protection means that only a person who owns or licenses (basically renting) the copyright is allowed to reproduce the work. This is overly simplistic but, let's say JK Rowling fully owns the copyright in Harry Potter. That means only she is allowed to make any books, movies, merchandise etc. with Harry Potter. She could rent out that right, that way movie studios might be able to make a Harry Potter movie. \n\nThe reason we give artists this protection is complicated. However, the basic idea is we want artists to create. So, when they make a work we give them a monopoly in that work. That way, they get to reap the full value of their creation, and thus pushing them and others to create more. \n\nNow, onto the Mickey Mouse issue. Originally the United States had fairly short copyright protection. Originally the protection an artist/author/whatever would get was only 14 years! Over time, those numbers increased. But for much of the 1800's the US was a pirate nation when it came to copyright protection. We stole LOTS of works from European countries. \n\nAround the beginning of 1910's Hollywood started to blow up and gain a fair amount of power. This marked the shifting of the United States from pirate nation (with respect to copyright protection) into one that cared much more about protection copyright. So, this also saw a push to increase copyright protection even further, to 56 years. \n\nMickey Mouse was set to lose copyright protection in 1984. This terrified Disney. They really didn't want their flagship character to enter the public domain. So they lobbied hard to increase the copyright further. It succeeded in 1976 and they did it again in 1998. They can't however ever just put in a law saying copyright is forever because our constitution states explicitly that it cannot be. This constant pushing means that there is a date sometime around 1920 which is the cut off point for what is or isn't in the public domain (free for the public to use). That's actually one of the reasons Sherlock Holmes remakes are so popular. He's a character from before that year so, totally free for anyone to make a Sherlock Holmes story. \n\nEvery country has a different copyright regimes (although the EU has some pan european regulations). However, there have been treaties that state that other countries will enforce copyrights internationally. So if you live in a place that is a member of this treaty having a copyright in one place will help you across the board. But if you aren't a member of the treaty, that can get complicated and it's easiest to register in that nation. Though, I think most countries are part of this treaty system (though the US has a few special exceptions).\n\nAnd who holds the copyright depends. There are a couple of different legal doctrines that comes into play, but generally because of either the work for hire doctrine, amanuensis or provisions in employment contracts, when an employee of a company creates something it's owned by the company. And if a company goes bankrupt the copyright doesn't just vanish. Instead, it will be sold off as part of its assets to help raise money to its creditors. So, the copyright could end up in anyone's hands. It'll continue to exist for as long as the duration allows.\n\nHappy to explain/answer more if you are curious.",
"In the US, the first copyright law in 1790 made copyrights last for 14 years, renewable for another 14 if the author was still alive. As copyrighted works retained they value for longer periods of time, this gradually extended, in 1831 to 28 years with one 14 year renewal, an in 1909 to 28 years with one 28 year renewal. These laws were all passed in a time before anyone envisioned mass media and cartoon characters, so they seemed plenty long.\n\nIn the 1970s, Disney and other pioneers realize their early works were coming up against the 28 + 28-year limit lobbied for another extension. The result was a new law in 1976, that extending copyrights to 75 years or 50 years after the death of the author. Facing similar limitations in the 1990s, a 1998 law once again extended it to 95/120 years or 70 years after the death of the author.\n\n > often hear about how Mickey Mouse is in the constitution\n\nThis is not true at all. All the constitution does is authorize congress to pass laws governing copyrights. Nor does those laws mention any particular character or company, Disney just happens to be one of the companies most affected and one that pushes the hardest for extensions.\n\nInternational copyrights are governed by the Berne Convention, where copyrights in one country apply to all countries."
],
"score": [
8,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How do copyrights work exactly?
I often hear about how Mickey Mouse is in the constitution because his copy right is essentially the only one that continues on past when it was or is supposed to expire. I think I heard that after a certain amount of time after someone who holds a copyright dies, the copyright is null and free game. But I feel like I see exceptions to that everyday. And how do companies, like Nintendo for example, maintain a copyright through all these countries? Do they have to do it individually? Or do they not? Does the company hold the copyright and not the person who came up with it? Then does it stop when the company goes bankrupt or closes? | [
-0.03613004460930824,
-0.04041864722967148,
0.02100258320569992,
-0.12896938621997833,
0.01820065826177597,
0.019262002781033516,
-0.01953432895243168,
-0.0135379359126091,
0.09292971342802048,
-0.006602393463253975,
-0.0287312101572752,
0.11472681164741516,
-0.061731453984975815,
-0.04016... | |
7d2eqg | Why do our taste buds change over time? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dpuw6ms",
"dpv5u65"
],
"text": [
"Repeated exposure and your taste buds dying, basically. As a kid you're primed to like sweetness and hate bitterness because sugar = energy to keep you alive and bitterness = poison that can kill you. Once you get older, you become more adventurous with your food choices largely out of necessity - I hate salad, and always have, but have to eat it because in America it's something you eat a lot. Repeated exposure means you get used to and grow to like it.\n\nAlso, as an adult, your nose isn't as sensitive to smell and your tastebuds aren't as numerous, meaning you literally don't taste things as strongly.",
"some things are healthy for adults but harmfull for children.\nlike, bitter compounds can help degstion, but to high doses can harm the stomach. for children, the harmful dose is very low.\nlikewhise, childrens dont like foods and drinks that contain bitter compounds, like colewort and for a good reason.\nhowever, its not so much the taste buds that change. its the brains interpretation of what tastes good that changes."
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do our taste buds change over time?
| [
0.026524800807237625,
-0.09956775605678558,
0.0721014067530632,
0.043463293462991714,
0.018815524876117706,
0.025841157883405685,
0.051644667983055115,
0.038807597011327744,
0.07624637335538864,
-0.010674501769244671,
-0.009704344905912876,
-0.004832210019230843,
-0.03659497946500778,
-0.0... | ||
2jzyr7 | Chronostasis.The phenomenon of ''Stopped second-hand ''. | I read about it on Wiki, but I do not understand, or cannot get a concept about what it is:(
| explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"clgln4n"
],
"text": [
"Your eyes move in small \"jumps\" called saccades. During a saccade, you are effectively blind, since your brain \"throws away\" all of the information coming from your eyes while they're moving (since it would be just a massive blur, which is useless at best, and disorienting at worst).\n\nBut I'm sure you've noticed that you don't appear to go blind every time you move your eyes. The reason is that your brain takes whatever you see once a saccade stops, and sort of \"back-dates\" it in your memory so that it seems like you were seeing that image when the saccade *started* rather than when it stopped.\n\nSo if you happen to glance at a clock **just** as the second hand ticks, you'll see the hand in the new position, but your brain will make you *think* that it had been in that position for a fraction of a second already, so it appears to you that the hand stays its current position for longer than one second."
],
"score": [
26
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Chronostasis.The phenomenon of ''Stopped second-hand ''.
I read about it on Wiki, but I do not understand, or cannot get a concept about what it is:( | [
-0.024139512330293655,
-0.06756333261728287,
0.01858266070485115,
0.08555819094181061,
-0.008868763223290443,
0.04646410048007965,
-0.00932466983795166,
0.06614337861537933,
0.08735014498233795,
-0.026101721450686455,
0.06156433746218681,
0.009755592793226242,
-0.026052352041006088,
-0.047... | |
197mn2 | How your drink can go down the wrong pipe? | It seems like we shouldn't be able to swallow into our lungs. I suspect that the previous sentence is not the case, but what is happening here? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c8liouz",
"c8ljtm8"
],
"text": [
"No it is in fact the case, your throat goes to 2 places, your stomach and your lungs. There is a flap that decides where the contents are going, and on occasion you will come close to sending liquid into your lungs. Of course your body realizes this and coughs it up rather violently to ensure it doesn't happen.",
"It's called a 'descended larynx' and is associated with speech capabilities. Most mammals can breathe and swallow simultaneously without problem, but can't produce the range of sounds necessary for speech."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How your drink can go down the wrong pipe?
It seems like we shouldn't be able to swallow into our lungs. I suspect that the previous sentence is not the case, but what is happening here? | [
0.05354229733347893,
0.00501809548586607,
0.01703484356403351,
0.014018066227436066,
-0.05971619486808777,
-0.04439525678753853,
0.0342068187892437,
0.02626691199839115,
-0.0034984045196324587,
-0.03058651089668274,
-0.014286018908023834,
0.036729928106069565,
-0.029344266280531883,
0.1131... | |
63yf2d | how do SSRI's cross the blood-brain barrier and inhibiting the reuptake? | when they get metabolized where does the drug flow to and how does serotonin become triggered? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dfy5gzg"
],
"text": [
"SSRI stands for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor which actually does a lot to explain what it does. First of all, many molecules can cross the blood-brain barrier, they can do so by either using existing channels in the barrier by being similar in structure to things we need to get to our brain, or by being able to diffuse through the barrier itself which typically requires the molecule to be highly fat soluble.\n\nOnce it gets to the brain, SSRIs act by preventing the reuptake of serotonin that has already been released by neurons at the synapse:\nBasically when a neuron (brain cell) is stimulated, it releases a chemical called a neurotransmitter from its terminal which hangs out in a small area called a synapse and can stimulate other neurons by binding to little antennae like extensions called dendrites that reach into the synapse. \n\nNeurons use all kinds of neurotransmitters, one of which is Serotonin (5HT). When serotonin is released at the synapse, it is eventually cleared by proteins that either break it down or reabsorb it into the neurons, a process called reuptake. If it wasn't broken down or reabsorbed it would just keep stimulating the other neurons in the area without limit.\n\nSSRIs bind to the proteins that are responsible for the reuptake of serotonin at the synapse and cause them to be less efficient at their job, this results in the serotonin hanging around for a little bit longer in the synapse before being cleared increasing its ability to activate other serotonergic neurons while its there. So SSRIs don't really increase serotonin or \"trigger\" them per say, instead they just increase that action of the stuff thats already there."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | how do SSRI's cross the blood-brain barrier and inhibiting the reuptake?
when they get metabolized where does the drug flow to and how does serotonin become triggered? | [
0.018215050920844078,
-0.03312684968113899,
-0.09293092042207718,
0.019518962129950523,
-0.017534039914608,
0.09017030149698257,
-0.044789399951696396,
0.05167938768863678,
0.05315240100026131,
0.005175437778234482,
-0.10582704842090607,
0.0268739964812994,
-0.0404110811650753,
-0.00170007... | |
1tqub4 | Is it as dangerous for animals to eat raw meat as it is for us humans? | We don't risk eating raw food because of the possible bacterial infections that can result, but animals (namely carnivores) eat raw meat on a daily basis and don't seem to get sick. Why is that? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cealixa"
],
"text": [
"Animals can and are frequently harmed by pathogens in the food they eat and humans both in the past and the present enjoy the eating of raw meat, including raw, or hardly cooked mammalean meat regularly without significant harm.\n\nHumans are a bit more succeptable to foodborne pathogens, largely because our guts have adapted to a diet where we do cook much of our food. Cooking also reduces the effort needed in digestion as it damages tougher cellular materials which can be difficult to break down chemically. Other animals have adaptations from the relatively simple of eating very fresh meat to more complicated such as very short digestive periods or extremely nasty bile.\n\nThere is a great amount of cultural diversity regarding the appropriateness of less-cooked animal products. While in the US, public health advocates have encouraged people to eat their poultry and pork products very thoroughly cooked, in many places from France to Vietnam one can find much less-thoroughly cooked meat products. It is still common in the US to eat beef which is not cooked to temperatures which destroy common pathogens.\n\nCooking is a great advance for humans as it allows us to eat a greater variety of food and reduces the amount of effort we spend in searching for and digesting it, freeing our time and energy for other tasks. Humans generally like the flavor of cooked food, both for its improved nutritional value and likely for its reduced risk of illness. However, humans are still quite capable of eating raw meats, but they do usually need extra chewing (or other pulverization) in order for our guts to get significant nutrition from them."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Is it as dangerous for animals to eat raw meat as it is for us humans?
We don't risk eating raw food because of the possible bacterial infections that can result, but animals (namely carnivores) eat raw meat on a daily basis and don't seem to get sick. Why is that? | [
0.026607003062963486,
-0.020678022876381874,
0.012514988891780376,
0.07337182015180588,
-0.021899588406085968,
0.02477170340716839,
-0.05223856121301651,
0.04790329933166504,
-0.01228981465101242,
0.035089850425720215,
-0.02322685346007347,
-0.057943008840084076,
-0.004531130660325289,
0.0... | |
64ahfq | Is there a way to argue that a person who buys two lottery tickets does NOT have twice as good a chance of winning as a person who only buys one? | I was thinking about how some values (or difference in values) are considered negligible in many situations (like the mass of an electron for example) and if lottery odds apply to that regard.
Thank you!
| explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dg0mo4r",
"dg0m2ne",
"dg0m377",
"dg0qvr4",
"dg0mbat",
"dg0mpgu",
"dg0q4ck",
"dg0xw5u",
"dg0nez7",
"dg10ned",
"dg0y527",
"dg0r8le",
"dg0rnjc"
],
"text": [
"The odds are better. BUT the odds are still *awful*. \n\nThis is like having **two grains of rice** vs having one grain of rice. Yes, it is twice as much, but it is still very, very little.",
"As long as the two lottery tickets aren't the same number, you *do* have twice the chance.\n\nFor example, if there are four tickets, and one ticket is randomly the winner, then if you get one ticket, you have a 25% chance of winning.\n\nIf you have two tickets, you have a 50% chance of winning, since you now have half the tickets.\n\nAll four tickets would give you a 100% chance of winning since you would have all four tickets.",
"If the numbers selected for each ticket are independent, then two different tickets gives twice the chance of winning. There might be \"a way to argue\" otherwise, but it would be wrong.",
"Another ticket DOES double your chances of winning - but doubling a small thing still leaves you with a small thing. Each ticket purchased does equal a higher chance of winning, and eventually you just might.\n\n\nAnecdote: My uncle won a smaller state lottery several years ago (about ~$800k after taxes), but this was after YEARS of buying multiple tickets a day. He had invested somewhere in the neighborhood of $10k before winning.\n\n\nThe moral of the story? The difference between 1 ticket and 2 isn't much. The difference between 1 and 10,000 tickets is quite a bit more. And even 10,000 tickets doesn't have a great chance of winning. As far as this goes towards answering the question... my uncle had to \"double his chances\" for years, sometimes multiple times per day, before he won. So the doubling is pretty close to negligible!",
"But he does have twice the odds, more or less. it's just that having twice the odds of a miracle doesn't make it less of a miracle. a 1 in 100 million shot at winning is twice as good as 1 in 200 million, but for all practical purposes there isn't a good difference for someone playing the lottery. An very unlikely event is still very unlikely even if twice as likely to happen.",
"you can only consider values negligible if you **compare** them to something.\n\nThe mass of an electron is incredibly tiny compared to the mass of an proton/neutron, so when you look at an atom or molecule you can ignore the mass of the electron.\n\nHowever two electrons still have double the mass of one electron.\n\n**What you could do in your situation** is saying something like \"if I but a lottery ticket and put all the rest of my money into my bank account, I will have roughly the same amount of money after a year as when I would have gotten 2 lottery tickets (for the price of one) and deposited my money\". Because generally winning the lottery is very unlikely and so the expected value of your account (lottery winnings times probability of winning = a few bucks at most) will be basically the same.\n\nBut that doesn't chance the fact that 2 not-identical tickets give you twice the chance to win the lottery.",
"So your odds double, but your expected value remains the same. Let's say the odds are 1 in 1000 to win the lottery, and the lottery pays $500. If you were to buy all 1000 options, it would cost you $1000 dollars, but you would win $500, for a net loss of $500. So Your $1 bet has an expected value is -0.50. \n\n If you buy 2 tickets, you now have a 2 in 1000 chance of winning the lottery. You've doubled your odds, but you've also doubled your investment. Buying a lottery ticket is a losing bet, buying a second ticket is taking another losing bet.",
"The short answer is: It depends on the rules of the lottery.\n\nSay there's one winner. 10 tickets are sold, each with 1/10 = 10% chance of winning.\n\nNow you buy a ticket, each ticket has 1/11 ~= 9% chance of winning.\n\nThen you buy another, each ticket is now 1/12 ~= 8%.\n\nSo by buying one more ticket, you increased you odds from 1/11 to 2/12, an increase of 183.3%. Less than double.",
"You could argue that buying two tickets does not double whatever enjoyment you experience from wasting your money on lottery tickets, but you can't argue that your chances of winning aren't effectively doubled.",
"Depends on how precise you want to be. But for the numbers in most lottery systems, it will be very close.\n\nThis really cannot be done eli5.\n\nAssuming your odds of winning are 1/m, which pretty much any odds can be expressed this way.\n\nThe odds of winning by purchasing n will be 1-(1-(1/m))\\^n.\n\nSo I calculated it out using Libre office.\n\nI couldn't quickly find a reference so I'm assuming the anecdotal evidence of 1/7 winning anything and the 1/13983816 of a perfect win are the interesting points.\n\nSo with the 1/7 chances, at least one winner:\n\n1 purchase is 0.143 odds\n\n2 purchases is 0.265\n\n3 purchases is 0.370\n\n4 purchases is 0.460\n\n5 purchases is 0.537\n\nAs you can see it is not exactly multiplied from one to two, but it is close, and as you buy more it changes more.\n\nWith the 1/13983816, winner:\n\n1 purchases is 0.0000000715\n\n2 purchases is 0.0000001430\n\n3 purchases is 0.0000002145\n\n4 purchases is 0.0000002860\n\n5 purchases is 0.0000003576\n\nAgain you can see that while the odds are very close to double, again not exactly double. Also as you buy more you can see the odds increase more slowly.\n\nSo how many do you need to purchase to have a 50-50 shot?\n\nWell at 1/7 your 5th buy will actually result in in an over 50-50 shot.\n\nWith the 1/13983816 you actually need to purchase 9692843 tickets to cross the 50-50 point.",
"Here is one small point to play devil's advocate to the rest of the comment section. The main issue is that this starts with the mistake of confusing a raffle and a lottery. \nFor arguments sake, let's say there are already 9 tickets bought. If you buy one ticket, your chances are 1 out of the now 10 tickets bought. If you buy two, your chances are 2 out of the now 11 tickets bought. If the type of lottery you are playing only allows for one ticket to win. The statement of \"2 tickets means x2 chances\" is marginally off.\nTruly doubling your chances of winning would mean that buying a second ticket would give you 2/10 chances. Since there is one extra ticket bought. This is no longer the case.\nI realize this logic does not fully apply, but I thought it was interesting to note.\n\nTLDR: 2 x (1/(tickets bought before you + 1)) != 2/(tickets bought before you + 2)",
"the point at which something becomes negligible is mostly conventional. that said, yes 2 tickets is twice as likely to win. that doesn't mean it's a good bet, though.\n\nsomething more useful you might not be aware of is called \"expected value\", essentially your long running average if you kept playing. \n\n(p x lottery jackpot)-(q x cost of a ticket)=E\n\nwhere p is the chance of winning and q is the chance of losing. negative values are bad bets.\n\nusing the commonly cited 1 in 14 million chance of winning the lottery, a 1 million dollar prize pool, and $1 tickets you get an expected value of -.93\nmeaning you are making a really bad bet.",
"If you have two tickets you do have twice the chance to win. But you have a 2 in a million chance instead of a 1 in a million chance so you're still really unlikely to win."
],
"score": [
50,
22,
15,
9,
9,
3,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Is there a way to argue that a person who buys two lottery tickets does NOT have twice as good a chance of winning as a person who only buys one?
I was thinking about how some values (or difference in values) are considered negligible in many situations (like the mass of an electron for example) and if lottery odds apply to that regard. Thank you! | [
0.03286866471171379,
0.038493067026138306,
-0.024352189153432846,
0.002305922331288457,
-0.09053178131580353,
-0.012568274512887001,
0.08011024445295334,
0.038226418197155,
0.026855675503611565,
-0.03869236260652542,
-0.02758311666548252,
-0.042342834174633026,
0.07679920643568039,
0.01741... | |
5kci4u | USB-A vs USB-C vs USB 3.0/3.1 | SO really confused. I read somewhere that USB-C is backward compatible. Does that mean we can connect our 'standard' usb's into a usb-c/usb 3.0 port and it will work as normal? Also, if that's true, then why do we have usb-c to usb-a adapters? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dbmzees"
],
"text": [
"It's backwards compatible in the sense that the protocols work together. They don't **physically** fit together. The USB-C standard carries *a lot* more pins designed for extra USB-C specific services and features. \n\nSo yeah, you do need an adapter. The nice part is that adapters can be relatively cheap and simple since you just need to get the right metal bits to touch. If the protocol was different you'd need some actually intelligent hardware to manage the process (like how USB to ethernet is a little box)."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | USB-A vs USB-C vs USB 3.0/3.1
SO really confused. I read somewhere that USB-C is backward compatible. Does that mean we can connect our 'standard' usb's into a usb-c/usb 3.0 port and it will work as normal? Also, if that's true, then why do we have usb-c to usb-a adapters? | [
-0.038698092103004456,
-0.07292329519987106,
-0.024259109050035477,
0.044555358588695526,
0.03856189176440239,
0.006534148007631302,
-0.11009025573730469,
-0.012703177519142628,
0.018713070079684258,
0.021098542958498,
0.08636946976184845,
-0.00435706228017807,
-0.03841809555888176,
0.0083... | |
3c1f9d | Can you fire someone for having cancer? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"csregix",
"csres0v",
"csrfc3j"
],
"text": [
"If you actually say it like that, then hell no. But if the person with cancer is missing work without calling in, staring off in extreme pain instead of working, or depressing customers to the point that they leave, you can fire them for that. Although they have a decent chance of winning a lawsuit against you if you do. \n\nEdit: Of course this varies by state, there are some where you can fire people for no reason at all, and others where it costs more to fire them than to keep them.",
"In most places in the US, while you can't be fired for \"having cancer\", you can absolutely be terminated if you have a medical condition that prevent you from adequately performing your job.",
"If you have a medical condition that prevents you from preforming your job description, your place of employment may look for an alternate job for you that has light duties if you're a full time staff member. Otherwise they're in their rights to send you to a medical practitioner and if you're deemed unfit for work they can dismiss you on medical grounds."
],
"score": [
11,
8,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Can you fire someone for having cancer?
| [
0.009570907801389694,
0.14237019419670105,
-0.056237444281578064,
-0.05343246832489967,
0.00006309362652245909,
-0.024789759889245033,
0.06560663133859634,
-0.02764987014234066,
-0.04668741673231125,
-0.01463744230568409,
0.01078589167445898,
0.07232072204351425,
0.022199586033821106,
0.01... | ||
5u0qml | Why do news and other websites need me to allow 34 scripts to watch a video. | I only have to allow 2 on youtube. Half of the time I don't know which ones to allow or not, they just inundate you with a flood of random scripts from various sites. The internet didn't used to have to run like this, why does it now? Is there anyway to make a change? Allowing scripts that have no function on a page is infuriating. Then once you allow that one, it opens up 5 more and only 1 needs to be allowed. So Temporarily allowing all the page is not an option unless you want to select it 3 times and allow a flood of 50 scripts running on the browser for one damn video.
EDIT: It keeps asking me to add flair but I can't. I've allowed everything for this page on noscript and it still tells me javascript://void(0) whenever I try to select a flair. Page has been reloaded several times. I'm getting sick and tired of all these scripts. It wasn't like this 17 years ago...
EDIT2: It finally let me add a flair. Thank the fucking heavens.
| explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ddqvlgw",
"ddqsln8",
"ddqt6aw"
],
"text": [
"Two broad brush reasons.\n\n1) Developers are lazy and often just grab something that they think works and run with it. They don't notice that it is pulling in stuff from 7 domains and that stuff pulls in more from 27 other domains. (I work in software development, and I see this in many forms.)\n\n2) As others have noted, pulling in ads and/or doing data collection or analysis to push more ads later.\n\nOh, and 3) some of that is hackers trying to mess with your system, especially with porn sites.\n\nI love NoScript, but some sites are so so screwed that I have to choose between disabling it and avoiding the site.\n\nEdit: Oops, pound signs made everything big and bold.",
"Some might but if they are that much hassle I just do a google search for the same video and see who else is sharing it.\n\nMost of the time just 1 or 2 scripts will do it. I temporarily permit them using noscript and when I have the file I revoke all temporary access.",
"The short answer is it doesn't need more than 1 or 2 scripts. The other 32 are for serving up those sweet sweet context-based ads."
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do news and other websites need me to allow 34 scripts to watch a video.
I only have to allow 2 on youtube. Half of the time I don't know which ones to allow or not, they just inundate you with a flood of random scripts from various sites. The internet didn't used to have to run like this, why does it now? Is there anyway to make a change? Allowing scripts that have no function on a page is infuriating. Then once you allow that one, it opens up 5 more and only 1 needs to be allowed. So Temporarily allowing all the page is not an option unless you want to select it 3 times and allow a flood of 50 scripts running on the browser for one damn video. EDIT: It keeps asking me to add flair but I can't. I've allowed everything for this page on noscript and it still tells me javascript://void(0) whenever I try to select a flair. Page has been reloaded several times. I'm getting sick and tired of all these scripts. It wasn't like this 17 years ago... EDIT2: It finally let me add a flair. Thank the fucking heavens. | [
-0.01832088828086853,
-0.09592728316783905,
0.05053995922207832,
-0.03616459667682648,
0.1332634687423706,
-0.005000002682209015,
-0.06302361190319061,
-0.06195368617773056,
0.07980076968669891,
-0.0005102856084704399,
-0.01807812601327896,
0.10214643180370331,
-0.0794154554605484,
0.00355... | |
6y476v | Why do gas stations charge extra for using credit/debit when it seems no one else does? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dmklbcf",
"dmkke06"
],
"text": [
"Visa/MasterCard (an association that sets the rules and takes 1/100th of every transaction) does not allow their merchants to charge more for credit transactions. It's a blacklisting offense that will get you banned from taking cards. \n\nHowever, the gas industry resisted credit cards for a long time due to their very slim profit margins. V/MC wanted their slice of that pie, because gas is a great industry if you are getting a very small chunk of each gallon pumped, so they created a special exception to the rule, allowing gas stations to offer a lower cash price, in exchange for bringing them onboard to process cards. It's built in a way that the gas station makes the same profit and the difference to take the card is passed on tomth e customer. \n\nIn addition, gas stations that are registered under certain SIC codes receive a significant discount on the fees, so they lay a lot less per transaction, and a much smaller percentage of the dollar value, then say a mom and pop corner store not selling gas.",
"Gas stations have very very very small profit margins. So small in fact that the credit card fees could result in them selling gas for a loss. I've spoken with a gas station owner who told me makes more profit on a single cup of coffee than 8 gallons of gas."
],
"score": [
7,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do gas stations charge extra for using credit/debit when it seems no one else does?
| [
0.007289583329111338,
-0.015700282528996468,
0.012522581964731216,
0.01733473502099514,
0.02076566219329834,
-0.022831367328763008,
0.04925764724612236,
0.0537257120013237,
0.1036786213517189,
-0.059112757444381714,
0.013155206106603146,
-0.03656444698572159,
-0.06713700294494629,
-0.02914... | ||
70hjon | google adwords v google advertising | Forgive me if this is stoopid but I'm about to launch an agency and am just trying to get my head around marketing, SEO etc for the company.
Be gentle. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dn3cqlt",
"dn3c3ad",
"dncrxnz"
],
"text": [
"Google adwords is the practice of paying for \"keywords\" to rank in search results. This has become extremely sophisticated with the tracking capabilities. \n\n_URL_0_ was always a great tool to get an estimate for how much a specific website is spending on adwords. \n\nYou may want to investigate seo as well as adwords. At a high level it's what keywords in your content are relevant to search terms. This has a great deal to do with amount of rich content with recent search terms, traffic, and link building strategies.",
"AdWords is the way to advertise on Google through sponsored link that appears above other results when someone is searching for something.\nYou pay everytime someone click on your link.\nSEO is basically all the techniques you can implement in order to make your website appear higher on search results.",
"You have to be willing to bid more than everyone else for “x” in order to get your site on the first page when someone searches for “x” \n\nHowever there are a number of complexities that I’m not including here. Do some research google offers really good documentation."
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"Spyfu.com"
]
} | train_eli5 | google adwords v google advertising
Forgive me if this is stoopid but I'm about to launch an agency and am just trying to get my head around marketing, SEO etc for the company. Be gentle. | [
-0.05873842537403107,
-0.09576128423213959,
-0.0475577637553215,
-0.010788717307150364,
0.085025355219841,
0.04276619106531143,
0.0319230817258358,
-0.011927472427487373,
-0.01911771111190319,
-0.03514718636870384,
0.027006566524505615,
0.039419058710336685,
-0.0034491363912820816,
-0.0232... | |
ng5qq | Could state level laws overrule things like SOPA? | It seems like states often make separate laws regarding national items e.g. the marijuana issue | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c38wp50",
"c38vmnf"
],
"text": [
"Look at the 14th amendment. Passed after the Civil War, the States have to do what the Fed says.",
"Nope. Look at how the marijuana issue is handled. California has basically legalized it, but the feds are still shutting down legal grow ops and dispensaries weekly. The feds will do what they want regardless of state laws. One of the big things that we lost in the Civil War were states rights."
],
"score": [
6,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Could state level laws overrule things like SOPA?
It seems like states often make separate laws regarding national items e.g. the marijuana issue | [
0.02263179048895836,
0.011521439999341965,
0.026522323489189148,
-0.003917580470442772,
0.03658066317439079,
0.015936728566884995,
-0.04216604307293892,
-0.06253696978092194,
-0.050851594656705856,
-0.023732151836156845,
0.03842417895793915,
0.11032047122716904,
-0.03788892924785614,
0.066... | |
4bmqyv | Why in the middle of winter, it's usually colder when it's sunny and warmer when it's cloudy but in the middle of summer, it's usually the opposite ? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d1ajszk",
"d1ajtsu"
],
"text": [
"Not an expert, but IIRC\n\nThe clouds in the winter hold in the heat from the sun creating a greenhouse effect increasing the temperature a small amount.\n\nThe clouds in the summer (depending on how humidity applies towards a sticky or steamy element in the air) block some of the sun's rays and cool you off.\n\nHope that sums it up!",
"I'm the summer, the clouds act like shade. In the winter, they act like insulation. Although in both cases, the extra humidity contributes to it feeling slightly warmer."
],
"score": [
6,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why in the middle of winter, it's usually colder when it's sunny and warmer when it's cloudy but in the middle of summer, it's usually the opposite ?
| [
-0.025924142450094223,
-0.009014791809022427,
0.06516917794942856,
0.06427492946386337,
0.055420272052288055,
-0.021143153309822083,
0.0242618378251791,
-0.017600011080503464,
0.08579880744218826,
0.049848347902297974,
-0.005067948717623949,
-0.015273788012564182,
0.10708039999008179,
0.02... | ||
3dvga6 | How would a smart phone go about orienting itself in space? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ct90mih"
],
"text": [
"Gravity can be sensed in a couple different ways. one way used to be with mercury switches, which are now banned from use. Another way may be the orientation of weights- like a ball on a string always points down. Another but least likely way is pressure from weights. \n\nIn space, however, there is no gravity. It's like taking that ball on a string and just randomly pulling it in a direction by shaking the device. More accurately, that ball, or weight is on a pivot rather than a string and instead spins on it's axis point.\n\nEdit: I should include that as far as I know. most smart phones have a way to disable this function all together. And iphones actually uses a type of vibrating gyroscope I was unfamiliar with."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How would a smart phone go about orienting itself in space?
| [
-0.047439828515052795,
-0.022349633276462555,
0.05952254310250282,
-0.051665257662534714,
-0.05830811709165573,
0.004635764751583338,
-0.01809626631438732,
0.02411974035203457,
0.06945794820785522,
0.024357952177524567,
0.11209945380687714,
0.06028327718377113,
0.014734908938407898,
-0.058... | ||
4udos9 | Why are defendants who are found guilty (and didn't plea guilty) not also charged with perjury? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d5ougyd",
"d5oyaxl",
"d5ov2v1",
"d5p2zmc",
"d5ou7ok",
"d5ov4qa",
"d5p1liw",
"d5oxhvv",
"d5p52uy",
"d5p4qyt",
"d5ox68t",
"d5p76wj",
"d5p9ff0",
"d5p6io8",
"d5p80g4",
"d5p7247",
"d5p301c",
"d5p4nq9"
],
"text": [
"The Pennsylvania Constitution states:\n\n > In all criminal prosecutions **the accused hath a right to be heard by himself and his counsel**, to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to meet the witnesses face to face, to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and in prosecutions by indictment or information, a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the vicinage; **he cannot be compelled to give evidence against himself**, nor can he be deprived of his life, liberty or property, unless by the judgment of his peers or the law of the land. The use of a suppressed voluntary admission or voluntary confession to impeach the credibility of a person may be permitted and shall not be construed as compelling a person to give evidence against himself.\n\nThe \"plea\" of not guilty is procedural, not substantive. The accused has a right to speak, but he also cannot be compelled to give evidence against himself. Technically, when the court asks the defendant to enter a plea, he has the right to stand silent. If the defendant refuses to plead \"guilty\" or \"not guilty\" that has the same procedural effect as a not guilty plea. Thus, the plea of \"not guilty\" is not being offered for its truth. it's being offered as a mechanism to initiate further proceedings.",
"It's because they are not asked if they are guilty or not, they are asked what their plea is.\n\nIt's the difference between, 'Did you do this thing?' 'No.'\n\nAnd, 'You are accused of this thing, do you admit to it?' 'No.'",
"Pleading isn't done under oath. It's not testimony. The state cannot require someone to testify against themselves, per the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution. So, when the court asks for a plea, it's not under oath and the plea can't be used against them.\n\nNow, if the defendant chooses to take the stand and testify, and that testimony is found to be false, the defendant could face perjury charges.",
"OK, so this is kind of complicated and while you've gotten some valid advice here, there's a lot of typical bad eLawyering. \n\nPoint of fact: you can absolutely be charged with perjury if you make a statement in a statutorily protected legal circumstance (the obvious one is while testifying under oath, but it also extends to other stuff like filling out a mortgage application, filling out a 4473 to buy a firearm or any discussion you might have with a Federal law enforcement officer) that is ultimately found by a jury to be untrue. It's just that prosecutors have limited legal resources and usually won't pursue perjury charges unless they have a huge boner for someone and/or the sentence from the associated trial was very low and pissed them off. \n\n\nWith that being said: fabricating false statements is a commonly used tactic by Feds, who conduct field investigations but do not record them. Instead, they write narratives... This is by design, so there is no evidence of what was actually said. There is only a written document of what they claim was said and naturally, it's not hard for them to claim whatever is most convenient to their case... so \"lying to investigators\" is a bread and butter charge for people they go after but for whatever reason, cannot make the predicate charge stick. See: Martha Stewart. \n\n\nThis also why talking to law enforcement without council present (ever, ever, ever under any circumstances) is so incredibly dangerous. They routinely claim you said stuff you didn't, confessed to certain details that you didn't, etc and when its your word against theirs, they *almost* always win, although juries are getting a lot hipper to low integrity cops these days than they were in years past. \n\n\nSo in short, yes, you can be charged with perjury for any statement you make- **even for telling the truth** - if a prosecutor is able to convince a jury that you were lying and there's no recording or eye witness testimony of the event in question to disprove him. It has happened.",
"A \"not guilty\" plea is not under oath. A defendant has the right to present a defense and force the government to prove its case; you cannot punish someone for exercising that right.",
"The plea that you submit is not given under oath so you cannot be accused of perjury on that. Pleas are given during the arraignment process before the trial has begun and before any oaths have been taken. \n\nYou also cannot be forced to testify against yourself or to perjure yourself during the trial thanks to the 5th amendment.",
"The shot answer is that a not guilty plea isn't saying that you didn't do it, it's just saying that you won't admit doing it. Since you can't be forced to admit doing it, you then get a trial.",
"Criminal proceedings convict on evidence \"beyond reasonable doubt\" not \"beyond all doubt\"\n\n\nThere was a cookie in the cookie jar\n\nYou were alone in the kitchen\n\nThere is no longer a cookie in the cookie jar. \n\nA reasonable person concludes you ate the cookie. \"Found guilty\"\n\nThat does not say that a burgler didn't break in, steal nothing but 1 cookie, and leave. That very well may have happened but that is so unreasonable, it's unbelievable. That said, you're not going to punish someone additionally because there's really no way to prove that's not what happened. Instead, you get sent to your room",
"This question reveals the double meaning of not guilty. As a plea it is a denial of the plaintiff's claim, and does not refer to legal guilt. As a verdict it does refer to legal guilt. Legal guilt can only be established by the court, so every defendant is legally not guilty prior to the court's determination.",
"At least in my courtroom, the lawyer submits a plea on behalf of his/her client. The less the client speaks (until they take the stand at trial if they so choose), the better. \n\nEdit: There is some really bad elawyering ITT.",
"We used to have a saying in the courts - in every defended case, there's someone who is lying. Other than that (here in Australia), Perjury proceedings are initiated by the State Attorney-General, not the Police.",
"There are several reasons\n\nFirst, and perhaps most important, an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. A plea of not guilty is not an assertion of innocence -- that much is presumed at that point in the proceedings -- rather, it is an election to force the prosecution to present a case.\n\nSecond, not every lie constututes perjury. Perjury has four essential elements:\n\n1. A sworn statement must be made before someone who is entitled to take a sworn statement\n\n2. The statement, or a part thereof, must be false or untruthful\n\n3. The person giving the statement must know that the statement is false or untruthful at the time that the statement was made\n\n4. The false or untruthful statement must be made with the intent to mislead the court\n\nAs you can see, although perjury can be broadly applied, it is very specifically defined.\n\nMoreover, in some jurisdictions perjury has specific evidentiary requirements not found in other offences. For example, in Canada, a conviction for perjury cannot be sustained on the evidence of a single witness unless it is materially corroborated. Thus, even in a blatant he-said/she-said scenario in which one or both parties are obviously lying under oath it may not be possible to charge either party with perjury much less establish the essential elements at trial.",
"A plea of not guilty is better thought of as you saying \"I am going to contest the charges and do not admit to them\". \n\nA plea of guilty means \"I am not going to contest the charges, and I admit to them\". \n\nA plea of \"no contest\" means \"I am not going to contest the charges, but I also will not admit to them\".\n\nNone of this happens under oath, so perjury statutes don't apply. It's not even a question about guilt or innocence; it's just the court asking you to make a choice as to how the proceedings will go.",
"Who says they perjured themselves? They could be wrongly convicted. The court isn't magic. A ruling isn't taken as discovery of truth. \n\nAlso, a plea of \"not guilty\" means you believe there is inadequate evidence to convict you of a crime according to the standard of law. *Not* that you did or did not do a thing.",
"the only time i've seen this done is when people give testimony at trial that they're innocent, are found not guilty, and then later brag about getting off scott free and not being able to be charged again (double jeopardy). the state then gets them for perjury.",
"Not really sure about the us (I am European), however defendants have the right not to accuse themselves, and that includes giving untrue statements. They basically can lie. The principle goes under the Latin name \"nemo tenetur se ipsum accusare\" (no man is bound to accuse himself).",
"You have the right to not implicate yourself in court. It is the prosecution's burden to prove that a crime has been committed and that you were the one that committed it.",
"It is the prosecution's burden to prove its case; you cannot be accused of perjury on that."
],
"score": [
427,
129,
98,
24,
13,
7,
6,
4,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why are defendants who are found guilty (and didn't plea guilty) not also charged with perjury?
[removed] | [
0.020019415766000748,
0.034610651433467865,
-0.04250981658697128,
-0.036962222307920456,
0.08228494971990585,
0.013717105612158775,
0.028111718595027924,
-0.023837599903345108,
0.07428086549043655,
0.007786863017827272,
0.11186480522155762,
0.028004556894302368,
0.022794270887970924,
0.014... | |
7nx99j | How does a split-brain work when the corpus callosum connecting the two brain halves has been removed? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ds57kt1",
"ds5fyaz"
],
"text": [
"While the corpus callosum itself has been severed, both sides of the brain still have their connections to the rest of the body. As a result, activities originating in one side of the brain but not the other can't really interact, as demonstrated in [Sperry's experiments](_URL_0_), but those activities can still be carried out.",
"The brain halves can still connect to each other, but only through secondary means. Basically, through the nervous system. Each half gets feedback from the nerves, and then they reconcile things with each other from the information they're getting instead of having a direct connection. It's not ideal, but in epileptic patients who had it severed for medical reasons or in people who suffer from a physical deformity it's better than no connection."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://www.nobelprize.org/educational/medicine/split-brain/background.html"
]
} | train_eli5 | How does a split-brain work when the corpus callosum connecting the two brain halves has been removed?
| [
-0.013385847210884094,
-0.07651923596858978,
0.02648915909230709,
-0.0030307709239423275,
-0.06597955524921417,
-0.0186510868370533,
0.007828463800251484,
-0.0029353469144552946,
0.0737510472536087,
0.008623193949460983,
0.057093940675258636,
0.018904488533735275,
-0.09182024002075195,
0.0... | ||
1mkftf | How does the fourth dimension work? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cca1zi9",
"cca22zj"
],
"text": [
"You will often hear that *time* is the fourth dimension, and this can be true in some contexts, but I assume you're referring to a fourth **spatial** dimension. \n\nI've had to work in 4 dimensions from time to time, and trying to picture it can be very difficult. In my work, we usually accomplish this by displaying 3-dimensional projections, specific views of the 4-dimensional space we're describing. \n\nConsider displaying a 3-dimensional space with 2-dimensional snapshots, and it's the same idea. Say you have a 3-dimensional ellipsoid with lots of points in and around it in an x, y, z coordinate system. One way to graphically show that space is by using 3 distinct 2-dimensional pictures - one each for the x-y, y-z, and x-z planes - they're 2-dimensional *slices* of the 3-dimensional space. \n\nWe do the same thing with 4-dimensional spaces, by showing 3-dimensional *slices* of it. Since we can wrap our head around 3 dimensions, this usually serves our purpose. \n\nI've never dealt with more than 4 dimensions, so I'm not sure how I'd tackle trying to make sense of those.",
"I apologize, I should have clarified, JoeJoe had it right, I was referring to the spatial 4th dimension. So the 3D figure is a 'slice' of the 4D figure if I'm understanding you correctly? So if thats the case, how would it extend in another direction? Or would it even extend in another direction? When I say that I mean for example a line, adding a second dimension could turn it into a square, then a third dimension would turn that into a cube, what would that cube become?"
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How does the fourth dimension work?
| [
0.05620535835623741,
-0.01964157447218895,
0.010637192986905575,
0.011948129162192345,
-0.05462068319320679,
0.0325407013297081,
-0.010426340624690056,
-0.05177125334739685,
0.08612538874149323,
-0.016506943851709366,
0.04392062872648239,
-0.03138038516044617,
-0.03658067435026169,
0.05161... | ||
5sx53n | What do 'Space Coordinates' look like? When NASA points a rocket at Jupiter and punches (trajectory solution) into a computer, what are they actually inputting? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ddii5pm",
"ddiircj",
"ddim12n",
"ddil3i0",
"ddiirm0",
"ddilhrx"
],
"text": [
"JPL has a [great web page on this subject](_URL_0_ ).\n\n > Spacecraft navigation comprises three main aspects: (1) Designing a reference trajectory which describes the planned flight path of the spacecraft; this is the task of mission design. (2) Keeping track of the actual spacecraft position while the mission is in flight; this is the work of orbit determination. And (3) creating maneuvers to bring the spacecraft back to the reference trajectory when it has strayed; this is the area of flight path control.\n\nIt's not just \"coordinates\" for the destination, but which of he infinite number of paths between the two points you want the craft to follow. Since stopping is as hard as getting going, they tend to work in terms of loops.",
"Try playing kerbal space, it will give you a really good idea of how orbital mechanics and space flight works",
"They're calculating how much velocity they need to send the rocket to its target, when to launch it or perform other maneuvers, and the exact direction to point. All of this is managed using what's called inertial guidance. Inertial guidance is a system that calculates an object's (in this case a spacecraft) speed, direction, and location by remembering the starting values and making changes based on those initial values. It keeps track of it's orientation using roll, pitch, and yaw, so for example if the rocket started with a pitch, roll, and yaw of 0 degrees, and then pitched up 40 degrees and later down 10 degrees, it would know it's at 30 degrees. Same applies to velocity. Essentially those are the only things the rocket itself needs to know to get where it's going: Which direction to point, and how much thrust to apply in that direction.",
"There is a northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere in space for our solar system, divided on the Sun's equatorial axis, everything Earth's northern hemisphere points at is the solar system's northern hemisphere, and is most of the other planet's and moon's northern hemispheres, and the same goes for the southern hemispheres of everything. They did basically the same thing with the galaxy and universe as well. \n\nBut to navigate in space, we triangulate the spacecraft using various earth based radio antennae. By measuring the shifts in frequency and length of time between transmission and reception between the craft and these antennae they can tell how fast the craft is moving and it's location pretty darn accurately. \n\nThey then use accurate models of the solar system to figure out where they are and where they need to go. They can also use known stars in the galaxy. \n\nSo basically when they launch a spacecraft from the Earth they aim it in the direction it needs to go and they monitor it to see if they need minor corrections while it is on it's way. Often the calculations are WAY more in depth than this and the spacecraft will actually be visiting a couple planets or moons for gravity boosts along the way, and the craft will eventually be aimed the way it needs to be in order to arrive where it's going at the time it needs to be there. \n\nI couldn't tell you what exactly they would call a certain direction if the spacecraft was off-course and needed to go \"that-a-way.\" From what I understand they might just say \"we need to do a course correction using this thruster to get back on track\" for all I know. I didn't read anything more in depth than the above. But it's fairly obvious that the \"direction\" (other than northerly and southerly) you need to travel in, has to be in relation to a certain object. So \"direction\" would vary depending on what planet or moon or star you are basing your directions off of. \n\nBut this is a really good question. For example, the exact spot in space the craft is supposed to be at when it arrives... does it have some sort of coordinates? If it does what are they and what are they based on? I'm certain that one day (a LONG time from now) humans will likely have a solar system GPS where maps will be good enough that the ship's computer can figure out exactly where you are based on where the craft is in relation to everything else. I really really hope reincarnation is a thing so I get to see it first hand. \n\nI read most of this and paraphrased a bit of it from: _URL_1_",
"They're inputting the angle to hold, the time of the burn and the duration of the burn. In orbital trajectory, you don't aim the ship at the target destination and fire your rockets. You aim at directions called prograde (in direction of current velocity), retrograde(against direction of current velocity), normal and anti normal (orthogonal to direction of travel, but parallel to surface of the body of orbit), radial and anti radial (towards and against the body of orbit). \n\nIn order to reach another planet, you have to fire your rockets prograde timed so that your new trajectory intersects with the orbit of the target planet in months or years when the target planet is there. That takes planning because there's only so many times windows when that trip is least fuel costly.",
"That makes a lot of sense. I'm very curious about the \"go that-a-way\" part. If we were driving I could say the car needs to go 10 degrees north. I wonder what they say for the spacecraft."
],
"score": [
10,
8,
3,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/basics/bsf13-1.php",
"https://futurism.com/how-do-scientists-find-directions-in-space/"
]
} | train_eli5 | What do 'Space Coordinates' look like? When NASA points a rocket at Jupiter and punches (trajectory solution) into a computer, what are they actually inputting?
| [
-0.008494632318615913,
-0.08261601626873016,
-0.055013127624988556,
-0.07202570885419846,
-0.017470436170697212,
-0.04458289220929146,
-0.059949614107608795,
-0.004190162755548954,
0.1157374307513237,
-0.034315310418605804,
0.028821870684623718,
0.021493451669812202,
-0.01717807538807392,
... | ||
5x4yxv | Why does water expand when it freezes. | I just can't understand why it does this. I always heard of things expanding when you warm them so why does water expand when it freezes? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"defaruc",
"def902f"
],
"text": [
"Water molecules (H2O) are made of an oxygen atom between two hydrogen atoms. They aren't lined up straight; they're bent at an angle, like a noodle of macaroni.\n\nWhen water freezes into solid ice, these macaroni shapes arrange themselves into hexagons, as shown in [this image](_URL_0_). The empty space in the middle of each hexagon means that the overall structure takes up more space than if the H2Os just smashed together randomly (i.e. if they were liquid). So the overall volume of water ends up expanding as it freezes into hexagons.",
"When water freezes it forms a crystalline structure. This structure means molecules are neatly arranged with more space in between them than when they were a liquid. When water is liquid this structure doesn't exist and molecules are moving more freely and closer together."
],
"score": [
24,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/Ice_Ih_Crystal_Lattice.png"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why does water expand when it freezes.
I just can't understand why it does this. I always heard of things expanding when you warm them so why does water expand when it freezes? | [
-0.03842783346772194,
-0.05169100686907768,
-0.01201704703271389,
0.04802127182483673,
0.041785161942243576,
0.025313477963209152,
0.0410531684756279,
0.07815533131361008,
0.0656123012304306,
0.049539726227521896,
-0.0334351472556591,
0.026117270812392235,
0.022913942113518715,
-0.04562650... | |
7e1iac | purchasing power parity (GDP)? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dq1t28n"
],
"text": [
"Say you live in the US. You make $100,000 a year. Now say you live in China, but you make $50,000 a year. You could say that the person living in the US is twice as rich as the Chinese person in absolute terms.\n\nBut consider that lunch (a sandwich) costs $10 in the USA. It costs $1 in China. So an American can buy 10,000 lunches with their salary. The Chinese person can buy 50,000 lunches. That means the person in China is richer in terms of how much they can buy.\n\nPurchasing power parity is a way to weight the amount of money someone has by how much things cost to buy in their country.\n\nThat's why global wealth inequality is so shocking. It's not just absolute wealth, it's based on PPP. Half the human population lives on less than $2.50 a day, after adjusting for PPP. A single mother in the US working 40 hours a week on minimum wage is significantly wealthier than 3 billion other humans. \n\nSo basically, PPP is a way of weighting how much people make by the cost of living."
],
"score": [
10
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | purchasing power parity (GDP)?
| [
0.015249676071107388,
-0.02090894617140293,
-0.012752922251820564,
0.027385884895920753,
-0.015341979451477528,
0.021618910133838654,
0.006128671113401651,
0.007045919541269541,
-0.04761580750346184,
-0.0202189888805151,
0.062106434255838394,
-0.008366493508219719,
-0.020200010389089584,
-... | ||
71hi6x | Why do TV shows have loud intros? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dnas74m"
],
"text": [
"I assume it's simply to:\n\n* be distinct and memorable\n\n* notify occupied people that their preferred TV show is starting"
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do TV shows have loud intros?
[removed] | [
-0.00039624638156965375,
-0.04658160358667374,
0.063860684633255,
-0.041286908090114594,
0.05571500211954117,
-0.005624457262456417,
0.0439894013106823,
-0.06220545619726181,
0.10218022018671036,
-0.08727992326021194,
-0.05434323102235794,
0.05661774054169655,
-0.0384434275329113,
-0.09768... | |
40oc9g | Why is it that when I Google image search "flag of Spain", many different flags come up? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cyvrkyr"
],
"text": [
"Spain has had many different flags in the recent past. It had a different one shortly after Franco's death, a few different ones under Franco, a different one before Franco, etc."
],
"score": [
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is it that when I Google image search "flag of Spain", many different flags come up?
| [
0.043646153062582016,
0.024950247257947922,
-0.005753459874540567,
0.0004666705790441483,
0.09971283376216888,
-0.043431684374809265,
0.016095295548439026,
-0.07505886256694794,
0.057313114404678345,
-0.09091464430093765,
0.07280222326517105,
0.01837579347193241,
-0.015114683657884598,
0.0... | ||
3om8ip | how do surgeons make incisions without cutting nerves? | I've always thought that cutting through a nerve was a bad thing to do, so how do surgeons avoid that? Are they somehow able to map out their location? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cvyfk26",
"cvyhq1u",
"cvyflnr"
],
"text": [
"They study for years to make sure they know where the major nerves are. \n\nSome minor nerves do get cut - and to some extent they can regenerate, though slowly. The one cut when I had surgery under my jaw took 20 years or so to reconnect!",
"Surgeons study anatomy to know where the major nerves are. \n\nSurgeons are trained not to cut things which they can't see. For example, if a surgeon uses scissors, they don't use the inner surface of the blades, because the inner edges are sharp, and because you can't see the bottom surface of what you are cutting. Surgeons use scissors by opening them, and letting the blunt sides of the blade, separate tissues gently, by pushing them apart.\n\nSo when a surgeon is dissecting the tissues to get to the site of interest, they will know when to expect nerves, and will be looking out for them as they go (they look quite distinctive and stringy). \n\nSome minor nerves are too small to see reliably, but those are less important than the big nerves, which are usually quite obvious.",
"Large ones run deep inside tissue most of the time and often run with arteries and veins. So, the surgeon will locate them and separate them from whatever needs to be cut to make sure the nerve fibers aren't cut. Smaller nerves aren't as big a deal and may be cut by accident to no great detriment.\nSource: med student"
],
"score": [
7,
6,
6
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | how do surgeons make incisions without cutting nerves?
I've always thought that cutting through a nerve was a bad thing to do, so how do surgeons avoid that? Are they somehow able to map out their location? | [
0.06409381330013275,
-0.005167490802705288,
0.046079136431217194,
-0.02268971875309944,
-0.08795489370822906,
-0.07153112441301346,
0.014668629504740238,
-0.06109308823943138,
0.036472611129283905,
0.06712895631790161,
0.041767656803131104,
0.0305300485342741,
-0.05404484272003174,
0.04234... | |
6utf7z | How do music streaming services pay artists? How much are artists paid? What is payment based on (number of plays, etc)? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dlva8zz"
],
"text": [
"They know what people are playing and they compile costs based on play count and cut checks to the labels on a pre-determined basis. Sometimes rates are different based on quantity and such. It all differs, but most services pay standard rates that are set by law.\n\nSometimes companies pay different rates depending on if they have a contract that gives the artist greater control of the streaming rights and sometimes they pay different rates for specific artists for things like exclusives.\n\nIt depends on the situation, the song, and what agreements have been struck."
],
"score": [
20
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How do music streaming services pay artists? How much are artists paid? What is payment based on (number of plays, etc)?
| [
0.0452658049762249,
-0.06284186244010925,
-0.0216755922883749,
-0.021092865616083145,
-0.054943908005952835,
0.11790245771408081,
0.053740281611680984,
-0.01593301258981228,
0.08698588609695435,
0.016511421650648117,
-0.08548092097043991,
-0.02326274663209915,
0.017762141302227974,
-0.0337... | ||
5w7xev | Why water feels like cement after jumping from a really high height. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"de7z7d0"
],
"text": [
"It takes a great deal of force to compress water. When you jump into the water, mostly it's getting out of your way rather than compressing. If you're moving too fast, then the water molecules can't move fast enough to get out of your way, and they won't compress. You hit a bunch of molecules that don't move, so it might as well be a solid at the moment of impact."
],
"score": [
8
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why water feels like cement after jumping from a really high height.
| [
-0.02661326713860035,
-0.06203761696815491,
0.1054232195019722,
0.032337505370378494,
-0.0069082933478057384,
0.010938674211502075,
0.0586942620575428,
0.10062353312969208,
0.02965795435011387,
-0.027045484632253647,
-0.04287382587790489,
0.0068174065090715885,
0.031087322160601616,
0.0225... | ||
3uoeel | Why do we hate hearing some sounds (e.g. nails on a chalkboard, fork on a plate, styrofoam against styrofoam)? | I'm high as fuck and I want to know. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cxghub6"
],
"text": [
"The sound frequencies they produce are disturbing to the ear. Humans generally dislike sharp frequencies and disturbed frequencies. As nails scrape against the chalkboard, the fingernails hit small cracks in the board which slightly alter the frequency of the sound. That's not something that humans typically enjoy. The same holds true for rubbing Styrofoam against Styrofoam.\n\nI would assume most of this comes from natural selection. Any sharpness or breakup in naturally flowing sound frequencies probably alerted early humanoids to some type of distress (e.g. leaves crunching may be a predator)."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do we hate hearing some sounds (e.g. nails on a chalkboard, fork on a plate, styrofoam against styrofoam)?
I'm high as fuck and I want to know. | [
0.12768009305000305,
-0.09720945358276367,
0.02930213138461113,
-0.04087553918361664,
-0.04264023154973984,
0.03345427289605141,
0.02438313700258732,
0.038463037461042404,
0.04284019395709038,
-0.01179349422454834,
-0.058191217482089996,
-0.08964838832616806,
-0.045749127864837646,
-0.0493... | |
1ujbyv | Why is it socially unacceptable or frowned upon to drink/eat soup out of a straw, yet using one to drink a beverage is fine? | I know it might sound stupid, but there has to be a serious explanation. I understand the concept of 'table manners' but why would it be impolite to do this when there are other exceptions? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ceinvgl",
"ceinz2c"
],
"text": [
"Soups are chunky bro. [At least man soups are.](_URL_0_)",
"Customs simply haven't evolved enough tolerance for this behavior, just as they had not for having elbows on the table at meal times (U.S.) a few years ago.\n\nHowever, the behavior might seem 'weird' to some people because of the perceived inefficiency or danger of drinking soup with a straw. Soup often contains large objects or particles (noodles, veggies, etc) which could be unpleasant or dangerous if taken through a straw. Suffocation could certainly occur for young children if they sucked down a pea or lentil in the wrong way. Also, many objects in soup might clog the straw (like a piece of tofu), which makes straws seem very inefficient for many soups.\n\nWhile there are some practical concerns about drinking soup through a straw, the practice is probably frowned upon simply because people aren't used to it and do not handle nonconformity well in this situation."
],
"score": [
15,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLIIKrJ6nnI"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why is it socially unacceptable or frowned upon to drink/eat soup out of a straw, yet using one to drink a beverage is fine?
I know it might sound stupid, but there has to be a serious explanation. I understand the concept of 'table manners' but why would it be impolite to do this when there are other exceptions? | [
0.004060374107211828,
-0.01236642710864544,
0.021381910890340805,
0.0025526515673846006,
-0.023362761363387108,
-0.038013894110918045,
0.02843852899968624,
-0.041696224361658096,
0.009830337949097157,
-0.01353426743298769,
0.0024988155346363783,
-0.03516514599323273,
-0.01503274030983448,
... | |
64kkpw | The economics of running a cemetery. | They must run out of space eventually. How do they pay for things like maintenance of the grounds and facilities once their income begins to dwindle or disappear altogether? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dg2u3ur",
"dg2u0fp"
],
"text": [
"If they are smart they take a portion of each plot sale and put it in an investment account. So if you pay $100 for your plot I take $10 profit right away and put $90 in an account. That account earns me interest, say 5% so every year I get $4.50 interest from that account. Hopefully it costs less then $4.50 to maintain the cemetery and I can get profit from that interest as well without ever touching the original money.",
"the purchase of property is a perpetuity investment. \n\nIf I need $10/year to maintain 1 plot, and I know I can earn 1% over inflation on a fixed investment, I need to invest $1000 to produce that $10 forever. So I sell the plot for $1000 and I am good to go forever."
],
"score": [
3,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | The economics of running a cemetery.
They must run out of space eventually. How do they pay for things like maintenance of the grounds and facilities once their income begins to dwindle or disappear altogether? | [
0.0583115816116333,
0.037329986691474915,
0.02365974709391594,
-0.02007930912077427,
-0.025968410074710846,
-0.069273442029953,
-0.0337323434650898,
-0.06926844269037247,
-0.014170346781611443,
0.0667845830321312,
0.00604135962203145,
-0.010518099181354046,
-0.08370877802371979,
0.01882542... | |
1bv3rp | Why do some sports games and programs start at random times like 8:49? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c9afcue",
"c9afwc0",
"c9ag8se"
],
"text": [
"I'm not entirely sure, but with sports, I wouldn't be surprised if the reason is so broadcasters can do pre-game previews and stuff before the game starts.",
"A sports game doesn't last a block amount of time so they need to start it at an odd time so it will end at a block time for the next show in the schedule. Also preshows play a part",
"Baseball games usually start at 7:05 because the umpire has to get the batting order from the skipper. _URL_0_\n\nIt's more of tradition than anything else."
],
"score": [
6,
5,
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/official_rules/start_end_4.jsp"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why do some sports games and programs start at random times like 8:49?
| [
0.034521833062171936,
0.02630731463432312,
0.04264317452907562,
-0.038117416203022,
0.0649554654955864,
0.061621733009815216,
-0.06450983881950378,
-0.019092487171292305,
0.17274270951747894,
0.04349292814731598,
-0.09819398075342178,
0.1112891286611557,
-0.0835070013999939,
0.041185922920... | ||
1j8bd0 | Why are the bodies left on Mt. Everest and are not returned to the families? | I've read in a lot of articles that some of the bodies are used as landmarks? Why don't they return the bodies to the families?
It's something I always was curious about and never found an answer online. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cbc3yww",
"cbc4xtl"
],
"text": [
"Summiting Everest requires a great deal of money, and it's quite treacherous.\n\nEvery corpse you see on Everest is someone who died on the way to the summit or on the way back. It's hard enough to do it carrying all of the gear (oxygen bottles, tent gear, clothing, food, climbing gear, so on) that they have to carry.\n\nTo attempt the same feat carrying a dead body along the way?\n\nMost people aren't willing to risk joining the person they'd be trying to bring back.\n\nThere are occasional expeditions to cover bodies and/or move them out of the main thoroughfares.",
"It's cold as fuck up there, brah. You go get them."
],
"score": [
12,
8
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why are the bodies left on Mt. Everest and are not returned to the families?
I've read in a lot of articles that some of the bodies are used as landmarks? Why don't they return the bodies to the families? It's something I always was curious about and never found an answer online. | [
-0.0017820694483816624,
0.07408586889505386,
0.05412282049655914,
0.03854796662926674,
0.03155235946178436,
-0.04853671416640282,
-0.0892724022269249,
-0.059913270175457,
0.003910092171281576,
0.014870691113173962,
0.036223068833351135,
-0.02019207924604416,
-0.03073456697165966,
-0.044041... | |
1p89wv | Hotel room lights | Why don't hotel rooms have lights like every other building? Every hotel I've stayed at has crappy lights on the side tables. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cczrf9r"
],
"text": [
"It is easier to replace a lamp if someone destroys it rather than rewiring the light fixture, and repairing the damage to the wall."
],
"score": [
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Hotel room lights
Why don't hotel rooms have lights like every other building? Every hotel I've stayed at has crappy lights on the side tables. | [
0.09662265330553055,
-0.047185152769088745,
0.03712896630167961,
0.08215917646884918,
-0.01414286345243454,
-0.026181809604167938,
-0.02792883664369583,
-0.08076008409261703,
0.08513227850198746,
0.007450985722243786,
0.052252013236284256,
0.016672281548380852,
0.02328146994113922,
0.04921... | |
3ngf5w | Why is force defined as mass x acceleration instead of mass x velocity? | If an object is moving at a fixed rate of speed (velocity = x), the acceleration would be 0, yet it would still have force.
Why does this calculation have acceleration involved at all? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cvnslzn",
"cvnsvcw",
"cvnskhs"
],
"text": [
"> If an object is moving at a fixed rate of speed (velocity = x), the acceleration would be 0, yet it would still have force.\n\nBut an object moving at a fixed speed doesn't have any forces acting upon it (or more correctly, all forces acting on it cancel out).\n\nWhy do you want to redefine physical units?",
"Forces only come into play when there is a change in velocity. When a ball is flying through empty space (because air resistance is a force) at a fixed velocity, there is no net force acting on it. \nWhen it hits something, it has a force of impact because it changes velocities rapidly, and the kinetic energy it has goes into the other object. When that ball is flying through space, it doesn't change velocities and doesn't 'have force' as an innate quality, though it has momentum.",
"Force doesn't really mean the energy of hypothetical impact. \n\nGravity is a force. Despite the fact I'm relatively stationary gravity is exerting a force on me; roughly 9.8 Newtons of force per kilogram of mass."
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is force defined as mass x acceleration instead of mass x velocity?
If an object is moving at a fixed rate of speed (velocity = x), the acceleration would be 0, yet it would still have force. Why does this calculation have acceleration involved at all? | [
0.012308301404118538,
-0.009560584090650082,
0.026313992217183113,
0.019203154370188713,
0.02729370817542076,
-0.00036595124402083457,
-0.0701131671667099,
-0.07799811661243439,
0.09618278592824936,
0.06583686918020248,
0.13412965834140778,
-0.06946516782045364,
-0.0030461435671895742,
0.0... | |
3rtxrx | what does it mean when a country "devalues" it's currency? | And what is the impact on other countries? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cwrfk6k",
"cwrasp9"
],
"text": [
"It means that one day one day the Fakeland Dollarpound is worth one US dollar, and the next day it's worth 35 US cents. Obviously that will make Fakeland's exports way less expensive, and anyone owing debt denominated in Fakeland currency will be laughing. BUT, all of a sudden your Dollarpounds pay for far fewer imported goods, inflation shoots through the roof and the cost of living goes way up for all Fakelanders.",
"They're making their money less worth (in comparison to other currencies). This is good for exports since it gets cheaper for other countries to buy their produce. It can, however increase inflation. And it makes imported goods more expensive."
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | what does it mean when a country "devalues" it's currency?
And what is the impact on other countries? | [
0.058068931102752686,
0.04279469698667526,
-0.08283878862857819,
-0.01055914256721735,
-0.02004680037498474,
-0.08003368228673935,
0.03466097638010979,
0.028157558292150497,
0.0562286376953125,
-0.043663911521434784,
0.02608504146337509,
-0.0470113530755043,
-0.03003326803445816,
0.0484926... | |
1fz8nq | Why do countries have different names for one another instead of using that country's local name (or something close to it) for itself? | I'm referring to how English speaking countries refer to Germany as such, yet the Germans call their country Deutschland. We use similar words for some countries (i.e. - France is France in both English and French), yet seem so far off in reference to other countries (i.e. - Germany vs. Deutschland; Japan vs. Nihon; Norway vs. Norge). | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"caf8851"
],
"text": [
"Have you seen the top post at /r/mapporn? It's about all the different names of Germany.\n\nCountries are named in different times and from different point of views. Before Deutschland was named Deutschland there were already a whole lot of names for that region. Germany after Germania, Saksa after the Germanic tribe the saxons, Allemagne after the alemanni tribe. All these names were already used before Deutschland became Deutschland. Why change the name of a country if you already have a name for it? This also happened in a time were europe wasn't one big happy family. Countries weren't going to change names just because some savages used a different name."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do countries have different names for one another instead of using that country's local name (or something close to it) for itself?
I'm referring to how English speaking countries refer to Germany as such, yet the Germans call their country Deutschland. We use similar words for some countries (i.e. - France is France in both English and French), yet seem so far off in reference to other countries (i.e. - Germany vs. Deutschland; Japan vs. Nihon; Norway vs. Norge). | [
0.046952586621046066,
-0.02659081481397152,
0.015681607648730278,
-0.05094360560178757,
0.024552281945943832,
-0.07012782990932465,
0.013846474699676037,
0.003562259953469038,
0.15611878037452698,
-0.09627208858728409,
-0.0008389806607738137,
-0.0503893718123436,
0.02521645464003086,
0.038... | |
3vhy9d | Military naming conventions, especially M-designations. | There are multiple weapons and vehicles called M1 but there are also designations in the M12XXs. There are a half dozen or more aircraft that have been called F4. I can't make heads or tails of this [list](_URL_0_). What is the logic behind the designations? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cxnpche",
"cxnvbkf",
"cxns3yn",
"cxnvhgx"
],
"text": [
"Ok. M seems to be model. Examples are m-4 and m-1911 a 1. Usually for weapons. F is fighter. Like f-16 and f-111. A is attack so air to ground. A-10 and a-5. C is transport so c-130 or c-5. It does have its logic in there.",
"??????\n\nsource: Army logistician\n\nBut thank you for posting the link to the Wikipedia article. This actually will help me.",
"If you're trying to find a single overarching system that handles the designation of all military equipment, you won't find one. Even in specific areas where you do find one, there's generally enough special cases & exceptions to the rule that it's effectively worthless.\n\nThe only logic behind it is that there is no logic. They just want a unique part number assigned to a widget & it gets a part number that (usually) sticks with it through the lifespan of the equipment - except for the times when they assign the same identifier to multiple items.",
"In the list you posted, Most vehicles use a sequential numerical designation starting before World War II with a light tank, and that number sequence has continued today, with recent additions including the M112X and M113X line of Stryker variants. As others have said, there are plenty of exceptions. \n\nSome items get a number designation based on the year of introduction or development, such as the M1903 Springfield Rifle, the M1911 handgun, and the M1919 Browning Machine Gun. \n\n\"A\" followed by a number tacked on to the end of a designation means it is a subsequent variant of the initial model. For instance M16A2 and M1A1. \n\nIn general, the Navy tends to use Mark (\"MK\") instead of Model/M and MOD (Model) for variants. For instance the Mk14 MOD 0 is a variant of the M14 developed by the navy as a marksman rifle. \n\nOthers have summed up aircraft pretty well, but to add to their list, KC designated aircraft are fuel tankers and Q is used for unmanned/remotely piloted aircraft like the RQ-11 Raven and MQ-1 Predator. \n\nIf you're at all curious about Soviet/Russian originated equipment, there is an additional layer of confusion there because NATO intelligence during the Cold War didn't always know the official designation of units they encountered. NATO came up with their own [\"reporting system\"](_URL_0_) that would give a piece of equipment a name and alphanumerical designation like most Western equipment. The NATO names for Russian equipment usually used an alliterative naming convention, for instance all fighter names started with an F, such as the Fulcrum, Foxbat, Flogger and Fagot (sorry I had to). Meanwhile, the Soviets/Russians had their own designations for the same equipment, so some sources will use the NATO name, others will use the Russian name, and others still will use a mix of both. As a result, you have NATO refer to a particular Surface to Air missile as the SA-2 Gainful, while the Russians call it an S-75 Dvina."
],
"score": [
51,
17,
13,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._military_vehicles_by_model_number"
]
} | {
"url": [
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_reporting_name"
]
} | train_eli5 | Military naming conventions, especially M-designations.
There are multiple weapons and vehicles called M1 but there are also designations in the M12XXs. There are a half dozen or more aircraft that have been called F4. I can't make heads or tails of this [list](_URL_0_). What is the logic behind the designations? | [
0.04191232845187187,
-0.0069205546751618385,
-0.02724345028400421,
-0.04164833948016167,
-0.04264885187149048,
0.014141288585960865,
-0.018568357452750206,
0.013489154167473316,
-0.027852045372128487,
0.0015970730455592275,
0.05225666984915733,
0.038256675004959106,
0.06349971145391464,
0.... | |
4jvq47 | . How does your body make you sleep so much when you are ill? | I got a stomach bug and ended up sleeping through most of the day and night. Normally I couldn't sleep that much if I wanted to. How does your body overcome your normal circadian rhythm and make you sleep so much? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d3a1y2g",
"d3a5qg5"
],
"text": [
"Your wanting to sleep is regulated by a chemical in your brain. When your brain feels it's better off sleeping to deal with an illness, it makes more of the chemical. So you sleep more.",
"there are several molecular pathways from inflammatory response to change in behavior in animals (including humans)\nthe initial response is driven by principal pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-1, IL-6 and TNF-alpha) which can result in increased melatonin production.\nthe induction of so called sickness behavior has several evolutionary advantages:\n\n• it is difficult for wild animals to get food from environment and they might be unsuccessful in search for them - this costs energy which is precious for fighting the disease - > animal is forced to sleep/move less and conserve energy for immune system - raising body temp, ...\n\n• you decrease the chance of ingesting essential growth factors for pathogens - e.g iron, zinc, vitamins - your body also tries to hide these nutrients from the them. in fact force-feeding of animals during disease results in lower survival rate\n\n• immobility prevents spreading of diseases among relatives"
],
"score": [
18,
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | . How does your body make you sleep so much when you are ill?
I got a stomach bug and ended up sleeping through most of the day and night. Normally I couldn't sleep that much if I wanted to. How does your body overcome your normal circadian rhythm and make you sleep so much? | [
0.09393821656703949,
0.013139334507286549,
0.00017434604524169117,
0.10801342874765396,
0.04136496037244797,
0.0004376006836537272,
0.04749879613518715,
0.020470522344112396,
0.05073319375514984,
-0.06530054658651352,
-0.10801676660776138,
-0.029766852036118507,
0.05097559094429016,
-0.011... | |
6g1t8d | Why are some people so against circumcision? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dimrq9a",
"dimr8gg",
"dimr2ag"
],
"text": [
"Generally people who are against circumcision don't have a problem with it if there is a genuine medical need for it, or if an adult chooses to be circumcised. \n\nCircumcision may not (usually) be harmful, but it's still permanently altering someone's body. Usually surgically altering a person's body without their consent or a valid medical reason is considered unethical. And if you're doing it to an infant, they can't consent to it.\n\nThink of it this way, do you think it's ok to tattoo a baby? I think a lot of people would say no. The tattoo isn't particularly harmful, especially if it's on a part of the body that isn't normally seen. But despite that, it's generally considered wrong.\n\nIn some ways circumcision is worse than that. At least tattoos can be removed. You can't get a foreskin back, not properly anyway. By forcing it on a child you have removed their right to choose.\n\nThe main argument against this line of thinking is considering circumcision as preventative medicine. It does reduce the chance of getting various infections. However people who are against circumcision dispute the benefits, especially when proper hygiene and practicing safe sex is a far better more effective way of preventing those infections.",
"There is absolutely no medical reason to justify circumcision. People (including myself) are against it because it's a violation of a human being and mutilation for the sake of cosmetic purposes.",
"People say that the baby should have a choice and that's it's mutilation and blah blah. Personally I don't see the problem either. It's a simple surgery, not mutilation"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why are some people so against circumcision?
[removed] | [
0.04274424910545349,
0.12535427510738373,
0.016528666019439697,
0.015492347069084644,
-0.0073627145029604435,
-0.013018673285841942,
0.0390031598508358,
0.0016181746032088995,
0.0145533112809062,
0.06142084300518036,
0.07144975662231445,
0.015183528885245323,
-0.03554345667362213,
0.008948... | |
7p5ltw | How a digital gyroscope works | Really, how does a solid block gyroscope on my R/C quadcopter detect movement across 3 axis? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dser70e"
],
"text": [
"These devices usually have microscopic vibrating structures inside a silicon chip, like tiny tuning forks. They tend to keep vibrating in the same direction in space even as the quadcopter turns. So if the electronics set one vibrating say, from front-to-back of the quadcopter but they start to detect vibration from left to right, they know the quadcopter has rotated a bit.\n\n_URL_0_"
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrating_structure_gyroscope"
]
} | train_eli5 | How a digital gyroscope works
Really, how does a solid block gyroscope on my R/C quadcopter detect movement across 3 axis? | [
-0.04361230880022049,
-0.08272624760866165,
-0.11644350737333298,
-0.1529957503080368,
-0.02818884886801243,
0.035813260823488235,
0.006788705941289663,
-0.041106075048446655,
0.0662141963839531,
0.035304997116327286,
0.05440902337431908,
0.021050525829195976,
-0.05570370703935623,
-0.0075... | |
1icy1g | The difference between current, amperage, and voltage | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cb38f76",
"cb389zl",
"cb38m12"
],
"text": [
"[Never seen it put better and simpler than this. ](_URL_0_)",
"Electricity is electric charge moving through stuff, the charged bits that get piped through wires are electrons.\n\nAmperage is a measure of current, that's how much charge is moving through a component. It's sort of analogous to how much water is flowing through a pipe. Voltage is more or less a measure of \"force\" pushing charge through something, it's sort of analogous to the pressure pushing water through the pipe.",
"Amperage (or simply \"amps\") is a unit of measurement for current, and as you say, current is essentially how quickly (or how many) electrons move through the 'pipe' of a wire. \n\nVoltage is the potential energy of electrons -- like the height of a waterfall. Higher voltages are like taller waterfalls.\n\n Because batteries and circuits work by forcing electrons down a specified path to get where they want to be (with positive molecules), it's best to think of a circuit like a water wheel. The height of the fall (V) * the volume of water falling (I, or current) equals the power generated by the wheel (Watts)."
],
"score": [
6,
5,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://i.imgur.com/OZMGxmv.png"
]
} | train_eli5 | The difference between current, amperage, and voltage
| [
-0.04832213371992111,
0.05115527659654617,
-0.04170529171824455,
-0.0036711234133690596,
-0.032999780029058456,
0.006997960153967142,
-0.03603433817625046,
-0.010725592263042927,
0.11008397489786148,
0.03183918446302414,
0.07227716594934464,
-0.028350429609417915,
0.024970006197690964,
0.0... | ||
3g822n | Why is "it's" so commonly grammatically misused over other function words like "your vs. you're" or "a vs. an"? | Every time I read Reddit, self-proclaimed Grammar Nazis and such always correct posts that even [the POTUS](_URL_0_) wasn't safe, and most of them become popular threaded comments.
However, no one bats an eye when someone goes "It's ability" or "Parking at it's best"
It's gotten so common on the internet that I have to remind myself that when I hear someone talking, and they say "its ability," the word "it's" automatically pop up and I have to remind myself that "its" is the correct word. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ctvqfbr",
"ctvqfr4"
],
"text": [
"People get confused because the 's declares ownership as that is what we have been taught. So when some people see its ability, they process it as it having the ownership of the ability hence using the apostrophe and writing it's ability.",
"In my case it's my damn autocorrect. It replaces most instances of 'it's' with 'it's'. If I'm typing quickly I miss them and end up looking (more) retarded."
],
"score": [
6,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/z1c9z/i_am_barack_obama_president_of_the_united_states/c60n1lg"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is "it's" so commonly grammatically misused over other function words like "your vs. you're" or "a vs. an"?
Every time I read Reddit, self-proclaimed Grammar Nazis and such always correct posts that even [the POTUS](_URL_0_) wasn't safe, and most of them become popular threaded comments. However, no one bats an eye when someone goes "It's ability" or "Parking at it's best" It's gotten so common on the internet that I have to remind myself that when I hear someone talking, and they say "its ability," the word "it's" automatically pop up and I have to remind myself that "its" is the correct word. | [
0.01014221366494894,
-0.023619702085852623,
0.0018266121624037623,
-0.011371007189154625,
-0.013335986994206905,
0.020307132974267006,
0.12675008177757263,
0.05811288207769394,
0.0419367216527462,
0.07217036932706833,
-0.10145840048789978,
0.01283044833689928,
0.05210861191153526,
0.065301... | |
6pbjbr | What are the benefits of salt grinders? | I totally get the benefit of pepper grinder. Pepper locks some aromatic oils, and when left ground for long, the oils evaporate.
Salt, on the other hand, has no oils in it, just solid minerals. So what is the different between "freshly ground" and not freshly ground?
I crushed some salt and left it aside for 2 weeks, couldn’t find any difference between it and "freshly crushed" salt. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dko5t9o",
"dko1xti",
"dko6m5n"
],
"text": [
"Aesthetics.\n\nIt allows the salt and pepper grinder to match more closely since they now have similar mechanisms in them.\n\nAlso, to some extent, you can choose grind size as others have mentioned, but that relies on the grinder actually having a grind selector. But it's more reliable to simply buy salt with the desired flake size and crystal structure, IMO. \n\nSize of crystals isn't really important, though; it's shape that is important. table salt has a dense cube shaped crystal, and kosher salt has a light flake like structure- kosher salt is more preferable to use in cooking because the flakey structure is better able to stick to moist surfaces when sprinkled, such as when seasoning meat) It's also important to know which a recipe is calling for- a teaspoon of table salt will contain more grams of salt than a teaspoon of kosher salt (which, incidentally, is one reason why you really should measure everything by weight, not volume, when baking)",
"The main thing that separates different salts is the size of the salt grain. Some salts might taste different or have different colors because of trace minerals, but that's a different topic.\n\nTypical table salt is pretty small and cubic. That's fine for when you want to dissolve salt into something, but it's not good for making something taste uniformly salty with a small amount of salt. \n\nSea salt and kosher salt tend to be larger flakes with a larger surface area. When you put those salts on top of something they tend to taste saltier with less salt. \n\nGround salt isn't as large as most kosher or sea salt, but it is irregularly shaped and as a result tends to make things taste saltier with less salt when the salt is sprinkled on top of something.\n\nSo when suing on top of food, table salt requires more salt to taste equally salty and is a little harder to spread uniformly. There's not really any difference if you're dissolving it into the food, though.",
"Besides the already mentioned reasons coarse salt is easier to pour without dusting and because of the smaller surface per volume it tends less to clump together/attract water. If you buy already small grinded salt, chances are high that they contain (undisclosed) flow enhancers like micro silica.\nIf you buy sea salt it is still more likely to clump together because of other salts contained that attract water more than NaCl."
],
"score": [
7,
4,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What are the benefits of salt grinders?
I totally get the benefit of pepper grinder. Pepper locks some aromatic oils, and when left ground for long, the oils evaporate. Salt, on the other hand, has no oils in it, just solid minerals. So what is the different between "freshly ground" and not freshly ground? I crushed some salt and left it aside for 2 weeks, couldn’t find any difference between it and "freshly crushed" salt. | [
-0.14143875241279602,
-0.09297468513250351,
0.08761540055274963,
0.04336452856659889,
0.07068147510290146,
0.04871397465467453,
-0.05435416102409363,
0.06335092335939407,
0.037592194974422455,
-0.12034067511558533,
0.036449119448661804,
0.02313399314880371,
0.01486637070775032,
-0.01673191... | |
6rx2gt | How does the shoulder joint work? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dl8fcqu"
],
"text": [
"I'm not sure if \"complex\" is the right word, but the shoulder joint is the most flexible in the body. The shoulder joint is what's known as a ball and socket joint. The ball of your arm bone(humerus) is nestled into the cup or socket of the bone in your torso(scapula).\n\nThe same is true of your hip bone. What makes the shoulder unique is the muscles that help control it. In the front of your arm, if held at your side, is the bicep. This muscle connects to the tendons just above your shoulder and is what makes you capable of moving your arm forward and backwards. Surrounding the back of your shoulder is the rotator cuff, another important group of tendons and muscles that allow your to move the shoulder up and down and in almost a complete circle.\n\nIn addition to muscle groups, the socket of your shoulder bone has a very small area in which it covers the ball of your arm bone. This allows for a much wider range of movement than it's ball-and-socket cousin the hip bone.\n\nTL;DR: Widest range of movement in the body, surrounded by important muscle groups."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How does the shoulder joint work?
[deleted] | [
-0.03689837455749512,
0.004672948271036148,
-0.023039795458316803,
-0.00010701450082706288,
-0.03740578889846802,
-0.008550242520868778,
0.10194459557533264,
0.006383873987942934,
0.01963186264038086,
0.040205396711826324,
0.04878602176904678,
0.11319516599178314,
0.0612524077296257,
-0.00... | |
2dib0u | USA Healthcare system costs. | With recent images uploaded to reddit detailing costs as high as a couple hundred grand, I, as a Austalian/New Zealander/Brit, am shocked.
Why is it so high?
How can families and individuals pay for such high costs?
Why is America against Obamacare (which I think mirrors the healthcare systems of the countries I have lived in)?
What happens if you cannot afford treatment? Do they just let you die? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cjps99l",
"cjprjxp"
],
"text": [
"ObamaCare, while an improvement, is still nothing close to what most of the developed world gets in terms of access to affordable healthcare. It basically compels more employers to provide insurance, and it offers group buying plans for those without access to employer plans. It sets rules for who and how the insurance companies can cover, and provides tax breaks to those with lower incomes so that their health insurance isn't more than a certain percentage of their income. But it's not a single payer system, or universal, etc.",
"You're a New Zealander, Australian and Brit? Wow."
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | USA Healthcare system costs.
With recent images uploaded to reddit detailing costs as high as a couple hundred grand, I, as a Austalian/New Zealander/Brit, am shocked. Why is it so high? How can families and individuals pay for such high costs? Why is America against Obamacare (which I think mirrors the healthcare systems of the countries I have lived in)? What happens if you cannot afford treatment? Do they just let you die? | [
0.04659990966320038,
-0.014275959692895412,
-0.021381104364991188,
-0.006379669066518545,
0.06276003271341324,
0.055443599820137024,
-0.008661292493343353,
0.04475193843245506,
0.06271572411060333,
0.03936517983675003,
-0.009988890029489994,
0.02114362269639969,
0.04511108621954918,
-0.050... | |
2cbbtb | Why do I feel like a bug or something is on me after I see a bug on me? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cjdrl1x"
],
"text": [
"Because you are paranoid of having a bug on you, your mind becomes more focused on the skin. It is a mind thing, because you think their are bugs on you, you will feel bugs on you."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do I feel like a bug or something is on me after I see a bug on me?
| [
-0.022819794714450836,
-0.11434764415025711,
0.019856926053762436,
0.08394366502761841,
0.07401620596647263,
0.008917265571653843,
0.09743138402700424,
0.04346878454089165,
0.042416155338287354,
-0.04603632912039757,
-0.020236540585756302,
-0.05812609940767288,
0.007577708922326565,
0.0063... | ||
2n4wsz | Where did the generic doorbell/clock melody originate? Why is it used around the world? | [This](_URL_0_) is the melody( apparently called West Minister ). | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cmacrcf"
],
"text": [
"It almost certainly got its popularity from being what the [Westminster Clock Tower (“Big Ben”) plays](_URL_1_), which was inspired by the church of Saint Mary the Great in Cambridge. Where it came from before that I don't think anyone knows, but building melody patterns out of different permutations of ringing a small number of bells is an old English tradition. Especially playing *all possible* permutations, called [ringing the changes](_URL_0_)."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://youtu.be/oLOS3VYliUs?t=10s"
]
} | {
"url": [
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_ringing",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_Quarters"
]
} | train_eli5 | Where did the generic doorbell/clock melody originate? Why is it used around the world?
[This](_URL_0_) is the melody( apparently called West Minister ). | [
-0.0012590300757437944,
0.052840251475572586,
-0.018550897017121315,
-0.0556257888674736,
-0.03448152542114258,
0.05003046616911888,
0.025566907599568367,
-0.03403457999229431,
0.04874492436647415,
-0.009237001650035381,
-0.05439189448952675,
0.08691466599702835,
0.05123911798000336,
-0.08... | |
62m3je | How do people find seemingly impossible Easter eggs in games? | I've seen countless videos of easter eggs in games. But I always get puzzled by how in-depth and secretive they are. How would a person be able to find such easter eggs? I.E. games with long input codes, and long tasks to get to the actual easter egg. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dfnm5hw",
"dfnl8z5"
],
"text": [
"They sometimes find them by accident, but in most cases they look at the code that makes the game work and find something in the code that makes no sense. For example...\n\nLet's say that you are looking at a code for a shooting game. You are looking at the names of the guns and you say \"BFG\" in the names, but have never found that gun. So you keep looking around for other places where it makes a reference to BFG. You may come across something that says \"push button sequence: 1356, release BFG\" so you do more investigation to see what push button sequence means and what it is referring to. Eventually you put all the pieces together and figure out how to get the BFG through the series of events.",
"Sometimes people spend years, or more likely millions of people each spend a few hours collectively. You can also take a game apart at the level of its code, and examine it for things that stand out. Usually something like an easter egg will be marked it some way too."
],
"score": [
6,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How do people find seemingly impossible Easter eggs in games?
I've seen countless videos of easter eggs in games. But I always get puzzled by how in-depth and secretive they are. How would a person be able to find such easter eggs? I.E. games with long input codes, and long tasks to get to the actual easter egg. | [
-0.00046915619168430567,
-0.0042098877020180225,
-0.006776081398129463,
-0.06259814649820328,
0.027984969317913055,
0.03508821874856949,
-0.010493455454707146,
-0.011557617224752903,
0.034356314688920975,
-0.00009014286479214206,
-0.03909270465373993,
-0.0208139605820179,
-0.0332178883254528... | |
4n93se | Water in a vacuum. | In [this video,](_URL_0_) they put a glass of water into a pot and vacuum all the air out. It looks like it's boiling at first, but then they talk about it turning to ice? What is going on here? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d41wepd",
"d41vyog",
"d41x8u1"
],
"text": [
"\"Boiling\" doesn't mean \"hot\". It just means \"turning into a gas\". At very low pressures, water will vaporize even when the temperature is relatively low. Here's [the phase diagram for water](_URL_0_). Notice that at room temperature (roughly 300K), water will change from liquid to gas at pressures below roughly 2 or 3 kPa.\n\nHowever, when something evaporates, the molecules with the most energy escape first, meaning that whatever is left un-evaporated is colder overall. This is why sweating cools you off. The same is true in this situation: The molecules of water with the most energy became a gas, so the water left in the glass had a lower temperature than before it started. You don't see this effect in situations where you're boiling water for cooking, because you boil it by adding heat, and not by decreasing the pressure.",
"Well, the lower the pressure of the air is around water, the lower its boiling point is. \n\nSo when they make the air pressure that low, the water has a boiling point that is very very low. \n\nWhen they add the pressure back, it would presumably freeze because the boiling temperature when back to normal.",
"There are two things going on. (Well, more than that, but mostly two)\n\nFirst, liquids boil into gases when individual molecules get enough energy (heat) to break free of the other molecules in that liquid. They need enough energy to push their way into the air. In a vacuum, there's no air pressure to push against, so it takes very little energy for the liquid water to fly apart into a gas.\nMore air pressure means more heat is required to change from liquid to gas (that's why you have to boil an egg longer at higher altitudes, water boils at a lower temperature on a mountain than at sea level.)\n\nAlso, in a vacuum (or anywhere really), gases expand to fill their container. As they expand, the *total energy* in the gas stays the same, spreading the heat more thinly. This means the gas temperature gets colder. It's also notable that the hottest particles tend to become gases first, carrying a small amount of extra heat with them when they escape.\n\nIf everything is just right, water will boil off and create a quickly expanding, constantly cooling cloud of vapor. The gas can further cool the remaining liquid as it spreads out.\n\nEdit: Resources to learn more.\n\n_URL_4_\n\n_URL_4_\n\n_URL_4_\n\n_URL_4_"
],
"score": [
10,
4,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://youtu.be/Rtrz7OcdUxQ?t=7m24s"
]
} | {
"url": [
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Phase_diagram_of_water.svg/700px-Phase_diagram_of_water.svg.png",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Properties_of_water",
"http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/phase.html",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boyle%27s_law"
]
} | train_eli5 | Water in a vacuum.
In [this video,](_URL_0_) they put a glass of water into a pot and vacuum all the air out. It looks like it's boiling at first, but then they talk about it turning to ice? What is going on here? | [
-0.04870009049773216,
-0.007303702645003796,
0.0073243239894509315,
0.06880886107683182,
0.03841857239603996,
-0.08233315497636795,
0.037620387971401215,
-0.05159473419189453,
0.0333150252699852,
-0.02688058465719223,
-0.03579021245241165,
-0.0043650222942233086,
-0.05368475615978241,
-0.0... | |
3x4kei | why do some foods like apples cause me to get hungrier? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cy1illn"
],
"text": [
"The sugar in an apple causes a spike in blood sugar level and insulin. When the subsequent crash takes place, your body tells itself it is hungry in an attempt to normalize the blood sugar level again. Vicious cycle."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | why do some foods like apples cause me to get hungrier?
| [
0.08599501103162766,
-0.05726981535553932,
0.02724638767540455,
0.10171688348054886,
-0.03570481017231941,
-0.046231698244810104,
0.09374561160802841,
-0.03419427573680878,
0.027138689532876015,
-0.05343044176697731,
0.0025656165089458227,
-0.07774218171834946,
-0.00832358654588461,
-0.085... | ||
135zbc | What are Imaginary Numbers, exactly? | I never really understood this concept from high school math, can someone please explain the concept like I'm five, and why the idea of imaginary numbers even exist? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c713848",
"c713pbt"
],
"text": [
"A Visual, Intuitive Guide to Imaginary Numbers:\n\n_URL_0_",
"Mathematicians like to solve equations; that's just what they do. And for *most* equations, that's pretty easy.\n\nE.g.: X + 4 = 10. Therefore X = 6.\n\nThe idea is that *no matter what* equation you write, mathematicians want to come up with an answer.\n\nBut what happens when you write:\n\nx^2 = -9\n\nThat *looks* like a normal equation, but it's not. Whenever you 'square' a number, the answer is **always** positive. It's literally impossible to get a negative number from squaring a 'real' number. This drives mathematicians nuts, because it means this equation (and others like it) don't have a real answer. And that's bad (for their sanity).\n\nAnd that's where 'imaginary' numbers come into play. Obviously you can't have an imaginary number of apples, and you can't owe an imaginary amount of money, but they 'fill in the gaps' in these unsolved equations. They give us a way to express things that we *can't* express through 'normal' ways.\n\nThat doesn't make them 'fake', though; they are as meaningful as every other number out there. That's because numbers themselves aren't tangible things, they are simply concepts to help us understand the world. And that's all imaginary numbers are, too. They are *ideas* (albeit complex ones) that help mathematicians wrap their heads around very difficult and complex problems."
],
"score": [
23,
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://betterexplained.com/articles/a-visual-intuitive-guide-to-imaginary-numbers/"
]
} | train_eli5 | What are Imaginary Numbers, exactly?
I never really understood this concept from high school math, can someone please explain the concept like I'm five, and why the idea of imaginary numbers even exist? | [
-0.09092310816049576,
0.007892534136772156,
-0.00878885854035616,
0.025299647822976112,
-0.0456521213054657,
-0.03810626640915871,
0.004465648904442787,
0.024783913046121597,
0.11864452809095383,
0.0049832467921078205,
0.03548181429505348,
0.007563666440546513,
0.007871625013649464,
0.0407... | |
2bwf97 | How can children watch the same movie (or any other content) over many times without getting bored? | Such as a 5 year old can watch the movie Frozen every day for a month multiple times. But, as an adult can only watch one episode of a new series and have to wait a long time before I can feel the same way about it? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cj9q7xz",
"cj9quqz",
"cj9r96d",
"cj9m1t5"
],
"text": [
"Uh... Children? I've seen \"How to Train Your Dragon\" at least a dozen times, and I'm 59 and live alone.",
"Kids don't grasp and comprehend plots as quickly as adults. They are also easily distracted. So they glean more content upon repeat viewings than you as an adult would. Their understanding of the movie as a whole builds over time.\n\nThey like the repetition and knowing what's going to happen next too.",
"Most people can listen to their favourite album many times and never get bored. A lot of the time people get more out of good music the more they listen to it—they start just appreciating the melody, then they pay more attention to the lyrics and start understanding the meaning behind the song, then they start paying attention to the background instruments and how the whole thing combines into one harmonious whole, etc.\n\nI don't really know, but it's probably a lot like that. A kid gets less out of the first viewing of a movie than an adult would, so they can enjoy many repeated viewings.",
"The only problem with this is that we don't have VHS or cassette tapes for the kids to wear out the Mylar."
],
"score": [
14,
8,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How can children watch the same movie (or any other content) over many times without getting bored?
Such as a 5 year old can watch the movie Frozen every day for a month multiple times. But, as an adult can only watch one episode of a new series and have to wait a long time before I can feel the same way about it? | [
0.03858179971575737,
-0.09655362367630005,
0.027326643466949463,
0.006676079705357552,
0.003149957861751318,
0.06239185482263565,
-0.008131604641675949,
-0.009135588072240353,
0.09878464788198471,
-0.019098056480288506,
-0.028215982019901276,
0.06641111522912979,
-0.05258413776755333,
-0.0... | |
6kijpp | How does our brain differentiate between a sad song and a happy one? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"djmcedb",
"djmp5n8"
],
"text": [
"Our evolution lead us to have empathy. Part of being empathetic is to attribute certain looks and sounds of another to emotional feelings. When we hear someone sound sad, it makes us feel sad. When we hear someone sound excited and happy, it makes us feel excited and happy. Empathy has an evolutionary benefit that makes us more willing to care for one another and form communities and to avoid harming our own species. The mechanism for empathy works with our senses and can apply itself to anything that can trigger it. A good example is our empathy for animals. Evolutionary speaking, empathy for animals doesn't really benefit us, but we can't help but attribute human-like characteristics to animals. This causes us to empathize with something non-human.\n\nThe same can apply to music. The mechanisms in our brain are incredibly complex, and it just so happens that some types of music triggers our thought process for detecting emotion in various ways. Our senses pick up the sound, the type of sound triggers our emotional mechanisms in our mind, and our mechanism for empathy makes us feel that same kind of emotion that our brain associates with that sound.\n\nMusic also generates emotional response due to the enjoyment of the music itself. The mathematical ordering of music is like candy to our thought process, and this also triggers our emotional mechanisms which can enhance our emotions.",
"Whaphlez answer is a good and correct way of explaining the empathetic psycological nature of humans, but if you are looking for a more musically technical answer here it is:\n\nMusic has 2 broad modes. Many others too, but all of these countless modes can be broken down in to 2 large families. These modes are called \"Major\" and \"Minor\". If you are a composer or a songwriter you are DEFINITELY aware of the mode you are composing in. I'll explain:\n\nMajor modes are based on a 3rd of the musical scale that is 3 steps up from do, counting do (pronounced doe) itself.\nMinor modes are based on a 3rd that is 2 1/2 steps up from do. It is a HUGE difference that defines western music tonality itself. I can't go in to all the history and implications in this scope, but to simplify:\n\nMAJOR MODES have a tendency to sound lively, pastoral, serene, and happy.\n\nMINOR MODES have a tendency to sound reflective, forlorn, melancholy, and sad.\n\nThis is an over-simplification and a skilled composer will make you feel however they want with whatever mode. But it really does come down to musical convention, which is both history, taste, and psychology."
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How does our brain differentiate between a sad song and a happy one?
| [
0.08221675455570221,
0.0029022227972745895,
-0.040473464876413345,
0.026739830151200294,
0.017541559413075447,
0.04738079383969307,
0.02939114160835743,
-0.03058132529258728,
0.11050188541412354,
-0.06746380776166916,
-0.009590612724423409,
0.021394191309809685,
0.03896017745137215,
-0.038... | ||
2667pl | How did people before the invention of toothpaste keep proper oral hygiene, if at all? | I'm wondering how people could stand each others breaths... | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cho18pj",
"cho1cns",
"cho74jh"
],
"text": [
"Toothbrushing tools date back to 3500-3000 BC when the Babylonians and the Egyptians made a brush by fraying the end of a twig. Tombs of the ancient Egyptians have been found containing toothsticks alongside their owners. Around 1600BC, the Chinese developed \"chewing sticks\" which were made from aromatic tree twigs to freshen breath.\n\nThe Chinese are believed to have invented the first natural bristle toothbrush made from the bristles from pigs' necks in the 15th century, with the bristles attached to a bone or bamboo handle. When it was brought from China to Europe, this design was adapted and often used softer horsehairs which many Europeans preferred. Other designs in Europe used feathers.\n\nThe first toothbrush of a more modern design was made by William Addis in England around 1780 – the handle was carved from cattle bone and the brush portion was still made from swine bristles. In 1844, the first 3-row bristle brush was designed. \n\nEgyptians are believed to have started using a paste to clean their teeth around 5000BC, before toothbrushes were invented. Ancient Greeks and Romans are known to have used toothpastes, and people in China and India first used toothpaste around 500BC.\n\nAncient toothpastes were used to treat some of the same concerns that we have today – keeping teeth and gums clean, whitening teeth and freshening breath. The ingredients of ancient toothpastes were however very different and varied. Ingredients used included a powder of ox hooves' ashes and burnt eggshells, that was combined with pumice. The Greeks and Romans favored more abrasiveness and their toothpaste ingredients included crushed bones and oyster shells. The Romans added more flavoring to help with bad breath, as well as powdered charcoal and bark. The Chinese used a wide variety of substances in toothpastes over time that have included ginseng, herbal mints and salt.",
"Many people used the split end of a twig as a toothbrush. Still used in many parts of world as seen in this video.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nApart from this, may other powders made from ox hooves, burnt egg shells, husk of rice etc were used.\n\n_URL_1_",
"Twigs. Mainly Neem for its medicinal qualities. Sometimes cloves as well."
],
"score": [
27,
5,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://youtube.com/watch?v=Gele2qAGkSU",
"http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/12/AR2009041202655.html"
]
} | train_eli5 | How did people before the invention of toothpaste keep proper oral hygiene, if at all?
I'm wondering how people could stand each others breaths... | [
-0.04462536796927452,
-0.0060659851878881454,
-0.007298699114471674,
-0.0028816387057304382,
-0.06671460717916489,
-0.030465276911854744,
-0.012175582349300385,
0.03683072701096535,
-0.04897628352046013,
0.03344348818063736,
0.02958860620856285,
0.01702050492167473,
-0.027401447296142578,
... | |
5lfbkc | Why are some hospital liquid medications that come in pouches brighly colored (neon colors)? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dbvbjip",
"dbvqe2v",
"dbv8bcq"
],
"text": [
"Depends on the drug; I work at a children's hospital and many drugs do not come in a liquid form but kiddos can't swallow pills. We have very specific recipes that we use to compound the drug into a liquid or emulsion. Dipyridamole comes as a white tablet but when you crush it using a mortar and pestle the inside is bright neon yellow. When you add the the liquids to it (usually a sweet liquid for a bit of a better flavor and light pink or white in color) it stays that same neon color. Oral meds are the color that the powder of the medication is usually.",
"It depends on the drug. Some will be due to the ingredients being that colour, some will be due to an 'indicator' (like litmus paper) effect where a pH adjustment is made to the drug so that its pH won't cause pain when injected. Some are very light/temperature/time sensitive and the colour tells you it is still safe to use. Some are coloured to make it easier to tell they are mixing correctly (have been homogenised) or being administered correctly. Some will be colour coded to make it harder to use the wrong one or mix a compound drug incorrectly. And some just because people like nice colours.",
"They will be light sensitive and most likely very, very expensive with a range of handling precautions"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why are some hospital liquid medications that come in pouches brighly colored (neon colors)?
[deleted] | [
-0.005197094287723303,
0.004578847903758287,
-0.06679356843233109,
-0.03019849769771099,
0.001483043422922492,
-0.04441141337156296,
0.07994978129863739,
0.06823781132698059,
0.09530077874660492,
-0.05426330119371414,
-0.010720319114625454,
0.06281798332929611,
0.02464112639427185,
0.06728... | |
3aakov | why is it ok to dig up human remains buried long ago, but not ok/acceptable to dig up more recent generations human remains? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"csasgub",
"csasf1w"
],
"text": [
"Because most people would be concerned if their mother was dug up and moved without very good reason, but wouldn't even know where their great-great-great-great grandmother was buried - or even who she was.",
"It's perfectly fine to dig up recently buried humans. It happens all the time.\n\nWe dig up recent remains to move them to better places. We might do it if the courts ordered a forensic examination. We might do it to return the body to it's homeland. \n\nThe point being, digging up remains is okay as long as the reasons behind it are ethical. Archaeological reasons generally only apply to remains buried long ago, and they're probably the most common. But even then, many people see even archaeological reasons as not sufficient when exhuming native/aboriginal remains.\n\nThe time frame isn't what's determines if it's ethical, it's the intent."
],
"score": [
8,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | why is it ok to dig up human remains buried long ago, but not ok/acceptable to dig up more recent generations human remains?
| [
-0.0432065986096859,
0.06938950717449188,
0.05565483868122101,
-0.04828936606645584,
0.029692262411117554,
-0.019721217453479767,
-0.10639948397874832,
-0.020460721105337143,
-0.016310399398207664,
0.09884956479072571,
0.022556068375706673,
0.04711977764964104,
-0.050426531583070755,
0.053... | ||
63t0tj | photographic memory. | How does it work and is it something you are born with or can you acquire the ability over time? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dfwrm4p",
"dfwy09k"
],
"text": [
"From what I understand; it's a fallacy.\n\nYou can have an exceptional memory, but the proof of a truly photographic memory is proving elusive.",
"The way I remember things is to recall the picture in my mind. \n\nI can write down a phone number, look at it for a few seconds, and then discard the paper and then weeks or months later recall the number without ever having dialed it.\n\nI do art for a living. When I was a kid I could draw cars, houses etc with some degree of accuracy from memory. My teachers got me excited when I did it too."
],
"score": [
5,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | photographic memory.
How does it work and is it something you are born with or can you acquire the ability over time? | [
0.012697519734501839,
0.017475957050919533,
-0.03078220970928669,
0.06302110105752945,
0.026217957958579063,
0.056077536195516586,
0.06475228816270828,
0.03529713675379753,
-0.00040466917562298477,
0.01373058371245861,
0.02128961682319641,
0.028080718591809273,
0.022677697241306305,
0.0221... | |
3puhhs | How does Google's Magic Leap, visual technology work? | _URL_0_ - Video of Magic Leap | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cw9jn1q"
],
"text": [
"It tracks things in the picture to create a frame of reference and then track them.\n\nIt then renders an image over the display."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw0-JRa9n94"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How does Google's Magic Leap, visual technology work?
_URL_0_ - Video of Magic Leap | [
-0.021259324625134468,
-0.03227701783180237,
0.06214527040719986,
-0.09799454361200333,
-0.030404431745409966,
-0.012428472749888897,
0.0033963676542043686,
-0.008130673319101334,
-0.011335339397192001,
-0.01978312060236931,
-0.0035623859148472548,
0.07893683761358261,
0.012615001760423183,
... | |
4nopc8 | What does it mean when divers suffer from "the bends"? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d45ony5"
],
"text": [
"The bends is an informal name for decompression sickness, which can happens if divers ascend too fast after spending time at depth. As divers descend, the pressure increases, and so does the pressure of gasses in the diver's lungs, which means the diver's blood can hold more dissolved gas. When the diver ascends, the pressure goes down, and blood can no longer hold as much dissolved gas. If the diver ascends at a safe speed, the excess nitrogen can slowly and safely be removed by the lungs, but if the diver ascends too rapidly, large bubbles form that the lungs can't remove.\nIt's frequently called \"the bends\" because the nitrogen bubbles tend to accumulate in joints, causing joint pain that may be relieved by bending them."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What does it mean when divers suffer from "the bends"?
[deleted] | [
-0.01175759732723236,
0.029149573296308517,
0.0613396093249321,
0.03995287045836449,
-0.005313067231327295,
-0.01909882016479969,
0.030483415350317955,
0.11225420236587524,
-0.04458624869585037,
-0.009519966319203377,
-0.014943038113415241,
-0.015736231580376625,
-0.045947760343551636,
0.0... | |
5b7ef9 | Why does the box say to make the oven hotter if I want a softer crust on my frozen pizza? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d9mbm2m",
"d9mid6n"
],
"text": [
"This is why you should read cooking instructions carefully. For the soft crust, the instructions will tell you to place it on a cookie sheet, thus avoiding direct heat. Usually, they either tell you to use a hotter temperature or just an increased cooking duration, your brand choose the former.",
"To make it simple and quick.\n\n\nCooking it non-directly like on a pan or sheet will cause less heat to harden the crust, but will still cook the pizza thoroughly.\n\nCooking it directly will have the same affect but because it is directly it will cook thoroughly quicker."
],
"score": [
10,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why does the box say to make the oven hotter if I want a softer crust on my frozen pizza?
[deleted] | [
-0.060812950134277344,
0.023630362004041672,
-0.020037954673171043,
0.0751219242811203,
-0.04013014957308769,
-0.06584765017032623,
0.021462634205818176,
-0.010687942616641521,
0.04028061032295227,
-0.0701625719666481,
-0.025017166510224342,
-0.06980649381875992,
0.04075581207871437,
-0.06... | |
3gzeem | Why do we have a preference as to what side we sleep on? | I know most people do have a preferred side. Mine is on my left side (so my body and face is facing the right). Why do we have these preferences? Comfort? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cu3aps1"
],
"text": [
"We are not symmetric. The heart, stomach, and the other intestines get different working conditions. Liquids and gases will be on the respective other side (where the entrance or exit of that organ is or is not). Pumping from above or from below is different for the heart. Some organs might have to work uphill."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do we have a preference as to what side we sleep on?
I know most people do have a preferred side. Mine is on my left side (so my body and face is facing the right). Why do we have these preferences? Comfort? | [
0.055361516773700714,
-0.0010481716599315405,
0.01690543256700039,
0.10373147577047348,
0.027325723320245743,
0.027010831981897354,
0.027753431349992752,
-0.014983728528022766,
0.08093209564685822,
0.05821917951107025,
-0.05285033956170082,
0.02829321101307869,
0.04398982226848602,
-0.0413... | |
74dbe8 | anyone know how to calculate how much force a car exerts on a human body when hitting a running pedestrian? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dnxll89",
"dnxg7ev",
"dnxf11n"
],
"text": [
"Short answer, it is very difficult - there are lots and lots of variables at play, that you would have to model mathematically. This is one of the reasons that they still use crash test dummies and physical tests in the automotive industry.\n\nFor collisions in general, the procedure usually relies in \"conservation of momentum.\" The assumption is that the total momentum (mv)1 + (mv)2 = m1m2*v1v2. For the case of a car hitting someone, this assumption does not hold though, as energy is expended in the permanent deformations that take place in both the car and pedestrian.\n\nIf you made a whole bunch of simplifying assumptions (such as assuming the pedestrian was a rigid body, assuming an \"elastic collision,\" you might:\n\n1. Calculate the change in velocity of the pedestrian though a momentum equation \n2. Calculate the average acceleration the pedestrian would endure during the collision (this probably required an assumption of the duration of the collision, unless you are going to perform a very complicated dynamic finite element analysis).\n3. Calculate the average force imparted to the pedestrian from F= ma\n\nNote that none of those assumptions are great though",
"Yes. we need more info, though.\n\nWe need speed of pedestrian, Speed of car. Mass of pedestrian, Mass of car. Assuming its a horizontal collision perpendicular to gravity.",
"The force formula is f=ma (force set equal to mass times acceleration) so I'd assume it's something not too different than that, but I've never taken a physics class so I'll leave the definite to the physics people on reddit."
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | anyone know how to calculate how much force a car exerts on a human body when hitting a running pedestrian?
| [
0.06040041893720627,
0.05829256772994995,
-0.04650415852665901,
0.02289142645895481,
-0.017841408029198647,
0.012330234982073307,
-0.06145838648080826,
0.07744545489549637,
-0.05676126107573509,
0.03408323600888252,
0.08415421098470688,
-0.06410996615886688,
0.00560896098613739,
0.06483864... | ||
42dkpa | Why do spaces turn into %20 when typing websites into the browser address bar? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cz9hplz",
"cz9hpuy",
"cz9hp9j"
],
"text": [
"URLs are not allowed to contain spaces. Trust me - it makes life a million times easier for programmers.\n\nIf you want to access a resource that has spaces in it's proper name (like a file named \"why did you use spaces.doc\") you need to use an *escape sequence* to put it in there. The standard used for escaping characters in URLs is to start with a % character and then follow up with that character's [ASCII](_URL_0_) value. In the case of a space, that value is \"20\". If you want a literal % character, you'd need to use two of them in a row - %% - so that the program doesn't get confused.",
"Some characters (particularly #, ?, & , and spaces) can have special meanings in URLs or aren't permitted for various technical reasons. Your browser converts these symbols to safe versions by taking the two-digit hexadecimal of the [ASCII character code](_URL_3_), and prepending that with the % symbol to indicate that it's a character code rather than the literal characters 2 and 0. This technique is called URL encoding or an escape sequence.\n\nThe webserver understands this particular convention, so when it sees % in a URL it converts the code back into the relevant character for processing.\n\nFor more information see [this wikipedia page](_URL_3_) or section 2.1 of the non-eli5 friendly [RFC 3986](_URL_3_) which is the standardisation document for URLs.",
"The space is not an allowed symbol in the format for URLs that is commonly recognized by browsers, servers, etc. URLs use the percentage sign as an *escape symbol*, indicating what follows is not to be parsed in the normal way; the numbers after the percent symbol specify what the character should be. This way the information (a space symbol is present) can be preserved without actually including it directly in the URL."
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII",
"https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986",
"http://www.ascii-code.com/",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percent-encoding"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why do spaces turn into %20 when typing websites into the browser address bar?
| [
-0.01959044300019741,
-0.05529982969164848,
0.036844607442617416,
0.03843199834227562,
-0.023285813629627228,
-0.04382047802209854,
-0.007376748137176037,
-0.009987630881369114,
0.08712387830018997,
-0.023765942081809044,
0.03271612152457237,
0.09153707325458527,
0.05014433339238167,
0.009... | ||
196zf8 | Why are models of our solar system always shown with the planets rotating the sun in a 2D plane? | I've never known whether this was actually how the planets rotated or if they actually rotate around the sun in different 3-directional planes. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c8lcnh9",
"c8lcbni",
"c8lekmg",
"c8lg0mg"
],
"text": [
"For the most part they do rotate in an almost 2D plane. I think Uranus's orbit is slightly skewed from the rest of the planets, but for the most part it's the most stable orientation.\n\nIt's kind of like how Saturn's rings are all settled in a single plane as they orbit around the planet, due to the gravity of the debris also having an effect on each other, pulling everything as close together as possible while still maintaining a stable orbit. Basically a similar thing happened around the sun in what is called an accretion disk. Eventually, clumps of the disk gathered together in more dense chunks, and the bigger the chunks, the heavier they got, the stronger their local gravity wells become, and the more debris they attracted, until these clumps all condensed into what are basically the planets, their moons, and the asteroid belt; all orbiting in roughly the same plane as they did before.",
"they basically rotate in the same plane. It's not completely perfect of course but at scale it's accurate.",
"It's because they do.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nWhich I think (and wikipedia seems to agree) is due to the likely method of formation of the sun and planets.\n\nWhich was a big bunch of dust which scrunched together because gravity pulled it together.\n\nAnd like water going down a plughole (or an ice skater pulling in their arms), as you move stuff inwards, it spins faster if it was spinning even a little bit to start with.\n\nSo you end up with a bunch of dust getting closer and closer together. The stuff in the middle gets close enough together to turn into a sun, bits outside it clump together into planets.\n\nBut the whole cloud had pretty much the same sort of spin, the remains of what the dust cloud was doing as it crunched up.",
"Short answer: an accurate model at any scale small enough to be mass-produced would appear to human senses to have them pretty much all orbiting in a 2D plane. \n\nThey aren't, actually, but the difference is so tiny you'd need a HUGE scale model to make the difference apparent, and at that point it wouldn't be visible in any event because the orbits would be so far from one another."
],
"score": [
28,
10,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecliptic#Plane_of_the_Solar_System"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why are models of our solar system always shown with the planets rotating the sun in a 2D plane?
I've never known whether this was actually how the planets rotated or if they actually rotate around the sun in different 3-directional planes. | [
0.032849665731191635,
-0.0019758830312639475,
0.011176218278706074,
-0.024199189618229866,
0.0032771655824035406,
-0.003243962535634637,
-0.08126513659954071,
-0.01052040234208107,
0.17734597623348236,
0.06572431325912476,
0.013461831025779247,
0.0885571613907814,
0.0013052911963313818,
-0... | |
meo39 | What companies like Goldman Sachs do? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c30aqbf"
],
"text": [
"They are brokerage houses, they enable consumers to buy and sell stocks, mutual funds, bonds, etc.\n\nGoldman in particular caters almost exclusively to high end customers, a few million and up."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What companies like Goldman Sachs do?
| [
-0.00946679338812828,
-0.09708977490663528,
-0.036121029406785965,
0.03357110172510147,
-0.05717983469367027,
-0.004514616448432207,
0.05408541485667229,
-0.01220158115029335,
0.03448481112718582,
-0.06952160596847534,
-0.01354930829256773,
0.08455370366573334,
-0.07184027880430222,
0.0028... | ||
8f7xng | What happens in your body when you instantly sober up after witnessing something traumatic if all the alcohol is still there? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dy1b5te"
],
"text": [
"It’s all about the adrenaline. You’re not actually sober but adrenaline causes you to be more alert and have extra energy giving you the sense of being sober."
],
"score": [
7
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What happens in your body when you instantly sober up after witnessing something traumatic if all the alcohol is still there?
[removed] | [
0.0339471809566021,
-0.004234439693391323,
0.01742934249341488,
0.07815650850534439,
0.10926160216331482,
0.02458743192255497,
0.028894128277897835,
-0.019326023757457733,
0.10640471428632736,
-0.09047657251358032,
0.05622624233365059,
-0.007723638787865639,
-0.08080673217773438,
0.0681252... | |
3tinvh | How are gamers able to find glitches to do speed runs? | I'm not sure if i should put this up in /r gaming but it seems appropriate here. I've recently started watching people doing speed runs of tons of games so my question is, how are gamers able to find all these exploits that allows them to finish a game in minutes what took me weeks to complete? It almost seems like random things to do so they can cut out hours at a time. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cx6h3jr"
],
"text": [
"brute force. Tons of people playing the same game for hundreds of hours, things will be found. A lot of the ways, they can tell how the physics in a game work and can think to themselves \"oh, how would this bit of physics work here\", and then they break the game through that. Other times, its pure luck"
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How are gamers able to find glitches to do speed runs?
I'm not sure if i should put this up in /r gaming but it seems appropriate here. I've recently started watching people doing speed runs of tons of games so my question is, how are gamers able to find all these exploits that allows them to finish a game in minutes what took me weeks to complete? It almost seems like random things to do so they can cut out hours at a time. | [
0.017414486035704613,
0.01824142411351204,
0.0012633712030947208,
-0.03233442083001137,
0.028964467346668243,
-0.044527553021907806,
0.00070787756703794,
-0.04774227365851402,
0.00008985681779449806,
0.01034676842391491,
-0.03267110511660576,
0.023746432736516,
-0.06290790438652039,
-0.087... | |
ubawk | An unbiased summary of the Patriot Act | I've heard a lot of stuff about this lately and I'm not too clear on exactly what it is. I also know there are very strong opinions on either side so I'd prefer a nice, just-the-facts account of the bill. Thanks!
Edit: Also, it would be great if you could tell me why exactly it is so controversial. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c4tybmn"
],
"text": [
"The two big things it does is increased information sharing and tweaks how warrants are used and issued.\n\nThe first one most would argue is necessary and is often overlooked. The second one is more controversial and gets the most headlines. \n\nOne change is that warrants can now be more broad. Instead of getting a warrant to tap a particular phone number, you only need a warrant to tap the phone of person x. If he changes phones regularly you no longer need to get a new warrant when he does, making it much more difficult to use \"burner phones\" to avoid the police. \n\nIt also gives more leniency about what can not be included at trial. If there is information that some criminal activity is happening at place x, if the police go to investigate they don't need to wait for the warrant first. This does not mean they don't need a warrant, it simply means that if the police act and the judge rules they acted on information that would have lead to a warrant, it no longer matters if the warrant was issued an hour before the raid or an hour after. They have three days to get the warrant and the warrant must meet the same standards as before or everything they gathered will be considered \"warrantless\" and will be excluded at trial, as will any information that comes from it. It is very risky and is used extremely rarely to avoid the chance of evidence being thrown out at trial.\n\nThis parts a bit convoluted so I'll use an example. To get a warrant you must have evidence first. That evidence is then used to convince a judge that \"reasonable suspicion exists\" and the judge either says yes that's good enough evidence or no, the evidence isn't good enough for a warrant. If a search is executed without evidence than everything learned as a result is not allowed at trial. What this rule change does is say that if the search was executed before the warrant, but a judge rules the prior evidence was good enough for a warrant, then what's learned is still usable at trial. It's a big risk because if the judge disagrees after the fact then everything learned from that search must be ignored.\n\nAnother kind of warrant is a \"sneak and peek\" warrant. This must still be approved ahead of time, but the police are not under any obligation to inform the person they are investigating. This way the search doesn't necessarily tip the owner off that they are being investigated, but like any warrant there must be evidence gathered before the search may start.\n\nThe changes to warrants is what troubles most people about the law, but some trouble comes from other sources. \n\nFirst the name is just intimidating in a very George Orwell way.\n\nSecond, most actions that have been taken post-9/11 have all been lumped unfairly together as part of the Patriot Act. The program of NSA surveillance was not authorized by the Patriot Act. Guantanamo Bay and the problems of rights for detainees is not part of the Patriot Act. Yet both these things and more have often been lumped together as \"the patriot act.\"\n\nThird, people are annoyed at how it was passed. It was passed just over a month after 9/11 and because of both that and its name it was difficult for reasonable discussion of repealing it without being accused of being \"soft on terror\". This is actually a rather valid point, but is separate from the contents of the bill itself.\n\nThis is by no means a full discussion but it is the simplest I can think to do it."
],
"score": [
13
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | An unbiased summary of the Patriot Act
I've heard a lot of stuff about this lately and I'm not too clear on exactly what it is. I also know there are very strong opinions on either side so I'd prefer a nice, just-the-facts account of the bill. Thanks! Edit: Also, it would be great if you could tell me why exactly it is so controversial. | [
-0.03858979418873787,
-0.019360559061169624,
-0.017801979556679726,
-0.0018615032313391566,
0.04293252155184746,
0.08641394227743149,
0.015166361816227436,
-0.027170667424798012,
-0.04675605520606041,
0.003488662652671337,
0.0014375579776242375,
0.16853977739810944,
0.021522987633943558,
-... | |
6r7npu | What makes a person's voice sound so weak and "shaky" when they're old? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dl2z6pl"
],
"text": [
"As you grow older the organs in your body become less efficient and it compromises their performance. The same holds true for your vocal chords. You can see this in singers as they get older. Their voices mature and start deteriorating past a certain point. Cigarettes and alcohol also speed up this decline (Brian Wilson comes to mind).\n\n_URL_0_\n\nEdit- By god, why can't I spell"
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://youtube.com/watch?v=meJCktX7YIc"
]
} | train_eli5 | What makes a person's voice sound so weak and "shaky" when they're old?
| [
0.04259161651134491,
-0.058758653700351715,
-0.010623734444379807,
0.014470428228378296,
-0.08551309257745743,
0.008208483457565308,
0.0112347062677145,
0.023309536278247833,
-0.020056450739502907,
-0.08565032482147217,
-0.029090287163853645,
-0.0313640721142292,
-0.05146067216992378,
-0.0... | ||
75sik5 | How do radio stations get traffic reports? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"do8l43d"
],
"text": [
"* Call in tips\n\n* Live Cameras on some roads\n\n* Communication with the police / transportation authority for accidents, incidents and construction.\n\n* Google maps\n\n* Airplanes and helicopters\n\nThese are the main ones and aside from google most have been in use for decades."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How do radio stations get traffic reports?
[removed] | [
0.044624485075473785,
-0.019763818010687828,
-0.08872021734714508,
0.008892171084880829,
0.037475574761629105,
0.04828689247369766,
0.0635736808180809,
-0.031451527029275894,
-0.002504016039893031,
-0.04051691293716431,
-0.05798308551311493,
0.03025088645517826,
0.029760070145130157,
0.012... | |
2ci0jr | Why are the effects and graphics in animations (Avengers, Matrix, Tangled etc) are expensive? Is it the software, effort, materials or talent fees of the graphic artists? | Why are the effects and graphics in animations (Avengers, Matrix, Tangled etc) are expensive? Is it the software, effort, materials or talent fees of the graphic artists? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cjfur90",
"cjfnjnz",
"cjfpmfu",
"cjfunko",
"cjfqxum",
"cjfrttw",
"cjfrq9p",
"cjfw0x4",
"cjg56wh",
"cjgdj2w",
"cjfrz18",
"cjfssze",
"cjfz2c7",
"cjfqmqn",
"cjg09h2",
"cjfsqse",
"cjfstl0",
"cjg12wg",
"cjg0gsn",
"cjfyyqg",
"cjg1s7s",
"cjg0nhp",
"cjfthrp",
"cjg29h6",
"cjftqko",
"cjfxmwx",
"cjfzcfb",
"cjfsryf",
"cjgcecm",
"cjfs3x2",
"cjfwuik",
"cjfu1kv",
"cjfuipb",
"cjgaptp",
"cjgbsec",
"cjfzj36",
"cjga11f",
"cjfua3v",
"cjfvxcj",
"cjftnie",
"cjfvzgh",
"cjfxktb",
"cjfyobw",
"cjfreax"
],
"text": [
"Former Digital FX Supervisor and 18-year veteran of the visual effects business here. Hopefully this doesn't get lost in the depths here...\n\nThe biggest expense in the visual effects business is people's time. ~80% of a budget for a VFX company goes towards paying salaries. Making movies full of things that don't exist is complicated. You need great concept designers, modelers, riggers, lookdev, animators, techanimators (for cloth/fur/deform cleanup), lighters, FX artists, compositors, pipeline TD's, coordinators, producers, supervisory and lead staff for each discipline, Systems & IT, staff supporting overnight renders, not to mention the company management, bidding, and executives, as well as folks overseeing any studio-wide training, and the folks who keep the building maintained. Most large VFX companies also have their own software staff, who build many of the tools the artists use. Great programmers are expensive! People people people.\n\nHardware and software costs are comparatively teeny tiny. It used to be that an artist's workstation could cost $40k (Loaded SGI Octane, back in the day) -- these days, a good workstation can be anywhere between $1500-$4000, depending on which discipline is doing the work. Measured against the cost of the artist, that ain't much.\n\nSoftware expense figures a bit more than hardware, but it still pales in comparison to the cost of the people doing the work.\n\nTell you what though, one of the most expensive aspects of making good VFX is clients not knowing what the hell they want, before the work starts. When a director changes his/her mind, mid-production, and a character has to be redesigned, it's awesomely expensive, because you've got a whole crew of people who now have to re-do some giant chunk of work when the new ideas flow downstream. OF ALL THE THINGS I'VE SEEN THAT MAKE MOVIES COST A LOT TO DEVELOP, THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS POOR PLANNING & COMMUNICATION.\n\nEDIT: Thanks for the gold :) Didn't foresee this turning into my top comment!",
"It's all of those things, and more. Professional rendering software is expensive, and they need licences for everyone working on the project. There will be a team of graphic artists working on it. For the really exceptional places like Pixar and Disney, they are well ~~payed~~paid. It takes time to create, animate, render, and edit all of your footage, and make sure it fits with the voice acting, etc. And all the work needs to be done on really nice, expensive computers to run the graphics software.\n\n**Edit**: Speling airor",
"Well, with Tangled, you've got an entire studio of around 1,000 people working on the film, where it starts off as just a script from one guy that moves on to a storyboarding team, and then a team that does concept art, and then pre-viz people who will create blocky sets and blocky characters and move the blocky stuff to show the general idea for the animation. And then a group of 3D modelers and artists get to work on the environment and characters for months, I mean MONTHS. And then that's sent down the pipeline to the technical art team that will handle the rigging for the characters and objects seen in the film while the animators get to on doing more blocky animation preparing to visualize while the characters complex rigs are set up and finished. And then the animators finally get to work on the characters, animating only a few seconds a day per animator because of how careful they are and the attention to detail. There might be somewhere between 50 and 100 animators at Disney, I really have no idea. When all the animation is finished, reviewed, and approved, it's sent to another technical art team that handles the special effects, lighting, rendering. The lighting people were already doing the lighting from the blocky pre-viz and trying to make it look as good as possible, so they should be good to go. The special effects is for stuff like particles in the air, foot prints in dirt and what not, a bunch of stuff really. And then that's all rendered on a render farm instead of trying to render the film frame by frame, which would take quite a while with all the high res polygons, high end lighting, higher resolution. Basically, with renders, you're only rendering one shot at a time. Of course, that's how I did it at school and at home. So with a render farm, you're able to render multiple shots that can take up to 24 hours just to render, depending on the complexity of the shot. This is especially true for films like Avengers or Transformers that have explosions and whatnot, a shot with an explosion can take forever to render if you're trying to get a super high quality smoke that doesn't look like CG, but looks good.\n\nAnyway, after all the rendering is done, you have the compositors and editors put it all together in a video editing program like premiere pro or the one that mac users use or avid or something. The compositors work with layers of raw images and do a bunch of crazy stuff and in most places, send it off to the editors when they're finished. Of course, you also have the sound foliage team that makes sound for the film, so they were doing that at some point and you're able to mix that in and time it with the video. And then you've got voice acting which is done before the animation so it can be lip synced. And then there's music, which varies as to when it's done, but the editors mix that into the film.\n\nI think I covered most of how animation studios like Disney work. It's a huge pipeline process. So when a script is being written and re-written and storyboarded and re-storyboarded, that team of animators within the studio are likely working on the previous film and it's being prepped for finishing touches, waiting to be rendered. Like I said, it's a massive pipeline process of 4 or 5 years, and these employees at the studio are being paid like anywhere between $60k and even $100k for senior artists. Hell, even the cafeteria workers at and cleaners at Disney are part of the budget. Then you've also got the marketing team. An HR team to recruit new employees. There's more than just artists at a studio, I can't think of anymore off the top of my head, but they're all part of the budget.\n\nEdit: I forgot the compositors!\n\nEdit 2: [Thanks for the gold stranger.](_URL_0_)",
"I used to work at Rhythm & Hues which won an Oscar for Life of Pi. Occasionally our studio owner would run numbers and show everyone in the company to costs and cash flows of the company. In almost every case the largest cost was people. \n\n**Why?**\n\n * It takes a lot of specialized artists to make a CG character. A single CG character has a concept artist, modeler, rigger, animator, shader/texture artist, lighters and compositors (though they work in scenes and aren't character specific,) a voice artist if they're have any voice, a sound editor and editor (both working in scenes and not per character) and finally the director and writer who invented the character in the first place!\n\n * There is a chain of command in filmmaking. Often these people represent the money (Executive Producers) and the creative (Directors.) Then there are the visual effects artist's own Leads, Supervisors and Directors who approve your work before showing it to the Director. Often there are bottlenecks in communication and people waiting to hear back if their work has been approved. \n\n * Towards the end there is bottleneck of work too. Maybe the Director didn't approve things in time, maybe the artists all got sick from a company party (happened on Big Hero 6,) maybe the render farm is choked with all the work. What ever reason, it almost always happens that there are a million things to get right at the end that forces a lot of people into overtime and/or renting a lot of hardware to make up for it. \n\nIn every case people are there, working long hours, doing all the work. Yes, the computer takes a big brunt of it too: processing I between images, calculating lights and shaders to make it look pretty, and yes those costs a lot of money; ultimately it's people every step of the way clicking to do stuff and then waiting. Maybe they're waiting for approvals, maybe they're waiting for the computer to process, maybe they're waiting to see if th whole production got canned! There's a lot of unfortunate waiting and that all costs the studio and the production company too. \n\nYou would think a lot of people would optimize this right? The business doesn't allow it. Production companies, the people directing everything, do not own visual effects houses (studios) which produce all the effects, and studios (FOX, Paramount etc) don't own production companies nor VFX houses either. Thus, two groups are there to maximize their time because that's how most of the money is made, and one, the studio like FOX, is trying to cut down costs as much as possible. \n\nIt all leads to a lot of friction :/\n\nI run an animation studio now and had made this short video to show what it takes to make animation. Perhaps it will help you to see the process :D \n\n_URL_2_\n\nI also helped film the documentary Life After Pi which documents the fall of our wonderful house, Rhythm & Hues, as it went bankrupt while winning an Oscar:\n\n_URL_2_\n\nHope this all helps :D\n\nEdit: autocorrected words and grammar",
"Actually a lot of times the studios are underpaid. The studio that did the fx for Life of Pi won an oscar right after declaring bankruptcy. Here's a documentary about it.\n\n_URL_3_",
"3D animator here. For even the most simple scenes, it takes hours and hours of work. If you ever look at the credits, look at just how many people are in the CGI section. There are animators, the lighting team, several on post production, material specialists, 3D camera workers, people to integrate the CGI, the motion tracking team, and so on. And there are dozens and dozens of specialists in each field. Then, some companies develop their own software. This costs an extraordinary amount. A lot of CGI also requires special work from people who are not even in the CGI field, such as having the actors record their acting in a motion tracking setup.\n\nThen, at some point, almost all of these people had to go through a training course about the software that they would use because there are dozens of pieces of software and the company probably uses several. \n\nThere is also the fact that it requires an extremely large amount of work to make something extremely simple. This is why there are hundreds or more people working on the CGI in a movie. I can post some of my hobby work. [This](_URL_6_) probably took a dozen hours to make. And [here](_URL_4_) are a few things that look really simple, but really took hours. And finally, a collaboration with a friend, [a boat](_URL_5_) that took several days. He did the modelling and some texturing, and I did lighting, post-production, and detail work.\n\nBringing me to the final expense, rendering. Rendering is stupidly expensive. You could take a high end gaming PC for a few thousand dollars and it would take probably dozens of years to render a movie with the current level of PCs and CGI software. My computer can probably render about one frame of a movie like Tangled in about 24 hours. The company then has to buy an extremely powerful computer cluster to render on, or they rent it. Both options cost an extreme amount of money. The problem with having your own computer system is that you have to upgrade it rapidly or replace it every few years.\n\nTL;DR, lots of people work on it, they all work really slow, they have to be trained, the software is expensive, and the hardware is expensive.",
"Ask anyone in the VFX industry, the money's not going to them.",
"As someone who does this kind of thing for a living, it is a combination of all these things, but the artists are what costs the most. If you have a team of say 100 artists, and you're paying them say $50,000 a year. Then you have their computers that they have to work on which is 100 computers, and we'll ball park it at a medium end custom box so say $2000. Now most VFX processes can't be done with just a single software. Often you'll have something like Z-Brush for modeling, Maya for animation, Nuke for composting. We'll split our team of 100 and say that there are 20 modelers, 40 animators, and 40 compositors Z-Brush [single user license is $800](_URL_9_) , but modelers often have to use Maya as well. So for modeling and animation we're looking at [$1470 per lisence](_URL_8_), and finally [Nuke runs about 4200](_URL_7_). That's just the software costs to create the content. You also have to purchase rendering machines, and rendering software. The studio I work for is using Arnold which is 1300 per machine. Rendering machines need more ram and processing power, as well as better video cards so we'll put their price at $2500. And we'll say we've got 50 machines for rendering. So for a 1 year production its costing you 5 million in artist salaries, 16,000 for z brush, 118,000 for 80 maya licenses, and 168,000 for Nuke licenses. 325,000 for computers/equipment. This brings your total annual operating cost to $5.63 million for 100 people. Now in this figure of 5.63 million I have left out all of the studio overhead, all non-artist production employees who keep track of schedules, budgets, artist assignments, etc, as well as leaving out a lot of other departments that may require additional software, or different computer configurations. \n\nBasically most commenters are hitting one element of it or another. Time is money for sure, my studio staffs about 300 employees, and to extend a project 1 week costs us in the ballpark of 10 million, I'm not privy to what all of our costs include but that should give you some idea. It's also worth saying that this answer is trying to stay within the ELI5 paradigm. I've really simplified everything and tried to use easy to work with numbers, this is by no means a comprehensive description of what it takes to produce these kinds of films.\n\nTL;DR - Based on my educated guess your budget breakdown goes like this more largest slice to smallest: Payroll, Overhead, Software, Hardware",
"Husband of an animator here-- rule of thumb is one week of work for one second of feature worthy animation. It takes a long time to do it right.",
"Former VFX artist and supervisor. Worked on about 15 feature films and many TV commercials (one campaign won the Gold Clio).\n\nContrary to belief, VFX costs are not that expensive relative to many other factors. When you budget out a film's production costs - we're talking mainstream blockbuster big budget, not indie stuff - the cost of the VFX is way way below things like talent (the actors), the director, producers, live action sets. In fact, most VFX studios in the US have shut down or are in a chronic state of insolvency because they don't make enough money. \n\nA VFX studio has to win a bid to get to work on a movie. It's like a house remodeling project - you get multiple bids from contractors, you pick the winner based on past project performance, reputation, and price. The bidding is very competitive. In fact, even good VFX houses will underbid and make a loss just to hopefully get more work in the future and just to keep cash flow positive (keep sinking but slower).\n\nThe money pays for artist salaries. The production pipeline works like this:\n\nYou have a movie.\nA movie is comprised of sequences.\nSequences a made up of shots.\nshots are made up of frames. \n\nYou bid $X for 10, 30, 100, 400, whatever amount of shots are asked of you. You have to bid considering what the work entails:\nIs it a set extension on a locked off shot (put up a matte painting and some smoke in comp?) or is it two armies of CG characters rushing at each other and it needs to integrate to a live action plate shot on a flying rig? \nYou plan out who needs to work on the shots: designers, modelers, rigging, texture, character fx, animators, lighting, compositing, match-move, fx (physics sims), layout, animatics. Then, throw in production staff for each of these depts - production assistants, production supervisors, associate producers, producers.\nFigure out the overhead cost - IT dept, management, rent, equipment. \n\nThe average salaries range from $35K for some depts (matchmove, plate cleanup...), 70K-100K (animation, lighting)... these figures depend on what studio, what location. \n\nA crew of 75 and up is considered large for a vfx studio. \nMost VFX studios are not unionized. Most make you work very hard and for very long hours during \"crunch time\" (it's almost always crunch time) and many of the overtime you perform will not be paid. \nThe way they do it is by having at least 2 sets of \"dailies\" (meetings in a theater where shots are reviewed and notes given for changes to be made for the next iteration until the shot is deemed good enough to be \"finaled\" - at which point work on that shot ceases and is signed off as part of the final reel). Typically, there are morning dailies at around 8am or 9am. There's another set of dailies at 4pm or 5pm. There, you should have the notes from the morning dailies addressed and shown - or in the case of complex shots, show the shots from the previous day's afternoon dailies. \nYou get your notes at 5:30pm. Quitting time is 6pm? No - you better make those changes so you can show the shot again in morning dailies the next day so you stay at your desk, make changes, do test renders for quality control, then submit the shot to the render farm. By now it's 9pm. Maybe 10pm. \nYou can't just not have the shot not get worked on between one daily to the next if there are notes. At least that was my experience.\n\n\nThe only way the studio made profit was by receiving a \"911 call\". That's when a studio needs shots done fast. Somebody fucked up somewhere - another vfx studio lagged and failed to meet production schedule, or producers got high, or who knows. It happens often enough. You charge about 100% markup on those and make everyone work extra hard but the artists don't make extra.\n\nIt's an unstable job and often requires you to move around a lot - from LA, to New Zealand, to Canada... it's hard if you have a family. The money is not that great for the hours you put in. \n\nI burned out and left so I could have a relationship with my family and be actively involved in raising my kids. I enjoyed the work and it was very challenging. In the beginning seeing your name in the credits (we are in the smallest font at the very end, 4 to 5 names across each row) is very edifying. Later, you don't care.",
"I would point out in all of this that sometimes in VFX it's not always the initial work that's so expensive but the revisions.\n\nIf the director / producer / client is indecisive, or doesn't know what he wants, or gets caught up in little side details, it can burn through a lot of money: oh, can we do this, can we try that, can that car in the background be red instead of blue. They treat CGI work as if it's a free playground, especially if they're not the ones signing the final check.\n\nAn economically-minded filmmaker can keep the costs down on visual effects in a few ways:\n\n- Recognizing that sometimes it's cheaper to do something \"for real\", or at least partially real, than entirely in post.\n\n- Coming in with a clear idea of what he wants, how many shots he will need, what we do and don't need to see.\n\n- Being able to make decisions about the visual effects based on the animatics, on rough renders to judge the angle and motion — not demanding that a shot be made perfect before asking \"can we change the angle here, can this guy move differently\" or even deciding to cut the shot entirely.",
"Life of Pi is absolutely amazing in terms of special effect and rendering. Ang Lee spent a fortune in Taiwan by building a gigantic warehouse filled with water to created the boat scene with the tiger even Steven Spielberg said it was an impressive achievement. Too bad the movie didn't do well and the entire team was laid off, two of the graphic artist committed suicide because they didn't get paid and was already in debt.",
"I graduated with a major in Computer Animation. At school it took a group of 30-40 students about 2 years to make a 3-4 minute short.\n\nIt's really hard.",
"Here you go, OP. There's more reading in another post about this :)\n\n_URL_10_",
"Effects are expensive for a variety of reasons, but the simplest and clearest reason I can provide is labor costs. Watch any effects driven film and look at the sheer number of artists in the credits. It takes a lot of man hours to make a photo-realistic images. That being said, VFX artists aren't actually paid that well. The worst part is that Studios typically don't carry the real costs of the labor. That burden is left to the effects houses, who have to pay for labor out of pocket or risk loosing business. Effects artists actually aren't represented by any guild or union. There is no one protecting them. To make matters worse, runaway production is hurting US, and more specifically California, VFX artists as studios chase tax incentives outside the US.\n\nThe capability of VFX software and the incredibly talented artists out there have created a safety net for filmmakers like never before. There is a (sort-of) joking expression in film-making, \"we'll fix it in post\". For those who don't know, this means that filmmakers are relegating on-set production problems to post production artists and editors. Furthermore, in today's world, it's actually a totally valid line of reasoning. I've seen VFX artists add entirely new light sources to brighten scenes, composite new backgrounds, and add/remove weather within a day or two of work . This mentality is indicative of the changing landscape of cinema. Since anything and everything can be changed after the fact, directors, producers, and the studios have more opportunity to fix mistakes or change their vision. I would never go so far as to say that VFX are ruining cinema, what it is really doing is changing the film making process. Filmmakers who know exactly what they want can create beautiful, shocking, images and still come under budget. However, when an indecisive filmmaker constantly makes new demands of a VFX team they end up driving up costs and adding more man hours to the project. Another huge part of the problem is that studios will have a set date the film has to release, so they have to hire armies of artists to get large tent-pole pictures out on time. Compound that with a director who wants to make large changes in the last few weeks and you have a recipe for a rather costly disaster. The nature of VFX as a tool is changing and so studios, effects houses, effects artists, and directors will have to engage in a new dialogue over time to ensure artists are paid, while bringing costs down. \n\nLast year there was a documentary on the subject, called \"Life After Pi\". It's about, Rhythm & Hues Studios, the L.A. based Visual Effects company that won an Academy Award for its groundbreaking work on \"Life of Pi\" -- just two weeks after declaring bankruptcy. The filmmakers have made the documentary available for free on YouTube (_URL_11_). I highly recommend it.",
"Sure, you have to pay for the software, the materials and renting the machines, rooms, and all that, but you'd have to do that even if you're not creating advanced 3D effects. You're mainly paying for very experienced professionals who know exactly how to do what you want them to do, even if no one has ever done it before. They have to be smart enough to figure out how to do things that have never been done before, with equipment that wasn't necessarily designed for what they want to do. They often develop new technology (motion capture for Gollum in Lord of the Rings, Bullet Time for those rotating frozen motion scenes in the Matrix) to get the effect they want. People like that aren't very common and you have to make sure that they work for you regardless of what impossible thing you want them to do for you. You're also paying for the years of studying and experience that these people put into getting where they are. Working on a film is extremely demanding anyway, add to that the ridiculously advanced experience that these animators have, and you have a huge budget.\n\n\nI once downloaded Blender and had a play with it. Tried to create a cube and then tried to create a round hole in it. Took me hours. Didn't work. I spent days memorizing the various shortcuts and the names of the things that you can do with shapes. I didn't get it. I decided that people who can do anything realistic with this stuff are magicians and should be paid loads.",
"Guy that works at a major VFX studio here. The amount of effort and time spent on doing the VFX is absolutely ridiculous. We worked on a movie once which had a large furry creature running the through the jungle and it took many man-months of work just to trace out every single hair on the blurry creature, and another many man-months just to trace out every single leaf and plant in the jungle. After that was done, the compositing team could start on their work. And that was just a 4 second clip in the 2 hour movie.",
"While waiting for the Guardians of the Galaxy credits to end, there was a very, *very* large list of digital artists. At one point during the scroll, it was just a screen filled with an alphabetical list of names.\n\nThat's a lot of paychecks to give out.",
"Watch the end credits on a big movie. These days it's like a small city.",
"On \"The Day After Tomorrow\" one team of roughly 100 people worked for one year on something that was 5 minutes of screentime. You can imaging what the labor cost of that was..",
"They now pay professional modelers and animators shit.\n\nDo not get into the industry.",
"There's also a language overlap; 'expensive' (like when Ubisoft said they couldn't put girls in Assassin's Creed b/c it was 'too expensive') in the game development/3D artist community doesn't always have to do with money (even though it is that kind of expensive too). But, usually when we hear that term it has to do with the size of the game. Expensive is used to describe how much room is taken up by a particular asset/environment/aspect of the game, and there's a limited amount of room/download size the designers have to work with. This is extremely true for mobile games b/c think of the size of your phone HD, let's say 16GB, you wouldn't DL a game that took up 4GB, so they have to think about this and limit the size of their game accordingly and every extra aspect they put in adds to this asset list/size. So in the case of Ubisoft they were saying (but not describing well) that it would take up room (on top of time+energy+licenses=money) in the game's code to make female characters that move different, have different 3D rendered shapes, have different skills.. etc. (ps: this is coming from a female game designer, if that matters). \n\nIn the title you were specifically talking about films, and i'm not sure if you are referencing an article you read or conversation you heard, but it's the same language used across the 3D artists field so this might be what you/they were referring too as well. \n\nBut again, this is on top of the meaning of 'expensive' when talking about money, b/c to do all these things is that kind of expensive too.",
"Licenses, software, hardware, paychecks and probably the most important, the render farms.\n\nThese alone have HUGE costs, if you own it the hardware of thousands of workstations and the energy cost for months of use for a single movie. If you don't own it you have to rent it, again at huge costs.\n\nA movie that uses a lot of CGI will still need a hours to render a single frame, and in case you don't know you have 24 of those on each second.\nAnd all this with thousands of computers doing it, that's tens of thousands of cores nowadays, many many dozens, maybe even in the hundreds of terabytes of RAM, yes terabytes not gigabytes.",
"Paying 50-100 professionals / specialists with degrees for 6 months = $900,000 / $18,000,000\n\nProprietary software dev = $10,000\n\nPaying for render farm rent $20,000\n\nMoCap & proprietary Equipment $2,500 / $15,000\n\nMass tape storage facilities $1,2000 / $30,000\n\nR & D $9000 / $15,000\n\nVisualizations $8,000 / $15,000\n\nRenting motion capture studios and MoCap actors & staff $35,000 / $200,000\n\nAnd thats just from the payments I can remember. Which would be about half.",
"Look up some Autodesk tutorials and you'll see how intricate things really are",
"Time. Time is everything in any craft, and animation takes boatloads of time. Modern animation takes even more because now we have to add rendering time - which while it cuts down on repeat work to use 3d (you can move the camera without making an entirely new background) it has the trade off of using many, many server farms to render. You can wait for them to render, but that could take decades, or you can buy more server time for lots and lots of money.\n\nThen there's the animation itself, which is a painfully slow process. I gave up on animation in second grade when I found out you had to draw some twenty four full pictures just to make one second of animated content. Fifteen minutes is twenty one thousand pictures, a feature length film is one hundred and twenty thousand, and then you have to make them all tell a smooth and cohesive story together both across the whole film and down to individual twists and turns in the character (see: [squash and stretch](_URL_15_), [anticipation](_URL_13_), etc). It is by no means an easy craft and is still very much in development, like film, even a hundred years down the line. Green Lantern, for example, while not a critical success of a film, did something new with its villain where the monster's body was composed of a mass of human bodies/skeletons that were moving in and out of the monster's shape. Figuring out the right level of detail for something like that - clear enough to see the bodies but not so clear that they distract from the shape of the monster as a whole, and while the whole thing is continuously moving at that - these are unsolved problems and need people who understand theory as well as how to make the craft itself. There are definitely animation leads and animation directors for things like this.\n\nSame goes for visual effects, particles, explosions (we can craft our own realistic explosions now? That's insane! Down to the pixel! This is definitely undiscovered territory), but I don't know as much about that field sadly.\n\nFinally: these skills don't come out of no where. Animation and visual effects take a long, long time to learn. Yes, licenses are expensive, but not nearly as expensive as an education in this stuff. I live in Los Angeles and have plenty of friends pursuing it (with a good number of [green facebook profiles](_URL_14_)) and it takes *forever* because you not only have to do the work, which itself, takes *forever*, but then you have to learn it by practicing even more of it.\n\nPersonally, I am in Computer Science, which is more high stress but ultimately saves a lot more time. Tools building is the future of this stuff since it will cut back on all this time, but when everyone's racing to just make content, it's hard to step back and change the platform you're making content on (which itself is more time etc etc). Luckily Disney's animation studio is [using Maya](_URL_12_) compared to DreamWorks and Pixar using custom software, so a lot of the updates to tools being made there will benefit everyone in the industry.\n\ntl;dr: it takes a long time to do anything in animation and visual effects, longer to learn how to do it since that's doing it AND screwing up and doing it again, and tools are the future of reducing that time so expect those companies to stick around.",
"All of the above. As an illustrator who has worked in animation, I can tell you that the biggest money-sinks in terms of graphics and effects are:\n\n1.) Time. This shit takes A LOT of time to do. There's no way around it. You have to model, UV map, texture, rig, program, effects, and light, every single one of which is an entire team's worth of jobs.\n\n2.) Software/hardware. Zbrush is 800$ for a one person license. I have no idea how much it would be for an entire studio's worth of artists but I'm betting it wouldn't be pocket change. Maya? 5K for a personal, unlimited license. Vray 1k for a personal license. See where I'm going? This shit is expensive as HELL. Then we get into the fun, fun world of computer hardware and renderfarms. A computer capable of handling 100K polycounts, enormous displacement maps, 4069px texture maps, etc will probably run you 3K per unit, at the very least. I've seen some go for 15K. A render farm capable of rendering your animations could cost hundreds of thousands and they still might only be able to churn out a handful of frame per day. Thankfully, with the advent of GPU rendering, rendering goes by faster nowadays but not by much. Sometimes, companies' needs are not met by existing hardware/software and they essentially have to make their own. That can be massively expensive as well. \n\n3.) Workers. Remember all the modeling, lighting, rigging, texturing, UV mapping... etc I listed before? Like I said, each one of those things is a full team job. In smaller studios, you'll see more individuals wearing more hats. The model often also textures and UV maps. The rigger might also be a programmer and lighter. In the larger studios, each one of these tasks might have a group of people working on them. That's a lot of people to pay.\n\nI've been out of the animation field for a while but my colleagues who still enjoy the sadomasochism of working in the animation industry tell me things haven't changed all that much. Some of the costs have come down but others have gone up. \n\nSo that's the gist of it.",
"It is all you mentioned and more. It takes many artists of many different specialties to produce a realistic and believable sequence. It's like asking, why is building a house expensive? Everything digital in a movie you see needs to be built by someone.\n\nSomeone has to model every object, every detail in a scene, and that takes time. Just the process on deciding *what* to model takes a long time. There are artists dedicated to just imagining what things might look like. They might make full paintings of scenes to help drive inspiration and look-and-feel. That model needs to optimized for rendering, sloppy work with modeling increases the amount of time to required to produce the final images. It takes a lot of work to produce quality 3D models, just as you would expect for someone to create a clay model. In a realistic movie, a lot of concern is also placed on accuracy or at least the illusion of accuracy. That takes time. Someone has to paint and texture that model. This is a major process itself. It needs to look realistic. If there are close-ups of the model, the artist has to put immense work into the detail. It has to look right. You also have the riggers who set things up for the animators. They make sure that when the model is animated that it always looks correct. They also need to set the model up so it can be animated as is needed for the animator. Any moving part of the model is set up by the rigger. Of course, you also have animators. They have to make things look like the move believably. For simple objects this is simple but a full-moving humanoid with tentacles is going to take work. \n\nIn short, it takes actual work to make special effects. Hours upon hours upon hours and long days and no weekends to make a AAA movie in a reasonable timeframe.",
"Ex-Animator (2D) - The amount of work that goes into any animated creation, either computer or traditional, is insane. First you have the script writers, who bring editors and story board artist into the mix after that. A team is put together to come up with the actual art design, or the fill of how the movie is going to be. There are rough animators, clean-up animators, and final draft animators. There are background layout specialist (what I did), as well as painters who go over what the layout guy did. Then, the animation is transferred to animation cells via an ink artist. As far as animation is concerned (or most film in general), there are twenty four frames per second. An animator in turn, is responsible for creating those twenty four drawings. It's actually a team of folks, consisting of an \"in-between animator\", and the main guy. The main guy will do the most important gestures of the animation, while the in-between person does the \"fill in\". Not to mention, costume designers, color technicians, and the people that actually compile all the layers and shoot each frame. It's an extremely complicated process, or at least it was. Now, with computer animation, some things are easy and some things are difficult. I would say traditional is overall much harder to create, but there is still a ton of work required to create the computer generated stuff as well. Also, overtime. When I was in animation we worked at least a sixty hour work week, with some weeks topping ninety hours. We slept under our workstations in rotations.",
"So I see a lot of the replies are placing a lot of the cost on the software and hardware required for the projects. In the gran scheme of things, those are actually not a huge factor in the cost for larger studios. They're only a big cut of the cost for smaller studios.\n \nOur software licenses are often site wide licenses, which while expensive, scale to large number of employees easily. \n \nThe real big cost is artist time. Movies can have anywhere between 10 to over a thousand highly skilled artists working on them, and the vfx work can start just as soon as the first few shots of the movie are shot and turned over to the studios. \n The costs also have to factor in revisions because clients always want changes, as well as unforeseen issues or requests. \nThen depending on deadlines etc, they need to factor in overtime because we do work a lot of overtime hours. \n\n \nAfter that, the rest of the overhead costs aren't nearly as bad. Computers, software, facility costs are included but really at the end of the day, those will last over many movies so their costs can be split. \n \nR & D costs are usually also included in a movie , but are often split with the overhead costs too.\n \n\nSource: I work in VFX and Animation. (Just finished work on Guardians of the Galaxy)",
"For a 30 second spot for a movie like \"Gravity\" you need video editing software that costs at least 5k. Then you need to pay a really good contractor or a regular graphic artist a lot of money to make the spot. \n\nIt's not uncommon for 40+ hours of work to be spent producing a 30 second spot (commercial) for a movie that has a lot of CGI, or is all CGI.\n\nCongrats, you just spent over 10k on 30 seconds of film. Does the client want a detail changed? That'll be another 10 grand.",
"As a VFX artist people have no idea how long this stuff takes. For a movie of the Avengers level, you might have 100 artists doing rotoscoping ALONE, split between 2-3 studios all over the world. And it will take them 100,000 man-hours - they have be paid, get benefits, healthcare, etc. That, more than that computer hardware or software licenses is why it's so expensive. And why they are outsourcing this stuff to India, and we as an industry are suffering. VFX houses are closing down left and right",
"I must of have been living with animators too long cause I thought it was obvious why it's so expensive... Seriously you should just spend the last week of any project watching them, it's a near miracle anything looks as good as it does, with the amount of pressure and man power involved. Yet most are underpaid and spend a lot of time outside of work trying to catch up with everything they have to do, at least that's the side of the industry I've seen.",
"Animator here. Animation that looks simple and flawless is among one of the hardest disciplines in the world. Ill hopefully have landed my first major studio contract within the next two years and at almost 10 years of animation training Ill barely consider myself \"skilled\".\n\nEDIT: forgot to mention the skilled aspect. Glen Keane for example is one of Animation's greatest masters. (Ariel, Aladdin, Beast, Tarzan, etc. )He was given a contract for five films with Disney at 10 MILLION. So thats one consideration.",
"It's the talent and only that. The rest are pennies in comparison. If you look at a film budget, you'll quickly see that manpower is by far the biggest expense. And I'm not just talking about above the line personnel (actors and sometimes director), but all the film workers as well. And because commercials/ads often pay far more for less work, the studios really have to open the wallet wide to attract art/animation talent.",
"Software can cost 3000+ per license. Hardware to render a scene can cost significantly more. Then add in special effects artists, skimp there and your movie looks like it should be premiering on the \"scifi\" network versus a Hollywood hit. The whole process is costly, and it is an art form to create those effects. And if something needs to be animated add animators as well. You can see where this is going.",
"Expensive software, huge banks of top of the line computers for rendering, teams of artists. The main thing though is that quality effects and graphics require considerable skill and experience, and huge gobs of time. So these are guys who are making good money, and working tons of overtime, weekends, etc. Note that Pixar movies and the like take 2 or 3 years or longer to complete.",
"It's very simple really. Man hours. It takes a lot of work to make it work. Mostly because of the sheer volume of fx shots in movies like the avengers.\n\nAnd this is the *cheap* way of doing things. Practical effects are much, much more expensive for the simple reason that they're even more labor intensive.",
"Because...it's a creative job. It envolves something that people can't do very efficiently - thinking - and anything that anyone has trouble doing naturally is also naturally well paid due to it's rarity. If anyone was paid in gold it would no longer increase it's value over time indefinitely.",
"I recommend [GoldenBoy](_URL_16_) in the sixth episode he's working in an anime studio, and tho is not the same as it is now the concepts remain untouched. \n\nif you have time watch the rest of the series, is hilarious. might be NSFW tho.",
"The most simple answer is sheer man hours, while paying them at a very high rate. For example, 1 frame in pixar's frozen took 132 hours alone, in a scen that consisted of over 200 frames. Source: _URL_17_",
"Gravity apparently cost more to make than it did for India to send a probe to Mars. It cost more to make a movie about space than it did to actually send something into space.",
"come join us over at /r/blender and start making models for yourself!",
"Labor is by far the largest expense in almost all businesses."
],
"score": [
1706,
1327,
256,
149,
113,
28,
15,
13,
9,
8,
8,
7,
7,
6,
5,
5,
5,
5,
5,
4,
4,
3,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://i.imgur.com/13BDat2.gif",
"http://youtu.be/rXDz-lelkPE",
"http://youtu.be/9lcB9u-9mVE",
"http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9lcB9u-9mVE",
"http://imgur.com/a/oZUtp",
"http://s8.postimg.org/413yu7avp/Render_5.png",
"http://www.gfycat.com/CheerfulSoftFly",
"http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/products/nuke-product-family/nuke/buy/",
"http://www.autodesk.com/products/maya/buy",
"http://store.pixologic.com/ZBrush-4R6-Single-User-License/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mdayz/why_are_realistic_cgi_movies_so_expensive_to/cc84095",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lcB9u-9mVE",
"http://www.cgmeetup.net/home/frozen-behind-scenes/",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticipation_(animation)",
"http://www.hitfix.com/motion-captured/the-visual-effects-community-sees-red-in-the-wake-of-oscar-protest-and-on-air-snub/2",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squash_and_stretch",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpVFviPMQBY",
"http://www.complex.com/style/2014/04/things-you-didnt-know-about-your-favorite-animated-films/the-longest-frame-in-frozen-took-132-hours"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why are the effects and graphics in animations (Avengers, Matrix, Tangled etc) are expensive? Is it the software, effort, materials or talent fees of the graphic artists?
Why are the effects and graphics in animations (Avengers, Matrix, Tangled etc) are expensive? Is it the software, effort, materials or talent fees of the graphic artists? | [
-0.023932654410600662,
-0.011918793432414532,
0.029914509505033493,
0.016151873394846916,
0.01465574186295271,
0.013310886919498444,
0.009027430787682533,
0.036421649158000946,
0.1458812803030014,
0.02713349461555481,
-0.09550730884075165,
0.004052170552313328,
0.0021470433566719294,
-0.00... | |
53y40i | What are the effects of Austerity and why does Germany allegedly profit from this policy? | Whenever it comes to fiscal policies in the EU most economist seem to say it hurts the economy. This makes sense to me since: more money - > more investment - > more growth. Yet Germany seems to push for Austerity. Why? Who profits and who loses from Austerity?
When I google the matter I find only left-wing articles that clearly follow a political agenda. I would just want a factual description of the effects of Austerity as well as who the winners and losers are so to make myself an opinion on the matter.
| explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d7x9qvi"
],
"text": [
"One problematic consequence of the financial crisis was that many European countries found themselves in deep, deep debt which put a big drag on investments and the ability to stabilize the economy.\n\nGermany was among the less afflicted countries in Europe but decided nonetheless to push for a policy of austerity at home and in the EU.\n\nThere is a big difference between the foreign and national policy aspect of this drive.\n\nThe EU and Eurozone is intertwined financially and economically and Germany is one of the biggest \"payers\" in the EU. This meant that the crippled economies of other countries had a negative impact on Germany and meant they had to pay a lot of tax-payers money to support these countries.\n\nAs a way to combat this, Germany fought hard for a European policy of austerity, this meant that countries like Ireland, Spain, Greece, etc. were held to stop spending and reduce their debt by increasing national income.\n\nAs you said many left-wing politicians think this is the wrong move as investments are necessary to kick-start the economy which would in turn increase income and therefore ease the debt burden. However Germany argues that the debt and spending of this countries is out of control and needs to be curbed first, before significant investments can be made again.\n\nThe results have proven both sides right. The overall economy has stabilized and volatility and need for foreign support have decreased (good for Germany and other countries like the Netherlands who have good economies right now). However stabilization in some cases meant \"locking in\" the economic divide and increased poverty for some classes and groups of people. Without investments these economies might not slide further down but they aren´t really recovering, especially as they cannot inflate their currency to reduce debt (due to the shared currency).\n\nSo generally on an international level, economically strong countries benefit from austerity and the weaker countries do not (also some forms of austerity and spending reform are and were needed in these countries).\n\nOn a national level Germany has been focused for years to curb it´s debt and reduce excess spending in social programs without raising taxes. Although economically this has been quite effective, many people have argued that given the strong finances Germany should invest more and begin to re-bolster social programs as the financial crisis has deepened the divide between rich and poor.\n\n**TL:DR**\nAusterity stabilizes economies and curbs debt and spending. This generally benefits the well-off (countries and people) and disadvantages the poor (again countries and people). More moderate economists agree that some financial restrictions are necessary to combat excess and inefficiencies but that investments are needed to grow the economy. Debates abound whether we are still in a downturn that needs to be combated (austerity) or on a rebound that should be fostered (investments)."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What are the effects of Austerity and why does Germany allegedly profit from this policy?
Whenever it comes to fiscal policies in the EU most economist seem to say it hurts the economy. This makes sense to me since: more money - > more investment - > more growth. Yet Germany seems to push for Austerity. Why? Who profits and who loses from Austerity? When I google the matter I find only left-wing articles that clearly follow a political agenda. I would just want a factual description of the effects of Austerity as well as who the winners and losers are so to make myself an opinion on the matter. | [
0.025714658200740814,
-0.02439531311392784,
0.002209540456533432,
0.003285493701696396,
0.11070562154054642,
0.0933975875377655,
0.01997470296919346,
0.05286591127514839,
-0.036053165793418884,
0.059277333319187164,
0.013146782293915749,
-0.03476039692759514,
-0.024282678961753845,
-0.0269... | |
3n8hh6 | I just turned 40 so I'm technically an internet grandpa. Someone please explain to me hashtags. I see them everywhere, TV, news stories, social media. What is the point of them? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cvlqxgj",
"cvlr1i1",
"cvmbct6",
"cvmdaq8"
],
"text": [
"You're probably aware that the most basic language for writing a website is called HTML (Hyper Text Markup Language).\n\nThere has been a function in HTML forever called \"named anchors,\" where you could link to somewhere halfway down a page. As an example, if I link you to the start of Section 2 of a Wikipedia article:\n\n_URL_0_\n\nIf you click that link, it'll take you halfway down the page to the anchor named Engraving. HTML uses the \"#\" symbol to say that whatever follows the # is the name of an anchor on the page, not part of the URL.\n\nSo we've been using this functionality for 10+ years, and then Twitter comes along, and Twitter uses this functionality to allow people to embed links in their tweets. A Twitter hashtag becomes a link that allows people to easily see other tweets about the same topic. So if I'm watching the moon landing, I can tweet \"Really enjoying watching the #moonlanding\" - and anyone can click on #moonlanding and see everyone else who has made a tweet with the same hashtag.",
"They are keywords. For example in Twitter if you click #ELI5 you get all the tweets which have the hashtag #ELI5. With hashtags you can participate in some discussion by writing the hashtag on your message. Like if you tweet \"*What's a hashtag? #ELI5*\" your tweet is included in the tweets people see when searching for that hashtag. And for example in Instagram you can tag your photos like #summer, and by clicking that hashtag you see all the photos tagged with #summer.",
"Just in case anyone isn't clear on this:\n\n\\# ⬅ Hash Symbol ^(aka pound sign aka number sign aka octothorpe)\n\nWumbo ⬅ Tag\n\n\\#Wumbo ⬅ Hashtag",
"Posted answers are true but not the actual answer. Twitter made hashtags famous by using them, as someone mentioned, semantic markers to get things to trend and get the community to settle on names for topics. It's also possible to search for any term, not just hashtags, so it's not to make things searchable. The technical reason, the reason Twitter wants/likes hashtags, is because hashtags are automatically indexed and stored separately by Twitter; Twitter automatically breaks hashtags out from tweets and stores them in a less space-efficient but more searchable way which makes it *much faster* to search for hashtags compared to regular words. When you're searching billions of tweets this makes a significant difference. You can see this by using the Twitter API. When you download the raw information for a Tweet (and you'd be surprised to see how much information there is), the text (hashtags included) is one field and another separate field is just a list of the hashtags."
],
"score": [
83,
7,
5,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Cup#Engraving"
]
} | train_eli5 | I just turned 40 so I'm technically an internet grandpa. Someone please explain to me hashtags. I see them everywhere, TV, news stories, social media. What is the point of them?
| [
0.020430685952305794,
-0.02340736985206604,
0.03529665991663933,
-0.04077630862593651,
0.048421237617731094,
-0.02407291904091835,
0.06114405021071434,
0.04369862750172615,
0.08518392592668533,
-0.06424720585346222,
0.05509794130921364,
0.03731021285057068,
0.09003441780805588,
-0.04319834... | ||
452mqz | If rain is a result of the water cycle, why do we have more rain in the autumn and winter when evaporation is presumably lower? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"czupkr4",
"czup5c3"
],
"text": [
"First: This is not true for a lot of places ([New York for example has the most rain in the summer](_URL_0_))\n\nSecond: For it to rain you do need water in the air - but you also need that water to condensate. There are certain things that will make it more likely to rain, that means favour condensation of water vapour into liquid water (rain drops).\n\n* the amount of humidity - more the better\n* the temperature of the air - lower the better\n* pressure of the air - lower the better\n* cloud condensation nuclei ( little dust particles where water can condensate) - more the better\n\n\nIn autumn the temperature is generally lower- so that criteria is met.",
"The major evaporation takes place in the Ocean in warm latitudes. The humid air moves to a cooler place. The moisture condenses coming down as rain or snow and incidentally releasing the heat accumulated in the tropics thus warming the region where it snows or rains. No it is not the heat of the tropics and the rain will be cold and wet. But heat was released when the water vapor turned into water."
],
"score": [
5,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://c3e308.medialib.glogster.com/media/19/19e91e921d5fcd7df3094bea484a19a7f5e292bc025945226c1f13bd819e3403/usny0996-climate-new-york-gif.gif"
]
} | train_eli5 | If rain is a result of the water cycle, why do we have more rain in the autumn and winter when evaporation is presumably lower?
| [
-0.0187197495251894,
-0.018380749970674515,
0.061383988708257675,
0.018951507285237312,
0.059310831129550934,
-0.047378480434417725,
0.001055262517184019,
-0.0236804336309433,
0.08013568073511124,
0.0038935018237680197,
-0.03012208268046379,
-0.03719582408666611,
0.1042650043964386,
-0.018... | ||
3418ss | Why does scanning take so long if photocopying or taking a photo of something is so quick? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cqq9l2z",
"cqqfjom",
"cqqevuv",
"cqqiwwe"
],
"text": [
"Because you have a cheap scanner. Cheap scanners are slow. Expensive high end scanners are very fast.",
"When you take a picture of a page, the light from various parts of the page enters at different angles. Ultimately the causes some lens distortion. The photo of the page isn't a perfect rectangle; the page bows out on the sides.\n\nA scanner takes a different approach. It has a photoreceptor that isn't concentrated in one spot, but is distributed across a bar. This whole ensemble is moved across the page. So there is no lens distortion: the page is scanned \"orthogonally\" (at a perfect right angle at every point), so there is no issue with perspective. This gives you a perfect rectangular image, as you expect.\n\nNow, it's possible to correct lens distortion and take an instant snapshot of a page with a camera, winding up with a rectangular image. But this requires precise positioning of the camera, which makes the whole ensemble larger than a scanner. Most people don't want a big bulky scanner, so waiting a few more seconds is a good tradeoff. Some places, like libraries, may indeed have \"photo\" style scanners which are bulky but faster.\n\nAside from avoiding the lens distortion, scanners also apply light evenly to the image. Again, possible with a camera, but requires a precisely tuned (and large) ensemble.\n\nScanners use a slow, but cheap, compact, and reliable method to get a great, high-resolution scanned image. You can make tradeoffs for speed, but generally scanners are the best approach for casual users.\n\nEdit: I didn't address photocopiers. Obviously, these are also larger than scanners. But the main issue is they tend to have lower resolution and worse contrast due to the methods they use for lighting the image. They are designed for final-step reproduction that's \"good enough\" in most cases. You might want the better results from a scanner for archiving documents, plus scanners are smaller and cheaper. Essentially they're better in every way but speed, which is fine for people who occasionally scan documents.",
"Most photocopiers are optimized to scan very quickly, and do so at a very low resolution. 100x200dpi is not an uncommon setting. If you're scanning a photograph, the 300x300 setting is much more common, with 1200x1200 requiring a bathroom break. Most wall powered scanners (i.e. not getting their power directly off a USB port) can approach the scan speeds of a copier if they're set to a very low, black-and-white resolution. Also, many USB-only scanners have weak servo motors that control the scanning lamp due to the limited amount of power available through the cable. Scanners that plug into an electrical outlet have more power available to them and can put more torque on the lamp.",
"Compare a pro-level photocopier with a pro-level scanner. The Canon DR-7580 scans 75pages per minute -- *both sides at once*. Your $50 HP from OfficeMax is a poor comparison."
],
"score": [
17,
15,
4,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why does scanning take so long if photocopying or taking a photo of something is so quick?
| [
0.018873795866966248,
0.024409307166934013,
-0.05867931619286537,
0.0012864487944170833,
0.08062390238046646,
-0.12904754281044006,
0.04723726958036423,
-0.051631536334753036,
0.0306895449757576,
-0.020483486354351044,
0.05109790340065956,
0.07382655888795853,
0.019324272871017456,
0.03810... | ||
719sez | Why are stores and restaurants on the east and west coasts of the US so different? | Some examples being in n out only on the west coast, Walmart barely on the west coast compared to the east, and so many other establishments. Why are they so isolated to one side? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dn96lk8",
"dn9a64l"
],
"text": [
"It can be difficult for a store to expand into a new market if already dominated by competitors. For example Wal-Mart is also notably weak in Minnesota, because it's the home of Target who already dominated the department store market.\n\nSome chains have a huge following in their home region but haven't expanded like In n Out because expansion can be expensive and may not pay off for a smaller company. Why risk it when you make a good profit where you are? They might gradually open up in other states but they're not going to become as big as in their homes overnight.",
"You have to remember that America is not homogenous or uniform. East coast history has a lot of French influence, especially as you head in the Alabama and Louisiana direction as they were once held by the French. West coast history is heavily influence by Spain and Mexico and explorers from Asia had a great influence on the building of the west, even if we did not treat them well. \n\nOn top of these cultural influences, the West Coast is newer than the East, they were able to take the building and planning lessons learned in the East and build their cities accordingly. The East Coast cities face problems of too narrow streets in historic regions as well as having to build around historic architecture.\n\nIts just a different history and cultural influences that make the West different from the East"
],
"score": [
8,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why are stores and restaurants on the east and west coasts of the US so different?
Some examples being in n out only on the west coast, Walmart barely on the west coast compared to the east, and so many other establishments. Why are they so isolated to one side? | [
0.13437272608280182,
-0.05414062738418579,
0.03594933822751045,
0.02755076065659523,
-0.0074501861818134785,
0.016749778762459755,
-0.08683379739522934,
-0.06605253368616104,
0.023035001009702682,
-0.06419384479522705,
0.04505293816328049,
0.06903912127017975,
0.008095359429717064,
-0.0256... | |
2p4aj9 | why isn't happy hour one single hour? | Why is it called happy hour when most restaurants have multiple hours when they offer the deals? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cmt88h2",
"cmtaugy",
"cmta0s7",
"cmt8ajf",
"cmt8xaa"
],
"text": [
"Because it is hard to drink enough in one hour to wash the smell and taste of Corporate America off of you.",
"The term happy hour goes back a long way, and no one is really sure where the term comes from as applied to drinking. It was a term for an hour of exercise, used by Navy sailors in the 1920s and has been used as far back as Shakespeare in other contexts.\n\nAs for drinking, Happy Hours occur in the period between leaving work, and dinner. The most reasonable explanation I've heard is that from 5-6PM was the Happy Hour where people leaving the office would stop off at the nearest bar for a drink before going home.\n\nSince bars like making money, and people like cheap drinks, happy hour has been extended to afternoons, evenings, and reverse happy hours at night. Like many outdated terms, its just stuck around in the language.",
"In most places where the drink specials are longer than an hour, it's still called happy hour because you are only happy for one hour. After a few drinks you go from happy drunk to angry, dejected, semi-incapacitated drunk. But \"happy hour followed by two hours of mind numbing, bitter depression\" just doesn't have a good ring to it.",
"because its not convenient for people and restaurants wouldn't make any money and get annoyed customers because happy hour is so short.Also happy hour is different for people depending on when they get off work. Generally speaking its the few hours after you get off work every day.",
"Time speeds up when you are drinking 3 hour sober time is 1 hour drinking time."
],
"score": [
6,
4,
3,
3,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | why isn't happy hour one single hour?
Why is it called happy hour when most restaurants have multiple hours when they offer the deals? | [
0.01947062276303768,
0.02791641838848591,
0.023211179301142693,
0.07800737768411636,
-0.04579738527536392,
-0.01259015966206789,
0.00891597755253315,
-0.03711479902267456,
0.08822587877511978,
-0.04898645728826523,
0.06684406101703644,
0.026151500642299652,
0.0017106860177591443,
-0.018310... | |
3paklq | Why do they call it FAPing? | I've been curious | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cw4magh",
"cw4mrnz"
],
"text": [
"\"Fap\" is internet short hand for masturbation. It is an onomatopoeic reference to the sound of a man masturbating (women is commonly \"schlick\"). Since many of the leaked photos were nudes or otherwise sexual in nature it is assumed they were used for masturbation.",
"The terms \"fap\" and \"shlick\" both originated with the highly NSFW web comic [Sexy Losers](_URL_0_), where the artist used them to accompany male and female masturbation as sound effects.\n\nYou can find a link to the original comic through the [Know Your Meme](_URL_1_) entry on fap, which is also NSFW.\n\nEDIT: Only one \"c\" in shlick, apparently..."
],
"score": [
4,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://sexylosers.com/262.html",
"http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/fap"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why do they call it FAPing?
I've been curious | [
-0.009694144129753113,
-0.08345594257116318,
-0.009385966695845127,
0.012666662223637104,
0.009714802727103233,
-0.031074589118361473,
0.12013120204210281,
0.033998843282461166,
0.07568609714508057,
-0.0033563144970685244,
-0.025762896984815598,
-0.004259252920746803,
0.009307832457125187,
... | |
2k6lxc | What's preventing world peace? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"clidvxh"
],
"text": [
"Lack of education, stupid politics, religions, greed, natural resources.\n\nHard to tell. People are assholes."
],
"score": [
6
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What's preventing world peace?
| [
-0.003747242968529463,
0.07629644125699997,
0.07233981043100357,
0.0027473776135593653,
0.06258087605237961,
0.04442210868000984,
-0.01970580592751503,
-0.09786472469568253,
0.05112946406006813,
0.07012444734573364,
0.005394130479544401,
-0.0033498776610940695,
0.007280189543962479,
0.0064... | ||
5vs78d | The first SHA1 collision by Google | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"de4f37n"
],
"text": [
"SHA1 is a hash algorithm. It takes some data, runs it through complicated math, and gets something like a fingerprint. You always get the same fingerprint for the same data, but you can't get the data from the fingerprint.\n\nSHA1 only produces a fingerprint of 160 bits (1's and 0's). That's like 40 hexadecimal numbers long. There are only so many combinations of 160 bits. That means sometimes different data will have the same fingerprint. \n\nIdeally, it's should be nearly impossible to get a specific fingerprint *on purpose*. If you see a fingerprint, you shouldn't be able to figure out what data you need to result in that fingerprint. The only way would be to keep trying random data over and over until it matches. The guys at Google have done math wizardry to come up with a shortcut. Now it takes less time to find a matching fingerprint.\n\nWhy does this matter? Let's say your password is \"Dog123\" and the hash is \"ABCDF\". Computers usually store the hash of a password and just compare it to the hash of what you typed in. Instead of trying all possible passwords until they get \"Dog123\", they can cheat and find out \"ILikeDogs321\" has the same hash. It's not your password, but since your computer only compares the hash it still works.\n\nYou might also use a hash to verify the software you downloaded is the software you wanted. This method potentially allows someone like the NSA to insert a virus into software, but make it appear as if it's not been tampered with since the hashes match."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | The first SHA1 collision by Google
| [
-0.04228580370545387,
-0.009277619421482086,
0.016084199771285057,
-0.03621900454163551,
-0.0029812564607709646,
-0.06535133719444275,
0.0218635406345129,
0.03141713887453079,
0.01190159935504198,
0.005182057153433561,
0.04401654005050659,
0.02394005097448826,
0.035803016275167465,
-0.0335... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.