Thanks a lot for the feedback, @eric3579!

I was trying for a long time to come up with a way to add at least a small level strategy into the mix, without making it too weird or confusing.

Now it's a bit more like Wheel of Fortune and less like plain old hangman I suppose.

Both my reply & the video itself are both tongue-in-cheek. So who knows the "stop before the line" mistake is intentional by the narrator or not?

What you described is pretty much correct. Where I live (suburb of Toronto - Canada's largest city of ~6 million) I've only seen 2 aroundabout in my area, and they're in located in low traffic residential area and they're the tiniest of aroundabouts. But I love them, they're confusing to us North American, I guess, but they're quite efficient.

Well I'll show him, by shooting out my own windows. 💢 😕

Tucker- “why are we on Ukraine’s side and not Russia’s side? I mean, who’s got the energy reserves, who’s the major player in world affairs, who’s the counter balance against China? Why would we take Ukraine’s side, why don’t we take Russia’s side? I’m totally confused.”

Answers. “Well, clearly. Ukraine is a democracy, Russia is an authoritarian regime that is attempting to impose its will on a validly elected democracy in Ukraine, and we’re on the side of democracy.”

Tucker- “yeah….I’m….I guess I’m on the side of democracy in other countries….I GUESS.”

That’s the right…..they guess they kind of support democracy somewhat when cornered and pressed, but not one bit when they think no one’s looking, clearly.

PS- Donald Hartle…know who that is? Look him up, then lock him up. LMFAHS!

Your video, Gender Reveal Confusion, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Hahaha - I was so confused about the title... and then finally the drop.

👏

Ah, I was all confused. Haha. Also, you meant notdead. Undead is for category.

Also, the very beginning was weird.

They just show him walking for a couple of seconds, then cut to "2 days earlier."

Like... two days earlier than... that time he was walking? 😕

Could've done without that look-ahead and just started out at the two days earlier stuff.

This was nicely done. Cute twist at the end.

I'm a little confused by it being a period piece. I mean there's nothing wrong with it, but it felt odd and had me wondering why.

🤷

In general I love the Ve channel, but I think this video does more to confuse people than to enlighten them.
Also, no mention of "holes" (even though that's more part of semiconductors).
Also, of the multiple-choice answers, there wasn't one corresponding to 80% speed of light which is the measured speed of electrical signal in copper (depends on the cable itself, frequency, and other factors).
And if all of the power actually travels through the air, then why does the ampacity of a cable matter at all? Tesla could be quick-charging with flimsy cat5 cable!

This is also a trick question, and in a way that I kinda dislike because it additionally confuses matters by the setup.

Specifically, any change to the electrical field in the wire triggered by something like flipping the switch IS always limited to propagating at the speed of light, and as such WILL take 1s to travel the ~300,000km through the wire.

There's a bait and switch here though, were if the wires are close enough, and the power on the wire is high enough, there is a strong enough magnetic field in the wire to reach across the 1m distance to the end of the wire by the light bulb. That magnetic field will induce a very small electric field on the wire as well. Calling that 'lighting' the bulb though is 100% a trick question though as no existing light bulbs are sensitive enough to light up from that little current unless the 'live' side of the wire is both in very close proximity and running very high voltage.

The part I dislike, is too many people believe that electricity running in a cable is 'faster' than light, and the trick here kinda re-inforces that rather than helping to clear that up for people.

Movember can be confusing that way.

Howdy - I don't know if "addressed" is the right word. Commented on, but not given sufficient perspective. Having said that, the problem is incredibly complex, so there should be no expectation that Mr. Oliver's video or any other single thesis on the topic could possibly suffice.

Your "one chemical bond difference" is an appropriate consideration, but with recognition that once we reach on the order of C20-C40 length dispersable or emulsifiable molecules as surfactants / surface energy modifiers, the insoluble polymers come into play, with not 30'ish bonds growing one at a time, but leaping to 20,000 or more. No doubt the pool has already been irreversibly pissed into by the irresponsible producers that convert small molecules into very, very large ones, but with some control, responsibility, and integrity in our industrial process owners (yes, hell just froze over) there is no reason why we could not safely continue to produce the polymeric forms of PFAS. We do so for substantially more toxic chemical conversion processes today.

It's interesting to note the (usual) examples brought forward by others in this post (Teflon cookware), just waiting for someone to mention Gore-Tex, but by far the biggest impact won't be on consumer goods that we all touch regularly and recognize the name brands of, but will be on the industrial / commercial uses of these polymeric families that are pervasive in the systems / processes that we all derive benefit from every day. Ironies exist, that perhaps confuse the "all PFAS are bad" premise ... consider - effectively every seal, gasket and control valve in a water purification plant is most commonly made of a PFAS polymeric compound, PTFE included, all tested to rigorous specifications and compliance by specific agencies that do nothing other than deal with potable water (thankfully not the EPA - it's National Sanitation Foundation (the other NSF), or Water Research Advisory Scheme (WRAS) in the UK etc.) .

So my contention and the view of many in the end user community is that it's not the final form of some of these compounds that are bad, it's the horrendous messes we leave producing them. We can't unwind our Clock of Dumb, but killing the entire crop just to get rid of the long ago seeded weeds doesn't solve the actual problem, it makes it much, much larger.

Thanks for your comments.

You really are a coward. You're afraid their going to take a piece of your pie. Just WHAT do you think you actually have anyway?

What you need is a heart, courage and a brain.

You may think you are in America but, in reality you are in the state of confusion.

Now put your clothes back on and get back in the house. You look silly exposing yourself like this.

You're right.
Better sit your cohort down and have a talk. He's actually making the right look worse, more infantile, more irrational, more butt hurt and full of sour grapes, and less civil. He's the one who went there, he's very confused.

You guys are like school in summertime.....no class.
Not surprising considering your classless, uncouth, honorless, uncivil, childish, spineless, honesty free leader.