You said almost 3 times that speed, continuously for over 10 minutes....and not with a lightweight speed shorting pistol.

If someone wanted to kill with each shot on moving targets at 3-400 yards in the dark, yeah, 5 seconds+- per shot still seem reasonable, maybe half that for someone who practices on living, moving targets often. Your claim some people can continuously do that 120 times a minute including mag changes is just laughable. They might shoot that fast, but not hit anything accurately at that distance.

You have to prove it to convince me...better? If it's as common as you say, that should be easy to provide with a comparison video instead of a suggestion to buy and read a certain book. The videos I found are all short range small target, not at all the same as what we're debating. Show me a comparison of a field layered deep with 10000 balloons getting shot at from distance, that would be informative, short course accuracy target shooting isn't.

My claim is you will have more control at full auto than absolute maximum possible finger speed.
My other claim is you will put more lead down range with most full autos. In a crowd situation where missing is basically impossible and aiming wasted effort, like this one, more bullets means more damage. Once the crowd dispersed, aiming a high powered rifle would probably be more effective, but not before. Were this not the case, why would any military allow them, ever?

In this Turkey shoot situation, you get more hits on target in full auto. In target shooting, you won't. This was not a series of targets at 20 yards, it was a target zone at 3-400 yards in the dark.

What this company (snapperstech.com) did is put together an upgraded control "rig" to manipulate facial expressions, taking into account muscle limits and interactions, skin elasticity, etc.

A little more info in the video's YT desc :
-Adaptive rig: which allows combining any number of expressions using optimized list of blendshapes.
-Real facial muscles constraints: the advanced rig logic simulates real facial muscles constraints.
-Advanced skin shader (for Maya and Unreal): holds up to 16 wrinkles maps and 16 dynamic diffuse maps with micro details and pores stretching.
-Easy to manipulate using facial controllers and/or GUI.
-Compatible with all game engines and animation packages.
-Smooth transition between all the expressions.
-Adjustment layer: freeform manipulation of multiple regions of the face to create unlimited variations of the same expression.

The real-time rendering part is achieved by the Unreal engine itself. The final rendering performance still relies mainly on the hardware used.

No need to politicise this with Obama/Trump or whatever.

Power corrupts, and political affiliations don't change that. I get the mindset that oversight might help, after all if the ones with power are corrupt, watching for it and removing the corrupt makes things better. The catch is that oversight in itself is also power. Meaning the people there also get corrupt. So then let's watch them.

We already have the legal system's power separated into 3 parts that are supposed to check/watch each other. Adding another layer onto legislative, judiciary, and police isn't transparently and obviously the correct answer.

Greater transparency on this crap helps, but the problem of people being terrible doesn't have some simple answer. Obama didn't solve it, Trump's not going to either, nor did either of them undo the perfect solution of their predecessors.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I have a weird memory of this show. I mean - it's in my brain, but I haven't thought of it since I was 12. Can something so inconsequential leave a layer of memory in your brain that is somehow retrievable 36 years later?

I want to watch this show now. I probably was interested as a kid because it's ripping off Tron's look - which I loved at the time.

*promote layers of lying lawyers!

key terms:

Defense in depth: multiple layers of anti-tank guns interwoven with mines, trenches, infantry, and artillery already registered and aimed at killing zones in front of the obstacles. No single hard crust; rather, more like the layers of an armored onion; as you peel one layer, the next one pops up.

"Pak belt": the reference term for anti-tank guns.

Commissar: the political officer who will shoot any man who retreats from their defense of the motherland.

"Shoulders": the sides of the place in the line pierced by the first plunge of the blitzkrieg that have to held by the defense in order to slow it and give the counterattack a wide open flank to punch into.

Reliability: new German tank models were rushed into battle at Kursk at Hitler's direct insistence before they had been debugged. The battle started 6 days after the last just-barely-not-a-prototype Panther had been delivered to the front. The battle began with 184 Panthers on the rolls; by day two, there were 40 operational; by day 5, there were 10 total...

https://tankandafvnews.com/2015/02/08/from-the-editor-panther-reliability/

Ironically, the decision to delay the battle by two months, giving the Soviets time to build up all of their defenses (digging trenches and anti-tank obstacles takes time)--was made to make it possible for the Panther to get to the front..

While suing someone for asking questions is clearly bullshit, his test at the end is pretty disingenuous.

You don't sleep on the actual plastic. There would normally be at least 3 layers (firesock, cover, sheet). Repeat the t-shirt test as you would sleep on it.

Most vehicle side windows are made of tempered glass, compared to the laminated glass of the windscreen. The windshield is designed to "hold" its pieces upon severe impact due to the lamination process (a layer of plastic material sandwiched between two layers of glass) whereas the tempered side windows will shatter into small relatively harmless globules. Tempered glass is used due to it being roughly 4x the strength of non tempered glass, and cheaper to produce than laminated.

Most automotive side glass is typically between 3-6mm thick, depending on the region of origin, eg Europe, Japan, USA etc. That said, calculating the compression, tensile and sheer strength a particular window can sustain is not exactly simple. However as a simple baseline, a 2ftx2ftx5mm sheet of tempered glass, with supports 2ft apart can support roughly 160lbs of sustained weight. In the case of automotive design, window frame support, distance of supports, curvature etc will change the properties and strength of the glass.

Long story short, with the vehicles window fully rolled into the frame, that lion would need hundreds of pounds of force directed at a single point to reach the shatter point. Granted, I've never arm wrestled a lion, so maybe those folks were just a can of Vienna Sausage ready to open anyway. Best not to mess with the king.

this is a layer cake of fake

You can magnetize a much bigger screwdriver with way less wraps of wire and way quicker. Use a little thicker wire and just one layer covering about 3 inches near the tip of the screwdriver. Then just quickly spark the wire ends on a 12 volt car battery and you'll have a very strong magnetized tip.

The thing is, most of the recent attacks in Europe and in the US were by Muslims who were innocent and regular people, up to the point until they were radicalized and committed terror. They weren't trained extremists like the ones that did 9/11. There are way more layers to this that the left like to admit.

And while I don't agree with Trumps policies, I think there needs to be a good discussion about why this one particular demographic is so prone to radicalization. And the faster this discussion happens the more people can be helped.

But it just seems like the left don't want to talk about it, in case they appear to be racist, and the right don't want to talk because they actually are racist. The refugees are trapped in a bunch of sensationalist material from two sides of the camp.

@ChaosEngine
agreed.
context matters and i think being a decent human being plays a large role in that dynamic.

people tend to attempt to break down complex ideas and/or ideologies into more easily digestible morsels.this "twitter speak",in my opinion,is largely responsible for the decay of human interactions.

we all are biased.
we all hold prejudices,and preconceptions based on our learned experiences.
which are subjective.

we see the world through the lens of our own subjectivity and even the most open minded and non-judgemental person,when trying to sympathize/empathize with another person, will use their own subjective understandings in order to understand that person.

this tactic,which we all employ,will almost always fall short of true understanding.

so we rely on words,metaphors,allegory etc etc in order to communicate fairly complex emotions and experiences.

what brendon o'neill is pointing out,is that when we start to restrict words as acceptable and unacceptable,we infantilize our interactions.

words are inert.
they are simply symbols representing a thing,action or emotion.
it is WE who apply the deeper meanings by way of our subjective lens.

i am not trying to make something simple complicated,but bear with me.
a rock will always be a rock,but a cunt has a totally different meaning here in the states than in britain.(love you brits,and cunt is a brilliant word).

the problems of culture,region,nationality or race all play a role in not only how we communicate but how that communication is received ...and interpreted.

so misunderstandings can happen quite easily,and then when we consider that the persons intent is by far the greatest metric to judge the veracity of the words being spoken,and just how difficult it is to discern that intent....this is where nuance and context play such a major role,but we need to have as many tools in our language box to express oftentimes very difficult concepts,multi-layered emotions and complicated ideologies.

and,unfortunately,there are attempts to legislate speech.

of course well intentioned,and reasonable sounding,but like any legislation dealing with the subjective nature of humans,has the possibility of abuse.

case in point:http://sds.utoronto.ca/blog/bill-c-16-no-its-not-about-criminalizing-pronoun-misuse/

a new canadian addendum to their human rights statute.on the surface this is a fairly benign addition to canadas already existing human rights laws,but there is the possibility of abuse.

a psychology professor from university of toronto was critical of this new addendum,and has created a flurry of controversy in regards to his criticism.

which you can check out here:
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/civil-rights/301661-this-canadian-prof-defied-sjw-on-gender-pronouns-and-has-a

now he was protested,received death threats,there was even violence and a new internet star was born affectionately labeled "smugglypuff".

see:http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/smugglypuff

i agree that free speech cannot be viewed with an absolutist mindset.absolutist thinking leads to stagnation and a self-righteous fundamentalism,so we NEED the free flow of ideas...even BAD ideas..even offensive and racist..because this brings all those feelings/thoughts/ideologies into the market of ideas to be either absorbed or ridiculed and ultimately ostracized for the shit philosophy they represent.

i WANT to know who the racists are.
i want to know who is bigoted or prejudiced.
i want to know who is holding on to stupid ideas,or promoting fascism dressed up as nationalistic pride.

and the only way to shine a light on these horrendous and detrimental ideas is to allow those who hold them openly state who and what they are...so we can criticize/challenge and in some cases..ridicule.

we should be free to say whatever we wish,but we are not free from challenge or criticism.
we can say whatever pops into our pretty little head,but we are not free from consequences.
we are also not free from offense.

i know this is long,and i hope you stayed with me,and if you did,thanks man.i know i tend to ramble.

but we can use the banning of gorillaman as a small microcosm of what we are talking about here.

i felt that we,as a community,could take gorilla to task for his poor choice in verbiage "nigger prince" and i attempted to make the case by using his history,dark humor and bad taste to add context to his poor choice of wording.

bareboards felt it was a matter for the administrators to deal with.i am not saying her choice was wrong.just that we approached the problem from different perspectives.

now gorilla decided to become the human torch and flame out.which threw my approach right out the window.

but the point i am making in that case,is that bad ideas,bad philosophies,bigotry and racism will ALWAYS reveal themselves if we allow that process to ultimately expose bad ideas/shit person.

the free flow of ideas is the proverbial rope that ultimately hangs all shit ideas.

thanks for hanging kids.
love you all!

This has become more layered than a baklava....we're now talking about one group's intolerance for another group's intolerance of the first group's intolerance.
It's like a Russian nesting doll of intolerance!

Lazy brick layers.

There has to be a downside to weld-additive construction. They'd have to do this in a vacuum or inert gas filled chamber to avoid oxidisation between layers.

I know you can't weld aluminium like this. Aluminium Oxide has a much higher melting point than aluminium, which is the main point of failure with aluminium welding.