Saw this a while back on YouTube - plenty of professional electricians in the comments there who say they got so many callbacks on Wago, but never for wire-nut.

Personally I've had one fail (I didn't install it though) - my bathroom which was partially remodeled < 2 years prior, the light above the sink started flickering randomly. I checked each bulb, they were fine, so I opened up the switch box - and there were some of those Wago-style (a cheaper knock-off I suspect) that were quite loose when tugged. So I removed them, used wire-nuts, and it's been totally stable since.
The other benefit to wire-nuts is that twisting the copper wires around each other greatly increases the contacting surface area. (the surface of a wire is where the electrons/holes flow)

Hotels should provide a visible washable marker to guests to mark sheets, blankets, pillows, surface areas as they leave.

EDIT: Something like Urine Yellow

Lay a piece of TP over it for more flushing surface area.

The little microbeads effectively prevent large surface areas of their purple material from fully flattening and sticking to adjacent purple material surfaces. So its a lubricant to keep their bed from sticking to itself. That's my assumption at least.

Probably safe enough unless someone was purposefully sleeping on the disassembled mattress and inhaling a lot of the plastic, in which case they could have some lung irritation.

Their R&D and Marketing teams should be working late nights putting together demos of exactly how much of this plastic micro-bead powder makes it up through their covering. I'm thinking demos of people in pristine black clothes jumping on the bed then laying on it, then getting up to demonstrate no dust on them through the mattress pad. They also should be looking at comping people better mattress pads if they still have concerns. Just my read of the situation.

All about that combination of combustible + surface area.

They aren't wrapped in wood, but if this is uncoated pipe, some will lightly tack weld a ridge or piece of scrap barstock to the OD of the pipe to keep it from rolling when building the stack; they aren't there to prevent this type of major rolling action. At around 1:33 you can see one of these going over the edge. Just guessing, but these look to be in the 20" to 30" diameter range with plenty of length, so they're just really small ships with the ends cut off and will float for a bit until well flooded - lots of surface area there for some buoyancy, and I've seen 40 foot joints of 20" diameter casing float near the surface for 30 seconds or so when a bubble gets trapped temporarily inside before burping out and sinking to the bottom. At around 2:15 you can see the big reddish block with the vertical groove right on the corner of the load platform about 1/4 of the way up the frame. That's where normal humans stab the stake or pipe to help contain the load (so, the vertical pipe or solid stake goes in the hole, the load is built, and no rolling can occur - momentum is the killer here, so if you keep things from rolling, life is good. This was an excellent example of how not to load pipe on a barge / ship.

A matter of scale, distance & speed. (assuming we are talking about electrically driven engines like ion drives or the proposed EM engine.)

If nothing else, the sun gets weaker the further away you get. Out at the edges of the solar system it's almost negligible.

Given that mass directly effects net thrust & fuel range, smaller craft working in the inner solar system may well be better off sticking with solar over a bulky reactor.

Larger and or longer ranged ships should start to favour fusion reactors and such.

Unless of course they manage to miniaturise the fusion apparatus, or perhaps harness quantum effects like matter/anti-matter. etc. etc.

Surface area to volume ratio also starts to shaft solar power the bigger the ship gets too. The panels would have to get exponentially bigger along with the ship/engines.

I couldn't tell you exactly where, but there will be natural tipping points between the practicality of one over the other.

Edit: The calculation would mostly be the ratio of energy produced to mass of the generating apparatus. The point where a fusion reactor (inc it's fuel) can produce more required power per unit of mass than solar cells (and associated gubbins), is the point where it becomes more efficient for most spacecraft.

Though solar still has a clear advantage where indefinite operational duration is a factor. (fusion requires fuel, albeit in small quantities)

The ease of cleaning is what makes or breaks a device in my kitchen. Garlic presses are just a messy inconvenience to me (I prefer hand-washing to dishwashers). You don't have to use the flat of your blade; any heavy flat object will do, but only if i don't have time to slice it paper-thin. More pieces with a larger amount of surface area produce the best flavour.
Of course, if you're cooking for a larger group of people than a single family, this all goes out the window in favor of mass-production.

Actually, it's all in the terminal velocity. He (or she) never exceeds the same speed he would from 10ft up. His weight-to-surface-area ratio is roughly the same as a human skydiver using a reserve chute. He'd easily survive, especially if he grabbed the end of a branch at the end.

As Woody once said, "it's falling... with style!".

Awesome! Thanks for the link, I had missed that one.

About the only way to improve on that would be if Mythbusters or somebody did a large amount sliced thin to maximize surface area, built a cage sturdy enough to keep it submerged, and then filmed it (underwater) in ultra high-speed...

Cool -- I vividly remember my High School Chemistry class demonstration on this, with a pea-sized bit zipping around the surface of the water.

I want to see a big brick of it (1kg or so) in a similarly breakable but enclosing container and held 10m or so underwater in a lake (or something) by a wire mesh cage. Would chopping it up into smaller pieces to maximize the surface area increase the effect? Or would the violence of the reaction make cavitation / hydrogen bubbles that push the water out of way and make the reaction happen in multiple phases as the water gets pushed away and returns?

It's not only the sting of the slap, it's the raw concussive force of a large surface area (ie. nape to ass) meeting strong surface tension. The best way to land is to break the surface tension with the smallest area possible (ie. fingertips, toes etc) allowing the body to slide in to the water.

...actually I thought the opposite, that genetic manipulation increased surface area thereby decreasing the force per square inch on impact. That way, you could still have a dog that does faceplants constantly but reduce the damage.

Pfft. No contest. One weapon has a surface area with like 10x the cutting power of the other; of course it's going to win.

How about the weed whacker guy trade his in for a riding mower instead? That would be about as fair as this was.

That space video from @oohlalasassoon tends to proves you right -- there there is no friction on the pivot point, but the top is still surrounded by air. It isn't clear exactly how long it would take before the air resistance would stop the spin, but it seems like it would be quite a bit longer (orders? of magnitude) even than the top in a vacuum.

I wouldn't have called it that way; the pivot point is so small that it has an very small surface area. And the vacuum chamber would leave that variable close to constant, but still resulted in a lot longer spin time -- so the air resistance (friction with the air instead of friction with the pivot point) clearly does have an effect.

Interesting stuff!