HA!!!!
The "rusted through" on my 70 Bronco had progressed to "rust held together by spit and paint" in many places...but many more were rusted through all the way around, like my hood which had no edge when I bought it. The windshield frame was only upright thanks to the glass, it peeled off by hand leaving me a windshield with no frame. I've since replaced both, but I still have at least one hole through every panel I haven't replaced. My front fenders are more rust than metal at this point. I have replacements, but I'm waiting for it to disassemble itself. ;-)

Thanks for that, makes me feel better about getting them confused since the terminology is semi-fluid.

Seeing the disassembled Wankel engine in the video should have clued me in that that was NOT what was used in the P-47, which had lots of big cylinders for pistons radiating around a central point, hence the "radial" designation.

It (the video) was very helpful for figuring out how the chambers and path of the parts work in comparison to a piston engine, which is quite interesting even for someone like me who really only understands the rudiments of either design. Live and learn!

I'm surprised Jawas haven't disassembled it by now.

You are partially correct, I listed the rank of a top submarine officer incorrectly, but not his position, I'm not in the Navy. He was Executive Officer of the first nuclear sub, but only First Lieutenant of the diesel. EDIT: He "qualified for command" of the nuclear sub...probably why I thought "commander" but properly should have said "was in command". Shortly after being assigned to lead the nuclear sub trials, after helping design and build it, he led the American shut down of the Chalk River reactor, lest you continue to insinuate he was an 'armchair warrior' that never held command.
(record below)

◾17? DEC 1948 - 01 FEB 1951 -- Duty aboard USS Pomfret (SS-391) Billets Held: Communications Officer, Electronics Officer, Sonar Officer, Gunnery Officer, First Lieutenant, Electrical Officer, Supply Officer Qualifications: 4 Feb 1950 Qualified in Submarine


◾05 JUNE 1949 -- Promoted to Lieutenant (j.g.)


◾01 FEB 1951 - 10 NOV 1951 -- Duty with Shipbuilding and Naval Inspector of Ordnance, Groton, CT as prospective Engineering Officer of the USS K-1 during precommissioning fitting out of the submarine.


◾10 NOV 1951 - 16 OCT 1952 -- Duty aboard USS K-1(SSK-1) Billets Held: Executive Officer, Engineering Officer, Operations Officer, Gunnery Officer, Electronics Repair Officer Qualifications: Qualified for Command of Submarine Remarks: Submarine was new construction, first vessel of its class


◾01 JUNE 1952 -- Promoted to Lieutenant


◾16 OCT 1952 - 08 OCT 1953 -- Duty with US Atomic Energy Commission (Division of Reactor Development, Schenectady Operations Office) From 3 NOV 1952 to 1 MAR 1953 he served on temporary duty with Naval Reactors Branch, US Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. "assisting in the design and development of nuclear propulsion plants for naval vessels." From 1 MAR 1953 to 8 OCT 1953 he was under instruction to become an engineering officer for a nuclear power plant. He also assisted in setting up on-the-job training for the enlisted men being instructed in nuclear propulsion for the USS Seawolf (SSN575).


On December 12, 1952, an accident with the experimental NRX reactor at Atomic Energy of Canada's Chalk River Laboratories caused a partial meltdown. The resulting explosion caused millions of liters of radioactive water to flood the reactor building's basement, and the reactor's core was no longer usable.[7] Carter was ordered to Chalk River, joining other American and Canadian service personnel. He was the officer in charge of the U.S. team assisting in the shutdown of the Chalk River Nuclear Reactor.[8] The painstaking process required each team member, including Carter, to don protective gear, and be lowered individually into the reactor to disassemble it for minutes at a time. During and after his presidency, Carter indicated that his experience at Chalk River shaped his views on nuclear power and nuclear weapons, including his decision not to pursue completion of the neutron bomb.[9]

1) As I mentioned earlier, implementing border control for each state is never going to happen. As I also mentioned, border control has already been proven ineffective at stopping both drugs and illegal immigrants so why would guns be any different?

2) My drug analogy is perfectly valid. Drugs are banned yet they are still smuggled into the country. And no, people aren't growing cocaine or heroin in their backyard. And yes, smuggling a small packet of cocaine by hiding it in your ass is easier than smuggling a gun through the same means but guns don't have be smuggled intact. They can easily be disassembled and the individual parts smuggled separately. Many of these pieces would be small enough to hide in your ass. But this is all largely irrelevant because the bulk of drugs are not transported via anus.

3) The motivations of mass shooters is highly debatable. I'd argue that they want to feel empowered and the easiest way to do that is in schools which are undeniably the least likely places for people to be armed. If they tried to go on a shooting spree in a police station or military base or gun convention, they probably wouldn't get many kills. Instead, they'd be shot and killed by someone else and that's something no shooters seem to want (hence the reason why they always commit suicide after the spree instead of letting themselves be arrested or killed by the police). In fact, if you look at the history of school shootings in the U.S., many of the shooters were adults. The Sandy Hook shooter was 20 years old and he primarily targeted first-graders who obviously weren't his peers. When it comes to mass shootings, it's all about quantity and targeting people who can't defend themselves is the most effective way of achieving that.

4) Do you have any statistics to support your claim? I seriously doubt suicide rates plummeted in countries or states where guns were banned. Japan and South Korea both have extremely strict gun laws yet they also have some of the highest suicide rates in the world (South Korea is #3, Japan is #8, the U.S. is #33). If you weren't serious about killing yourself and just wanted attention, you wouldn't use a gun in the first place. You'd stand on the ledge of a building and wait for the news vans to appear. Like you said, guns are the quickest way to kill yourself so you wouldn't use them if you had any doubts or hesitations.

Your video, Star Wars Lego Disassembly Prank, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Now you have enough bits and pieces to create a stimulating, surreal piece of folk art. Getcha some super glue and turn that passion for meditative deconstruction into, Canon Conglomerate #7! (hoping you're not disassembling Leica und Hasselblad, jah?!)

Bet it's a bitch when you want to take something apart and they get stuck.
...really, what is the point? Screws are good because 1) you can really torque them down to hold joints tightly, which does not look possible with the magnoscrew, and 2) because these strong joints are easily disassembled.
If you don't want to take the thing apart, use dowels, a mallet and some glue - cheaper, stronger, and fewer moving parts. If you want to take the thing apart, bite the bullet and use a regular screw, cause mangoscrew is going to get stuck.

Your video, Russian Students AK-74 Gun Assembly/Disassembly., has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I have a car with a knackered lock barrel, so I had to hot wire it (I didn't have to - I could have bought a new lock barrel, but it's going to be scrapped soon so I thought I'd see how hard it would be to do this). This can all be done safely and without cutting any wires by just taking the thing apart. If you've got the time and all the tools it's easier and nothing needs to be broken.

I took the covers off, then disassembled the lock barrel. You can get to the rotary switch that is operated by the key and simply remove it from the barrel. You can then just use a screwdriver to turn it, and it will work exactly as the key in the ignition. Remove the lock barrel completely to remove the steering lock. This is far safer than breaking it open like in the video, as it won't slip back into place while you're driving. I've replaced the cowling around the wheel and the rotary switch now sits under the dash. You'd never know from the outside that it had been done. All I'd have to do to fix this is buy a new lock barrel and key set and fit them.

What key can start any car? A pikey.

Maybe he's a construct as well. Just because we hear keystrokes and a bit of surprise in his voice doesn't mean he's human.
>> ^Ghostly:

It's fine, he's not paid to think either, perfectly realistic
>> ^EvilDeathBee:
>> ^mxxcon:
as a tech demo, it's shit.
as an emotional story, it's pretty good.

Funny, i was thinking the exact opposite. As a tech demo it's showcasing some very impressive facial animation. As a short story, it was poor. Cliched, convenient and rushed.
"You're defective, I have no choice but to disassemble you."
"Pretty please with sugar on top?"
"Oh, alright."
His reaction to her being sentient is as if this sort of thing happens a lot, not "Oh my god, how is this possible? Maybe we should study this" astonishment. If it does happen a lot, why let her free this one time? We don't get any feeling from him as this being the straw that broke the camel's back (could just be bad acting/direction on the male character's part). It's just "Oh, you're sentient. Ok, just this once I'll let it slide... Wow, what a weird occurrence. Ooo, it's lunch time!"

It's fine, he's not paid to think either, perfectly realistic
>> ^EvilDeathBee:

>> ^mxxcon:
as a tech demo, it's shit.
as an emotional story, it's pretty good.

Funny, i was thinking the exact opposite. As a tech demo it's showcasing some very impressive facial animation. As a short story, it was poor. Cliched, convenient and rushed.
"You're defective, I have no choice but to disassemble you."
"Pretty please with sugar on top?"
"Oh, alright."
His reaction to her being sentient is as if this sort of thing happens a lot, not "Oh my god, how is this possible? Maybe we should study this" astonishment. If it does happen a lot, why let her free this one time? We don't get any feeling from him as this being the straw that broke the camel's back (could just be bad acting/direction on the male character's part). It's just "Oh, you're sentient. Ok, just this once I'll let it slide... Wow, what a weird occurrence. Ooo, it's lunch time!"

>> ^mxxcon:

as a tech demo, it's shit.
as an emotional story, it's pretty good.


Funny, i was thinking the exact opposite. As a tech demo it's showcasing some very impressive facial animation. As a short story, it was poor. Cliched, convenient and rushed.

"You're defective, I have no choice but to disassemble you."
"Pretty please with sugar on top?"
"Oh, alright."

His reaction to her being sentient is as if this sort of thing happens a lot, not "Oh my god, how is this possible? Maybe we should study this" astonishment. If it does happen a lot, why let her free this one time? We don't get any feeling from him as this being the straw that broke the camel's back (could just be bad acting/direction on the male character's part). It's just "Oh, you're sentient. Ok, just this once I'll let it slide... Wow, what a weird occurrence. Ooo, it's lunch time!"

No disassemble Number Five!!

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

I don't disagree with any of it, but he completely ignores indicting Wall Street and the multi national corporations that demand all of these genuinely terrible practices of our government. Ron Paul was completely silent after the Supreme Court made it's Citizens United ruling, giving corporations unlimited influence over our elections. He is afraid of big money too.
Nothing is going to change until we get mad enough and take to the streets to demand real change.


Problem is, we have a propped up market that favors heavily to the corporations and heavily against the people. I think Paul's idea is to disassemble that system for a more level playing field. I think the field should be leveled more to the civilian, IMO, but that's because people don't exercise their own power.

In a game where every chess piece matters, then corporations have little more power than the others.