?

Why? There was no damage done, and they exposed potential weaknesses in a school system’s security. (Imagine a school shooter using it to tell everyone to assemble in the gym or something, they needed to know their security sucked).

Sr pranks I saw in person included covering the hallways in liquid dish soap. That caused the school to close, and cost thousands to clean up, yet no charges were pressed (I think the entire sr class got an hour of detention or something weak). I’ve seen others where teacher’s/principal’s car was put on the roof, or disassembled then reassembled in the teacher’s lounge with no way to drive it out.
As Sr pranks go, this seemed innocuous, almost pleasant.
I suppose a hard nosed principal and DA could bring charges, but both would lose all public support from their community and possibly their jobs.

I only meant that the required modifications didn't by themselves mean it was not simunition. I didn't mean to imply you were wrong, it does mean you couldn't just accidentally grab the wrong clip with real bullets, you would have to disassemble/reassemble the gun. Sorry I wasn't clear.

Hmmm...I can barely hear it on that video, but good find none the less. Could be it. I sure wish the video was better. Scary about the warnings, especially since they shot her crotch. Every 40mm I've heard, both in documentaries and movies, sounded like a loud potato gun.

I think in Star Trek the physical mater is converted to energy and then sent in the beam, and reassembled into matter. So, you get pulled apart and put back together, still made of the same stuff.

That's why, even though they have subspace communications with earth, they can't transport someone that far because it's not merely data being sent.

next in the series:
please verify that your watch doesn't conceal a garrote in the bezel

please verify that your gold lighter, cigarette case, and pen don't reassemble to become a pistol

please verify that your lotus esprit turbo doesn't transform into a submarine

These weapons are designed to be easily stripped down and reassembled in the field, so it doesn't take much skill. Do it 3 or 4 times and you could do it that fast. I don't understand why they need to do this... (especially the part where they just pull the tool-kit out of the stock). is it just a manual dexterity thing for gym class? (card shuffling tricks would be harder and more impressive) Or is there a 'military skills' class in middle school?

Thanks for the promote!

In reply to this comment by lucky760:
*promote

That would be fine if you just wanted the text from the document. In this case the the document as a whole is what is of interest. Anyone with any graphic sense would scan into photoshop since the image would be a photo. This would present itself as 1 and only 1 layer.

No one would OCR scan to PDF execpt those with out photoshop. Sure the scanner will have software provided for OCR ( optical character recognition). in such case then you would und up with a plain text document with no background. According to what you wrote, then all of these TEXT areas would have to be reassembled and arranged to fit onto the green pattern background. That does not make sense. Why would anyone pull a document apart just to put it back together? The only logical way to do this is to scan into Photoshop and save as a jpeg or equivalent. To convert it ti PDF then I would open it in Illustrator and do a save as PDF.Or on a Mac just print to PDF



In the video they use Illustrator to open the document. Illustrator will open a PDF and if there were any layers then they would be available also.

Again there is no reason for this document to have this amount of adulteration that this has.


>> ^mfsteele:

Here's a very simple explanation I found on a forum I frequent:
When you scan a document into PDF, you can use a mode which does text recognition. This will produce a document with layers. It stores the text as actual text instead of an image. This option is there because it typically generates a smaller PDF file.
In the areas where the birth certificate is near-black, Adobe's PDF-rendering engine eliminates the 8-bit RGB data and replaces it with a 1-bit layer with alpha. It's all in the interest of reducing file size
Try scanning ANY item directly into Acrobat using the twain tool, which the EXIF data shows was done. Run OCR on it, as is required by all federal and state agencies that work under the paperwork reduction act. Multiple control layers are added, as are masks for objects.

Feel free to correct it. Off the top of my head, split it out into frames (easy, something like FFMPEG will do it nicely), correct (Panotools) and reassemble (ffmpeg). We look forward to your newer, better version.


>> ^Jinx:

Man, I wish so much that wasn't recorded with a fisheye lense. Kinda spoiled it for me tbh.

EVERYONE... REASSEMBLE!

One eye on her pistol the other on the task at hand...shoulda posted a montage of these vids....there's a ten-yr-old breaking down an AR-15 and reassemble in 1:05...It's adorable.

Your video, Exploding/Reassembling Picture Frame, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

So many different things running through my mind...

1. Laura, you are fucking wonderful.
2. I agree with what most are saying
3. If I were torn apart by atom, and I was reassembled somewhere else.... seems to me it would have to be the exact same and that there would not be any duplicates of me made. It would only be a transport machine...unless somewhere in the transportation my DNA was damaged and things about me changed. Then, I might as well be someone different. A mutated copy of myself.

Each person is filmed separately and then reassembled in layers...

i care not for the method, only for the results. i don't have anymore devotion to the mises school than i do to chocolate ice cream. i support their theory, like any other in science, because, from what i have seen, it best fits the empirical data, and consistently makes the best predictions.

the theory of gravity as postulated by newton was wrong . as of 2009, the human race still does not understand why or how gravity works.


In reply to this comment by Farhad2000:
Well I would say you are mistaken then, economics is a social science not science like physics.

The theory of gravity is absolute because it produces consistent results in accordance to the theory, in keeping with newtons laws of gravity. This is not the same case in economic theory, where new theories are constantly presented, refuted and reassembled because one theory does not always produce consistent predictable results when applied to different economies.

Apply BWF so widely makes just as much sense as saying cutting taxes right now will create stimulus in consumer spending. That is completely out of touch with current economic situation.

Look you are an acolyte of the Mises Insitute so you will agree with pretty much anything they say.

In reply to this comment by imstellar28:
In reply to this comment by Farhad2000:

theories are judged not only by their absolute truthiness, but in their ability to make accurate predictions. gravity, for example, is not understood by a single person on this planet yet we gladly utilize newton's laws to make reasonable predictions. even if a theory is seen as accurate, it is often too unwieldy to use for macro examples (see quantum mechanics).

given that, i think it is reasonable to apply the BWF to large-scale action like the governmental stimulus -- even if its not "fully" correct, it makes very accurate predictions

Oh, that was very clever. The new Kirk even has some of that omg-someone-stepped-on-my-puppy look that Clark uses all the time.

Funny how the action montage in this reassembly seems much more effective than the way it was presented in the trailer.