>> ^Wingoguy:
dupeof=http://www.videosift.com/video/Airbag-recycling-at-your-buddy-s-expense


Confirmed.

*dupeof=http://www.videosift.com/video/Airbag-recycling-at-your-buddy-s-expense

*dupeof=http://www.videosift.com/video/Airbag-recycling-at-your-buddy-s-expense

>> ^grinter:
What the hell were they trying to do there!


Exactly what happened, sadly.

>> ^imstellar28:
You are saying that corporate boycotts are too difficult. You think changing governmental policy is less so?

Actually yes. I also think it can be more fine grained. Boycotting car companies that charge extra for seat belts won't make them standard equipment, ever. Ask lots of people "should seat belts be required equipment on cars?", and you'll get an overwhelming vote in the affirmative.

Also, since it's law, there's no backsliding. No making them optional in bad economic times, no new companies who have some unproven alternative that's cheaper, etc. If a superior safety device comes along, there's a whole series of regulatory agencies who can test it, review it, and approve it.

Perhaps there's an argument to be made saying seat belts and airbags shouldn't be specifically required, but instead earning a 4+ star rating from an IIHS crash test, but I don't see operating only by boycott as being a superior method for improving car safety.

Cultural changes don't happen overnight, they happen over years, decades or even centuries. Unfortunate for those living during that time period, but thats the reality of societal evolution.
However, when the government is in the way, cultural evolution grinds to a halt. How can you evolve if you are jailed for doing so?

I agree that it takes time, and that government can be in the way. On social issues, I'm already essentially a libertarian though. I'm a touch different in that I'd rather have government give positive affirmation of rights (gay marriage recognized nationally as legal, as opposed to government not recognizing marriage at all, just civil unions), but that's essentially just a semantic difference.

When it comes to more economic matters, I'm happy to call myself conservative in the sense that I'm okay with evolution being slowed down a bit. Not that I'm afraid of progress generically, but I think we should be careful about what we do, and make sure we've tested things thoroughly, and thought through all the implications before we go wild with a new technology.

For example, I'm in favor of bans on human cloning...for now. However, my reason for a ban would be so we have time to prepare a legal and ethical framework for the people created through such a process. I think the people who pushed that kind of a ban through had religion on their brains, and intend for it to last forever though. I doubt we'll see many bioethicists pushing for legislation covering guardianship, clone creation consent, etc. anytime soon.

I also hope someone is paying close attention to robotics, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, etc. I'd hate for the first big breakthrough in self-replicating machines result in an unstoppable mechanical pest or virus.

Turns out I was looking too far ahead, I should've been worried about Credit Default Swaps to the same degree.

I'm not saying people only deserve they rights they can defend, I'm saying all people deserve the same rights. Start there, and let the culture catch up.
Governmental policy does not drive culture, nor has it ever - its the other way around. Why do you think I'm talking to you instead of my state representative?

On this we agree completely. I think we just disagree on where people's equal rights end.

Remember this video? I got to the end without disagreeing with anything they said. You're right that they left off the right to life, though that can be situationally controversial (abortion, euthanasia, capital punishment, etc.) and it was supposed to be a happy feel good sort of presentation.

I think a right to life also includes the right to medical care, and access to preventative medicine, affordable healthy food, etc. I think paying for that is an issue, but I think we have a moral imperative to find a way to pay for it, in the same way we had a moral imperative to find a way to pay for manual labor once slavery was abolished.

Sorry, but no seatbelt, airbag, HANS restraint, or insta-foam is going to save you if your car is struck by two rocket sleds.

QM never complained about Bush giving us the biggest government of all time.

QM never complained about Bush during FISA/NSA.

QM never complained about Bush stealing from the Social Security cookie jar.

QM never complained about Bush raping our treasury.

Actually, wrong on all counts. But your first language is French so WTF, foo, you can't be everywhere!

QM complains about California, which is run BY A FUCKING REPUBLICAN who was never fairly elected, and only got 20% of the vote after running a Dem out of office for wanting to raise DMV taxes. All backed by Enron and Cheney's energy task force.

Yes, yes, it's only a conspiracy/voter fraud when people elect Republicans. Gray Davis wasn't a corrupt piece of crap, it was all lies. And since Schwarzy acts like a FUCKING DEMOCRAT who cares what his voter card reads? Democrats should proudly stand for what they've done to California! California government schools are some of the worst in the nation, and Democrats get reelected there again and again. Coincidence?

QM should sincerely shut the fuck up and get his pussy ass over to Iraq. But he never will, because he's a chicken-hawk who loves the smell of dead Iraqi kids in the morning.

QM will always call a Republican he doesn't like, a "Democrat emulator" yet every fucking Repub in this country is responsible for the FUBAR mess we're in.

Rs get some of the blame, but no Republican ever woke up and said, "Let's force banks to give the poor houses they can't afford. It's the fair thing to do" (looking at all the taxocrat tax cheats and bribe-takers STILL in office, I guess that spirit of spreading the wealth doesn't apply to them).

You and your goofball Saul Alinksy-wannabe anarcho-whatever radicalist rascals...you're not interesting when you act this way, the ad hominem attacks cut-n-pasted from Daily Komatose's baboonery are tiresome; instead of dealing with the FACTS of the matter you're...just making a fool of yourself. Everyone deserves to go on a wild rant now and again--I don't fault you for it--but wear your seatbelt, airbags won't always save you.

And you know what QM? Fuck you and your "335 million dollar condom scheme." Either you're a fucking idiot and believe that shit, or you're evil and you're lying and obfuscating. Any thinking person knows that that 200mil was for FAMILY PLANNING, of which, a measly less than one percent is for free condoms.

No matter, this generational looting of the Treasury--the second time Congressional majority taxocrats will be voting for one--won't make it through in its present odious form.

I'm simply offering my opinion of what's going on with the scum in DC and the mechanics of their powergrab to rottenseed, who posted the question.

I knew this would happen to liberals when Bush left office. All that titanic machine-against-the-RAGE has to go SOMEwhere. Fox Derangement Syndrome won't absorb it all.

May I suggest picking up a copy of Ann Coulter's new bestseller?

Can they learn from this? Yes. Would they have survived if their suits and seat belts were working 100%? Highly unlikely.

People die in car accidents on the freeway with perfectly working seat belts and airbags. At <80mph.
Now imagine entering the atmosphere at 17,000 mph. Pray all you want. Magic or technology isn't going to help you if something goes catastrophically wrong at such high speeds and altitudes.

NASA -better- learn from this failure. All the more reason for a next-gen shuttle program (which was in the works by the way).. conveniently cut by the federal government.

>> ^xxovercastxx:
>> ^shuac:
I've always said there should be two brake light configs:
1) always on for speeds above 30 mph
2) fast blinking for speeds below 30 mph

I've had similar thoughts, only I figured it would be more valuable if they flashed when rapidly decelerating instead of based on their speed. Cars are all equipped with accelerometers for the airbag system anyway. It can sometimes be difficult to tell if the car up ahead is lightly breaking or if they're coming to a screeching halt, especially at night.
Perhaps one day all cars will be equipped with those 'sonar' type systems that allow them to match the speed of the car in front of them when using cruise control. I see no reason why the same system couldn't warn you of pending impact when the cruise control is off.


Of course this is why seasoned drivers (I picked this up in Europe but have seen it in North America), kick in their four-way hazard lights when braking hard in heavy traffic.

Especially useful if you have yellow tail turn signal lights rather than the cheap "all-red" rear which I simply despise.


There was this one crash - just this spring - when I was driving family from Europe down to Niagara Falls and there was a sudden highway slowdown.

I was keeping a safe distance, but had to break pretty hard. I kicked on the 4-ways while I was at it. Car behind me noticed and slowed down okay. Whoever else was behind HIM though, was retarded/asleep... BOOM< CRUNCH> SMACK.

Yeah.

Called the OPP to report a multi-car collision... oh, just behind me, I'm fine.

>> ^shuac:
I've always said there should be two brake light configs:
1) always on for speeds above 30 mph
2) fast blinking for speeds below 30 mph


I've had similar thoughts, only I figured it would be more valuable if they flashed when rapidly decelerating instead of based on their speed. Cars are all equipped with accelerometers for the airbag system anyway. It can sometimes be difficult to tell if the car up ahead is lightly breaking or if they're coming to a screeching halt, especially at night.

Perhaps one day all cars will be equipped with those 'sonar' type systems that allow them to match the speed of the car in front of them when using cruise control. I see no reason why the same system couldn't warn you of pending impact when the cruise control is off.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'funny, humor, fail, hilarious, comedy' to 'funny, humor, fail, hilarious, comedy, queen, airbag' - edited by Ornthoron

>> ^Spoon_Gouge:
This is another example of the dumbing down of America. Teach people to use the tool properly. I can see the example given earlier of 10 serious injuries a day jumping to 60+ superficial injuries a day absolutely happening. As an engineer, I applaud the effort and the idea behind it. As a craftsman, I say, learn to use the damn saw properly!


An uncle of mine, with over 10 years of experience in fine carpentry, slipped due to some sawdust and opened his wrist down through a main artery. He was off for over 3 months, and out several thousand dollars in medical and lost wages even with Workers Comp. With this product, he would have fixed the saw, got a bandaid, and finished out his shift.

Even people who know what their doing can make a mistake. This isn't the dumbing down of anything, it's a safer way to work. Hard hats, steel toed boots, airbags in cars... all things that have almost nothing to do with the proper use of anything.

I knew airbags were useless!

where the fuck is the airbags?

It is quite a bit bigger. It can run over spirit. And yes, you guessed it, MSL is too heavy for the airbag deployment method. The viking lander which was heavy too used retro rockets. MSL is avoiding retro rocket use because they do not want to contaminate the landing site with organics from the fuel.

Here is a hypothetical picture of MSL next to Spirit:
http://www.nasaimages.org/luna/servlet/detail/nasaNAS~4~4~19199~123813:Size-Comparison,-Mars-Science-Labor

She had two airbags to his one.