Amsat can get the stuff. Elon can get the stuff. It might have to be special ordered, but I can't find any law or regulation keeping it out of the hands of Americans. So yes, I expect it can be bought in this country and then it will wander across our notoriously open boarders.

There is no way that Russia could ever figure out how to have someone in the U.S.A. (maybe even someone who works that the Russian embassy) just order this stuff from Digi-Key and then send it back to Russia, maybe even in a diplomatic pouch.

I was thinking exactly the opposite. You don't want to say who did it when it was the N.S.A.

I clearly remember Al Gore claiming to have invented Origami.

Origami is the Japanese art of paper folding created by Akira Yoshizawa

I find it extremely hard to believe that Akira Yoshizawa, born in 1911, invented Origami. Oh sure, he apparently did a lot of Origami, as did others. But to claim he created the concept is a pretty bold claim.

I don't know where he is driving or who his insurance company is, but I've checked this out in my state and my quote for just liability insurance was more than twice this, even with the "second vehicle discount" (a huge 10% slap in the face). And I'm told that I live in a relatively low cost insurance state.

OK, I'll accept that I was wrong about the Volt being all-electric. Replace it above with the Leaf or any other all-electric car (maybe even leave out the ones bought from Elon) and the argument about getting hit twice for insurance on the driver when owning two cars still holds.

Don't get it. When I need it, I hire a truck. 7.5 ton truck for a day is quite cheap.

You are correct, you don't get it. Maybe you think that everyone is just like you, but we are not. In my case I'm not talking about needing a large truck, but still needing the capacity to take things when I go on trips (luggage, camping gear, a bike, and perhaps other items I'm taking to or bring back from the people I visit). My preferred day-to-day car would be a little two seater sports car like a Miata or a Scion, but there just isn't room in such a car when making a long trip. Plus rental mileage costs can add up quickly on a cross country trip and any vehicle would be rented for a couple of weeks, not a day. Also, I take very good care of my car and know it will serve me well on such a trip, I'm not comfortable with risking such trips on less trust worthy rental vehicles.

If you are happy renting that 7.5 tom truck on occasion, fine. But it doesn't really respond to the argument that I presented. The insurance is really on the driver. The insurance rate goes up when there is a teen driver or a driver with a less than perfect record. So we should stop lying about the insurance being on the vehicle rather than the driver (a lie promoted by the insurance companies so that they can get their double hits). We should tie having insurance to having a drivers license, and not penalize the driver who wants to drive a more efficient, lighter weight, less capable of doing damage vehicle on occasion. I would even be fine with the insurance rate being tied to the largest registered vehicle that the driver drives, even if it is not the vehicle that he drives the most, but I really object to being charged for insurance twice if I want to own two vehicles in a single driver household (and there could certainly be "no loan" clauses tied to insurance policies if the industry saw that as an issue, they don't because they would rather get the double hits).

Absolutely. As long as the insurance companies keep the lawmakers in their pocket, they will only gain by fewer accidents. If you have liability insurance (the only type that is legally required by most state laws), you are required to have it on each vehicle that you drive (even if there is only one licensed driver in the household). Yet the driver can only drive one vehicle at a time. The industry claims the insurance is on the vehicle and not the driver, but that argument wears thin as soon as you have a teen driver in the household or the driver get into an accident or even gets a ticket. The insurance is clearly on the driver, but the industry is allowed to charge for it for each vehicle. One obvious problem with this is that we claim to want to reduce pollution and improve air quality and have poured millions and millions of tax money into private industry all electric vehicles like the Volt. But because of the limited range, many people who would buy a Volt don't get one because they would have to have a second vehicle for longer trips if they did (particularly in single driver households) and be charged liability insurance on both.

Personally, I drive a larger vehicle than I would like. I do so because I feel that I need to ability to haul things around occasionally. If I could have a smaller vehicle without the double hit on liability insurance I would also have a small two seat vehicle (or maybe even one, or a motorcycle). The insurance company would win because statistically I could do less damage when I drove the smaller lighter vehicle, but they have their hooks into the lawmakers and they insist that they deserve the insurance payment on each vehicle even when there are more vehicles than drivers in a household.

Absolutely. they could have built more than 6 homes for Haiti government officials with it, and very nice homes too.

Gave money to the Red Cross? Consider the advice of the great philosophers Nelson and Mr. T.

I made a laptop out of a Kodak easy-share picture frame and as Raspberry PI. And I made a digital picture frame out of an old laptop.

And if ISIS were to kill Will Weaton, that is OK since I have his Wesley Crusher action figure.

spoken like a true A.C.

If they don't pass it then the government will just do all those things anyway. It's not like they are subject to the law or the constitution or anything.