nathaniel

Do you have any sources to back this up? Last I checked, we've been hearing the same thing since before the Irish showed up here in en masse in the early 1800s. Of course he doesn't, because the facts are demonstrably opposite. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

*cough* Free speech zones? My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

There are bits and pieces of the book and another, "The New Americans" available in Google's cache. One such snippet from an executive summary: My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

It's precisely what that book I linked does. It's a large dose of ignorance and xenophobia, imo, that prevents the anti-immigration side from utter collapse. edit to add: In economic terms, for it to be anything other would be truly astonishing. To understand this, you must understand the demographics of immigration, which that book explains. Which, btw, is titled The Immigration Debate: Studies on the Economic, Demographic, and Fiscal Effects of Immigration if you should like to look for it. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Imagine, if you can, that instead of China's or India's GDP that was growing by 6-10% over the last 10 years, it was ours. Then extend that back all the way to the 1920s when we foolishly clamped down on immigration. Imagine we had 200%, or 2000% more people in our armed forces to send on errands in north korea or iraq or iran. You don't actually understand what GDP is, do you. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

There is no shortage of landfill space, rather there's an overabundance. Can you provide anything besides xenophobic tripe to support this? Do immigrants and their offspring not also join the police? Immigrants till the fields that will provide us with alternate energy sources. Moving them from one place to another won't necessarily make them consume more or less fuel... or consume it more or less efficiently. It's not a question of growing them from scratch... Immigrants are as clean as you and me. I bet you don't smell very good either. This much is true. In dollars, denominated with upwards of nine zeros. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

What part of GDP do you not understand? Immigrants drive up the GDP, massively. Any patriot should know that GDP wins wars, and besides that makes life better for (nearly) everybody. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

http://books.nap.edu/books/0309059984/html/381.html This book has a fairly detailed economic analysis. Unfortunately all of nap.edu seems to be offline at the moment...I've linked to it before when we talk about immigration but apparently you've not yet read it. Thought I had a copy of the full PDF locally, but I can't find it... Basically the main groups harmed economically by immigration are 1- the states in which immigrants immediately arrive 2- workers who cannot or do not wish to compete in an expanded free market The first case is easy to solve with federal subsidy, should our leadership ever get its wits. The national economic benefit vastly exceeds the drain on the initial immigration states. The second case is people who would drain our economy for their own personal benefit, hiding behind immigration as a trade barriers to artificially hold up their wages. Not much more than welfare leeches, in economic terms. Drawing from economic inefficiency rather than from the tax rolls... They deserve no sympathy or subsidy from the state. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

The analogy between private property and citizenship is without merit. Citizenship is not something you can rent or transfer to someone, or that you as an individual have a right to deny of others. Citizenship is connoted by the state, for such reasons as the state decides. There's a lot of facts that suggest allowing more immigrants is overwhelmingly good for the country...not to mention a tradition spanning more than half of our nation's history that in large part brought it to where it is today. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-08/apa-ppo080106.php This has broad implications for the SC. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

I've seen this one happen a few times, esp on a plane like an otter with a side door and the victim goes out toward the middle or end of the group, so that the base of the formation is behind when the victim is exiting. If the victim cranes his head to keep an eye on the base, the shoulders come down and the jumper winds up corkscrewing into a spin as soon as he exits. Losing sight of the formation as he tumbles a few hundred feet below them. Lesson: keep your head high and shoulders square when exiting a side-door. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Most external hard drives are portable, if you had 2 you could take each one in every other week and leave the other in a safe spot. Hard drives aren't necessarily the brightest backup storage medium, tho, because a hard drive doesn't have a longer lifetime than what your original medium is (another hard drive in the computer). External hard drives are susceptible to damage from rough treatment. On the plus side, they are relatively cheap at less than $100 each for your storage requirements. Tape media are designed to last longer than HDDs...the downside is tape drives can be a little harder to setup unless you have ready access to a techie, and they're a bit more expensive--they tend to be geared for storage capacities much greater than your needs. You'd look to spend around $1000 bucks for an entry level tape drive plus a few bucks for each of the tapes. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

There've been several random shooting events over the last 15 years in Israel & surrounding territories where an extremist Jew was the perpetrator. Among settlers in particular IIRC. And then there was that whole Yitzhak Rabin thing...doesn't really make a difference to me whether they use bombs or bullets, effect is the same when they kill people. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Just about every religion has tracts that can be taken in support violence or against it. In spite of the insinuations of the fellow that started this thread, there's plenty of material in the Koran and in the New Testament that could incite violence. As well as the Torah. None of it means anything until it is interpreted by a human. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

From wikipedia: NY and NJ periodically get into fights over whether Ellis Island is part of NY or NJ. The island is very valuable, it's a landmark with huge cultural & historical significance. It draws millions of tourists every year, and they spend lots of money on visiting the site. But NY and NJ realize that the site is more valuable between them if they don't launch rockets at each other, or kidnap each other's citizens, etc. Their economies are already interdependent and despite administrative scuffles from time to time they manage to abide without violence. No hiding behind citizens as shields or mounting guerilla attacks and then suing for peace before an effective response can be made. And the result is that both states prosper side by side. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

It could be said that most americans don't know which hemisphere they'd find the Shebaa farms in, and that they don't care any more than the average Syrian cares whether Ellis Island is part of New York or New Jersey. The difference is that NY and NJ can work it out peacefully without resorting to kidnapping or launching rockets at each other. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

In other news, at 7:12AM today a CNN website said "40 killed in airstrike, Lebanon's PM says" then in a striking demonstration of journalistic integrity, they changed the article at 10:30AM today to "Lebanon's PM revises death toll from 40 to 1" Move over George Orwell! By contrast, the BBC keeps their old articles around so you can see how the story changes, and if / how the original published report fell for it. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Yeah, the black & white one, seemed much earlier in the development cycle, I don't think it has a name yet. Only one jump for me on it, Tony challenged me to beat his 47mph record on it. I only got 53, but this was at 12000ft. I was worn out by the end of the jump; it was the end of the day and I'm not used to flying gripper suits. The arm wings were large and had grippers and went from the wrist/gripper to the knee. The grippers themselves were about 3 or 4 inches long. The leg wing is the biggest I've flown, wider than a MTR3 or a V1, tho it didn't extend past the feet. Arm intakes, iirc, were scoops on the front & back of the shoulder. The leg intake was Tonysuits' hallmark symmetric front/back mesh on the inside of the leg wing gap. It was floaty, but I was flying it a bit head high to minimize my fall rate. Felt like it tended to oversteer with leg inputs, reminded me a bit of the GS1 in this way. I did feel that this suit would pick up a lot of speed if I nosed it forward. Jeff mentioned it was a bit of a rush jump to sew it all together for the wffc/summerfest, I expect we'll see more of it over time, perhaps at zflock 2.5...when he flew the suit he seemed to have a very good range of flight.... My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

I think Western media still hasn't figured out that Western norms about honesty & integrity don't translate literally into other cultures. Which is not to say that Western gov'ts / cultures are more or less honest than others, but that the things that Westerners are likely to be dishonest about and the ways they'll be dishonest (and how the public will fall for it) are different from other cultures. It's not particularly accurate to just line up statements from Bushie &c and Pervez Musharraf or Ahmadinejad and call it unbiased reporting. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

No quarrel there. But I don't think any number of jumps over around 50 (assuming they weren't 50 solos, reasonable feedbackreceived from time to time, etc) will give a safety advantage when moving from any to any suit currently on the market. Experience will help you learn it quicker and rejoin flocks & get into accurate maneuvers quicker. You'll start off with better performance etc... You'll look better on video and, being hundreds or thousands of jumps older, you'll be more risk averse. But on a safety basis I just haven't seen what there is to pick up. Someone with 25 or 50 ws jumps on top of 200 minimum total jumps should already know how to deal with turbulence, spins, to pull high, not to fly a spinny canopy etc. That said...some people would generally prefer to get coaching, take their time and max out each suit before progressing to another. Nothing wrong with that...it's probably a good idea to get coaching no matter what your experience level / wing size is. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

I got to jump two of Tonysuits' prototype wingsuits at Summerfest this week. One was a prototype "Eagle", it was an orange suit with spitfire type armwings and a medium size leg wing. Definitely still a prototype, in discussions Tony mentioned there are a few things they're not finalized on such as how the leg zippers/cutaway system works, liner material for the inside of the suit, etc. But I got the sense that the overall planform of the suit is fairly well congealed. This orange suit is roughly the same planform as the white one you see Tony flying in Matt's video where Tony has handprints on his butt

Reading through what I just wrote...maybe I'm being too narrow here. IMO the question of whether you ought to feel safe with a bigger suit is the same question of whether you ought to feel safe in any suit. To feel safe at all in a ws IMO one should be able to *) fly relative to others, probably incl taking and holding a dock *) plot your flight away from hazards *) spin/tumble & recover *) reach your hackey & emergency handles at all times *) deploy at a reasonable altitude *) move partially in and out of someone else's burble without losing control, or otherwise demonstrate awareness of where someone's burble is My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Tumbles happen, even sometimes to experienced ws pilots in beginner suits. Esp when they get taken out by someone else's burble. The question to me is whether it's likely to introduce significant risk for someone who's already acquainted with ws flight to fly a bigger suit, and the answer is no. Taking tumbles, flying poorly, getting tired are all likely, but where is the risk? And where is that risk due to a large suit vs a small suit? It's always a good idea to avoid groups until you're comfortable with a new suit, and this applies whether it's a large suit or a small suit. Perhaps tomorrow some manufacturer will introduce a suit that can't be flown without dozens/hundreds of ws jumps, IMO that suit has not been invented yet. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

IMO for skydiving (no comment on BASE, that's not my thing) the skills are pretty much transferable from whatever suit you learn on. Every suit I've flown has had a comfortable range in which it could be safely navigated & controlled. Unlike flying a canopy, pretty much all you need to do with a wingsuit to be safe is 1) point yourself in a direction clear of airborne hazards incl other jumpers 2) deploy safely As long as there's some degree of control, you probably already have this skillset if you can fly whatever suit you're in. Flying inefficiently IMO won't change your safety level--you shouldn't be jumping out of the plane if there are obstacles like gliders or air traffic you may not clear. Different styles eg grippers, palm up, palm down, palm in, etc use different muscle groups & it'll take you a while to get used to flying any suit of a different style before you can fly it well (read: with other people) and not end up drained by the end of the jump. Having said all that, there are marked differences between all the suits on the market & those suits that are under development. You should choose a suit based on what you want to do with it & perhaps your body type as well. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Why don't we just ban injuries and leave it at that? My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?