niolosoiale

So we're falling right... wind.... wind more wind... obviously. But at one point the wind got quieter than I would have expected it to, then a slight falling feeling in my stomach appeared, and then just like that we're under a canopy. All of this occured within 3-5 seconds. I didn't expect to have any sensation of falling after being out of the plane (save some hard canopy turns). So I'm a bit confused.

Jumped out of an airplane for the first time. Nothin special.

No doubt. I'll be doing AFF as soon as I can. My raise will be coming up here in a couple months, then it will just be a matter of time.

Well you know, about like jumping out of a plane. Really cool. My tandem master was an awesome guy. Took my friend with me (who I warned on thursday that she would be going) and a couple other friends spectated. I'll tell ya though, my dreams did a pretty good job recreating the experience prior to every doing it. The wind was less uncomfortable than that, but everything else was spot on. And I will be jumping again. God knows I want a $1,000 a month raise to devote to doing this

...I think I lost my whuffo badge.

Too bad, for the sake of this thread, I am not limber enough to grab my ankles. By the way, if anyone on here want's to say hi out there, I'll be wearing a blue t-shirt and jean shorts. Glasses, short hair, general look of a guy who's never jumped out of a plane before.

Won't be a problem. Nervous yeah, not scared.

Yeah, as long as the weather is good, I'm jumping. Anyone else planning on being at OSC tomorrow for the Mike Mullins boogie?

as a person who has never jumped out of a plane. The day of destiny is nigh.

Sounds like a case of a guy doing something for a girl, simply because he is a certain way, and the girl reading more into it than there is. The guy is nice. Being a guy, if he's attracted to you, he wants to hook up. He's either being nice and wants to fuck, or being nice and doesn't want to fuck. The nice thing has no strong relationship to whether or not he wants to. Guys can be nice to unattractive girls to. Typically it's because they are nice guys. Of course, since he's continually offering (out of nervousness presumably), it's a strong indicator that he has some sort of thing for you and probably wants to say something more, but knows that you can't just ask a girl out every time you do something nice for them. You can, but only if you're the type of guy that can pull that of. He isn't, he knows it. Sounds like beta material. Can you handle a beta? Being a woman you should obviously know its not what he does, it how he does it.

Sex twitches. Either too much, or too little. Seriously though, same thing happens to me every once in a while. Did it just yesterday for a few minutes as a matter of fact. There's a lot of different things that could cause it. I have no idea where to begin.

----Public Service Announcement---- Please do not feed the troll. That is all.

Don't get me wrong, the movie was horrible. But the whole barbed wire thing was just so rediculous. I mean come on... SPOILER WARNING (for an already spoiled movie) having strands of barbed wire shoved up your ass and vagina one at a time until you are ripped in half by the internal pressure, with a little girl (demon or not) dancing beneath the entrails and shower of blood that's just rediculous, almost unnecessary. Yes, me and my friends were laughing quite a bit through the final scene. It wasn't being taken seriously.

Bah, they work better on #3 and #4. The only reason Silent Hill gets #2 in my opinion, is that I have not seen anything like what that movie did.

What are you referring to when you say "this" and "this video"? Blues, Dave Sorry, my dumb ass forgot to paste the link... http://postarchives.entensity.net/080604/media.php?media=irreversible.wmv

Tru das sun. http://postarchives.entensity.net/080604/media.php?media=irreversible.wmv

This. But I'm talking in the context of disturbing violence. I could almost feel the pain from this video. Silent Hill was just rediculous. 3rd would be Starship Troopers, but it was sort of comical.

I'm sure someone here has seen it before. I would say the last 15 minutes of "Silent Hill" come in a close 2nd. EDIT: I forgot to post the link. http://postarchives.entensity.net/080604/media.php?media=irreversible.wmv

Again, I don't knock the ability of Non-MS based products to achieve results superior to that of MS based products. No disagreement here that some of Microsoft's large scale networking infrastructures are... lacking to say the least. But in terms of end-user operation... MS and Mac have it down. BTW, being "based" is a world of difference from being something. EDIT: I never said IE worked better than FF EDIT2: But I do like IE better. I use Opera for forum browsing (their gesture feature is unbeatable) and IE for everything else. I've never experienced any negative effects from browsing in IE that weren't fixed with say... Google Toolbar for pop-ups and Adaware for spyware. I haven't even had to run Adaware for a few months now. I don't use anti-virus (I have more problems with the AV software than I've ever had with spyware) and the most of a firewall I've ever ran was windows built-in plus whatever weak firewall my router had. I've never had a virus that I didn't consciously know I was going to contract, disregarding that time i turned on IIS.

A system pre-configured with Mandrake Linux, running the KDE desktop is just as easy/user friendly for the dumb end user as Windows. Heck, most users can't fix windows when they run into a problem, so why would Linux be any different. Zipp0 Errors/configuration of the OS isn't the biggest problem Linux has, it's software accessibility, compatibility, and useability. The biggest problem a user has with trying to break into Linux is the availability of productivity software that provides 100% compatibility with the MS flavors. I don't know if you've ever used OpenOffice, but I did, and it sucked. Specifically the Excel knockoff. It just didn't have the features of functionality I easily found in MSOffice. It would work if you need something and have no money or ways to acquire better software for free, but again, when given two choices, people will normally take the better one. Essentially, the things that people use a computer for, have software already developed on MS and Mac platforms that essentially sets the standard for everything else. Again, this goes back to the resources the software had for development. I'm not saying it's impossible for Linux to become a mainstream end-user OS, I'm saying it's unlikely for previously mentioned reasons. The biggest of which is standardization.

I was really tempted to stop reading after these really mediocre and baseless predictions. I'm glad I didn't because the long paragraphs had surprisingly intelligent analysis. I knew the opening lines were relatively weak predictions, but to date, that is the current setup. Linux is for developers and script kiddies, Windows is for everyone who doesn't like Mac. I just remember a kid coming in to work with his laptop so he could use it while waiting for his car to get done. He comes in asking if there's anything special he has to do to connect to our wireless internet. I tell him there isn't. He comes back 5 minutes later "Are you sure there isn't a problem with the wireless?" My co-worker has his Dell laptop running and connected. I show the kid how the Dell is connected just fine. I intuitively asked "What operating system are you using?" Response: "Well my friend installed Linux on this last week." Yeah I bet your "friend" did. I told him I couldn't help him because I don't know anything about wireless networking with Linux. He was sad and put his laptop back up after doing what I presume was playing snake for a few minutes.

Linux will always be an operating system developed by developers, for developers. Windows will always be an operating system developed by developers, for users. Due to the nature of open-source, Linux distro's and the software developed to run on them will never be as standardized, and honestly... as quality, as those programs developed to run on the Microsoft or Apple platforms. Why? Because there isn't any money in open-source development. There isn't any money because the target market isn't even paying for the platform. And the only VIABLE market is in network servers. And frankly, Microsoft has a strong hold on the server market as well. Why? Because they developed a superior product, and that product required far more resources to develop, had more access to said resources, and was done by people that obviously do their job well enough to warrant getting paid. At the end of the day, an operating system that is as dependent on the competency of the user as Linux is, will never succeed in a market where the user is more often than not, incompetent. Many times I've show people websites that don't display properly in Firefox yet display just fine in IE. The open-source kiddies will open up Firefoxes little source editor and spend some time fixing the code. Then with a smirk on their face they say "It's not Firefox's fault, it's the coder's fault." I say to them, it doesn't matter whether it's the coder's or the browser's fault. It still ends up being a user's problem. If one piece of software can correctly compensate for the inadequacy, thereby allowing the user to remain oblivious that there is a problem, and one piece of software can't, the user will probably lean towards the one that makes the problem remain transparent. User's don't want to spend time configuring a computer outside of changing their theme and wallpaper. They sure as hell don't want to have to configure programs and hardware to make sure shit works right. That is all.

Yup, because to the military, family counseling = abuse, whether it's true or not. I told them prior to the psychiatric consult that it was just me being depressed for a few weeks. After the consult, i never heard from my recruiter. Doesn't matter though, things worked out for the best. Although the psychiatrist died a month later. Me and him had a very pleasant talk.

Wages Fact: The majority of Wal-Mart’s hourly store associates in the United States work full-time. That is well above the 20 - 40 percent typically found in the retail industry. Our average hourly wage for regular full-time store associates in the U.S. is $10.11 an hour. In some markets, particularly urban areas where the cost of living is more, the average full-time hourly wage for Wal-Mart associates is even higher.For example: $11.58 in Denver, $11.49 in Boston, $11.11 in Atlanta, $11.05 in San Francisco, $10.78 in New York, $10.98 in San Diego, and $10.29 in Los Angeles. Community Impact Fact: Wal-Mart supports communities financially and provides hundreds of jobs. Our property taxes, sales tax revenue and community giving help fund basic services like police and fire departments and schools, and support for invaluable charities. The typical Supercenter raises or gives $30,000 to $50,000 a year to local charitable needs ranging from youth programs to literacy councils. In fact, Wal-Mart is the largest corporate cash contributor in America. In 2005, Wal-Mart donated more than $200 million to help charities and organizations throughout the U.S. More than 90 percent of cash donations from Wal-Mart Stores and the Wal-Mart & SAM'S CLUB Foundation target local communities. That’s $18,000 an hour or $6 a second. In 2005, Wal-Mart collected more than $12.1 billion in state and local sales taxes and paid millions in property taxes. Promoting From Within Fact: Seventy-six percent of our store management started in hourly positions. We believe in promoting from within and we walk the talk. We provide career opportunities for people who may never have dreamed of one day supervising a multi-million dollar department or a $100 million Supercenter. Many associates will advance to careers in retail, but also to careers which support our core business: real estate, public policy, merchandising, logistics, information technology, marketing, advertising and more. We project we will create more than 100,000 new jobs this year in the United States. Benefits Fact: Wal-Mart offers affordable health care coverage to both its full and part-time associates. We work hard to offer good, affordable coverage to our people. Historically, Wal-Mart has paid about two-thirds of the cost of the Associates' Medical Plan. Wal-Mart provides insurance to more than 1 million people and offers up to 18 different plans. Coverage is available for as little as $11 per month for individuals and 30 cents per day for children - no matter how many children an associate has. Unlike many plans, after the first year, the Wal-Mart medical plan has no lifetime maximum for most expenses, protecting our associates against catastrophic loss and financial ruin. We have different deductibles to meet individual needs. Associates also have access to world class healthcare at the Mayo Clinic, Stanford University Hospital, Johns Hopkins University Hospital and many other leading health care facilities without insurance approval. In recent years, Wal-Mart has contributed 4 percent of an associate's eligible pay to the combined Profit Sharing & 401(k) plan. Our hourly associates, just like our management and executive associates, receive bonuses and other incentives for helping the company achieve its goals. In FYE 2005, we spent $4.2 billion on benefits for our associates. Taken from walmartfacts.com -------------------------------- Big bad ugly mean wal-mart monster!!! They employ almost .5% of the US population. What civilian company can beat that?

Please. They chose to work there. If they don't like it, they can leave. There are many others who would take their place. It's a job, it's a relatively low or no-skill job... it doesn't justify anything more than $12/hr unless you are a manager type. It's not slavery, it's employment. My heart bleeds not for the willfully "abused".