Oh, the guy being filmed is a free-diver, so he can prob hold his breath for several minutes. I was just as impressed with the cinematographer - it's so well shot - at times he looks like he's falling, other times in outer space, so cool.

Here's another video they did together:

http://vimeo.com/112491662

Boring to watch...I bet it's exciting to 'fly' through though!
I would have been too scared of hitting bottom at speed to relax enough to hold my breath long. Dude's got some serious control!

Not likely they could Imax it. Imax uses the same 35mm film, but sideways, meaning each frame uses twice the film, and so has twice as much picture to project. If you project a plain 35mm onto an Imax screen, it looks terrible and grainy. It's possible they could digitize it, do some digital magic, and make it happen, but I'm not holding my breath.

In your opinion, what is "the right thing"?

This isn't a flame, just an attempt to understand your perspective.

My reason, and perspective, is because for many years I've seen what actions that Israel has taken, even through the American rose-colored-lens of media, as oppression-bordering-on-genocide. I also sincerely doubt that the Palestinian media has such a subversive hold on American media that it could launch as much propaganda as what I've seen over the last couple decades.

The US appears to have an unspoken mandate to support everything that Israel does. Even when I research US and world history, I don't fully understand why the US has taken this stance.

Regardless, terribly, ironically, the US seems to be supporting an organized regime of the like since we have not seen since the early 19th century. I try to listen to all channels of media because I feel it's healthy to be exposed to contradicting viewpoints, but I've never heard a single positive action that Israel has done in the name of its geographical area, history, or government, that wasn't entirely selfish in the name of biblical righteousness.

Anyway, I originally viewed this post because I was actually surprised that the US would condemn an action of Israels because I'm so used to the US government loading up the state of Israel with arms and supporting their militant actions. I've no idea what "WochIT" media is, but it would be a nice turning point for the US if their channel portrays a legitimate perspective.

In the meantime I won't hold my breath.

Hmmm Idk, i was really pumped up for that game and it ended up being only so-so. I wouldn't hold my breath, and im done pre-ordering until i demo the game.

Ill believe it when I see it. Google translate has a bloody hard time doing proper semantical and contextual translation, which leaves you with a conversation as if you're talking to a 4 year old.....not holding my breath on this one.

I'm not going to hold my breath on this being anything great, but I'll give it a chance (likely more than Fox will give it). *promote anyhow

> "(and I try to avoid the 2 main parties like the plague)"

How is that working out for you?

Ah, I see, your candidate rarely wins. I'm surprised any of your candidates win at all, if they are not Democrats or Republicans. Where do you live? Still, you are doing quite well for yourself, a beautiful orchard and all, so things are good. You are fortunate.

> "try to ignore the barrage of campaigns and look for other alternatives to make main stream (someday)."

Well, you know what I will say... Good luck with that but don't hold your breath.

> "One is to refuse to vote for anyone not actively working to fix the system, no matter what else they do for or against you."

Is this what you do? I wouldn't be able to vote for anyone, following this advice, since no politician seems actively working to fix the system in any way I consider an actual "fix". (They'd be out of a job, if they did!) And voting only legitimizes what I consider to be an illegitimate system anyway.

> "I know, good luck with that. A newtboy can dream, can't he?"

Yes, like I have been telling you, good luck with that. You sure can dream, all you want. It is a freedom not yet legislated against. So enjoy it. And if you find a way of making your dreams a reality, even better!

#2 They weren't dealing drugs in that video, were they? And the Oakland vice squad does conduct raids, does it not? I personally know a detective who worked there for years.

#3: "how many slaves do you own?"

Obviously slavery violates self-ownership rights. Shooting a gun on your own property violates no one's rights.

#4: "They document it in hopes the police will do something."

Don't hold your breath.

#5: "Business won't move to these places UNLESS you give them incentive (like tax huge breaks "

Sure, like in Pittsburgh or Singapore.

> "they do not just go there and fix things unless we all pay to let them."

Tax breaks is not "paying them." In fact, you have no moral right to tax. Taxation is theft.

#6: You're too vague positing little more than a bunch of opinions and declarations. Nothing here which really warrants a response.

#7: "They don't allow crime on their (ever expanding) property, period."

That's what I said. Only "public" property allows that kind of violent crime. No legitimate business would. So, while Disney can raise the standard of living on and around its grounds, it's under no pretense to maintain the civility outside of its property.

> "They show clearly that private ownership/control leads to MORE regulation, not less, it's just not government regulation."

When I say "regulation," I mean state-imposed regulation. Of course, however someone wants to regulate within their own private property is within their rights to self-ownership and private property. It's fine since it is not aggression/coercion. I'm not against private regulation. In fact, I regulate who enters into my house or uses my car. Duh. Don't you?

#8: "Oakland HAS been high crime with little money"

This is often the case. The same underlying causes for crime and poverty.

> "Much if not most of the crime happens in parking lots and buildings, on private property, not in the street."

Certainly not while the owners are using the property or while they are liable for allowing a crime to occur there. But tell me: where specifically?

I was making reference to what is happening in that video. If you want to talk about other specific instances, then tell me which ones and we can look at each one specifically.

> "Your apparent assertion that police have unfairly and wrongly stopped mob justice that would assuredly solve all the crime (by committing crimes against criminals) is laughable."

I don't know where you get this "mob justice" from. You are reading into what I said or something.

#9: "nor can you for $35 a month."

Yes I can, and better than what the police offers.

> "People will gladly take your money, but what do they do for you?"

If you are talking about the police, then nothing really.

> "Your taxes are not used only for 'security' you know."

Technically, they are used mostly to pay for war and the national debt. But police is also paid from taxes.

#10: "Most honest people in Oakland are struggling, or they wouldn't live there."

I don't know if this is true, but apparently you do. Somehow, I doubt they are struggling so much that they cannot buy a gun.

> "they can't afford rent and food"

Most "hardworking people" in Oakland cannot buy food? Really?

> "especially when you and yours stop paying taxes and all services they depend on to survive dry up."

I guess they'll still have you to pay for them and the wars and the debt. Although I'm not against charity, in fact I am actively engaged in such activities. But if you need my money, then put the guns away and ask nicely.

> "it's insanely easy to buy an illegal gun there"

But most law abiding people don't want to break the law on this or many other things.

> "Yeah yeah, I just know nothing, so ignore me."

I kind of do.

> "I don't think Oakland is a libertarian dream"

No, that was @enoch who said it was.

> "it's what you get when you de/under fund police and have terrible governing."

You always have 'terrible governing' when it comes from the state, politicians and such. It's a logical fallacy to conclude otherwise.

> "I don't think the answer is to stop governing and policing, it's to do it better (which doesn't necessarily mean more)."

Sorry, but this will NEVER happen. (But, hey, good luck with that. I'm certainly not stopping you. Go ahead. "Do better.")

> "Where is this utopian free market that has "much less poverty" you reference as evidence, I can't find it."

Then you must not be paying attention. Virtually all progress comes from the free market.

And again, if you are not interested, then it doesn't matter if you find it or not, does it? It's your life. You decide what you want and go ahead and do it and live with the consequences.

> "Ahhh, so you admit, anarchy is preferable to you over a government that's not libertarian...hmmmm."

In my opinion, a government cannot be libertarian. The logical conclusion to libertarian non-aggression is anarchy, i.e., no ruler; no state. A "libertarian" state is not really "libertarian." It's a contradiction in terms.

> "I don't think the working people of Oakland, or most anywhere else would agree."

So what? Who cares if they agree or not? They obviously don't agree and, therefore, as you say, they live in Oakland and are "struggling." If most people in Oakland agreed, they could probably turn things around. But as you say, they don't. So they, like everyone else, must live with the consequences of their decisions, their beliefs, their behaviors.

See, the good thing about being libertarian is that you don't really need to convince anyone of anything. That futile endeavor is the lot of those who hope -- against all evidence -- that they will somehow get "good government" if they can only convince others to elect the "better politicians." I sincerely wish you the best of luck with that. I'm certainly not counting on it ever happening. You have your idea of what "good government" means and how to get there, and so do many millions of other people. And they obviously don't agree.

> "And back to 'praxeology', an infant 'science' with questionable if any results."

Questionable in what way(s)? What do you know about it?

> "BTW...I was a libertarian until the Tea party came along...then I had to re-think."

The Tea Party is not libertarian. They have some libertarian preferences, but that's it. They are certainly not anarchists.

Anyway, in sum of all of this, let me say that, if you think you have the answers, then I encourage you to put them into practice. See if you can and deal with the problem!

I was holding my breath the whole time.

Because I thought he was going to run out of battery

I've got no problems with them seceding at this point. Texas for example, their ego is so over-inflated I would just LOVE to see them fall flat on their face if they put their money where their mouth is.

That's the thing though, it's all bluster, it's a temper tantrum at a state level. If you don't do what I want I'm going to hold my breath until I die. THEN you'll be sorry!!!

If any state seceded, the most immediate effect would probably be the taxes for that state would go up dramatically since they'd now have to pay for things the fed used to pay for.

Don't hold your breath waiting for TIE Fighter. As far as the rest of the industry is concerned, the space sim genre is dead. Doubt Lucasarts would ever give up the IP to let it be crowdfunded.

I think I passed out twice watching the video holding my breath. Going to have to watch it again to see what I missed!

" sensibly address the Sandy Hooks"??

Keep holding your breath-it's already old news as a topic of discourse here on this site with a majority of the opinions coming from outside the country in question).

BTW, the state of the union address was like watching some surreal event targeting an audience of the developmentally disabled and mental incompetents. Obama sickens and distresses more each passing day, he looks angry and tired and his voice has become synonymous with bullshit in many minds.

He NEVER looks directly into the camera, that shifty, side-to-side head whilst speaking-The mans' a piece of garbage.

No, dive into the nearest water from a standing position and hold your breath or run 30 kph in random patterns to avoid detection