kazga

> Also elephants are pink.

What does this expression mean in this context?

"I firmly believe this technology will create business value" is so obviously and categorically different from "Humanity has birthed a silicon god that I have also developed romantic feelings for" that I'm not sure if your comment is even trying to be in good faith

Not true. You can't really train your muscles to use less oxygen for the same energy output (what "oxygen-efficiency" would imply). You rather increase their capacity to take up oxygen from the blood and burn it. They will use more oxygen to output more energy.

That additional oxygen needs to come from somewhere. Endurance training at the same time trains the heart to deliver more oxygen to the periphery; the primary mechanism is increased cardiac stroke volume.

> Any condition which causes the individual to self-sterilize or not have progeny is maladaptive from an evolutionary perspective

I mean, this is just trivially wrong on a basic factual level. Look at ants, look at bees, even some mammals like mole-rats.

Not that these "biological facts" argument ever hold any water for complex social issues, but would you mind at least using actual facts?

> > 'The same language' is usually just a desguised nationalistic claim

> It's the opposite: "it's a different language" is usually just a nationalistic desire for differentiation of what are essentially dialects/variants of a language.

It's both. The idea that Ukrainian is an uneducated farmer's dialect of Russian is a common talking point in the "Greater Russia / Russkiy Mir" narrative. Conversely, asserting the status of the Ukrainian language is a big part of Ukrainian identity in the face of an imperial invasion.

That's not true in practice. Floating point arithmetic is not commutative due to rounding errors, and the parallel operations introduce non-determinisn even at temperature 0.

> They just don’t think their daughter swimming against “boys” and then using the same locker room is progress.

Do you genuinely think you're presenting the "woke" side of the argument in good faith here?

>Using steroids and then to promote your programs that act like it's possible to achieve them without is dangerous.

Which one of the linked resources is doing that? The deception part, I mean.

Mike Israetel is very vocal and open about both his own PED use and its health risks, and how taking them is a very bad idea for 99.9% of people. That does not make his content about exercising and nutrition for general health any less superb.

Steroids a fact of life in strength sports and not even really considered cheating, as long as you compete in "untested" divisions. Training for a top-level competition is not the same as exercising for health, even if you don't take PEDs. The people doing it consider it an acceptable tradeoff.

Genetic mutations and recombinations, as has been known for centuries. There is no need to make up some overarching esoteric narrative out of thin air that has people on the losing side of the lottery somehow "deserve" it.

Cycling is not strength training. Did you do some form of resistance training prior to the trip?

I recommend the book "Digital Minimalism" for some excellent advice on exactly those sort of questions

That's a huge generalization for something that differs so heavily even within countries. Cities vs rural, east vs west, catholic vs protestant... Compare Poland and the Czech Republic, both V4 countries, neighbors, former Eastern Bloc, yet one is pretty much the least and the other one of the most religious countries in Europe.

That's trivially false by looking at the field of history.