Russians No Longer Dispute Olympic Doping Operation

>> Like most jobs, programming is positive sum. If you take modafinil or caffeine or carphedon, you'll write more software of higher quality (hopefully).

You can argue that olympic sports is positive sum then as well. If an athlete takes testosterone, he will perform at a higher level and push the boundaries of human achievement further, entertaining more fans. He won't reduce the quality of other competitors output.

>> And the drugs you take don't have long-term disadvantages. For example, modafinil won't give you early onset Alzheimer's.

This is absolutely unfounded, we don't have longitudinal studies on nootropic use and there are many anecdotal reports of the short and long-term side effects of drugs like modafinil.

>> Contrast that to doping in sport. Sport is zero-sum. For me to win, you must lose.

As I said above, if you argue this, then you can argue the same thing for software. For me to take adderall and outperform another employee (both intracompany and at other companies) makes the other employee lose because he was not willing to undergo the same health risks.

If I become a top performer with the aide of drugs and beat my coworker for a promotion, did he not lose as a result of my willingness to sacrifice my health? What about if my whole team does drugs and ships a better product with faster deadlines, causing another firm to lose the deal and go out of business?

As a thought experiment ask yourself this: if there are no disadvantages then why hasn't the human brain evolved to operate that way normally without medication? I suspect there are some trade-offs, even if they aren't readily apparent.

I would disagree; the more superhuman the feats, the more people are likely to watch. See, e.g., Cristiano Ronaldo.

Note also, that the race to find new steroids that are less detectable has not necessarily corresponded to finding those that are more safe and effective.