CooCooCaCha

A lot of people seem to think you need some inherent talent to get into art. But art is a skill that you can practice and get better at.

So go for it!

You don’t have to use an SPA framework. Hopefully you don’t think you need one to use react.

LLMs can have simulated wants and preferences just like they have simulated personalities, simulated writing styles, etc.

Whenever you message an LLM it could respond in practically unlimited ways, yet it responds in one specific way. That itself is a preference honed through the training process.

Yet you don’t have to use all of it, but it’s there if you need it.

This is why I never understood htmx. Vanilla react is pretty easy to get started with, you just create a root component and mount it to a DOM element.

Maybe 10 lines of code.

Then you can go as simple or as complex as you want without having to awkwardly rig it up to another UI system.

Looking at the example on the front page, I don’t see how you can look at that and think it’s better than react.

Reasoning is also about processing facts.

No I’m connecting the dots. A couple days ago you got downvoted for saying Elon Musk is getting us to mars and that he’s a great man. Now you’re arguing about fasting and keto.

If you want to deny it then fine, but I’d have to be an idiot not to connect those dots.

I’d encourage you to step outside your bubble and actually read about these things because you’re definitely not reading medical literature. You’re being fed bro science, not real science.

We both know you’re trying to frame it as a hack. There’s no point in emphasizing fasting as much as you did if you didn’t think it was a significant improvement over traditional calorie restriction.

So no, I don’t think a “similar or modest” improvement over traditional calorie restriction supports your point. That phrasing suggests they’re not even willing to commit to it being a modest improvement.

You also seem to have completely misunderstood my point. It’s not about ketosis breaking things down slowly. Like I tried to explain, your body has various substrates it can use for energy (fat, muscle), and if you try to “trick” it by forcing it to burn a disproportionate amount of one, it’ll try to make up for it later. So if you do fasted cardio you might be burning more fat during your cardio session, but your body will try to compensate by burning less fat later. So these tricks don’t work, fasted cardio doesn’t help you lose weight more than non-fasted cardio.

Frankly it sounds like you’re getting your information from misinformed right-wing influencers.

You’re not wrong about breaking down fat via lipolysis but you’re wrong about the overall picture. Also, not sure what you mean by cardio stopping you from gaining weight. Cardio burns calories and you need to burn calories to lose fat.

Anyways, fasting isn’t a body hack like some people think. Just look at this article by Harvard health. At best the benefit is modest:

“intermittent fasting has a similar or even modest benefit over traditional calorie-restriction dieting for weight loss”

https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/can-intermitt...

One reason is because the body regulates which sources of energy it uses, and will actually compensate for using too much of one energy source. For example, you might burn more fat during intermittent fasting because that’s what’s available at the time, but when you’re not fasting your body will actually burn less fat to compensate.

This is also why doing fasted cardio isn’t a hack. You’ll just burn less fat later and it’ll mostly be a wash.

You said “surely I’m missing something” so I explained it.

I thought I made it pretty clear I wasn’t offering an opinion on the subject, just explaining it

It’s normal for people to feel less hungry after an intense run. Not everybody all the time but it’s normal.

You’re stuff about obese people and joints isn’t relevant to this discussion on hunger.

Most communication isn’t a legal contract, and a lot of meaning is implicit, not just what is explicitly said.

I’m not saying I agree or disagree with the statements you mentioned, but "wallowing in guilt over it would do nothing" implies wallowing in guilt is a natural or even expected feeling. The person you’re replying to is questioning why someone would wallow in guilt in the first place.

It’s not about fasting or even cardio, it’s about caloric restriction. Fasting reduces the calories you eat, and cardio increases the calories you burn.

I’ve actually found running decreases my appetite.

Technically yes but not for the reason you think.

Muscle and fat are metabolically active, which means they burn calories just to stay alive. If you lose fat, guess what? Your body doesn’t need as many calories to survive.

Another factor is the calories you burn not exercising. We burn calories all day, even when we’re not exercising but when people are dieting they tend to have lower energy so the don’t move around as much.

So yes, technically metabolical rate slows down but it’s not some conspiracy against you. It’s a direct result of losing fat.

That’s why some people lift weights while dieting to build muscle at the same time they’re losing fat. Personally, I haven’t had a huge issue with caloric restriction so I’m doing a more intense diet in the short term, then cooling off once I get to my goal weight and switching to more weigh lifting.

None of what you described is a scam. Time and again, I’ve found the people who are critical of dieting aren’t doing it right… Which is hard for me to wrap my head around since weight loss boils down to one factor, caloric restriction.

You burn more calories than you eat and you lose weight. It’s that simple. All these tricks people use like glp-1 inhibitors and keto all serve the same goal of caloric restriction. GLP-1 reduces appetite which reduces calories, keto removes food groups from your diet and decreases hunger which reduces calories.

I’ve been dieting recently and lost 20 pounds just by diligently tracking and restricting my calories. 10 pounds lost in just the past month. In that time I’ve eaten bowls of pasta, pizza, gone out drinking, etc. All I do is accurately track everything I eat (everything), and if I have a less-strict day (like going drinking), I just eat less the next day to make up for it.

It’s simple, but it requires some discipline. That’s the real reason people have trouble dieting.

Elon is trying to reinvent public transportation in a way that he profits from.

Perfect is the enemy of good.

I'm not concerned with who used what and when. I'm talking about what people expect of AI. When you tell people that you're trying to create digital intelligence, they'll inevitably compare it to people. That's the expectation.

I'm reminded of AI hypesters complaining that people are constantly moving the goalposts of AI. It's a similar effect and I think both have a similar reason.

When people think of AI they think of robots that can think like us. That can solve arbitrary problems, plan for the future, logically reason, etc. In an autonomous fashion.

That's always been true. So the goal posts haven't really moved, instead it's a continuous cycle of hype, understanding, disappointment, and acceptance. Every time a computer exhibits a new capability that's human-like, like recognizing faces, we wonder if this is what the start of AGI looks like, and unfortunately that's not been the case so far.

In that case, you defeated your own argument because if you dismiss historical democracies (which I agree with) then you’re left with modern democracies which haven’t existed long enough to compare with monarachy in terms of resilience.

But I also fully acknowledge that invalidates my argument as well. However, I still think the stability of monarchies is overstated. Just because a dynasty lasts for 700 years doesn’t mean it was stable.

The counter-argument is that even if you say democracy is sub-optimal, it’s certainly more stable than monarchy. Monarchy sounds good when you have a benevolent philosopher-king that does all the right things, but what if you get a bad king? That could mean decades of poor leadership.

With a monarchy, lighting has to strike over and over again.

I agree with everything you say except the “can’t get much worse” part. I think it can get substantially worse, and death is the primary mechanism that prevents power from centralizing on individuals forever.

Every death is a mini-reset in some way.

This is related to Marx’s concept of surplus value. That capitalism is based on most people being under-compensated for the full value of their labor so that someone else can be overcompensated for their labor.

Given that this website comes from a VC startup incubator I highly doubt it’s meant to refer to hacking security.

I think it’s meant to mean the “move fast and break things” style hacking. Which basically means churning out code fast and pushing through problems quickly instead of getting stuck on perfectionism.

I'm convinced there are a large number of people, mostly in tech, that are unknowingly in a death cult because they think complex human systems can be boiled down to simple metrics and logic. And they get attached to this libertarian-type thinking because it makes them feel smart and above it all.

Like the rest of us are over-complicating it, and human economic prosperity is as simple as blindly accelerating value creation.

What we’re really talking about is freedom. Freedom to do what you want with your time whether it’s relaxation or work, but on your own terms.

When you have to work for an income that is a type of forced work, and generally speaking forced work is not going to be as effective as work done of your own volition.

It’s intrinsic motivation vs extrinsic motivation. When I think about your point of view I see a lot of waste and misery. Instead of naively maximizing value production, I want to see a future of contentment and quality value production. Value produced because people are inspired to produce value, not because they have to.

This is one of the more rational comments. I’m really surprised there aren’t more comments expressing how insane this topic is.

It’s absolutely insane that technology and productivity are increasing so rapidly, yet we’re talking about raising the retirement age and people being increasingly unable to afford children.

Something is incredibly wrong here.

People will always yearn and wonder and imagine. Sure some people will spend their time fishing but a lot of people need things to strive for a and they will make things up or seek out others who feel the same way.