einaros

While true, I think there's more to the mix than that. For the last 9-10 years I've stuck with a high-weight-few-reps approach, and I've found that while my strength has increased a lot, I by no means look bulky. I'd think most people would just place me in the "possibly working out" category if they saw me in a t-shirt.

Biking, on the other hand, which I for the most had a brief encounter with to shed 45 excess lbs 10 years ago, I found built huge leg muscles. My biking had much more in common with the low-weight-many-reps-strategy.

I think that largely depends on the gym. Some are really just show-off spots, I agree, but my experience is that the less mainstream, often kinda run-down joints have a much friendlier, less cocky and pretty intelligent under-tone to them.

Weight lifting has been my primary form of workout for the last 9-10 years. I've found that its the only way of training I can do and still keep half a brain focused on a code / architectural issue.

As with biking / jogging / rowing, I find that a proper weight workout also helps me stay focused after finishing up.

That's a pretty difficult path to follow. Chances are you'll end up not eating enough, and start burning muscle in addition to fat. If you lose more than about 1 kg / ~2.2 lbs a week, you're at risk of doing just that. On the other extreme, you can easily wind up eating too much, and gaining more than fat than actual muscle.

To really know what's going on, you'd of course have to measure actual body fat lost, rather than just weight lost. Muscles weigh more than fat, some build muscle more easily than others, etc.

Generally I'd say there's a reason most body builders bulk up for months, then spend time dropping excess weight, rather than aiming for a steady increase in muscle mass with zero fat gain.

For the most, my experience is that aiming for slow weight / fat loss through any muscle exercise is also bound to provide some muscle build up. That seems adequate for most people.

I'm guessing most of the people on CR are also on /b/.

As for me, I really can't be bothered on both instances.

I've yet to try the v4 beta. Seems unlike that they've taken such a huge leap back from v3, though. I'm more inclined to say that Google's implementation on MacOS is inferior to Mozilla's.

Did you ever measure the difference with the Windows versions of the browsers, on said web sites?

Which Chrome version is that? v3.0.195.38 runs it without a glitch here. I did a screencapture, but Jing can't quite keep up with the framerate of the animation, so that looks jumpy (http://screencast.com/t/ODQxMTdmMzg).

On my HTC Hero there's about a second delay between each re-render upon mouseover. Without a keyboard I cant trigger the rotation, so it's difficult to say for sure.

I'm amazed it even renders, though. Kudos to the old Android browser for that!

I wrote a completely useless 3D effect using DOM manipulation some time ago (http://portfoli.no), and have been using it since to do my own personal benchmark of various browsers. Being horribly unoptimized, and probably riddled with flaws, it seems a fair middle ground for most JavaScripts out there.

FF3.6 is (obviously) by far outperformed by Chrome, but it seems to me that even 3.5x did a better job of running it. In either case, the 3.5->3.6 difference seems marginal for this one.