kiloshib

Since strength is a measure of maximum force, then the 1RM is probably the best metric for judging strength.

> I’ve always hated the 1 rep max mentality. Mostly saw it in high school with kids trying to out do each other, but it fails to promote strength.

I agree. There is a difference between the mentality of high school lifters chasing a 1RM to impress people (often called "ego lifting") and the use of the 1RM as a baseline for measuring a person's strength for the purposes of developing a strength training regimen.

The 1RM also takes into account comfort of the lift. If you feel like your spine is going to snap, but you complete the lift then the weight is probably too heavy, for example. Some lifters use the Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE) as a heuristic for this [1].

[1] https://blog.nasm.org/rate-of-perceived-exertion

What is the difference between "Redot" and Godot?

The README for this GitHub contains the same info as the official Godot repo [1], so it's not clear what this fork does differently or changes.

[1] https://github.com/godotengine/godot

>I recommend ramping up weight after you can do a full 3 sets of 10 reps at your current weight.

This seems rather arbitrary as rep ranges will heavily depend on what type of exercises/routines a person is running.

3 sets of 10 reps doesn't really fit the bill for a strength training program. That is more of a "bodybuilding" routine focused on hypertrophy.

"Strength" in weightlifting is measured by the one-rep max (1RM) [1] of a given movement. Most starting strength training programs recommend starting off with 5 reps. (For example, Starting Strength [2], Stronglifts 5x5 [3], or Wendler 5/3/1 [4] were common recommendations for beginner routines when I first started lifting).

This is why most strength training programs focus on basic lifts like squat, bench/overhead press, and deadlift.

Some of the intermediate programs will also use "linear periodization" [5] that (iirc) is supposed to help prevent plateaus as a trainee acclimates to their routine.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-repetition_maximum [2] https://startingstrength.com/about [3] https://stronglifts.com/stronglifts-5x5/progress/ [4] https://www.jimwendler.com/blogs/jimwendler-com/101065094-5-... [5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4637911/

FWIW: I think this is true for modern AAA gaming, but the independent game industry seems to doing much better.

Some of the biggest hits this year - like Baldur's Gate 3 and Helldivers 2 - came from independent developers (Larian Studios [1] and ArrowHead Studios [2], respectively).

That being said, I think that the "discourse" in gaming communities online seems to be full of people who are frothing at the mouth over this, that, or the other thing. It makes going online to talk about games a miserable experience sometimes.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larian_Studios [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrowhead_Game_Studios

His YouTube channel is a fun place to deep dive if you are into music at all. Is schtick can be a little bit grating, but some of the reactions from artists to the amount of research and understanding he has about their origins can be really fun to watch.

Also, he has his very first interview up from when he was a kid which is kind of cool: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=002S7Bho3jE

I recently took a CS101 class that used ZyBooks for the textbook and absolutely hated it for this very reason [1].

The "reading" was basically a bunch of mandatory checkbox exercises that turn into a slog through a bunch of slow-loading prompts that were just "Click Next" to receive confirmation that I had read the info in the prompts.

Absolutely miserable experience all around.

[1] https://www.zybooks.com/

If you've got 20 minutes to kill and want to know more about it, I recommend the Marques Brownlee review of the Rabbit [1].

(It also kind of ironic rewatching that video now considering all the bad press Brownlee is getting for is $50 per year wallpaper app [2].)

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddTV12hErTc [2] https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/24/24253023/mkbhd-panels-wal...

> For any with eyes to see, Harvard's graduation rate should be a mark not of pride but of shame: an elite so confident in its own ability to pick winners and losers that it requires them to prove nothing at all once present, yet so determinedly exclusive as to turn away all but a tiny fraction of those who would test themselves against it.

I feel like I've heard this argument before and a common rebuttal is the fact that one year at Harvard costs $82,866 - or Or $331,464 for a 4-year degree (albeit before financial aid) [1].

Is the point here that Harvard should increase its attrition rate?

I think that is a weak argument considering the comparison they set up with the SEALs and the military. Yes, SEAL training is hard and it has a high attrition rate, but to go to SEAL training you must first be in the Navy. If you don't make the cut you go back to the regular Navy - which means you still have a job, housing, medical benefits, etc. (Also, when you get out you get the GI Bill).

There is no "Navy" to fall back on if you fail out of Harvard; just a potentially crushing amount of student debt.

I agree that elite universities should strive to be elite, but I just don't follow the logic of that particular part of this piece.

[1] https://registrar.fas.harvard.edu/tuition-and-fees

Mind did, but I am a technical writer not a dev so take that with a grain of salt.

During my job search, it was nice to have a portfolio to point to because I didn't have any "official" writing samples from my previous jobs (gov't). I wrote tutorials on some simple tech stuff - e.g., "How to install [this tool] on [whatever OS]" - as well as some thoughts on trying to learn computer science fundamentals as technical writer.

It really helped in the interviews to be able to talk candidly about all the fun I had learning different things, and the process had given me a deeper understanding of the tech related to the job.

This quote jumped out to me because it is something that I see quite often among bisexual people. Especially this statement a few lines after the text you quoted:

>That’s not to say that disputes over categorization aren’t important. They may be necessary, especially in rule-making contexts like the law or in organizations. But you have to take the entire process with a grain of salt and recognize the limits of what the category can tell you.

If you peruse (safe for work) bisexual communities online, you will find a lot of people asking whether they are "actually bisexual", "still bisexual", "bisexual enough", etc. for a number of reasons. Some bisexual people who are in heterosexual or homosexual relationships (e.g., a bisexual man dating a heterosexual woman or a bisexual woman dating a lesbian woman) often share a sense of struggle with the fact that they have "chosen" a specific gender to partner with.

This creates a strange insecurity that I see to often - especially (IMO) among bisexual men - centered on whether that bisexual person is "no longer bisexual" partner because they have chosen a partner of the opposite sex.

Some people seem to have an idea that bisexuality implies a type of attraction that is evenly split between men and women. The notion that a bisexual person can have a gender preference at all seems to also be something people struggle with.

But, to me, this quote offers some much needed guidance. Namely, that bisexuality is a way of simplifying a complex form of attraction so that it can be easily understood. That simplification throws away a lot of granular information about the nature of a given bisexual persons feelings of attraction, but it is also a helpful starting point for those who feel this way and wish to understand themselves better.

In other words, like all categories, categories describing sexual attraction can be liberating, but also limiting.

Washington, DC has a similar program [1]. I believe Capital Bikeshare is also maintained by Lyft in some way. I wonder if this one is harder to abuse or if it's just that NYC has a larger pop than DC so there is a larger pool of bikes to collect?

[1] https://capitalbikeshare.com/bike-angels/rewards

FWIW I recently got a great job off a random LinkedIn EasyApply for a company I never heard of at the time. I didn't even remember applying to it when the recruiter reached out to me to set up and interview. I was on unemployment at the time and the state I was in required a minimum of two job contacts a week, and sometimes I would just apply to random jobs that looked interesting. Turned out I picked one that was perfect for me and the recruiter actually followed through.

That being said, you're still right when you point to reliance on the network. My network didn't get me that job per se, but I had a strong network from which to pull from for employment references (old mangagers, etc.) as well as a friend from school who now does career counseling/interview prep at a college.

I'd been unemployed for over a year, but was able to get a quick pep talk from an old mentor and some good interview advice from that friend from school. It was definitely great to have that support to lean on.