If it's not painfull you are not exerting enough effort at least that's the case in the gym. People who are refreshed and more energetic after going to the gym are the same people who won't improve beyond intermediate levels. The ones who let go of the any set at the first feelings of unease and never take a set close to failure.
It's actually fascinating how an ancient proverb could line up with modern science so perfectly.
It certainly does not need to be painful. I think most people will make a distinction between the burn of acidosis, or what you call unease, and actual pain indicating damage is occurring.
But yes, if you never train close to failure you will not grow, not past beginner gains, unless you take steroids.
> think most people will make a distinction between the burn of acidosis, or what you call unease, and actual pain indicating damage is occurring.
There's not a discernible distinction for me. Which is why I always hate hearing shit like "It should feel uncomfortable but not painful." Like, no, it's FUCKING PAINFUL! It HURTS!
I understand you, I just think there is value in using a separate adjective, to avoid beginners thinking pain caused by damage to tissue is normal and you need to push through it to get gains.
There is no reason to protect against bots using regular captchas (Seems like I'm weaker than your average bot in passing those). Brave search has a proof of work captcha and everytime I face it I'm glad it's not google's choose the bicycle one. Having a captcha be a hevy process ran for a couple of seconds might be a nuisance to me who needs to complete it once a day but to the person who has to do it a lot of time for scraping, the costs might add up rather quickly. And the foundamental mechanism of it makes its effectivenes irrelevant to how much progress AI has made.
Also maybe the recent rise in captcha difficulty is not companies making them harder to prevent bots but rather bots twisting the right answer. As I know it captcha works based on other users' answers so if a huge portion of these other users are bots they can fool the alghorithm into thinking their wrong answer is the right answer.
Graphviz is hard. I only need a graph making tool three or four times a year and when I go back to mermaid, only 5 minutes of going through the documentation get's me up to speed. But graphviz is much more complex in a way I often don't need. It's also pretty verbose; You first need to define nodes then the connections while in mermaid both are done in a single line.
However mermaid's experience and output is definitely subpar. Under the saved graphs section you find randomly saved graphs and there is no way to organize multiple graphs in the web editor.
I've even thought of writing a simple script to translate mermaid charts into dot language.
A potentially much bigger difference in verbosity comes from graphviz being a general purpose graph drawing software, while mermaid is more of a software for drawing software development related diagrams (not just graphs and tables). This is well reflected by the fact that in graphviz the diagram types are categorized by layout engine (hierarchical drawing, spring model, force directed placement, circular layout,...), but in Mermaid they are categorized by what data the diagram represents (flowchart, sequence diagram, class diagram, state diagram, entity relationship diagram, gant diagram). You can draw many of those types of diagrams in Graphviz but you will have to potentially do a lot more of reinventing the wheel and low level manual formatting (arrow and node shapes, line style, etc.), while Mermaid documentation uses more of diagram specific terms like cardinality, visibility(public, private, ...) and many others.
That's like comparing Excel with purpose built accounting software or an inventory management system. Excel might be a lot more flexible, but if the usecase specific software matches your needs it can be a lot more streamlined and less error prone.
So the conclusions will very much depend on your use case. If you are trying to draw one of the standard software engineering diagrams as part of design documentation, Mermaid can be great. For less formal design diagrams or quickly visualizing the state of some algorithm it's much more even playing field.
There is no solution. The problem is not in the lack of funding or interest from investors. The public itself is not interested in preventing. They think the probability of something bad happening for them is low (for example heart attack) thus they are not willing to put in the effort and proactively try to prevent it (for example by exercising). This can be either from a lack of accurate data or even when the data is accurate and available someone might still interpret it differently. For me a 3 percent chance might be insignificant for someone else 1 percent is still high.
> The public itself is not interested in preventing. They think the probability of something bad happening for them is low
Which is ironic because we all know someone who’s had a heart attack, cancer or a stroke.
And if someone decides to make lifestyle changes, they’re often going against society and the medical establishment.
A friend recently was able to stop taking her diabetes and hypertension meds after she did things her doctors discouraged her from doing, like intermittent fasting, which I told her about.
Now she distrusts doctors because they told her she’d have take these meds for the rest of her life.
Damn. I noticed this happening a while back and I didn't think much of it. I just deleted the si= part because I knew it's not necessary for a Youtube link to work! I was curious about why this has been added and figures there's been something nefarious going down.
I kept using the app (with ads) because despite my hate for Google I still thought it was the right thing to do. And using YouTube in a browser on mobile felt clunky. But I noticed that identifier in the shared url too and that, plus the increase in ads, finally pushed me to ditch the official app and go with NewPipe. No more ads, no tracking in the URL, sharing the URL can be done with timestamp, when tapping a yt Link in another app, I get asked if I want to play it right away, enqueue it, play it in the background or play it in a little floating window.
At least on Apple devices, it allows you to “paste” things in surprisingly unlikely places. With some finesse, you can even add custom actions on MacOS like passing it to a shell script that downloads and then pipes it into ffmpeg or whatever. Yeah I use it a lot
Same thing I've noticed for Instagram links and many other different apps. Most of them have started tagging the link, to track the user, or check who interacts who, I think.
Those who don't want clean link manually, can use link cleaner apps or uBlock origin in browser.
Right, first I noticed Twitter doing it and then YouTube. I thought, someone sold those corporations new tracking tool or an existing one got a new feature.
About four days ago our professor was talking about how easy we have it and how he had to use punched cards to program. I didn't believe him (not knowing the history of punch cards, I thought they were much older than they actually were so in my mine he couldn't have been using them) but just yesterday he brought a pack of them with himself and showed them to us shattering all doubts.
People who are capable of learning on their own pace are already doing it and the ones that can't use this approach shouldn't hope that a software system is going to allow them to. For me the questions of which professor explains better or the suggestions of not taking a course because the proffesor can't explain, were always meaningless. I never relied on a professor's lecture for learning (but had to sit through them) and my method was possible because engineering is not opinion based (Obviously I did terrible when the course was a amalgamation of different subjects from multiple books). But people who don't have the motivation to start reading a 1000 page textbook by themselves wouldn't have the will to watch 100h of videos around the same topic. In fact it might be even worse for them just watching the videos and not paying any attention.
My buttom line is personalized learning has existed for centuries and changing its medium from books to videos won't make it possible for more people.
I guess people only care and notice theire own prefrences. I never thought about 42" eink display but I'm constantly wishing for the price of 10" and 13" modules to drop cause that's the usecase I'm interested in.
I think their demand would be much much more compared to a 42" panel (what even is the use of such thing) so they can benefit from scale.
It's actually fascinating how an ancient proverb could line up with modern science so perfectly.
reply