I like how you describe vo2 max as similar to an xp bar, because I've felt something similar. Zone 2 is what got me into running, because it made running not hurt and almost pleasurable.
It's much more sustainable than Zone 4 (supposedly anyone can maintain Zone 2 for hours) and brings with it a bunch of metabolic and health benefits. I found the book "80/20 Running" to have excellent running schedules for how to mix in a small but appropriate amount of fast Zone 4 running into a schedule that's predominantly Zone 2. It has a good mix of intervals, tempo runs and hill runs that build you up to run 5k, 10s, halfs and full marathons in beginner, intermediate and advanced pace goals.
The intent of the slow Zone 2 is to build the cardiovascular base that gives you better aerobic endurance without stressing your body out too much. Zone 4 is what makes you faster.
I have read this on Quora 10 years ago, esp. when i was in a highly divese neighborhood, like: Poor people, doing-well-people, refugees, unemployed, but also academics and wealthy. So i could jump segments very often in a week, and this saying turns out to be absolutely right, in my perception.
Since then, i'm looking/hearing very thoroughly when being in a group situation.
It's called "Du Chinese," but if you search for something like "story language learning German" (or whatever your language of choice is) and scroll past all the ads for Duolingo and Babbel, you'll find a lot of other options. I'm not sure which are the best ones, or how to figure that out.
From what I have read/watched, Rogan didn't refuse to interview Harris and offered to do the same multi-hour interview he does with every guest.
Harris just wanted him to fly to another city and do a 1-hour interview in their studio. To make an exception for a single guest seems unfair and I don't blame Rogan for not agreeing.
You have to understand American politics behind the rise of Trump. Since the 1980s and Reagan, Democrats had broken with their New Deal era coalition composed of union workers. Instead, Democrats have aligned with middle class knowledge workers, and pushed for neoliberal policy that have offshored many manufacturing jobs. This was seen as a betrayal to the working class. That has left many working class whites with high school degrees with low-paying service jobs, that gave them a lower standard of living compared to the union jobs their parents worked.
This continued from Clinton to the Obama era. While Obamacare was a step in the right direction, it was seen as too little too late. It also had unintended consequences. For example, some of my part-time service job colleagues reported that pre-Obamacare, the employer could have them work 40 hours a week, because they weren't forced to provide them health insurance that met some minimum standard. However post-Obamacare, their hours were limited at 29 hours, which made it much harder to make a living.
By 2016, there was an opioid addiction crisis composing largely of working whites with only a high school degree, and the economy was still suffering from the slower-than-possible recovery from the Great Recession. (Economists say it would've been faster with more stimulus, but Obama was cowed by his neoliberal econ advisors). Due to gridlock in the political system, immigration system reform was impossible, and Presidents could only use Executive Orders to try to mitigate (but not solve) the problem of an increasing number of illegal immigrants from the Southern border.
All the pieces were in place:
- Scapegoat: illegal immigrants
- Weak economy: check
- Disgruntled populace: check
Feeling abandoned by both parties, the electorate went with an anti-establishment strongman demagogue who preyed on their hopes and fears. It's almost identical to the political environment that gave rise to Hitler and Mussolini.
The saving grace for the US during Trump's first term has been her strong democratic institutions. Pray they hold up during his second and hopefully final term.
> There was an understanding of natural selection even back to antiquity. How could there not be? Did people not tame the animals and plants? These are experiments, and they saw the results.
No, people did not know natural selection before Darwin. He spent decades collecting and then analyzing data collected in Galapagos Islands before he made his breakthrough.
It's pure hindsight bias to think that you can go from "I bred the fattest chickens together, who made a fatter chicken" to "Humans evolved from apes who evolved from single-cellular organisms". For millennia, people from all cultures believed that God created humans from the void. In the absence of data, that's as good a guess as you can have. If Darwin concocted his theory of natural selection before he had his data, no one would have believed him. By dismissing the theory of natural selection as something that was "obvious" pre-Darwin you are dismissing his life's work.
Read the history. The topics discussed were are not reminiscent of evolution because hindsight, they are similar because they are similar. Darwin himself references many of these. People knew of artificial selection because they did it. You don't breed animals and plants without some basic knowledge here.
I'm not saying Darwin's work wasn't important. It's critical. But this does not warrant dishonoring and forgetting all those who did work that led to that point. Their work wasn't as ground breaking and influential, but they still helped set the stage. Darwin's work didn't appear out of a vacuum.
Science doesn't happen in leaps and bounds.
> By dismissing the theory of natural selection as something that was "obvious" pre-Darwin you are dismissing his life's work.
This is a grave misinterpreting of what I mean. You have made mountains out of the pebbles I described. It can both be true that scatterings of the ideas exist, with only circumstantial evidence for them, while also monumental work be accomplished to legitimize those ideas and fill in so many holes.
Your basis of what the average person believes is also irrelevant. Even still many reject evolution and so many more did even just a decade or two ago. It was national debate not even a century ago.
You might be stretching Dan Luu's essay a bit far. It's been a while since I read it, but my recollection of it was him saying the 95th percentile in an arbitrary hobby, say amateurs playing competitive esports (e.g. Overwatch), and that if you put even a small amount of time into deliberate practice, you would be better than 95th percentile player in Overwatch. I didn't get the sense Dan Luu was extrapolating to multi-billion dollar companies, what it would take to take the fight to them, and taking their market share.
The worst part of Apple Maps is it doesn't have "always point north" mode. That makes it unuseable for those of us that can't use non-North turn-by-turn maps.
It's been a feature request for many years now and Apple hasn't done anything about it.
It's much more sustainable than Zone 4 (supposedly anyone can maintain Zone 2 for hours) and brings with it a bunch of metabolic and health benefits. I found the book "80/20 Running" to have excellent running schedules for how to mix in a small but appropriate amount of fast Zone 4 running into a schedule that's predominantly Zone 2. It has a good mix of intervals, tempo runs and hill runs that build you up to run 5k, 10s, halfs and full marathons in beginner, intermediate and advanced pace goals.
The intent of the slow Zone 2 is to build the cardiovascular base that gives you better aerobic endurance without stressing your body out too much. Zone 4 is what makes you faster.
reply