freeloop3
Wouldn't our ancestors carry far less, maybe max 90kg, then people do today? It doesnt make sense to brutally punish your joints with much more than that for part of that action and completely ignore the other part of it.
> So if a joint doesn’t go through its full range—if the hips and knees never go past 90 degrees—the body says ‘I’m not being used’ and starts to degenerate and stops the production of synovial fluid.”
And,
> A 2014 study in the European Journal of Preventive Cardiology found that test subjects who showed difficulty getting up off the floor without support of hands, or an elbow, or leg (what’s called the “sitting-rising test”) resulted in a three-year-shorter life expectancy than subjects who got up with ease.
(Study here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23242910)
As far as the first one, I'd say, so what? More fluid means healthier? Why?
As far as the second one, correlation doesn't prove causation. We should stop pretending this is the case with everything.
> At best, we might undertake ［squatting］ during Crossfit, pilates or while lifting at the gym, but only partially and often with weights (a repetitive maneuver that’s hard to imagine being useful 2.5 million years ago)
I kind of go along with that. Squatting with a bar on your back is a weird maneuver.
A few people have been saying that. But, how can you possibly know? It sounds like a platitude one tells themselves in order to not feel self-conscious, rather than an actual discernable fact.
You assert these things exist without going into any of them. PoS is very new and complex and there are many differences between implementations, much more than in PoW.
Any dismissal you might have read would most likely been based on a previous version because the latest versions of PoS are quite new.
There doesn't always have to be a meaningful trade-off between different technologies that do the same thing. Is there a meaningful trade-off between a zipped wav file and one compressed with flac?
Jeez, just stop spreading FUD.
If someone is considering whether to drive to an event or get a ride, a coupon isn't going to sway them. They may want to show off their new car, or have the ability to take someone home with them, etc.
For people who drove to the event and drank too much there, they'll worry about their car. Also they'll take offense at being offered a ride. Alcoholics often have a lot of arrogance and would rather risk it than use a coupon to take a ride because they're "out of control", and take that hit to their pride.
This would only work if the law would allow for free transportation to the event, as controversial as that may be.
I could have made a lot more if I didn't sell so much, but at the time a 10x increase seemed like a one in a lifetime event. When it increased to $80 per btc, I sold 80% of my investment.
When it hit $1000, I felt bad about selling so much during the last run up, that I didn't sell at all. I took the crash back to $200 in stride. I was convinced that crypto was following a pattern of boom and crash, and then boom again and that in the coming years there would a final "big wave" as the last market (finance and retail) opened up to it. It appears that that is what happened. I've already sold a lot, avoided taxes by making a CRUT (a tax shelter) but still have about 50%. I plan to sell some more in January, because I think this wave is going to peak rather slowly (because, let's face it, finance and retail are dumb. It will take finance a long time to shift direction, and public perception is going to change slowly, IMO. For example, the housing bubble went on for a year after it seemed obviously to have reached its peak.). Also it works to my advantage considering taxes to wait.
My general advice now is if you see an investment you are unsure of but could pay off big time, you should invest a little at least. A basket of risky investments can be a huge windfall even if not all pay out.
Also, when you think a risky investment has run its course and is going to crash, it's usually a good idea to not sell all of it and leave maybe 10% just in case.
Nowadays, there is no center. No matter where your individual preferences lead you, there is a group on the internet to validate them. With everyone pursuing different goals and interests, there is no center anymore. This leads to disharmony and chaos.
By Apple controlling what you listen to and when, they are attempting to help society. If you, me, and everyone else was excited about the new Miley Cyrus album, think of how much more together we'd be as a whole. We'd have something in common with our physical neighbors, something to talk about and share. Being part of a collective, IRL, is far better than the poor substitute of some Reddit group.
In the end, what Apple is doing is helping people. And, I for one, can't see how anyone can so readily dismiss what they are doing as bad, simply because they limit the functionality of their products a little bit.
Not only that, but if bitcoin dumps its miners as unceremoniously as you describe, it will create a lot of distrust between miners in general and the bitcoin users. I don't know what alternative hashing algorithm you had in mind, but if it becomes mineable by miners of another coin, they may see an opportunity to attack. Without a large community of miners protecting bitcoin, you will have thrown bitcoin to the wolves so to speak. And there is little reason for miners to protect bitcoin against such an attack, after they showed such disregard to the original community of miners.
So, no, miners are not as impotent as you make out.
His best option would probably be to create an irrevocable trust which pays him a percentage every quarter. Then he won't owe any taxes on what has already accrued.
Then he can consider expatriation or moving to Puerto Rico.
IT WOULD BE SIM A LER TO LEARN ING ENG LISH WRIT TEN LIKE THIS.
In the story they said they were having a hard time tracking it with radar