Also I do not think Olympic athletes should be tested. I once competed at a very high level in sports and the use of drugs is significantly higher then anyone would expect. The difference was that the poorer countries only had access to old school steroids (testosterone, dbol, tren etc) while the richer countries had access to things which at the time were impossible to detect (GH, IGF-1, Research Peptides).
The effects of steroids specifically are seen many years after use, so unless you are testing the lifetime of an athlete the test is meaningless anyway.
2 twins, one does steroids for 2 years, one does not. The steroid user comes off of drugs for another 2 years, and still has a major advantage over the non-using athlete.
Many people like to believe our choices are between letting the best drug infused athlete win, or the best drug free candidate win.
But based on your comment and other readings I think that is a false choice, and the real choice is between letting the best drug infused athlete win, or letting the best athlete who can hide their drug use win.
The difference between natty and enhanced body building is not drug use, but deception.
As someone involved in bitcoin since 2012, these cycles are pretty standard. It went from $1000 to around $250 iirc at one point and recovered. No reason it cant go from $20000 to $5000 and recover. It may take many years, but its not as if all crypto will die overnight.
I see crypto being big in the more distant future, 15-20 years away when many of the problems are sorted out. Everyone is focused on the extreme short term.
It seems like a bit of a stretch to argue that a major scam just starting to unravel represents "the best buying opportunity of the year". Buy when it appears to be just about to crash said no investor, ever.
But I can see how holding large amounts of Bitcoin you want to shift could distort that perspective...
> No reason it cant go from $20000 to $5000 and recover.
There are plenty of reasons why it could never recover. The previous cycles happened with a very different environment and context for bitcoin. This time Bitcoin has just hit mainstream. This cycle will very likely crush the mainstream's faith in Bitcoin to where it will never recover.
Their comment is based on historical facts, making it apples and oranges. Your speculation has no substance, but is 'absolutely' true? I'm not sure I follow that logic.
The apples to oranges is in reference to comparing Bitcoin to the AI's as a whole. AI as a whole survived the winter but a random implementation from 1985 did not. My comment was comparing Bitcoin as an implementation of a cryptocurrency to previous implementations of AI that have generated hype and then became either irrelevant or obsolete.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't back-propagation one of the major techniques in the AI of the 80s? It's 90% of mainstream AI today. Activision was one of the major publishers prior to the video game crash. Today it has the largest share of the market. Just because some things fall out of favor doesn't mean all of them do, especially the most popular ones.
Bitcoin could crash and never recover, but the tech and its descendants could indeed find uses in the future.
"Cryptocurrency is a massive bubble" and "cryptocurrency and the tech behind it is a major innovation in distributed systems and finance" can both be true.
Very much this. Bitcoin is going to have problems scaling both on and off chain. Newer technology can re-examining of proven methodologies will probably yield a better way forward.
Overweight from eating like crap, too many office snacks, drink 5+ cups of coffee a day, eat fast food, back pain from sitting too much, poor circulation, bad sleeping habits, carpal tunnel, high blood pressure, stressed out and depressed, think about ending life fairly often.
10 years into a career as a professional software developer, been writing software for 18 years though. 32 years old.
Through these sacrifices I have managed to make an absolutely ridiculous income, more then I ever dreamed of to be honest. In one year I make what my father made in 5 working for the federal government. I recently put in my notice and I am retiring. I hope to never write a line of code again in my life.
I love technology but being involved in software was not for me.
> Through these sacrifices I have managed to make an absolutely ridiculous income
Beware of attribution error. Were these "sacrifices" necessary to gain the income? I strongly disagree that healthy lifestyle and productivity/income are mutually exclusive.
But I saw some good people go down in the business. Maybe I was lucky to meet someone in my early twenties who was like you and told me not to go down that road...
Maybe in situations where someone throws a beach ball in front of your car and your immediate split-second reaction is to turn your car into a murder weapon directed at the first "hoodlum" you spot who may or may not have thrown this ball.
That is a complex question. I see both sides of the issue and a lot of grey area between (I'd be shocked if I foresee even 10% of all the things philosophers will consider).
I'll just say that it is an option with some merit. Depending on the technology and the local situation I might or might not be in favor of it.
Millenial here. I think things are better then you think.
Failing government systems? Have always existed.
Unaffordable education? Never went, no idea. Online education still free.
Limited Housing and Land? Flyover country, tons of cheap housing and land.
Degrading Climate? Yes. But even the most pessimistic projections are unlikely to effect my life.
Its a great time to be alive. Country not at war, unemployment is low, stock market doing amazing, crime is low, tons of new fields are emerging, sex is significantly easier to find then past generations, and the internet is still pretty great.
Even more pedantic: The United States has been at war with North Korea since June 27, 1950. The war has been in a ceasefire state for a long time, but there has never been a formal peace treaty.
Although a still more pedantic person might point out that there was no formal declaration of war in Korea, so technically it's not a "war" (it was called a "police action").
An even more pedantic person might point out that while various norms (international or internal) might obligate a country to declare war before prosecuting it, the fsct of armed international hostilities is war in international law (though it may not trigger all the effects triggered by a declared war in a states internal law) even if there is no declaration.
That would be a good argument that we were at war in 1950, but it's not a good argument that we've been at war continuously since 1950. If the fact of armed hostilities is war, the fact of no hostilities is peace.
Kind of a red herring IMO. Anecdotes only get you so far—when we look at the vast majority of millenials, most of their prospects are not so great. And this is especially true in comparison to the prospects of earlier generations.
Come to Colorado. Formerly the apex of flyover real estate. Now the location of million dollar 2000sqft houses. I see maps from as late as a decade ago with nothing on them where whole cities now exist.
"But even the most pessimistic projections are unlikely to effect my life."
I applaud the optimism, but let's not minimize the gravity of climate change: the most pessimistic projections involve a runaway release of methane gas which makes life inhospitable on all of earth.
I don’t think flyover country is as cheap as it used to be. I’m willing to move anywhere, but after much house searching, the only places I consider affordable now are Idaho and the deep rural south.
I’m with that other commenter who suggested Eastern Europe is much more interesting.
Take the weekend off from the news, or longer. Find a good, non-political book and dive in.
I've found it pretty easy to get into a negative spiral when reading about all the shit going on. Our awareness of the myriad problems and the seeming political and cultural insurmountability of them don't do our minds any favors.
