Considering those Wikipedia references are a blog saying parabiotic effects are really interesting, but there's no evidence in humans, maybe in 10 or 20 years, and a review/opinion article with the title "Younger blood from older donors: Admitting ignorance and seeking stronger data and clinical trials" I think your response "stop asserting bullshit moron" might be a little bit too strong?
Any activity that you sustain for more than about a minute is almost certainly not mostly anaerobic. High school biology texts often talk about metabolism "switching" from aerobic to anaerobic, but that's not really what happens. When you begin to exercise your muscle metabolism is almost purely anaerobic, as aerobic respiration takes a while to ramp up. That happens over the first two minutes or so. If the energy demands are below your anaerobic threshold, aerobic respiration then provides all the required ATP. If not, anaerobic metabolism makes up the *shortfall*.
Aerobic respiration is limited by how fast you can deliver oxygen and substrate. Sustained anaerobic respiration is also strongly influenced by muscle perfusion for a variety of reasons, one of which is maintaining a workable ionic environment around and within the muscle cells.
So the amount of time you can maintain an anaerobic activity is limited by the combination of your aerobic and anaerobic capacity, both of which are affected by perfusion. A sustained anaerobic activity has the distinction of running your cardio-pulmonary system flat out.
Uranium decays through alpha emission. You can block the radiation with tissue paper (or a layer of dead skin cells). The cylinder was probably acrylic, because it's cheap, transparent, and doesn't break easily.
Assuming you can actually do a pushup, muscle strength doesn't really factor in.
Your ability to run for a long time on a treadmill is mostly limited by energy availability and motivation. Your ability to do a a bunch of pushups in a single set is mostly limited by how fast your circulatory system can supply blood to your muscles.
That's likely why it's a better indicator of cardiovascular problems. Short duration high intensity exertion requires the same of your heart. Lower intensity cardio requires your heart to work at less than its maximum, but over a longer period of time.
A maximum effort treadmill test might do as well. Just turn up the speed until the subject goes flying off.
"I really think it comes down to what management gets or think they get out of it."
Yes. Like I said, people, including management, have weird ideas about work.
Studies have also shown that workaholics are often less productive than more well-balanced people, and are more likely to burn out. Some people need a manager to force them to take a break. Some of those people are managers themselves.
I think the summary writer meant something along the lines of "even though you'd expect cutting work time by 25% would result in a reduction in productivity, it did not."
The article states that productivity went up 20% and profits also increased.
This isn't really surprising. Lots of research shows that 40 hours a week is maximum sustainable effort, when you're building bombs as fast as you can to avoid being invaded by Nazis (seriously). Intellectual work seems to be less than that.
It's also not surprising that companies aren't "all over this." Management is a highly conservative discipline and people have really weird ideas about work. Yours is currently one of the first listed comments on this story, but I'm sure scrolling down will reveal a lot of people who simply refuse to believe this.
There isn't really any such thing as an interpreted language anymore. There are Python compilers. There are even Python compilers that can be told to compile single functions or methods.
Deep learning code is absolutely compiled, but for the major libraries the models are specified in python.
I'm not the OP, but I would argue that. Governments shouldn't give special treatment to individuals (including corporate individuals). Laws are supposed to apply to everyone equally.
Tax incentives to corporations are straight up bribes. Research has also shown that those bribes almost never pay off, so not only are they corruption, they're also against the public interest.
On average, renting is cheaper than owning. That home ownership thing you said is a line thatâ(TM)s been sold to a couple of generations now, presumably to spur the construction, real estate and mortgage industries, but it has the side benefit of forcing people to save money as well. Owning the home you live in is a pretty effective forced savings plan.
I'm in Canada; time off didn't change and is effectively the legal minimum; I have a contract that is renewed annually but contains a clause that says I can be fired for any reason, including "funds ran out", with two weeks notice or two weeks pay in lieu.
It's possible, but not necessary. Performance scales of any kind are generally nonlinear, usually something like a logistic curve. So a beneficial effect tends to create more of a boost in the middle than at the top. Also, poorer students might not have good influences from home, so a great teacher makes more of a difference.
A 90% student might go up to 95% with a great teacher, but a 50% student might jump much more than 5%.
First thing to do is make sure that your passphrase system accepts spaces. It's a pain in the ass to type "thisismypassphrase" compared to "this is my passphrase".
Suprisingly, governments generally don't spend ALL their tax income on hookers and blow.
Amazon coming to town means a lot of expenditures on infrastructure, policing, fire, etc. I don't know exactly what the tax balance is for large corporations in NY, but there's a good chance that giving them a big tax break would end up in a net loss. Enough people seem to think so that they killed the deal.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering those Wikipedia references are a blog saying parabiotic effects are really interesting, but there's no evidence in humans, maybe in 10 or 20 years, and a review/opinion article with the title "Younger blood from older donors: Admitting ignorance and seeking stronger data and clinical trials" I think your response "stop asserting bullshit moron" might be a little bit too strong?
Any activity that you sustain for more than about a minute is almost certainly not mostly anaerobic. High school biology texts often talk about metabolism "switching" from aerobic to anaerobic, but that's not really what happens. When you begin to exercise your muscle metabolism is almost purely anaerobic, as aerobic respiration takes a while to ramp up. That happens over the first two minutes or so. If the energy demands are below your anaerobic threshold, aerobic respiration then provides all the required ATP. If not, anaerobic metabolism makes up the *shortfall*.
Aerobic respiration is limited by how fast you can deliver oxygen and substrate. Sustained anaerobic respiration is also strongly influenced by muscle perfusion for a variety of reasons, one of which is maintaining a workable ionic environment around and within the muscle cells.
So the amount of time you can maintain an anaerobic activity is limited by the combination of your aerobic and anaerobic capacity, both of which are affected by perfusion. A sustained anaerobic activity has the distinction of running your cardio-pulmonary system flat out.
Much less exciting. Also not as high intensity as pushups to exhaustion.
That's true, but a plastic bucket is a pretty effective beta absorber. The bucket with the loose lid would have let a bit more out.
Uranium decays through alpha emission. You can block the radiation with tissue paper (or a layer of dead skin cells). The cylinder was probably acrylic, because it's cheap, transparent, and doesn't break easily.
Shifts are still 8 hours, but you have four per week instead of five. Neither four nor five goes into seven equally.
Assuming you can actually do a pushup, muscle strength doesn't really factor in.
Your ability to run for a long time on a treadmill is mostly limited by energy availability and motivation. Your ability to do a a bunch of pushups in a single set is mostly limited by how fast your circulatory system can supply blood to your muscles.
That's likely why it's a better indicator of cardiovascular problems. Short duration high intensity exertion requires the same of your heart. Lower intensity cardio requires your heart to work at less than its maximum, but over a longer period of time.
A maximum effort treadmill test might do as well. Just turn up the speed until the subject goes flying off.
"I really think it comes down to what management gets or think they get out of it."
Yes. Like I said, people, including management, have weird ideas about work.
Studies have also shown that workaholics are often less productive than more well-balanced people, and are more likely to burn out. Some people need a manager to force them to take a break. Some of those people are managers themselves.
I think the summary writer meant something along the lines of "even though you'd expect cutting work time by 25% would result in a reduction in productivity, it did not."
The article states that productivity went up 20% and profits also increased.
This isn't really surprising. Lots of research shows that 40 hours a week is maximum sustainable effort, when you're building bombs as fast as you can to avoid being invaded by Nazis (seriously). Intellectual work seems to be less than that.
It's also not surprising that companies aren't "all over this." Management is a highly conservative discipline and people have really weird ideas about work. Yours is currently one of the first listed comments on this story, but I'm sure scrolling down will reveal a lot of people who simply refuse to believe this.
There isn't really any such thing as an interpreted language anymore. There are Python compilers. There are even Python compilers that can be told to compile single functions or methods.
Deep learning code is absolutely compiled, but for the major libraries the models are specified in python.
I'm not the OP, but I would argue that. Governments shouldn't give special treatment to individuals (including corporate individuals). Laws are supposed to apply to everyone equally.
Tax incentives to corporations are straight up bribes. Research has also shown that those bribes almost never pay off, so not only are they corruption, they're also against the public interest.
It surprises me that western governments are allowed to bribe corporations. Laws are supposed to apply to everyone equally.
On average, renting is cheaper than owning. That home ownership thing you said is a line thatâ(TM)s been sold to a couple of generations now, presumably to spur the construction, real estate and mortgage industries, but it has the side benefit of forcing people to save money as well. Owning the home you live in is a pretty effective forced savings plan.
Education is also the second most cost-effective method for reducing crime. You want to make sure you're providing enough of it, efficiently.
There are lots of murders and burglaries that aren't reported. People disappear in big cities, and unknown bodies are discovered.
This report (from 2009) shows burglary is among the highest reported crimes, at 54%. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n...
I'm in Canada; time off didn't change and is effectively the legal minimum; I have a contract that is renewed annually but contains a clause that says I can be fired for any reason, including "funds ran out", with two weeks notice or two weeks pay in lieu.
Yes, I am an academic.
My union just negotiated such indirect benefits as a salary cap and a six year pay freeze (to bring me under the salary cap).
It's possible, but not necessary. Performance scales of any kind are generally nonlinear, usually something like a logistic curve. So a beneficial effect tends to create more of a boost in the middle than at the top. Also, poorer students might not have good influences from home, so a great teacher makes more of a difference.
A 90% student might go up to 95% with a great teacher, but a 50% student might jump much more than 5%.
OR, you could just not collect personal information. Yeah, I know, radical solution.
That's a lot of passwords written on stickies.
First thing to do is make sure that your passphrase system accepts spaces. It's a pain in the ass to type "thisismypassphrase" compared to "this is my passphrase".
Suprisingly, governments generally don't spend ALL their tax income on hookers and blow.
Amazon coming to town means a lot of expenditures on infrastructure, policing, fire, etc. I don't know exactly what the tax balance is for large corporations in NY, but there's a good chance that giving them a big tax break would end up in a net loss. Enough people seem to think so that they killed the deal.
They matched the drapes.
Either that or JPM has figured out the advantages to issuing their own currency, er, excuse me, crypto coins.
Question is which happens first: they lose interest or regulatory agencies gain interest.