generalenvelope

egui has native accesskit support

AFAICT, the majority (60%) of funding for roads doesn't come from direct user charges...

Roads are subsidized, free parking (and generally a lot of paid parking) is subsidized, and the sprawl encouraged by car dependence combined with the resulting infrastructure costs has and will continue to bankrupt cities.

I don't think we should "just only have trains", but the current US transit landscape is absurdly stupid and inefficient.

Which SDK? I've only written Rust FFI to pretty basic C APIs. I'm curious to get a sense of the limitations on something more complex

Vigorous activity is defined as something like > 75-80% max heart rate, or > 6.0 METS, not as an absolute, all out sprint. It's actually quite far from what you expect

The 2019 physical activity guidelines for Americans include consensus recommendations including the evidence and some good graphs to visualize the "bang for buck"

For those curious, those (weekly) recommendations are: twice weekly resistance training, and 150-300min moderate intensity aerobic activity, or 75-150min vigorous aerobic activity.

If you want a program to just give you a starting point, I highly recommend Barbell Medicine's (free) "Beginner Prescription"

I'm pretty sure OPs reply is direct from an LLM

It feels ridiculous not to mention car dependence and the things that enabled it: restrictive zoning, parking minimums, the car lobby.

In the last 50 years, the US has bulldozed dense, mixed used housing that enabled community and tight knit neighborhoods. More economically/socially viable housing (read: an apartment on top of a business) has literally been banned in much of the US. Ensuring that there's a large plot of asphalt to house personal vehicles that are ever increasing in size is baked into zoning laws (though some cities have finally banned parking minimums). Suburbia sprawls, literally requiring most of the country to own a car.

I would love to see some data on this, but my intuition is that everyone is physically farther away as a result, which weakens their general connection and likelihood to party together, and makes it harder for them to get to/from a party in the first place.

There's other feasible side effects too like less savings due to the cost of owning a car (I've seen estimates of the US average exceeding $10k/yr), or expensive housing exacerbated by all of the above - less space for housing due to roads/parking (and the cost rising as a direct result of a developer needing to include parking), and rising taxes to finance more and more infrastructure: suburban sprawl means more roads, pipes, electrical lines, while contributing significantly less economic value (Strong Towns has done some great graphics on how much dense urban areas subsidize their sprawling single family home filled counterparts).

Curious why you chose C++? Were there aspects of other languages/ecosystems like Rust that were lacking? Would choosing Rust be advantageous for blockchains that natively support it (like Solana)?

To be clear: I don't mean to imply you should have done it any other way. I'm interested mainly in gaps in existing ecosystems and whether popular suggestions to "deprecate C++ for memory safe languages" (like one made by Azure CTO years ago) are realistic.

Dr. Feigenbaum from Barbell Medicine says "We want to add years to your life, and life to your years" :)

I haven't seen anybody mention NvChad, which is a popular pre-configured neovim setup with lots of documentation (and a community of support). You're still free to customize, but it saves a TON of time in terms of getting to the foundational editor features.

https://github.com/NvChad/NvChad

The author mentions switching from editor to terminal often - NvChad has built in terminal integration so you can toggle floating/vertical/horizontal terminals (whose contents persist when closed) with a simple keybind.

Highly recommend Barbell Medicine if you're interested in evidence based strength training info. The best workout routine is one that you enjoy and adhere to. Progressive overload (which is NOT just adding weight) is important for progression too. But you probably don't need to go "as hard" as you think - somewhere between 2 and 5 repetitions from failure (RPE 5-8) is fine assuming you're in it for general fitness/health (but even if you aren't).

What linker are you using? I've gotten really significant speedup over the default linker by using lld or mold.

Alan has an MSc and PhD in nutrition and runs Alinea nutrition.

I can't speak on Huberman's assessment of research in the neuroscience space, where he has expertise. Alan has done some breakdowns of Huberman's broad claims related to nutrition, and how they're generally hyperbolic and lacking sufficient evidence (ie they're not based on studies that show outcomes in actual humans in a controlled fashion). The folks at Barbell Medicine have spoken to some of his generic health/fitness claims as well, to similar effect.

I think Huberman uses his platform and title to paint overly broad strokes about all kinds of things outside of his expertise. Some of this could be attributed to a platform like twitter that prioritizes small amounts of text, but overall I think it's disingenuous especially as someone claiming to be an expert. I think if he were more interested in helping people he would focus less on money/fame/views and take a more nuanced approach, instead of (mis)leading people to change based on extremely limited evidence. The problem is he wouldn't be able to churn out so much content if he did so.

I have no reason to doubt any of his academic qualifications. But I have a lot of appreciation for the breadth and depth of knowledge required to speak confidently about the latest evidence in a field. This becomes a problem when the field is outside of one's expertise. Alan goes into this in detail on his instagram post.

I realize the post is based on something Huberman said within his expertise. But I think the context is important to understand, as it makes me wary of listening to him in general.

if you didn't time your caffeine intake this morning it's all a wash /s

Huberman's pretty good at taking research he doesn't have the expertise to assess out of context and turning it into some protocol that everyone needs to do.

The vast majority of things he talks about, if beneficial at all, are at the margins and people stand to gain far more from doing things like exercising and eating vegetables more.

Edit: Alan Flanagan has spoken on the Huberman paradox in detail: - https://www.instagram.com/p/CkLPU7BMiIN/ - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Bgc3uGu0uoI

I don't mean to rain on your parade - but the reason I've heard of this book is red pen reviews: https://www.redpenreviews.org/reviews/why-we-get-sick/ Which didn't give it a particularly favorable review in terms of scientific accuracy

The glaring assumption here being that deficiency can be treated with supplementation. There are tons of reasons why you can be deficient, and many that don't respond at all to supplementation. More people should be talking to medical professionals about this stuff

+1 for UnHook. Amazing how the experience of youtube changes when all you can see is a search bar and the current video

aside: I love egui

Trains are also vastly more efficient, space-wise, at moving people than cars.

As the article mentions, increasing rail infrastructure would logically include regional connections first. It's not like we'd be building a train track everywhere there's a road

I think the social ramifications of car dependence are overlooked. US loves its freedom but in many ways cars make people much less free by taking away their free time, money, social interaction, physical activity, etc. It's incredible how expensive car infrastructure is, which increases taxes to an often unsustainable level (and poorer people not living in the sprawl of single family homes end up subsidizing). Paving everything looks disgusting and is bad for the environment and economy. Not to mention minimum parking laws' contribution to the housing crisis, or the trauma caused by ~40,000 deaths per year due to cars (not to mention all the other injuries). It's not hard to see why this sort of lifestyle could damage your health.

I hope we can get more deep dives on this topic as you mentioned because there are millions of people that would use viable alternatives. These would carry over to QOL improvements for everyone else too.

Exactly. Two things: 1. The vast majority of people do not need to worry about nuances of nutrition. Most Americans (90%+) don't even meet physical activity guidelines, for which there is extremely strong evidence of far more significant benefits. 2. OP responded to another comment of mine that they actively go against what Phd nutritionists say. This was never a post about facts/science.

What makes you think a layman can assess whether the argument is sound and backed by evidence?

What are the qualifications of the author? Much of this content is contrary to content I'm familiar with written by those with Phds in nutrition science

None of those things will replace personal vehicles.

Unless you mean in an abstract sense, They do, and they have. By replacement I mean "if there were a train to get me to work, I would take it instead of driving". I don't feel as free or private in a train, but I am using one instead of a car, and I would call that a replacement.

I am treating cars as a way to get from point A to point B because this is what they are to most people, and it's exactly why many people would and do use viable alternatives as a replacement: because getting from point A to point B is a more valuable function in many cases than freedom, status, privacy, storage, functional space, and mods. Europeans do not have 830 cars per capita because they have other methods of transportation that are a replacement for cars. I feel like this goes without saying, but just because a car is more private than a train etc does not mean trains shouldn't exist, which has essentially been the development ideology in America for the past 70 years, and what I'm arguing should change.

I think we're talking past each other a bit. I think that the degree to which America is car dependent is ridiculously stupid for our safety, solvency of our cities, and enjoyment of everyday life. In Europe, many people are comparably rich but there are far fewer cars. There is also significantly better public transit.

If your entire city is designed for cars, and there are some buses that sit in traffic with everyone else, I'm not surprised that people buy cars. It doesn't mean that's what they want - it's just the only option.

In the end I think viable alternatives should be available. I think it's stupid to drive 15 miles into a city on the same 8 lane highway as everyone when 1 or 2 train tracks could meet the same demand and function (and a streetcar/subway/walk for the rest of the journey).

I do not think cars shouldn't exist. I think they're completely necessary for tons of people at the moment, but I think we should invest in other options that are working extremely well in other places.

Lots of people here are assuming that supplementing vitamin D will "treat" a low level of it, which isn't necessarily true. The level might not change, but you also might care a lot less than you think about the level specifically. Many problems can cause the level to be low, and won't be affected by raising it. Highly recommend the Barbell Medicine podcast on Vitamin D: https://soundcloud.com/user-344313169/vitamin-d-mixdown-1

It costs money and won't necessarily do anything about the levels / the things that were causing the levels to be low in the first place. Highly recommend this deep dive: https://soundcloud.com/user-344313169/vitamin-d-mixdown-1

There is no recommendation made here. These are observations and far from clinical guidelines, or anything any doctor would recommend you do.

Obligatory NJB Plug: "Suburbia is Subsidized: Here's the Math" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nw6qyyrTeI