On March 09 2016 17:55 SoSexy wrote: Other question: why do not professional weightlifters try first the heaviest weight? It seems like common knowledge to me that the more reps you do, the more tired you become so it seems inefficient.
Your not allowed to shift down in weight during competition so if you attempt a weight at your max and fail you cannot then try a lower weight, giving you a big risk of not scoring at all.
but why is it so? wouldn't it make more sense to allow for it, since humans seem to be built in this way? I think they could improve a lot of records
Because it would go on for ever. Try super heavy weight fail, go to next heavy fail, next next next. events would take 4-5 times as long.
Indeed. There needs to be a failure clause, something that stops the event eventually and makes athletes drop out. If people were allowed to constantly shift weight to whatever they like, they can stay in the event indefinitely, which means that the event never ends and noone ever wins. That sounds like a really shitty sport.
It is even worse than what SoSexy describes, due to "Try super heavy weight, fail, try again, fail, try to lift 2 kg, succeed, try to lift superheavy, fail, try to lift superheavy, fail, try 1 kg", etc ad infinitum.
On March 09 2016 14:03 miky_ardiente wrote: Does fragrances/colognes with pheromones really work to attract girls ??
Ok so i know there are a lot of fake parfums out there but I remember watching in Discovery channel a show called "Science of Sex" (Or something like that) where they made an experiment and supposedly the majority of the girls picked the guy that used the pheromones fragrance.
The simple is they don't work, and if they did work, they wouldn't work in the way you think.
I reallize the irony of what I'm going to say here, but I figured I'm in the right thread:
How do you pronounce the name of the guy in your quote about knowing how to read?
Dufresne was the guy in The Shawshank Redemption - sounds like dufrain or doofrain.
On March 09 2016 17:55 SoSexy wrote: Other question: why do not professional weightlifters try first the heaviest weight? It seems like common knowledge to me that the more reps you do, the more tired you become so it seems inefficient.
Your not allowed to shift down in weight during competition so if you attempt a weight at your max and fail you cannot then try a lower weight, giving you a big risk of not scoring at all.
but why is it so? wouldn't it make more sense to allow for it, since humans seem to be built in this way? I think they could improve a lot of records
Because it would go on for ever. Try super heavy weight fail, go to next heavy fail, next next next. events would take 4-5 times as long.
Indeed. There needs to be a failure clause, something that stops the event eventually and makes athletes drop out. If people were allowed to constantly shift weight to whatever they like, they can stay in the event indefinitely, which means that the event never ends and noone ever wins. That sounds like a really shitty sport.
It is even worse than what SoSexy describes, due to "Try super heavy weight, fail, try again, fail, try to lift 2 kg, succeed, try to lift superheavy, fail, try to lift superheavy, fail, try 1 kg", etc ad infinitum.
Oh my bad then. I simply thought that during an event u had like 4 liftings and u summed up the total.
On March 09 2016 14:03 miky_ardiente wrote: Does fragrances/colognes with pheromones really work to attract girls ??
Ok so i know there are a lot of fake parfums out there but I remember watching in Discovery channel a show called "Science of Sex" (Or something like that) where they made an experiment and supposedly the majority of the girls picked the guy that used the pheromones fragrance.
The simple is they don't work, and if they did work, they wouldn't work in the way you think.
I reallize the irony of what I'm going to say here, but I figured I'm in the right thread:
How do you pronounce the name of the guy in your quote about knowing how to read?
Dufresne was the guy in The Shawshank Redemption - sounds like dufrain or doofrain.
On March 09 2016 14:03 miky_ardiente wrote: Does fragrances/colognes with pheromones really work to attract girls ??
Ok so i know there are a lot of fake parfums out there but I remember watching in Discovery channel a show called "Science of Sex" (Or something like that) where they made an experiment and supposedly the majority of the girls picked the guy that used the pheromones fragrance.
I'd be very surprised if the placebo doesn't overpowering any real effect by at least an order of magnitude here.
Oh, and all experiments they do on TV shows are horrible. I've seen so many shows where they have their question, go out and ask experts, the experts say that there is no consensus, and the results are not really clear. The host will then go and do their own experiment, pretending that they can solve it where all others have failed. Then they do their horribly design underpowered "experiments" full of nonsensical confounding factors, they will do they completely bogus analysis of the meaningless data, and present the flawed results in a horrendously biased way to confirm whatever the host had decided was the truth before he even decided to do the show at all. Then they pretend that they have done science, and go and broadcast it, and people watch and swallow that happily while in their next breath saying that there is no solid evidence of global warming, and that vaccination is dangerous.
I'm not bitter at all.
amen to that, brother! It's called the mythbuster effect, when you make an horribly flawed experiment and conclude whatever you already wanted to conclude on a definitive way based on one point of measurement. Remember kids, actual science is pretty far from TV science
On March 09 2016 17:55 SoSexy wrote: Other question: why do not professional weightlifters try first the heaviest weight? It seems like common knowledge to me that the more reps you do, the more tired you become so it seems inefficient.
Your not allowed to shift down in weight during competition so if you attempt a weight at your max and fail you cannot then try a lower weight, giving you a big risk of not scoring at all.
but why is it so? wouldn't it make more sense to allow for it, since humans seem to be built in this way? I think they could improve a lot of records
Because it would go on for ever. Try super heavy weight fail, go to next heavy fail, next next next. events would take 4-5 times as long.
Indeed. There needs to be a failure clause, something that stops the event eventually and makes athletes drop out. If people were allowed to constantly shift weight to whatever they like, they can stay in the event indefinitely, which means that the event never ends and noone ever wins. That sounds like a really shitty sport.
It is even worse than what SoSexy describes, due to "Try super heavy weight, fail, try again, fail, try to lift 2 kg, succeed, try to lift superheavy, fail, try to lift superheavy, fail, try 1 kg", etc ad infinitum.
Oh my bad then. I simply thought that during an event u had like 4 liftings and u summed up the total.
You're right. 3 attempts per lift (snatch and clean & jerk). The highest weight counts for the total.
On March 11 2016 14:43 Epishade wrote: Is the economy a zero-sum game?
No. A small example: a technological advancement allows workers to produce 2 kerfluffles at the same rate, given the same production costs, as what used to make 1 kerfluffle. Given a competitive market, now everyone will have more kerfluffles, and each will cost less.
If you're not convinced: estimate at the total wealth of humans at 100 AD, and compare it to now.
On March 12 2016 06:36 Jockmcplop wrote: Does it strike anyone else as extremely apt that 'mother in law' is an anagram of 'woman hitler'?
I kind of wish that it came about recently, so all the mother in law jokes would be that much funnier. Unfortunately its usage goes back to the 14th century per Merriam Webster.
At what point does a software go from version 0.9.X to 1.0?
It's in research, so no official launch, apart from publishing a paper on it. It has already been on github for some while, and mostly works, although still buggy.
On March 12 2016 19:18 Cascade wrote: There are professional programmers here right?
At what point does a software go from version 0.9.X to 1.0?
It's in research, so no official launch, apart from publishing a paper on it. It has already been on github for some while, and mostly works, although still buggy.
Theoretically, as soon as it has all the must-have things that where agreed on in the planning and weren’t cast aside since then.
Realistically, whenever you feel like publishing it without calling it an alpha/beta.
On March 12 2016 19:18 Cascade wrote: There are professional programmers here right?
At what point does a software go from version 0.9.X to 1.0?
It's in research, so no official launch, apart from publishing a paper on it. It has already been on github for some while, and mostly works, although still buggy.
Theoretically, as soon as it has all the must-have things that where agreed on in the planning and weren’t cast aside since then.
Realistically, whenever you feel like publishing it without calling it an alpha/beta.
Planning? :/
My best bet so far is to set 1.0 to the version that runs the performance testing in the first version of the preprint... Does that sound ok?
Related: what is the standard for version number like 1.2.4 and so on? is there one? Any good practices to keep in mind for that?
On March 12 2016 19:46 Cascade wrote: Planning? :/
My best bet so far is to set 1.0 to the version that runs the performance testing in the first version of the preprint... Does that sound ok?
Related: what is the standard for version number like 1.2.4 and so on? is there one? Any good practices to keep in mind for that?
Thanks.
I assume this is an non-professional project, like an assignment or something? Should be right then. Regarding the standard for version numbers, there is a code for that. Usually 1.0 should be running, have the must-have features and .x increases means that some sort of function got added. .x.y is for minor improvements without changing how things work in general or at least thats what I learned at my paid internship... but what I really learned:
On March 12 2016 19:46 Cascade wrote: Planning? :/
My best bet so far is to set 1.0 to the version that runs the performance testing in the first version of the preprint... Does that sound ok?
Related: what is the standard for version number like 1.2.4 and so on? is there one? Any good practices to keep in mind for that?
Thanks.
I assume this is an non-professional project, like an assignment or something? Should be right then. Regarding the standard for version numbers, there is a code for that but: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6kgS_AwuH0
"The code is more of a giudeline"?
It is kindof professional actually. It's an analysis pipeline for biological sequencing data that I've been developing as part of my research. Only I am not an actual software developer. I've been coding for many years in research, but never had any formal training, and this is the first time I'm actually releasing something with the intention of having it used by people I don't directly collaborate with.
I figured TLs "Stupid Questions" thread was the best place to catch up on any gaps I have in my knowledge. Reasonable?
Regarding versions, I was thinking it'd be useful to separate algorithm changes that actually affects output from the analysis, versus just bug fixes. So I was thinking of putting them as the second and third digit of the X.Y.Z version. First digit for really major changes. It'd probably mean that I'd work my way up the 1.1, 1.2, ... 1.15, 1.16 pretty fast, but that shouldn't be a problem, right? So yeah, I have no idea what standards are, just thinking what the users might want to know. In this case, an update in the last digit isn't something to care about as long as the software was running fine on their data. Probably just a fix for some bug that wasn't exposed in their analysis.
Does that make any sense?
Edit: your edited description of versioning doesn't seem to be that different from what I had in mind. With what the pirate said, it is probably close enough.
EPT
