2,876 karma · joined October 7, 2012
facepalm Good luck hitting the RDAs for the following using only the meats you described:
* Vitamin C * Vitamin E * Vitamin K * Calcium * Magnesium
I hope beef liver is in your daily diet, otherwise you're also going to come up short in a bunch of other micros. If you're also strength training you also need to go above the RDA for certain micros (e.g, Vit C, B vitamins, Calcium, ...) making it even harder.
This diet is pure pseudoscience.
There were also multiple claims of them doing cryptomining on your device.
Nonsense. This is all part of the "oppressive language" concept peddled by the neo-Marxist authoritarian types.
> Some people use the term opaque box instead because it a more clear antonym to clear/open box.
This is the first time in my life that I head the term "opaque box" used instead of "black box" in this context. I couldn't even find this phrase using a Google search.
First let's start with a few books to prep you for college-level maths:
* https://www.amazon.com/How-Study-as-Mathematics-Major-ebook/...
* https://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Proofs-Introduction-Mathemat... ; or
* https://www.amazon.com/Numbers-Proofs-Modular-Mathematics-Al... ; or
* https://www.amazon.com/How-Prove-Structured-Daniel-Velleman-... (I believe you can find solutions to the 2nd edition online)
For Single-Variable Analysis
* https://www.amazon.com/Think-About-Analysis-Lara-Alcock/dp/0...
* https://www.amazon.com/How-Why-One-Variable-Calculus/dp/1119...
* https://www.amazon.com/Mathematical-Analysis-Straightforward... (contains solutions to exercises)
* https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Analysis-Undergraduate-... (there are solutions online for the 2nd edition)
* https://www.amazon.com/Numbers-Functions-Steps-into-Analysis... (this book is a brilliant exercise-guided approach that helps you build up your knowledge step by step + solutions are provided).
A simple walk on an incline (5km/hr @ 5% incline) can help you burn 400+kcals/hour. You can probably eat at 1500 kcals and start your day with a walk like that on the treadmill while watching some TV show :).
> .. but it is possible to lose weight by calorie restriction alone.
Indeed it is! :)
If you're obese or severely overweight, it's best to just do a PSMF to lose weight as quickly as possible. Btw, at 230lbs you can easily do strength training which will help you with body recomp (stimulating muscle growth while burning fat).
A good rule of thumb for a PSMF is 9.7x[protein intake]. For example: given 1.6g/kg*104kg = 166g of protein per day we get: 166g * 9.7 kcal/g = 1610 kcal. So your daily calories are at 1610 kcal max, and you need to eat at least 166g of protein (the rest of the calories can be filled with carbs/fat). I suggest min 50g of fat per day for men.
No. Loving your sister and loving your wife are two different forms of love. You are equating them both.
> Open relationships, and poly relationships even more, are difficult for many reasons I can't bother to detail here.
I don't think they are possible without exploitation, period. There are plenty of horror stories online about these types of relationships, and rarely an honest appraisal.
> Anyways your vision of the whole thing seems to be pretty much informed by your resentment (They are not even paying for dinner!) and it is not that hard to find someone to have sex with you as a man.
It's informed by the fact that one side of the relationship usually has access to relationships without putting it any work (the woman), while the other part needs to put a lot of work. This obvious asymmetry makes this arrangement quite unfair to the man.
> Having some emotional intelligence, basic social skills, not having a definite vision of what gender roles are, and in general not being an asshole will help a lot, adding to that women are for cultural reasons less sensitive than men to attractiveness.
None of that helps much in a sexual market with strong competition (like where I live). Tinder barely works for most men here. You, like all leftists tend to make everything a cultural choice, so that you can go ahead and simply rewrite the rules as you see fit... I don't buy it, especially not for gender roles which have strong biological components.
> What's funny with incels is that they complain they can't get laid but what they mean in general is that can't have sex with the most attractive women and make fun of less attractive women
I don't care about incels - heck, I don't even know what they are. Men and women have different parameters for sexual attraction. Men are attracted primarily to youth and beauty and women are attracted to dominance and social status (this is not because of cultural reasons, as you claim). I wouldn't want to settle for an unattractive woman just like a woman wouldn't want to settle for a submissive man.
By the way, if you manage to find it, consider reading https://www.amazon.com/Why-Men-Rule-Theory-Dominance/dp/0812.... Read the first review.
Monogamy exists because of a strong bond between two people. Sex is part of that bond. If you "love" another person, then obviously you would fear of losing them, and so would they. A bit of jealousy is healthy in a relationship, and there should be certain boundaries set (so called "red lines").
> Can you explain why you think "loosing your partner" is bound to happen when they have sex with other people?
The fact that I have to explain this is already outrageous.
> Jealousy always exists. I can be jealous because my partner goes to her "girls night" and I don't get to spend time with her.
There's jealousy and there's her actually fcking a stranger. My gf should know that going for a "girl's night out" to some night club is not OK, just as it would not be OK for me to do the same thing. I have personally hooked up girls who were on trips abroad while they had a bf waiting at home... if your gf insists on going on such a trip, she's for the streets.
> Once you think about this for a bit you realize that the choice/reasons for jealousy are mostly arbitrary/cultural and can be overcome. Like any bad habit.
You can't just erase culture like that. Culture is not born out of thin air, it is partly based on our psychology. Biology -> Psychology -> Sociology. If you don't mind other men fcking your gf, then you are clearly in the minority of men, and that's OK, there's a minority for everything. But don't go around claiming that mate guarding is just purely cultural (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mate_guarding_in_humans).
> As for access to sex: there are options for men to balance the sheet. Just take up some sort of social dancing; tango, swing, salsa etc. Or sport. Climbing gyms are playgrounds for singles.
It's not even close. Believe you me. Maybe it is where you live, but where I live the competition is so fierce that these places are just sausage fests.
Longer fasts (over 16 hours, IIRC) are also catabolic to muscle mass, so they're not even recommended for people who have optimal training plans.
One meal per day is also not enough as only a certain amount of the consumed protein is going to be used for muscle protein synthesis so it's optimal to spread the consumption across multiple meals.
If you lift (and you should!), you should strive for 1.4-1.8g/kg of protein per day, try to hit the leucine threshold per meal (even though this is just a hypothesis!), and use calorie cycling to consume more of the protein around the workout window (anabolic window -- it's not been debunked!!!). Try not to go below 50g fat per day, and do whatever you please as far as carbs go :). I'm personally not a fan of keto as it's too restrictive.
I'm not talking just about relationships, I'm talking about the asymmetric access men and women have to sex. This is an undeniable fact of life. If a man wants to get laid tonight, he will have to work hard, and his chances are not that high. That's why ~80% of the prostitutes are women... most women just don't need to pay for sex.
In most cases this is pretty much cuckoldry under a neutral or "hip" label, as women can get laid without effort and men have to work pretty hard for sex, so the woman has her fun with the myriad of choice she has on dating apps (she doesn't even have to pay for dinner), while the guy is barely getting any.
This is all dandy, but how can you do that when Putin breaks previous obligations by invading Crimea and the Donbas?
See https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-parliament-abandons-neutrali...
Putin wants Ukraine either to be part of Russia, or as a vassal/subservient state. You don't even realize how compromised Ukraine was by the FSB. Politicians, media figures, etc... all on the bankroll of the FSB to the tune of billions of dollars. In a way, this war has allowed these rats to be exposed and has unified the Ukrainians even more so as a people. Neutrality would've just prolonged the suffering and allowed Putin to destabilize Ukraine even further.
There's also some interesting discussion here: https://www.russiamatters.org/analysis/nato-or-bust-why-do-u...
> However, the motives behind Russia’s actions toward Ukraine could extend far beyond traditional security interests. Unlike Ukraine, neither Austria nor Finland was viewed by Moscow as part of “the same historical and spiritual place” as Russia, as part of “a single whole.” Hence, it was easier for the Kremlin to accept their statehood, including their right to integrate with Europe politically and economically. It is unlikely that Moscow would ever acquiesce to the same latitude in Ukraine’s foreign policy. As Russian President Vladimir Putin has stressed, “true sovereignty of Ukraine is possible only in partnership with Russia.” Without a common understanding of what neutrality means, Russia would then be even more likely to interfere in Ukraine as long as it interprets any of its foreign policy actions as hostile. Furthermore, in the absence of outside security guarantees or military cooperation with the West, Ukraine could be perceived as sufficiently weak to be coerced to Russia’s liking.
Here's the thing, the people who keep saying that US bears responsibility for Ukraine's predicament are wrong. I'm Russian so I follow various sources (both Russian and Ukrainian) in the original languages. Putin has had his eyes on Ukraine at least since he came into power 20 years ago. In 2014 Igor Girkin (among others) was sent clandestinely to take over Crimea and start the war in the Donbas. Girkin is a monarchist and believes in "the Greater Russia". He believes that Russians and Ukrainians are the same people (an opinion Putin shares and has publicly proclaimed before the war).
The FSB has a whole department (the 5th service) devoted to subversion of Ukraine, including payment/bribes of billions of dollars to various gov't and media officials (one of whom, Viktor Medvedchuk, was captured by the SBU recently while attempting to flee house arrest).
Blaming this conflict on NATO and the US is part of Kremlin propaganda, including their "de-nazification" claims. If anything, this conflict has shown just how important NATO is in keeping people like Putin in check, as he would've gladly continued to the Baltic states and maybe others if his Ukrainian campaign succeeded (in fact, some Russian politicians have publicly stated this on national Russian TV recently).