"Anything we fail to reinforce will eventually dissipate."

This kid is likely to go far.

"The World’s Quickest Advice Column: Hack Your Life."

Via Nerd Fitness:

Worst case scenario, fear-based thinking is ruining everything.

Because Men Are Evil®, of course.  I blame the patriarchy.  A Man Took a Selfie in the Toy Aisle of Target. Obviously, He Must Be a Predator. - Hit & Run : Reason.com: "In an Australian Target store last week, a man stopped to take a selfie with a cardboard Star Wars cut-out. He thought it would be fun to show his kids. Another woman saw him with his camera in the toy department and immediately assumed the he was photographing her children. She snapped his photo, pasted it on Facebook along with what she thought he’d done, and it went viral...

Every day we are groomed by the media to believe the worst of the worst about men anywhere near kids. The Joey Salads video did not create that fear. It just repeated it, like a tired sermon. Salads believes he is warning parents about something they don't know, when in reality all too many parents already believe it with every fiber of their beings. And the media repeats this lie it every day, despite the fact that kids have never been safer.  

Here’s a totally unrelated-yet-related story of a 5-year-old boy who left school without anyone realizing it and walked a mile home on his own. Big deal. This is news? Yes. Because the media figured out how to bend it to tell the same old story: When they boy walked home, even though he wasn’t abducted, he could have been. The reporter tells us there are sex offenders in town. The implication is obvious: It’s just incredible luck that they didn’t spot him out their window, run outside, and lure him to his doom. Over. And over. And over."

"...the writers are merely engaging in the malapropism du jour, wherein words can be "violence" and challenging or uncomfortable thoughts make people "unsafe.""

Oh, FFS.  Classical Mythology Too Triggering for Columbia Students - Hit & Run : Reason.com: "During the week spent on Ovid’s "Metamorphoses," the class was instructed to read the myths of Persephone and Daphne, both of which include vivid depictions of rape and sexual assault. As a survivor of sexual assault, the student described being triggered while reading such detailed accounts of rape throughout the work. However, the student said her professor focused on the beauty of the language and the splendor of the imagery when lecturing on the text. As a result, the student completely disengaged from the class discussion as a means of self-preservation. She did not feel safe in the class. 

Ovid’s "Metamorphoses" is a fixture of Lit Hum, but like so many texts in the Western canon, it contains triggering and offensive material that marginalizes student identities in the classroom. These texts, wrought with histories and narratives of exclusion and oppression, can be difficult to read and discuss as a survivor, a person of color, or a student from a low-income background.

Apparently this discussion of Ovid was so threatening it was a matter of self-preservation to ignore it. If that's really true—if the mere discussion of rape causes this student to feel panicked and physically unsafe—than she needs help treating severe post-traumatic stress disorder, not a fucking trigger warning. I say that with no judgment; being raped can obviously be traumatic enough to produce lingering psychological trauma. But that's what that level of reaction represents: psychological trauma. Which, while something professors should be sensitive to, shouldn't dictate the parameters of acceptable education for all students.

That the student physically stayed in the classroom for the discussion and talked to the professor immediately afterward, however, suggests she wasn't as struck with crippling post-traumatic terror as the op-ed makes it seem. Rather, the writers are merely engaging in the malapropism du jour, wherein words can be "violence" and challenging or uncomfortable thoughts make people "unsafe.""

Training.

5/13 - power cleans, db curls, bench dips

Training.

5/12 - deadlifts, situps, back xt, sauna - stretch

Well Played.

but is the elevator worthy?!  - Live in Your World, Play in Mine【ツ】:

"It just is."

Training.

5/11 - press/push/btn, chins, dips - stretch/foam roll

My Fitness Journey - Melody Decena Wyatt: "LK @ me in 2009! I know, I know.. I’m just as embarrassed as you are BUT I wanted to show everyone what a complete cardio bunny/party gal’s bod looked like. So get this, I was totally one of those chicks that would run up to 5-7 miles a day and only do body weight exercises, trying to get skinny; THEN I’d go party on the weekends (WHAT was I thinking!?) I even thought I had a bangin body that when I had found out I was prego, I completely flipped thinking, “WAHH, there goes my amazing body!” Pshh, I’m in WAY better shape as a mother than I ever was before my munchkin came… Anyway, I’m so glad I broke away from that “get skinny” mentality because now, I absolutely love being a strong determined woman withambition and drive rather than some wanna-be-skinny party-girl concerned about what outfit I was going to sport at the club that weekend. We are all born with potential; however, it means nothing if you don’t do anything with it. Don’t be pressured into being anything less or hold back from discovering your strength and how amazing you can be."

Why? | 70's Big: "Every time you step under a bar, you’re doing. Instead of talking or watching, you execute. Every time you look at the distance you’ll sprint or the thing you’ll lift with an honest, healthy fear, you are doing. When you look down at your hands and see grit, callus, and blood, it’s the product of work. The product of life. You train for a purpose, do you not? Training is nearly synonymous with suffering, because true training is difficult. At times, it’s a giant pain in the ass. The moment is hard when the doubt or fear sets in. The planning is hard when you pass on adult beverages or place head to pillow one hour earlier. But there is purpose to this suffering. Not only for the end result, but the moment of clarity when you burst through the fear or adversity. It’s the small victory, the success in the moment. It’s re-racking or lowering a weight with quivering muscles, the electricity flowing through your body. At the success in the moment. There is purpose to this suffering. And that’s why we do it."

Listen to Captain America.

"Life is energy."

Worth Remembering: Logically/Statistically/Mathematically, we probably live in The Matrix.

Dr. S. James Gates Jr. - Simulation Theory: "Dr. S. James Gates, Jr. is a theoretical physicist and Professor of Physics at the University of Maryland. Dr. Gates is well known for his work on superstring theory, supergravity, and supersymmetry. Dr. Gates has gained some mainstream attention for his discovery of Doubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code found in String Theory Equations, the math that we use to describe the universe. This mainstream attention has led to much discussion from members of both the scientific community (Neil deGrasse Tyson) and the entertainment industry (Joe Rogan). One reason contributing to the popularity of this discovery, aside from the strangeness of it, is that Dr. S James Gates Jr. was not looking for evidence of the Simulation hypothesis and yet he stumbled upon it anyway."

Simulation Argument - Simulation Theory: "The simulation argument was authored by Nick Bostrom and asserts that one of three propositions must be true: 

Almost all civilizations go extinct before reaching a state of technological maturity required to run a convincing ancestor simulation. 

A civilization will lose interest in creating an ancestor simulation. 

We are almost certainly living in a computer simulation. 

If propositions #1 and #2 are not true, then there is an estimated probability factor of between 20% to 50% that we are living in a simulation. Although it should be noted that this probability factor has very little basis in science. If we are living in a simulation then there is a higher probability that you are one of the simulated people whether than one of the exceptional non-simulated people."

Life in the Matrix: New Evidence Supports the Simulation Theory | The Ghost Diaries: "Nick Bostrom has become somewhat of a cult celebrity in fringe circles for his authorship of the Simulation Theory. This theory supposes that because of the overwhelming likelihood of technological singularities occurring in the universe, it is quite likely that advanced civilizations–either us in the future, or aliens in a distant galaxy–have created or will create simulations. Since the number of these simulations would number in the billions, Bostrom submits that it’s actually quite likely we are living in some sort of a computer simulation."

The Measurement That Would Reveal The Universe As A Computer Simulation | MIT Technology Review: "First, some background. The problem with all simulations is that the laws of physics, which appear continuous, have to be superimposed onto a discrete three dimensional lattice which advances in steps of time.  The question that Beane and co ask is whether the lattice spacing imposes any kind of limitation on the physical processes we see in the universe. They examine, in particular, high energy processes, which probe smaller regions of space as they get more energetic  What they find is interesting. They say that the lattice spacing imposes a fundamental limit on the energy that particles can have. That’s because nothing can exist that is smaller than the lattice itself.  So if our cosmos is merely a simulation, there ought to be a cut off in the spectrum of high energy particles. It turns out there is exactly this kind of cut off in the energy of cosmic ray particles,  a limit known as the Greisen–Zatsepin–Kuzmin or GZK cut off. "

Do we live in a computer simulation? UW researchers say idea can be tested | UW Today: "The concept that current humanity could possibly be living in a computer simulation comes from a 2003 paper published in Philosophical Quarterly by Nick Bostrom, a philosophy professor at the University of Oxford. In the paper, he argued that at least one of three possibilities is true: 

The human species is likely to go extinct before reaching a “posthuman” stage. 

Any posthuman civilization is very unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of its evolutionary history. 

We are almost certainly living in a computer simulation. 

He also held that “the belief that there is a significant chance that we will one day become posthumans who run ancestor simulations is false, unless we are currently living in a simulation.”"

Training.

5/9 - power cleans, alt db curls, ovh tri xt

Training.

5/8 - squats, knee raise, calf press

"God damn that DJ made my day."

"Death pisses me off more than ever."

The Unkillable Arnold Schwarzenegger | Rolling Stone: "...below this sits a small photograph of Meinhard Schwarzenegger, Arnold's strikingly beautiful older brother, who died in a car crash at 24. Schwarzenegger has forgotten what Meinhard's voice sounded like. But he thinks of him often. 

"I have always been extremely pissed off about the idea of death," he says. "It's such a waste. I know it's inevitable, but what the hell is that? Your whole life you work, you try to improve yourself, save money, invest wisely, and then all of a sudden — poof. It's over." Arnold Schwarzenegger is 67. "Death pisses me off more than ever," he says."

Can't Stop the Signal.

3D Printed Gun Prisoner's Legacy Lives on in Improved Pistol Design - Hit & Run : Reason.com: "Last year, university employee Yoshitomo Imura became the first person sentenced to prison for 3D-printing a firearm. A Japanese judge put him away for two years after noting with particular fury that he'd posted his design online and that "This has shown that anyone can illegally manufacture guns with a 3D printer." So how did the gun law-flouting 3D printing community respond? You knew the answer, didn't you? Yes, tinkerers went and improved his zig-zag design, and named the sleeker .22 gun after him. Behold the Imura!"

“If we accept the idea that people have a right not to be offended, we will end up with a tyranny of silence, for almost any speech may be deemed offensive.”

Hate Speech Is Free Speech - Hit & Run : Reason.com: "If people are only free to say things that are unobjectionable to anyone, then they are not free to speak. The editorial board of the New York Times misses this vital point with an editorial today headlined, Free Speech vs. Hate Speech. Versus? 

...there is no clause in the First Amendment that forbids the speaking of hateful words.

But it is equally clear that the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest in Garland, Tex., was not really about free speech. It was an exercise in bigotry and hatred posing as a blow for freedom. 

Yes, the organizers may well harbor hatred against Islam and Muslims in their hearts. Nevertheless, expressing such hatred is not just "posing as a blow for freedom," it is the exercise, however distressing, of freedom of speech...

 Let's hop into the WABAC Machine to the late 1970s when our highest courts ruled that Nazis calling for the death of Jews is protected speech. In the 1977 case, the National Socialist Party of America vs. the Village of Skokie the U.S. Supreme Court properly ruled that the hateful Nazis had the free speech right to rally in a town where one in six residents were Holocaust survivors...

Any confrontation in Skokie would be painful, as the disciples of murderers flaunt their hated symbols in the faces of people who survived the gas ovens. But on this issue, the A.C.L.U. has no choice. As Mr. Neier explains, if his organization is not faithful to the principle that free speech must be demanded for all, then it does not deserve the words "civil liberties" in its name. The Times' Skokie editorial concluded: As long as the Nazis do nothing illegal, they are entitled to the protection of the law. The argument that they will provoke violence simply by appearing on the streets of Skokie only emphasizes the obligation of the police to keep the peace - and gives an opportunity to the people of Skokie to demonstrate their respect for the law."

...tolerance properly understood is the ability to accept speech one dislikes. “When we focus on non-discrimination and equality, and aim to empower the aggrieved, tolerance is no longer about the ability to tolerate things we don’t like,” he explains. “It becomes the ability to keep quiet and refrain from saying things that others may dislike.” Calls to ban offensive speech sacrifices diversity of expression in the name of respecting diversity of culture. “If we accept the idea that people have a right not to be offended, we will end up with a tyranny of silence, for almost any speech may be deemed offensive,” declares Rose. 

Insult fundamentalists justify their efforts to restrict speech with the catchphrase, “Freedom of speech is not the same as the freedom to offend.” In fact, there is no freedom of speech if people cannot offend those who would deny women equal rights, persecute homosexuals, and commit violence against people who do not share their faith. “The idea that if you say something that might be construed as offensive, you somehow restrict the liberty of others is nonsense,” argues Rose. He is entirely right."

...We must never reward violence. "We can understand the practice of violent retaliation against sacrilege as analogous to the violence employed by terrorists in pursuit of a political goal, or by kidnappers and extortionists in pursuit of personal gain," argues Dacey. In such situations, government officials properly adopt the "No Compliance Principle" – they do not give into the demands of the terrorists and kidnappers. Doing so will simply encourage others to engage in terrorism and kidnapping later. Similarly, refusing to comply now with the demands by violent Islamists to shut down free speech will prevent even more harm in the future. "By adopting a presumption of refusing to comply, and being seen to refuse to comply, we are doing what we can to uphold the rule of law and to contribute to a culture of open public discourse, in which no lawful expressive acts are prevented by threats of violence," explains Dacey."

"I got nothing against it. As long as there's room to the individualist to do his or her own thing." - RAW

"I'm a libertarian because I don't trust the people as much as anarchists do. I want to see government limited as much as possible; I would like to see it reduced back to where it was in Jefferson's time, or even smaller. But I would not like to see it abolished..."

"Well I sometimes call myself a libertarian but that's only because most people don't know what anarchist means. Most people hear you're an anarchist and they think you're getting ready to throw a bomb at a building. They don't understand the concept of voluntary association, the whole concept of replacing force with voluntary cooperation or contractual arrangements and so on. So libertarian is a clearer word that doesn't arouse any immediate anxiety upon the listener. 

And then again, libertarians, if they were totally consistent with their principles would be anarchists. They take the position which they call minarchy, which is the smallest possible government... The reason I don't believe in the smallest possible government is because we started out with that and it only took us 200 years to arrive at the government that we have now. I think any government is dangerous no matter how small you make it. 

Instead of governments we should have contractual associations that you can opt out of if you don't like the way the association is going. Religions fought for hundreds of years over which one should dominate Europe an then they finally gave up and made a truce, and they all agreed to tolerate each other — at least in this part of the world... But I think government should be treated like religion, everyone should be able to pick the kind they like. Only it should be contractual not obligatory. 

I wouldn't mind paying tax money to a local association to maintain a police force, as long as we need one. But I hate like hell paying taxes to help the US government build more nuclear missiles to blow up more people I don't even know and don't think I'd hate them if I did know them. A lot of anarchists had a major roll in influencing my political thinking, especially the individualist anarchists. Benjamin Tucker and Lysander Spooner especially. But I've also been influenced by Leo Tolstoy's anarcho-pacifism. And I find a lot of Kropotkin compatible even though he was a communist anarchist. Nothing wrong with communist anarchism as long as it remains voluntary. Any one that wants to go make a commune, go ahead, do it. I got nothing against it. As long as there's room to the individualist to do his or her own thing."