Another case of terrible economic nomenclature. Apple is a public private sector company.
Apple is in the private sector [1] of the economy, i.e. it "is not controlled by the State." This distinction is important to Constitutional law, since the First Amendment does not restrict the private sector; it restricts the state (also known as the public sector [2]).
Apple is a publicly-held corporation, as opposed to a privately-held one like Uber, but that's less relevant to this discussion.
The only thing rubbish here is blatant disregard for freedom of speech (Didn't really expect anything different from the fools here). There are platforms that are monopoly and they control free speech at this point.
But where does "partner" start? Is your cloud provider a partner to what you put online? Is Comcast partner to what you do online with your internet connection? Is your electricity company partner to what you do with your energy?
Of course a private entity can disregard morality for the good of the public in their decisions (they're after profits), but what happens when that private entity becomes the town square? Or when it has monopoly over something that has become a basic utility for everyone?
At this time I'm starting to cringe at opinions defending these actions with "it's a private entity".
We are living in a state of monopoly and EU laws agree with that. How can you then throw away freedom of speech! Just cause the goons on this forum are pissed, doesn't mean that guy should be banned. 48% of population voted for trump!
The definition of "freedom of speech" is "the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint" (Oxford Dictionary). It does not say anything about the 1st Amendment.
The principle of free speech has to do with the systematic extermination of a widespread viewpoint (ex:Tienamen Square in China).
This is one company/guy getting booted off a private platform. He is still able to go to other platforms or apply for public permits to express his viewpoint.
Freedom of speech only applies to the government. Apple as a private company is free to censor whatever they want. Not saying that they necessarily should but it is well within their rights.
Yeah, it's an awkward situation, I understand, but the user is scaring the crap out of people, then retracting part of the essential information. I'm still hoping they will post the information somewhere in an anonymized form, so the bodybuilding community can learn from this accident.
Sorry, didn’t mean to scare anyone. I mainly removed it because it was kind of embarrassing. The injury was caused by trying to set a barbell down on the ground myself rather than calling for help when doing bench press. Not something that would happen to most weightlifters.
Just wanted to say there's nothing wrong or embarrassing about sharing our mistakes. Take heart in the likelihood that, by sharing this, you've probably saved a reader from a similar injury.
Depending in the lift this may or may not be possible.
I don't know which lift the author was performing (and would ask you not to repeat it if you do know), but of the popular lifts which could cause a problem if you fail:
1) Bench press. Have a spotter or don't use clips (the things that hold the weights on the bar). Some benches will have safety bars which can help as well. If you don't have clips you can tip to one side and dump the weight off the end of one bar, then the bar should roll of you (albeit painfully/noisily). People have died benching alone in a gym, don't get caught out.
2) Squat. Have spotters and/or squat in a cage/safety rack (with parallel bars either side of you). It can be dangerous if you fail, have no spotters and aren't in a safety rack. i.e. you can dump it, but this can be dangerous to you and those around you.
I went to a personal trainer once, the program was effectively 30 minutes of personal training on one day, 30-60 mins of 'on my own' the other, and the trainer gave me an exact schedule to follow. On the days with the trainer, we could rack up the weights and he'd be there all the time. On my own days, I had to go for much safer exercises - dumbbell bench presses instead of the bar - and at a lower weight.
If you want to just train, go for the safe options and a bit more reps. If you want to really break your limits, never not have a spotter. They will allow you to be a bit less safe on the one hand (e.g. bars with max weights) and provide you with motivation on the other. I never pushed past my limits before I had a spotter.
Good advices. And we should repeat this: there's no need for putting extreme weight on bars. Repetitions, series and rest time are golden here. You can do wonders with 50-80kg deadlifts (not when starting weight lifting), no need to go after 150/200kg. Same goes, for example, for bench press: failing alone (which should not happen) under 30/50kg is very manageable, but the same under 150kg can cost your life.
I would agree with you, up to a point. I agree that one doesn't need to put oneself under undue strain every time in the gym, and you can get a good workout from doing lots of reps for light weights.
But naturally by virtue of not increasing the weight on the bar one will reach a point where one ceases to get stronger (measured by the amount of force you can produce). There are limits to what more reps will do for you.
So don't deadlift your 1RM every time you go to the gym, just slowly increase how much you lift in a safe and structured manner.
This so much. I switched away cca year ago from trying to lift as much as possible during every session simply because it's stupid. I was walking on the edge of serious injury for no good enough reason. Anyway most people I know don't go to gym for bodybuilding, but rather getting/keeping in shape and looking good.
So unless you are a professional (then you already know about this more than I do), lower the weight and stick rather with 15-20 reps. If you feel that given excercise is too easy during set, just another 5 reps and try to do perfect movements. YOu can get the same famous 'burn' in the muscles. This also builds stamina, which is much more beneficial in real life compared to pure power for few seconds.
Needless to say, since I switched, i didn't have a single injury, not even minor stretches. Even if I am totally exhausted, I can handle the loads I use to put them down/to the rack safely.
Do companies write checks to plumbers of $100,000. No they don't, cause they don't deserve (intelligence required for the work they do) and the supply is abundant. Why can't western developers accept basic economics and move on to greener pastures.
can you explain this in better words: "then it would always make sense to rent 51% of the capacity at market rates, earn the transaction fees, and also perform a double-spending attack."
I think what jhpriestly is saying is: As the market gets efficient, the price of renting mining capacity will approach the profits earned from transaction fees. So renting mining capacity will almost pay for itself, i.e. is almost free. But then you might as well rent a lot of it, like 51%, because it's allowing you to attack the chain almost for free.
I've heard an opinion (but I'm not certain) that mined coins are considered less traceable than purchased coins.
For any purchase, there's a trail that leads to you through however you paid for it; for mining, the mined coins are totally disconnected from the hardware that mined the block and how you bought it.
Well then the buyer and seller would race to gain 51% of mining power (as its free) which will make it more expensive because of the constant biding war.
The exchange can have thresholds for total volume per given time interval then. Once the total amount of pending transactions breaches a given volume, the transaction period for more transactions within the window goes up.
Govt inflation numbers represent a portfolio consisting of all commodities in equal quantity. But if you hold a portfolio of iPhones, Toyotas, and etc (assuming they are non depreciating assets) that number would double very easily.
Government inflation numbers don't work like that at all. They are based on the Consumer Price Index, which uses a market basket of consumer goods and services.
Yes, but all of them being commodities (what I said) is not the same as inflation only being accurate when someone purchases every commodity available in the marketplace (what you said).
Inflation of a portfolio of iPhones is completely different than inflation that an average American pays due to cost of living changes in the economy. You're cherrypicking a hypothetical scenario that doesn't apply at all to the example at hand, which is the average person's ability to pay for emergencies that arise related to living expenses.
Which includes blackbox modifiers like "hedonic adjustments". So if it costs you $800 to get a cast for your broken leg today as opposed to $400 a few years ago, but they claim the quality of the cast is twice as good, then they say there was 0% inflation as you are getting the same "value" even though its costing you twice as much to fix the same problem.
This can easily be done on CME futures market, we don't need dharma for this. Futures can be used in multiple ways to swap inherent volatility with a fixed stream of return.
