I started lifting 10 years ago using the Starting Strength 5x5 iOS app1. I
would still recommend it for beginners.
Then when I switched programs to 6 day Push/Pull/Legs 2, I switched to a
paper notepad with just handwritten weights and reps like so:
Since my progression solely depended on the last time and the goal was to do
“moar”, with a 6 day split it was easy, just flip 3 pages before and compare.
Eventually I started using multiple gyms, and didn’t have the notebook with me,
so I switched to a long note in the Notes.app on iOS. There the comparison to
previous time was more tedious, one had to scroll up and down.
Naturally I made an app. I started by making it an iOS app, but quickly
abandoned that since I realized nobody will ever use it and I do not want to go
through the review process.
Note that I made this app for me. I am sharing it with the world since it is
based on many open source contributions. I am licensing it under AGPLv3, but I
provide no support, or would answer for any feature requests.
I have used the Stronglifts
app back around 2016, so I can’t say how it has evolved. ↩︎
I really like the 6 day split, even though these days I usually do it
over 2 weeks rather than a single one.
LinkArchive↩︎
I bought this toothbrush almost exactly 4 years ago. It replaced my then 4 and
a half years old Oral-B PRO 3000 toothbrush. Today, the Series 8s is dead, due
to failed battery. This article is a little post-mortem, a review after the
whole lifetime of the product.
Let us start with the good parts:
The toothbrush cleans teeth well.
The best feature is that the pressure sensor not only indicates when too much
pressure is applied (all decent electric toothbrushes do this), but also
indicates when you do not apply enough pressure.
You can customize the color of the LED and it has RGB, which is always great.
However this is where the good parts end. The main problems with the device
are:
It is expensive, and so are the replacement brushes.
Its smart features are pure gimmick: the position tracking does not work and
nobody needs to track their brushing frequency.
The travel pocket is way too small to actually fit the toothbrush properly.
It gunks up easily.
Too many brushing modes make the menu tedious to use.
The battery is so bad it merits its own paragraph. The toothbrush became
unreliable after maybe two years of use. Randomly, in the morning it would drop
charge from 100% to 0, suggesting faulty electronics. Even at its best it would
not last through a 10 day trip.
Verdict
Do not buy this, and steer away from the iO line in general. Myself, I bought a
newer model from the PRO series for two reasons:
The battery in my old one still work and I use it when I go visit my
parents.
You can now get off-brand cheap (and ecological) brushes for the from The
Humble Co.
We all know the “10x developer”. A person who walks into the office after lunch
and codes until they get kicked out by the night guard. In the morning their
colleagues wake up to a ton of pull requests that require “immediate
attention”.
They write verbose code of poor quality. They consider rules to be roadblocks:
coding conventions, DRY, separation of concerns… However they deliver
features, fast.
Leadership praises them because they do deliver. They are branded ‘10x’
developer because they seemingly deliver more value to the company than 10 of
their colleagues.
But do they?
These individuals will pump out features at breakneck pace until everything
grinds to a halt because of the countless refactoring the project has to go
through. Naturally they do not refactor the code themselves, or they do them
with disregard of other people’s work.
Eventually the 10x developer leaves the project because they are frustrated by
the slowing pace. The team takes the blame for failure, and the life goes on.
In short, being a 10x developer means borrowing time from the future by
eschewing good practices.
10x developers have been rare. After all, they needed to be proficient coders
and have a strong work morale (if not ethic) to remain focused. If not for
their ego and impatience, most would be excellent developers.
But with agentic AI anybody can be a 10x developer. That is: anybody can spew
hundreds of lines of code that “do stuff”, and do not follow any rules.
I know this is a hot topic but LLMs in agentic mode absolutely can produce
complex functional code all the way up to fully functional programs2.
Agents make it stupidly easy to create interactive prototypes from nothing.
Herein lies the problem: The quality of the code they produce follows the
quality of the prompt. The LLM does not know about your good practices,
unless your documentation is in context and extremely explicit it will pull the
general good practices for React developers even if you write a fuel pump
controller in ADA.
You will end up with a horrible mess, that nevertheless works (and is of course
full of bugs). But debugging code is hard, and somebody using an LLM to just
zero-shot things will have neither skill or patience to make it clean. They
will send it to you for a review.
If you actually take the time to comment on all the problems, they will most
probably just feed those back to the machine, inevitably losing context. Worst
of all, they will not learn anything, so you will remain in the role of the
slop reviewer forever.
I don’t particularly care about the differences between machine
learning, transformers, LLMs and so on; I use the term AI for anything that
one would think of as one. ↩︎
I am not talking about copy and pasting code from ChatGPT.
A modern agentic IDE is capable of:
Planning step-by-step feature development with a test plan for each step.
With multiple rounds of plan review.
Gathering additional information from the web, documentation and any
given resources.
Running programs, opening webpages, interacting with both, recording the
interactions in screenshots and video and using these artifacts as
additional input.
All this to say that you can give a screenshot of a bug of your web
application to your IDE with the istruction “fix it”, and it will do it. ↩︎
Here is a little overview of the current most popular fitness influencers, and
what you should know about them before listening to anything they say.
The Team
Alexander Bromley
My favourite at the moment. Unfortunately the last video contains AI generated animations which I’m not fond of.
Bro
Mike Israetel
Science Based
Milo Wolf
Science Based
Greg Doucette
Drug dealer with a loud mouth. Has an absolutely insane video editor.
His videos are 90% drama with some workout advice sprinkled on top. His workout
advice is extrememly basic and generally good.
Do not listen to him concerning supplements, even if everything he sold worked,
he is still very much in the game of peddling turk (which has never shown any
efficacy).
Using Milo Wolf3 as a mouthpiece, Mike has made a response video
. Mike claims that Solomon
has reviewed an old draft of the document. This draft was allegedly—by no
one’s mistake— uploaded by Mike to the University’s servers. Milo has
read an alleged “much later version” where most of the mistakes were
corrected.
Jeff Nippard4 commented on Solomon’s critique with a truly ignorant
comment:
Bro was out here adding semicolons to mikes rough draft from 13 years
ago thinking he did something
It turned out that the “much later version” was indeed a forgery and was
even older than the version that Solomon has reviewed. Mike Israetel
admitted this himself in an Instagram post.
Why does this matter
We could dismiss what is happening here as your Tuesday YouTube drama. However,
I think that it has some larger impact.
Sports science peer review is bottom of the barrel tier. The field is already
criticised for poor studies due to small sample sizes and bad methodology,
while needing to deal with extreme inter and intra subject variance Adding
abysmal review standards and the “science” label evaporates.
Jeff Nippard’s behavior also makes it clear that scientific method plays a
second fiddle to the protection of the group.
What I’m saying that sports science is useless.
What I’m going to do
With more studies are being published6 disproving previously touted
methods for optimizing training7, I am going back to the tried and tested
methods of bros. Yes, bros have won.
The new, revised, training recommendations
Consistency – Showing up day after day, month after month, year after
year is the only way to build reasonable amount of muscle.
Technique – Can’t lift if you hurt yourself.
Close to Failure – In order to grow muscle, the training has to be
challenging.
Volume – The more you train, the better the results. No top end has
been found, keep your technique in check so you don’t get hurt.
That’s it. Everything else (e.g.: progressive overload) is corollary of these
four basic steps
Solomon Nelson is a fitness coach and influencer, he is in cahoots
with Lyle Mcdonald. ↩︎
Dr. Mike Israetel is a sports science fitness influencer with a very
large following. ↩︎
Dr. Milo Wolf is a sports science based fitness influencer that often
works with Mike. ↩︎
Jeff Nippard is the most influential natural sports-science-based
influencer. ↩︎
Greg Doucette is a supplement peddler, fitness coach and IFBB Pro that
likes to scream a lot. He hates Mike Israetel. ↩︎
The irony of using scientific studies to dump on science is not lost
to me. ↩︎
Recently a study has show that time under tension does not matter.
Which means that slow eccentrics are no better than quick ones. ↩︎