The Algeria Olympic Committee (COA) said: "COA strongly condemns the unethical targeting and maligning of our esteemed athlete, Imane Khelif, with baseless propaganda from certain foreign media outlets."

Khelif, who is a Unicef ambassador, has previously spoken, external about growing up in rural village and not being allowed to take part in sport initially by her father as "he did not approve of boxing for girls".

nostr:note1q3pvmfjt0uq8jhcvkjmul35len2qfptf9tj6qttr9j0naer6macqm40pe8

Personally I've always found the mental effort of getting more exercise easier than the mental effort of trying to restrict my diet.

Travelling in Europe and eating "good" food doesn't get me to lose weight if I don't get a bunch of exercise regularly. Being in Canada and consistently exercising with North American crap food does.

The most weight I've ever lost in my life was while cycling to school and work regularly, and eating fast food multiple times a day. I can't out eat regular 50km bike rides.

It’s true. The biggest impediment to understanding bitcoin is not intelligence. It’s ego.

You have to re-assess something you previously dismissed. You have to buy in late compared to what you could have done earlier, and accept that. You have to embrace the fact that you are but a tiny node on a network that nobody controls.

nostr:note1xue79l4vcr2c4vw9s3wgz20p249lng56ctsx3dklxp65fkr0kymqdjxc05

Oh for sure the problem CAN be worked from either or, ideally, both sides (reduced calorie intake, increased calorie burn).

I'm just saying that the effort required and mental resistance is WAY skewed against the calorie burn side. To the point where, Richard Simmons' best efforts be damned, I think it's a losing case to try to make to the average American.

But too few people understand how EASY the reduced calorie intake side can be (it has its own mental resistance -- "not my beloved carbs!" -- and misconceptions -- "I can't live on salads").

I'm just viewing it as a pragmatist. If the goal is fat burn, I just focus on what they're eating.

Double that... Java chip and whipped cream is my style :-)

Back in the day I would usually walk 20 minutes there and back with a detour (up to an hour if I had the time and a good podcast).

A tall frappuccino is about 160 calories. That's about equal to the extra calories burned for. 200lb man walking at a brisk pace 2.5km, which will take about 25 minutes.

If your walk to and from the Starbucks, that's just 12.5 minutes each way. Pick a Starbucks that isn't close to you. No big deal.

If you ran at a moderate pace, the same man could equal the calories burned in just 10 minutes round trip, 1.6km.

I once calculated the distance I had to walk (at a fast pace, with or without elevation change) to offset a single Frappuccino. It was a depressing but certainly doable number. Some fitness apps give you a vanity number of calories spent that don't subtract baseline metabolism though.

Agree with the observation that keto mostly helps increase satiation and therefore calorie intake. The one time I did that it was very effective, but not fun.

Exercise may, in addition to obviously burning calories, have some influence on (the type of) appetite too. I haven't read up on any studies.

I know steady cardio isn't the same as HIT / HIIT (in terms of burn while active and residual effects), but still. The effort-to-calorie-burn ratio is rough.

The average American is just not willing to offset a single can of Coke by running 1.4 miles every day, let alone do enough additional work to get into a calorie deficit for the day.

Yes, they'd be better off doing sprints / HIIT (I used to do cycles of 20s sprints, 60s rest with my gymnasts in the summer. Holy shit was that hard to get past even 5 rounds). But the average American probably can't even move fast enough to get into a high intensity zone nor could they sustain it for 20s. And they'll give themselves a heart attack.

Barely. Exercise IS crucial for staying healthy but is a terrible way to try to offset calorie intake.

Disciplined keto at home, fuck all enjoy yourself for a week in Nashville.

Lineup around the entire building for Trump but not much attention on this stage at a bitcoin conference. People are funny

I’ve been heads down working on a new zine! 3,000 sats to the first person that can guess what it’s about.

Kind of sort of not really hint: This herecomesbitcoin.org guy will be on the cover

I just saw a young couple trying to pass airport security and being forced to throw the home made jelly from his grandma out the trash because the jelly recipient, even if small, had no size markings, so there was no way of knowing it was under 100ml (it definitely was). Police was called to assess the situation and they ruled in favor of throwing it out.

iT cOuLd hAvE bEeN a bOmB!!

Seriously, how did we get here? How in the world is this normal or acceptable?

Email is very much not deniable in practice. Almost all email is sent via third parties who create records that any court will accept as true. DKIM doesn't significantly change that.

Remember that I sued Lovecruft for defamation, and she didn't even try to deny sending incriminating messages on _Pond_, a extremely secure crypto-nerd anonymous messaging platformed designed for deniability.

Courts almost always accept electronic records as true by default.

My personal email server has worked fine for like 10 years but gmail just did something recently and now all of my emails to gmail users goes to their spam.

I think they require dkim now (signed emails), so much for deniability?

Email decentralization is a joke.