PsychedelicEagle

100%, as long you can be completely authentic in conveying your true values and desires during those interactions and relationships.

Yes, it'd be great to see more details. Maybe the guy has some studies or research published? Also, it's important to assess the hidden of this energy retrieval. What's the impact to the plants/ecossystem?

It could be many factors. You could try walking or exercising next to your meals (before or after - both work) to decrease the glycemic peak and therefore dampen the valley, which is one of the possible causes. Or use other strategies to control the glucose spikes (longer term, reducing saturated fat intake works best to increase insulin sensitivity). Another thing would be to try to increase sleep quality. If you don't sleep well at night, or if you take too much melatonin for example, the body will try to compensate by sleeping during the day. This entails regulating circadian rhythm. That said, I've heard getting sleepy in the afternoon is somewhat natural to our chronobiology. Even studies with red light targeting mitochondria shows that it has little effect in the afternoon. So it could also be something biological that we can't completely eliminate.

The key there is not wasting too much time. Cum fast and get work done.

Haha fair. What I meant is, the phrase itself (taking it non-sarcastically) is an epitome of stage orange - that's precisely how a stage orange mind would justify itself.

This is not much even for some vegans like me. I eat mostly vegan and I get 1.2g/kg of bodyweight. Valter Longo indeed suggests 0.8 grams, but I'm not sure if he's considering the level of physical activity of the person. The less active you are, the less protein your body needs. If you are physically active and trying to build muscle you can easily shoot for 1.2 or 1.3g/kg of bodyweight. See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7727026/ . If you strictly want longevity you may shoot for 0.8. Personally I'd be more concerned with my overall saturated fat intake would I be eating a lot of meat. But this could be my bias to overweight the side effects of saturated fat in our bodies.

This is the epitome of stage orange self-rationalization.

IMHO we evolved eating A LOT more fruits and vegetables than meat. If you want to stick to carnivore, research the potential effects of saturated fat on cell membrane, especially regarding insulin sensitivity and glucose uptake, cooking toxins (AGEs, acrylamide, etc.), how a carnivore diet affects gut mibrobiome, and the role of BCAAs in potentially triggering diabetes and the connection between low methionine intake and longevity. @Ero, as mentioned above, high BCAAs intake is connected to weight gain and diabetes. Also, there are lines of research suggesting a lower protein intake in middle life is desired for longevity, Valter Longo included.

Interesting analogue they mentioned comparing porn to hyperpalable, ultra-processed foods. Also, comparing convenience stores to pharmacies, in that they sell more chemicals than anything else.

LOL. The idea is that, if someone needs blood, then getting the microplastic is less of a problem to them. So it could be a win/win despite the ironic first impression. Who knows, maybe in the future humans invent a microplastic filter to be used to filter blood. We may end up with artificial secondary kidneys.

Amazing!

Cool. Besides blood donation, I think plasma donation also helps to eliminate PFAS, so it could help with microplastics too. With the advantage over full blood donation that some parts of the blood are preserved, and the individual can do it more often. But sauna must be king, indeed. I'm just not sure if it eliminates all types of microplastics, or only a subset.

Yes, of course you also look from different angles, such as the sheer mysteriousness. It also applies to other areas of social interaction, and even for marketing and sales. The less we know about something, the more we tend to project and imagine it with rose-colored glasses. But I believe that, when it comes to men-to-women interactions, displaying too much validation and too much needy behavior conveys what we can associate with "low value" characteristics, from the man's side. I am still inclined to believe this is what is at the core of this dynamic. Notice I'm not in favor of these mechanisms, but simply stating them. Another concept related to this is the idea of a challenge. Inexperienced men throw themselves at a girl's lap, making it extremely clear and too easy for them. (Younger) girls are often accostumed to this and as soon as they realize they're dealing with 'just another' guy like this, they get turned off. So by not giving approval and by keep a distance, a guy positions himself differently, which can create attraction. Of course, this is not about faking not having interest, but rather to display interest in a very direct and unashamed way. Another book discussing this idea is 'Models' from Mark Manson - another great one.

+1 It's wise to respect one's own perceptions. You can do so while maintaining respect for others. Let them earn your trust, should that ever happen. Then the default is no.

Great move, it's always wise to ask "what do you mean" when what a girl says is unclear. No, only if you choose so. Chances are in your favor. The more we mature, the better we get at being authentic - expressing our true values. That in turn helps attract better matching people. --- I was in a similar situation a month ago. Dating an awesome girl, really open-minded, open to my strict eating habits (I'm mostly raw vegan and I never ever eat processed food - though sometimes I do eat meat), super into sports, etc. But I wasn't strongly attracted to her, physically. I decided it was time to let her go. It was the toughest thing I did, but as the days went by after pulling the trigger it became clearer and clearer that it was the right decision. I've had times in my life where I didn't follow my heart; instead, I followed what I thought people would expect from me, what I ought to do, or the "safest" path to mitigate risk and avoid failure; those were the decisions I regretted the most. Of course, it's still wise to use reason, but notice that the rational mind can't track the really infinite realm of possibilities that reality provides.

As Corey Wayne says, "women are more attracted to men whose feelings are unclear". If you wanna dig the rabbit hole, I could recommend his book "How to be a 3% man". It will likely provide you with many insights into what makes women attracted to men (especially the first parts of the book, where he focuses on the attraction phase). Plus he's got a funny newsletter if you can tolerate his stage orange biases: I interpret it as related to status and neediness. The more a guy validates a girl and the less mysterious he is, the more it shows that he is more into her than she is into him, that he has no other options, etc. Validation and mystery are ways to convey status (status = the relative standing between two people; how someone is perceived within a particular setting), and by displaying these behaviors a guy communicates he has low status (whether that is true or not is another discussion), i.e., he conveys he's likely not successful (or at least this is how people perceive it), and the less value he can provide to the woman.

What else to expect from someone who shamelessly promotes AG1?

This is what cultivating a principled-life allows you to dodge. “Honey: it started sweet, but who knew it was dipping into our cookie jar the whole time?” ~ ChatGPT

Interesting. @koops, could you please share some links to David Deida's talks that were the most impactful for you?

That's quite some weight, congrats on your achievements! And if you enjoy the gym, keep going. The whole process helps build discipline and self-confidence, which you can then leverate elsewhere. It's not necessary to be successful in one area to become successful in another, but it often helps. As for improving in other areas: improving in the gym is no different than anything else. As Leo has taught before, everything is the same and everything is different at the same time; it depends on the distinctions you create. Lenses you can use to distinguish different areas where you want to improve are stochasticity and the frequency of outcomes. Let me elaborate below. Stochasticity - How directly and consistently your actions influence your outcomes. We can say going to the gym is nearly deterministic, because following the basics directly influence the outcomes. If you sleep, train, and eat well you are directly influencing your muscle and strength gains. Social interactions, on the other hand, are highly stochastic, because your actions (speaking well, being funny, conveying the right body language, expressing yourself authentically) do not necessarily entail picking up a particular girl, due to her initial preferences, circumstances of the environment, the moment of both of your lives, etc. In this way, inferring causality in highly stochastic processes is more challenging due to noise when measuring outcomes. You can say all the wrong things yet pick up a girl just because she was horny that day (if you go out often enough this will happen). The problem is, how to improve? I.e., how to know which actions produced the right outcomes? And how to know YOU are improving? Frequency of outcomes - How often or common it is to have an outcome. We can say going to the gym has a relative medium to high frequency of outcome in that you can often check how much you can lift and how you look and directly relate that to your most recent actions. Conversely, picking up girls has a low frequency of outcome in that when you're beginning it's rare for you to score, and you can go months or years without a signal. In this way, processes with low frequency of outcomes are more challenging because again it's hard to connect actions to progress. Then, how do you solve these issues? For stochasticity, the simplest way is increasing the sample size. That means having a massive number of social interactions, such that the noise will fade away given how many data points you have. It obviously also directly contributes to your own personal experience and learning. For the low frequency of outcomes, you use the concept of lead measures, borrowing from the 4 Disciplines of Execution methodology. A lead measure measures whether you're likely to achieve the goal: I'll leave up to you to decide which measures to use as lead measure, but some ideas would be, how many girls you talk to per day. Notice the lead measure does not even need to be a successful interaction. It can just be any interaction. Under the premise that the more you interact, the better you get at conveying your true intentions in a smooth manner.

+1 I've played poker around 2010 semi-professionally, when I was beginning University. I managed to make 12k dollars out of $50 bucks. Back in the day, poker was easier, if you would study the game and have the mental stability to apply it consistently. Some of my grinding nights put me through extreme stress -- there was one time I lost half of my bankroll due to a very unlikely series of bad beats. If you gamble often enough, you are sure going to test the limits of your mental stability. Ultimately, gambling for money, even if you know what you're doing, is a zero-sum game. You are always relying on the mistakes of others to win; your actions are basically to create baits where others will fall. It can increase your appreciation for the deep deception mechanisms necessary for survival. Due to this survival character, I believe gambling has the potential to get you stuck into lower spiral levels. The activity often attracts people who focus on the short-term over the long-run. If you have a more sustainable mindset, that can be a big advantage, given you know how to place yourself in situations where you Expected Value is positive. One of the insights I can share out of the top of my head is that projection is very real. People who play loosely have a hard time placing other players as tight players, just as a basic example. You can definitely leverage a lot of psychological understanding to improve your game. That said, I don't believe gambling is something worth pursuing. Someone is generally better off working with something creative; a non-zero-sum game. Put your time on something that will create value not only for you but for others too, and see your inner balance and true happiness flourish.

I did a masters by research in data science and machine learning back in 2018, after working for a couple years with web development. After I graduated, I joined a big company as a data scientist, and then I transitioned to become a machine learning engineer within a couple more years. Currently, I have a well paying job that I quite enjoy. Plus, the statistical knowledge you gain is beneficial for your own reasoning and understanding of scientific research (especially becoming aware of its limitations). I think what's most important for your own development is to learn and practice by yourself, ultimately developing the rare skills that the market will value, paraphrasing "So Good They Can't Ignore You" from Cal Newport (the deliberate practice concept is crucial - approach your career like a professional athlete approaches their training). Data science is a very complex field and even after years studying it you may go tackle a real-life problem and commit silly mistakes. Due to this complexity, it's not uncommon to see beginners exhibit the Dunning-Kruger effect (I've come across some people like this in my career, some of which were difficult to deal with), thinking they knew everything while in reality they were committing crucial mistakes in their modeling. As far as how AI will affect the job market, I don't have big insights or opinions to share. What I would say is, if you're interested in the field, having the knowledge of how to create existing models won't hurt you get jobs in the future, even if your future job will not be as a data science as we know today.

https://five-meo.education/risks-and-cautions/ if it helps. I don't know about melatonin interaction. +1

I've shared an occasion where I did it on mushrooms on this thread: I think it ties to the idea being discussed there -- deep tripping unleashes deep energies from within ourselves. Normally I consider myself very mentally stable, but that trip took me off-guard.

+1