I’ll add a small point to this. The computers my old cars do have, I’m quite thankful for. Being able to purchase a ~100-200 buck code reader and easily plug it in and figure out what my warning lights are trying to tell me has been a great educational tool and saved me a ton in maintenance.
Advanced software can be used for good. It's sad that the same advanced systems that can perform extremely accurate self-diagnostics that empower even the most amateur mechanic to do their own work on extremely complex ICE setups for years and years will also be the component most likely to render the vehicle a 6000-lb brick made of animal skin and rare earth metals
I suspect she may be referring to the stereotypical carbureted V8 + manual / hydraulic auto combination that's still highly popular amongst US enthusiasts, which certainly has no ECU at all.
Microprocessors didn't exist until the early 70s. Late 70s / early 80s is when they started becoming common in cars.
I don’t have a dog in this thread’s particular fight and am basically just doomscrolling on a Friday night.
But I don’t think English is a nominally supported language in Quebec. IIRC all of Canada outside of Quebec requires dual signage in english + French, but Quebec only requires French. I’d guess Gare bonaventure is an artifact of that law rather than a translation strategy.
That may be the case, but you'd expect that a service like public transit is likely to have a higher than average number of users (travelers from elsewhere) that don't speak French and they still chose to minimize concessions to English.
Unfortunately there’s no great answer — any mammal that bites could carry rabies even if not obviously rabid, and there’s no way to test for that when the animal’s alive. Running the prophylactic for rabies also ain’t cheap and runs the risk of human noncompliance, meaning someone ends up rabid (and eventually, dead).
While I can appreciate the simplicity of the older version, the lack of padding around text + monochrome made this a sea of black marks to me. Basically illegible. 2013 was much easier to read
All that juice on the delete button really plays poorly with iOS text selection. While I agree with the article in spirit, I’ll take this delete button dry (just rinse the glass please!)
Some of the most impactful code I've written has been absolutely trash. Like, really, really bad. By almost all objective measures, terrible. Except for the results it helped bring about. By that one measure, it was excellent, damn near perfect code
Likely because if the effect of "bad" code is positive enough, you have incentive to just let it keep on being "bad" and not touching it, so you can keep reaping the benefits.
Also, if you're on a tight timeline for a critical function, you may want to push ugly/inelegant/dense/"bad" code just to get the function in prod a day sooner. This doesn't mean the code isn't "bad," it just means that the business needs outweigh the ugliness.
I wrote some really trashy code in what was supposed to be a "proof of concept" where I had about 7 days to write something that would be shown to the executive committee of the very large company I was working for at the time.
Then I was told the CEO and CFO wanted a preview in 3 days....
That was 12 years ago, still in production as far as I know!
[The functionality was supposed to be replaced with something built in or integrated with the new ERP system.... but that project crashed and burned].
Oh man I have some bash case statements that fit this description. Could be improved, but it's tested with every commit on every PR and by George it really holds the room together.
I've seen snippets of the back-end code of a public cloud, and it is full of multi-page "switch" statements where they have hard-coded lookup tables for what SKUs support what features.
It's ugly, it's a maintenance headache, but it does function, and very robustly too. There are no API calls, no microservices, no performance issues, etc...
Hi, worth mentioning that you should explicitly ignore this advice if you’re lifting heavy deadlifts. Eventually you will get to a point on that exercise where your concentric pull can put up vastly more weight than you can safely lower to the ground in a slow manner. Above 3-4 plates and you probably should be dropping the weight. Maybe even less. Your lumbar will thank you.
> Eventually you will get to a point on that exercise where your concentric pull can put up vastly more weight than you can safely lower to the ground in a slow manner.
I'm not particularly qualified to speak on this, but this does not match my experience. I can deadlift 455 lb with great difficulty, but I can lower 455 lb to the ground fairly easily. And I don't see any physiological reason why this would be true—if your back muscles can support the weight on the way up, then they should be able to support it on the way down, when your body is subjected to less force.
Gravity acts over time, if you are slowly lowering it you could be expriencing the same force practically as on the way up.
The reason you don't do it for powerlifting is because you're more likely to injure yourself after a max effort lift (like a one rep max lift in competition). Since you exerted maximally on the way up and may struggle controlling it on the way down it while exhausted. All the other compound lifts in powerlifting end at the finish of max exertion so don't have that issue.
If you are only training for general reasons you might not run into it, but if you are a powerlifting athlete doing 5, 3 or 1 rep sets for comp then this is good advice.
It great advice for exactly the reason you stated. And in gyms that disallow dropping, you give minimal effort on the way down, just enough to not get kicked out.
If you’re hellbent on doing long eccentrics on your low back, do it on back extensions with light weights. I used to do them. I always regretted it the next day.
I think I'd agree with the OP, the eccentric is more precarious. Weakness on the pull and the bar slows/stops but there is still control, weakness on a slow lowering and the weight runs away from you breaking your form. When you are at 4+ plates then your strength on the day can be a little unpredictable and your 5 rep max can be lower than it was last week and you don't want to discover that in a precarious position.
It's like comparing driving up a steep hill vs. coasting down a hill with just the brake, a slight bump or misjudgement and things get hairy quick because gravity is compounding your mistakes.
IIRC you can generally handle 120-140% weight of concentric with eccentric. The issue is HEAVY eccentric for advanced lifters is extremely taxing and fatiguing on body and is suboptimial in how much it can eat away at overall routine volume / practice by pushing body into recovery debt that ultimately drives progression (for many). Singles with 90%+ or supermax (over 100% 1RM) eccentrics when programmed are done with very few reps (often just last rep to pins/safety, anything over handful singles per week is considered machoistic). Otherwise it's reserved for tempo work i.e. 4010 or 40X0 (4 second down, no pause at bottom, 1 second up or X explode up, no wait at top) with relatively light %s that doesn't fatigue for technique work.
Heh, ‘drop’ is an overloaded term. I don’t mean you need to release the bar from your hands or not follow through on the eccentric. By ‘drop the bar’, I mean you shouldn’t resist during the eccentric portion in the same way you might during a pull up or curl. Said another way, on heavy deads, your eccentric should be noticeably quicker than the concentric. The bar falls to the floor with you attached.
The other commenters explain why — you’re building up fatigue during the concentric, easier to over round on the eccentric if you resist.
It’s worth caveating to that there are many ways to pull, and I could imagine someone lightening the weight to resist and control the eccentric. But in the the style of pulling I grew up with, a set of 5 reps functioned more like 5 heavy singles in a row, with some seconds of rest and resetting form between pulls. I’ve never seen controlled and resisted eccentrics with that style, and the thought of it lit scares me.
PS. Pulling 455 means that you almost certainly have some expertise in this matter ;). That’s not an untrained pull
Is there any supporting evidence for this? On the face of it, it seems highly illogical, considering you'll pretty much always be much stronger on the eccentric than the concentric. It's more a matter of learning to brace correctly, I'd say.
> Your lumbar will thank you.
This to me reinforces the unfounded and harmful narrative that deadlifting, or generally low back exercises pose more danger to the spine than e.g. not lifting.
The irony is that chatbots and automated phone support dont function like this — instead, they amplify anger. By the time you actually get to a human, you’re not just frustrated with the original issue, but the massive (and often bigger) pain of dealing with the terrible automated support system.
I mean, I’m a Mercedes fanboy, and I don’t. I don’t need to. I don’t care who’s running the show — the cars deliver on the brands reputation and that’s all I care about.
Given that ECUs / microprocessors have been standard on cars since the late 60s / early 70s.
For me it’s the network connections and updates that scare me. The software on my ‘99 Benz hasn’t changed in 24 years, and I don’t need it too.