Print Story Important information for your eyes only
Diary
By ucblockhead (Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 12:58:43 PM EST) (all tags)
The Day After Tomorrow. I feel sorry for a coworker. Other random crap.


Last night, with the magic of netflix, I watched The Day After Tomorrow. Gord what a shitfest that was! The only saving grace was that it was an unintentionally amusing shitfest and therefore worth watching while I put the cap on a space-race victory as the Romans on an 18-civ earth map. (For those who care, I finished having most of Southern Europe, West Africa, much of South America and all of North America. I launched the year after crushing a massive Russian onslaught in what is, I suppose Croatia or something.

Anyway, I am not sure what was worse: the utter scientific idiocy or the fact that we're supposed to care if one or two particular people survive when the whole fucking northern half of the planet is wiped out. I should go find that site where the physicist reviews movies for scientific accuracy.

This probably does get some sort of award for being the first movie to have the heroes outrun cold.


I have a coworker...call him Fred or something, that I feel sorry for.

Years ago, when we were a young dotcom, out to change the world and hiring like mad, we hired Fred. Fred was straight out of college, a foreign student from one of those paternalistic cultures where people grow up thinking the way to success is to do what they tell you, work hard, don't rock the boat, and success will follow.

Like most, we turned into a young dotcom, bailing like mad, to stay afloat. First, some of the, to put it politely, "less skilled" people went. Fred, a hard worker, was not one of these. Then, we had "the day" where a third of what remained of the company was let go. The owners were basing success on engineering, so only a few engineers were let go. Fred was not one. He was evidently good enough to survive the cut. (I have had little first-hand work with him, so I can't say as to his skills directly but the fact that he survived the layoffs says volumes.)

The situation was odd. Fred was the only junior engineer left on a team of eight or so engineers. There was talk of mentoring and such, but I don't think much happened in the fast dotcom scramble.

Then we got bought by $BigJapaneseCorp and the situation changed. We went from mad scramble to not enough work. For years, we were in a situation where getting products required effort and where people had more than enough time to do what few tasks they had. So I don't think Fred had much to do. I'd see him most days reading asian comic strips. We shed a few engineers and hired a mid-to-senior level one, but things otherwise didn't change much. You could see the bad habits developing.

Then the parent division started to go down like the Titanic. Our boss lept to another division and took most of us with him. All but Fred and the guy we hired. Scuttlebut in the company is that the old division has a shaky future. Worse, the division was located in another city, and we were the only people in SF that were a part of it. The other guy, seeing the writing on the wall quit. Now there's just Fred, the one guy in SF that's a part of this group. I'm not sure the rest of that division even knows he's there. I don't know that he's pyschologically equipped to do what he probably should do, which is jump ship, and our history means he's essentially a guy who got maybe a year's experience in the last five.


Since I know everyone's burning to have a diet update, I will report that after losing ten pounds during the first month, I've only lost a pound or two in June. I'm not sure why. Perhaps because work combined with some illness has kept me from getting to the gym as much as I should.
The FoML has decided that he's going to do potty training now after nearly a year of stubborness. The pissing is going ok, but he still hasn't successfully shit on the pot.

Last night there was an accident just before I arrived, and there was some shame, apparently. (He first refused to see me, then clung to me.) I'm concerned...I don't see how that can be coming from us. I'm worried that his day care may be giving the kids a line that we don't approve of.


Speaking of the kid, the FoML has informed us that My Neighbor Totoro is the best movie ever and wants to know when we're going to Japan to see Totoro in person.

I've been letting him play with GoogleEarth. It's hard to tell if he's getting the concept of geography or not. "I want to look at the planet on your computer, daddy!"

< 4 1/2 hours to go | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' >
Important information for your eyes only | 32 comments (32 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
My Neighbor Totoro by codemonkey uk (2.00 / 0) #1 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 01:13:31 PM EST
Much loved by Dylan also.

--- Thad ---
developer of ... ?


weight loss by alprazolam (4.00 / 1) #2 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 01:33:39 PM EST
that's the way it goes. There's always a much greater initial weightloss and then it slows down. This is when most people usually quit their "diet" and go back to eating shit. To lose a pound in one week you'd have to eat ~3500 calories under your maintenance level (the amount of calories it would take to maintain weight, which is your BMR modified by an activity level coefficient).

I found using fitday.com to track my daily calorie consumption to be of great help while trying to lose weight. Losing about a pound a week is a pretty reasonable goal for most non obese people, until you get to around 15% bodyfat or so.



I've done it by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #5 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 01:46:48 PM EST
On my last big diet, I was able to maintain 11 pounds a month over five months. But that was before the kid, was I was going on 3-4 hour hikes on the weekend plus four gym workouts/runs a week plus two yoga classes a week.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

that's very atypical by alprazolam (2.00 / 0) #6 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 01:49:59 PM EST
Your metabolism has slowed quite a bit since then. Plus that is a good bit of exercise. Being active every day will definitely raise your metabolism.

There are things you could do in say, half an hour, which would get your heart rate up pretty good and build muscle (something you should do as you get older as it's good for you general health, bone density, yada yada).

[ Parent ]

It's kids by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #7 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 01:55:03 PM EST
Finding time is very hard when you have a kid. It was the hiking that was probably the best as they say that the best for weight loss is slower, longer cardio workouts. Hiking up mountains for hours gives that.

My current goal is just to get to the gym for an hour four times a week, but that's hard. It usually means waking up at 5:30 am.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

actually that's not true anymore by alprazolam (2.00 / 0) #8 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 02:57:22 PM EST
The newest information is showing that longer cardio workouts tend to burn a higher percentage of calories from fat than from muscle or glycogen or whatever else. However at the same time the fatburning or metabolic effects are limited to the actual time that you're exercising. Whereas a shorter, more intense cardio (ie HIIT) may burn less calories or a lower percentage of calories from fat, but actually increases your metabolic rate for something like 24 hours, while burning less muscle for energy than steady state cardio does.

I'm not trying to tell you how to live your life or anything, but it doesn't take an hour a day every day to lose weight. You can give a more intense effort for a shorter period of time, either doing cardio or resistance training, and see better benefits, especially over time, as you will burn less muscle for energy and even encourage muscle growth (more muscle means higher metabolism).

I'll try to find you some links.

[ Parent ]

here's one by alprazolam (2.00 / 0) #9 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 03:12:52 PM EST
http://www.ironmagazine.com/viewarticle-946.html

Also while this article is all about HIIT, which is a form of cardio, I just want to emphasize that resistance training (with or without weights) has similar effects: more calories burnt over a given time period, muscle growth which increases metabolism (not to mention the hormonal respons which also increases metabolism), and less muscle burnt as fuel.

And it's not like it has to take a long period of time. Hell you can do bodyweight squats in your cube. I do.

[ Parent ]

I hate weights by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #11 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 03:24:45 PM EST
I'd rather run, but my fucking knees won't allow it.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

Why not by Bob Abooey (2.00 / 0) #12 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 04:11:01 PM EST
You could get an elliptical machine for your garage and get a workout in every morning before work. It would save time (no commuting to and fro the gym) and also allow you to sneak in some workouts when the kid is napping or whatever.

Warmest regards,
--Your best pal Bob
[ Parent ]

You single guys are so niave by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #13 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 04:22:28 PM EST
I'd like one, actually...but I've got only so much cash.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

well by alprazolam (2.00 / 0) #14 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 05:35:25 PM EST
I guess we just have different priorities.

I have no desire to be like most of the people I work with (keep in mind this is Texas). One guy so **ing fat he needs a wheelchair to get around.

Anyway you can invent all these reasons not to exercise, it's none of my business. I used to do the same. But I decided to commit to a healthier lifestyle and I feel that the reward has been well worth the effort. I'm not going to be on the cover of any magazines, but I feel good, I have energy, and I don't get injured. The path I was going was gonna have me dead at 50 and I'm pretty glad I changed.

[ Parent ]

Don't get me wrong by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #16 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 07:02:15 PM EST
I am doing my best to exercise. But it's *much* harder with a family. It used to be "hey, let's go hike!". Now it's figuring out how to fit it between someone's nap and the grocery store.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

good by alprazolam (2.00 / 0) #17 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 09:06:29 PM EST
i'm glad to hear it. i don't really take you for the wienies i've been listening to lately who think they're going to get a six pack by walking every day and doing 100 pushups a couple times a week. honestly some people will come up with every possible excuse to justify either not exercising or avoiding weight lifting (what the heck is so scary about it?!) when the sad part is it will be the people who care about them that suffer because they have to take care of their overweight, cancer ridden, falling apart selves.

[ Parent ]

Exercise makes healthy. by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #20 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 06:33:28 AM EST
Lifting weights makes strong. The two are not the same.

[ Parent ]

lifting weights correctly makes healthy by alprazolam (2.00 / 0) #21 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 08:14:07 AM EST
for one thing, it is exercise. secondly, there are a lot of health benefits to strong muscles, joints, and bones, which weightlifting can provide.

[ Parent ]

It doesn't make your heart strong, though (nt) by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #24 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:15:59 AM EST

----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

says who? by alprazolam (2.00 / 0) #27 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:37:21 PM EST
it can certainly give you a better cardio workout than snoozing your way through an hour long "workout" on an exercise bike or something like that.

[ Parent ]

It's all heartrate by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #28 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:40:46 PM EST
What makes the heart strong is a high heartrate. I'd be amazed if you could get a heartrate of, say, 140 lifting.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

lol by alprazolam (2.00 / 0) #31 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 03:51:11 PM EST
you've obviously never done heavy squats.

[ Parent ]

I'm serious by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #32 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:15:27 PM EST
Does your heartrate go over 140 for over thirty minutes? Because otherwise you're doing diddly for your heart.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

Es machts nicht by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #10 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 03:23:23 PM EST
I don't really have much choice in the matter. I've got limited time, so there it is. I know for myself, long hikes worked best, probably because I enjoy going out on a four hour hike.

When I work out at the gym, I tend to peg my heart-rate at the maximum for my age.

I also suspect hiking created more muscle.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

Age related heart rates are crap. by Weapon of Pack Destruction (2.00 / 0) #19 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 11:24:14 PM EST
I'm 43.  My max HR is 190 and it hasn't changed in 15 years.  My aerobic threshold is around 175.  A friend of mine is 53 and his max is over 200.

The "220 - your age" formula was determined by a back of a napkin chart based on 20 heart patients on a flight to a conference in 1976.  It's complete shit.  Go get a sub-maximal test and lactate threshold test done if you're interested, but also realize that many factors including your fatigue level can transiently change your threshold HR.

[ Parent ]

I'm mostly convinced by Bob Abooey (2.00 / 0) #3 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 01:37:40 PM EST
Your diet is 95% of the cause of weight gain or loss. Going to the gym is needed for toning and for motivation and strength training and cardio etc etc etc, but I personally don't think it has a huge effect on weight loss, well, unless you're running 50 miles a day.

Course this is just my opinion, I'm not basing it on anything scientific.

Warmest regards,
--Your best pal Bob


scientist says... by iGrrrl (4.00 / 2) #18 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 09:28:06 PM EST
...incorrect.

Increased muscle mass means increased resting metabolism means burning more calories even at rest.  But that's just the opinion of physiologists with data.

Yes, yes, I'm being a brat.

As one of the better known people on our nutrition faculty once said, "We know how to lose weight:  Eat less and exercise more.  The trick is getting people to do it."

"I don't have time for martial law, I have to get to the gym!" zarathus
[ Parent ]

Oh sure, I understand that by Bob Abooey (2.00 / 0) #22 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 09:05:31 AM EST
I'm not denying the long term effects of working out wrt weight loss, it's the short term effects I'm talking about.

UC lost 10 pounds in month one, and only one or two in month two, and he's wondering if it's because he couldn't get to the gym as often. I'm saying that going to the gym over the course of one month won't burn off 8 pounds1 unless you live in the gym. Rather it's mainly what we eat that causes short term weight loss. Of course going to the gym helps, but not really that much.

[1] How many calories do you need to burn to lose one pound?

Warmest regards,
--Your best pal Bob
[ Parent ]

do the math. by iGrrrl (2.00 / 0) #23 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:09:34 AM EST
[1] How many calories do you need to burn to lose one pound?

Answer.

The other problem in measuring entirely by weight (as opposed to how your clothes fit) is that muscle is 22% denser than fat, so as you exchange muscle for fat, your measurements may shrink while the scale says you're not losing weight.

But yes, it is related to the gym or lack thereof.  It's an energy balance equation, and he's reduced the absolute value of the energy expense.

"I don't have time for martial law, I have to get to the gym!" zarathus
[ Parent ]

Okay by Bob Abooey (2.00 / 0) #25 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 11:28:08 AM EST
Let's look at this in a scientific manner then.

Your link claims you need to burn 3500 calories to lose one pound. As such you would need to burn 28,000 calories to lose 8 pounds, the 8 he claims he missed by not going to the gym.

I can spend 1/2 hour on the excersice bike, set on level 13 (out of 16, which is rather challenging) and over the course of a brisk 30 minute ride the bike claims I've burned about 300 calories. That's it, 300 lousy calories for a half hour of seriously busting my hump. I'm not sure how accurate the little computer on the bike is but that's all I have to go on.

I would then have to ride the bike for 93 half hours, or 46.66 hours over the course of the month to burn off 8 pounds. That's about 1.5 hours every day for the 31 days that hath May. Indeed, that's 31 straight days of a killer 1.5 hours. Now, I'm in damn good shape and I don't think I could do that, so I'm not sure how UC (who claims to not be in damn good shape) could do it.

That said, I guess it is possible to do, if he didn't drop over from a stroke or a heart attack, but I still subscribe to the theory that he ate more food and that's the main cause for the decline in his weight loss.

Warmest regards,
--Your best pal Bob
[ Parent ]

Calories by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #29 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:44:05 PM EST
I typically burn 800-900 calories in an hour long workout.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

Addendum by Bob Abooey (2.00 / 0) #26 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 12:05:04 PM EST
More to the point, if he were to burn say 400 calories 4 times (that's a pretty healthy workout) a week that would be 1600 per week, times 4 which comes to 6,400 calories, or just under 2 pounds, which is pretty realistic for a guy like UC, in his 40's and out of shape.

Warmest regards,
--Your best pal Bob
[ Parent ]

shape by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #30 Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 01:45:07 PM EST
When I was in shape (the period I lost 10/month), I was burning 4000 calories a week at the gym, not counting the hiking.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

Too bad about Fred by georgeha (4.00 / 1) #4 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 01:38:08 PM EST
but at least he can say he worked at hyper-merga-corp, which at least should open some doors.




There was a great review of DAT by wumpus (2.00 / 0) #15 Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 06:51:12 PM EST
in rec.arts.sf.books (or some such usenet sci-fi list). A professor of climate (or similar status) at Duke mentioned in passing that it would take $100 to get him to watch said flick. This was too much for one joker who started passing the hat. Once enough was collected, our hero ventured forth and reviewed the flick. I'm sure it can still be found on google.

A summary: "The true parts: Climate scientists all look like movie stars and will risk life and limb to save every tax dollar. The fake parts: everything else".

Wumpus



Important information for your eyes only | 32 comments (32 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback