Many Americans base their identity off that appliance though, buying big trucks to drive around the suburbs and commute in. It needs to go vroom, so no e trucks allowed. I'd say it's more like a form of narcissism than enthusiasm.

That's how east berlin marketed it too, it still features bi-directional blocking abilities, like all walls.

This is the whole thing about polymarket, whoever writes the original bet can lawyer it to create a misleading impression of probabilities by defining an overly narrow or vague victory condition that they will interpret to their benefit to make more money.

The conditions are public and (as far as I know) immutable, though. Getting language lawyered is part of the risk of taking such bets, which is why it's probably a bad idea for most laypeople to do it, except if they're hedging some other investment or something similar.

Yea, but to get an idea of how events will be decided you need to look at similar past bets.

i think its supposed to be fun and if you get rules lawyered then you get to complain about it and have people agree with you at parties that you should have won the bet

i dont think it is intended to be used as a meaningful investment platform, or even a serious gambling establishment like an actual casino.

its whole angle is "wouldnt it be funny if you could bet on ____" and then you can

Unfortunately, no it's supposed to be a predictive platform that uses market forces to reduce bias.

they can pitch themselves however they want, I am thinking along the lines of where I believe it works as a product

The creator of the event doesn't resolve it, I thought

Yeah I think one could easily argue that the special military operation in Venezuela was intended to gain control over the country. Trump literally stated that his team, in particular lil Marco, would be running the country. Of course Rubio walked that back a little, explaining that we only have "leverage" (via Maduro's trial/pardoning), but that still is within the terms of the bet.

I think this is called 'being specific'

Contra proferentem or caveat aleator? That is the question.

Where could I find more information on proper set timing?

I like Mehdi's description over here as a good starting point:

https://stronglifts.com/stronglifts-5x5/intermediate/#rest-p...

Has a paper from 1976 but this seems in line with what I've read elsewhere

basically, 2-3 minutes is probably good for most of your lifting, you could go to 5 minutes if you are doing your heaviest lift of the day

this is also a reasonable way to make sure your workouts aren't going to take 3 hours at a time

some people really mix max this though if they're focusing on super heavy lifts. i remember being at the gym and watching people take 8-10 minutes between sets when they were putting up 400-500lbs on a squat. they also arrived before me and weren't done when i was leaving and, i'm assuming, they were interested in powerlifting competitions

i've actually started looking at reactive training system with mike tuchscherer who has a lot of interesting things to say about training, rest times, etc. been startin to build his stuff on RPE and fatigue percentages in to my training and it has already been super insightful and helpful

https://store.reactivetrainingsystems.com/blogs/default-blog...

This guy has a PhD in exercise science and is a very evidence based dude and breaks things down very nicely.

https://youtu.be/DupQfkoI-Sc?si=QK_w2d99TcvNcQsD

Honestly from a personal training/lifting coach. When I could spend serious time in the gym there’s a lot to just having someone with expertise for 30 minutes to give perspective. You can do a lot of it over video today as well.

In general YouTube is a good resource. There are a lot of respected coaches that also produce content.

It ends up being personal, but you want enough time to catch your breath and be “ready” to go again, but no more.

Different weed smells different, skunk weed has volitale sulfur compounds, others varieties lack this and may smell like fruit or rosemary.

You're correct, the non existent democratic rights of the people have not been eroded. As you have you described, USA is a Republic not a Democracy.

Well, your democratic right would be to vote. However, as you said we are in a democratic republic where we don’t vote to make the laws but rather vote for representatives.

Teachers and doctors may abuse their authority, but there is a sharp legal limit to what they can get away with.

There are sharp legal limits to what cops can get away with: they've just historically been unenforced by government prosecutors and/or juries.

Those limits don't seem very sharp if they are rarely enforces.

The primary argument that castle "created the modern state" suggests we've regressed into feudal times. I don't think this is accurate.

It's an opportunistic solution to a budget problem.

Local governments have extra money from property price bubble increasing tax revenues.

At the same time there are great open source image analysis models for companies to put on a pole using cheap android hw and a solar panel and make bold claims about solving all crime, then they can sell that data again to 3rd parties like insurance. Also can start buying access to more video feeds from ring cameras etc and resell that. They'll hire someone to make a ux to integrate it into PDs later, for a premium of course.

Or you could say a coalition of women and their male allies forced the state to acknowledge their innate human rights, if you wanted to focus on accuracy and cohesion.

Yes! Thats a good one too.