Author Topic: Episode #582  (Read 3176 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline gebobs

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 199
  • Me like hockey!
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #30 on: September 06, 2016, 11:43:30 AM »
Actually, the distance from Marathon to Athens isn't 42.195 km (or 26 miles and 385 yards).  The marathon distance was standardised as 42.195 km for the 1924 Olympics in Paris based on the distance used in the 1908 Olympics in London for some reason or another (and it's suspected that the winner of the 1924 marathon didn't actually run 42.195 km having taken a few shortcuts using an intimate knowledge of Paris geography).

I was a bit surprised that at least some of the Rogues seemed to be unfamiliar with the Phidippides myth/legend (I use that spelling as it's the name of a store here in Atlanta for running shoes/apparel). That item was certainly the fiction since the first Olympiads preceded the Battle of Marathon by a few hundred years. Also, his run to Athens was not to deliver a message of an invasion, but rather of a victory: "Joy to you, we have won!" Or something along those lines.

Some accounts also have Phidippides running from Athens to Sparta before the battle to recruit help, meeting the god Pan along the way, and then running back to Athens the following day...a total of 270 miles or 440 km.

It's true, as Steven said, that it is a myth that the courier, whatever his name was, died on arrival in Athens inasmuch as the entire story is a mythical. Elements of the story may be actual history, but others certainly are not (e.g. the runner meeting with Pan). I'm not sure what information Steven is relying on to dispute that the runner died since it seems to be in at least some if not most of the accounts.

The name Phidippides is also apocryphal. Translated, it means "sparing a horse". It is also given in other accounts as Pheidippides and Philippides.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2016, 01:43:45 PM by gebobs »

Offline dreamlander

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #31 on: September 06, 2016, 12:58:58 PM »
Allow me to say a few words in defense of the "Muscle Confusion" principle.

As background, I was into the bodybuilding scene back in the 1970's and 1980's - think "Pumping Iron" - as a wannabe and fanboy. Later, starting in 1990, I became part owner in 3 different Gold's Gyms. I also got certified as a Personal Trainer by the ACSM in the early 1990's.

The "Muscle Confusion" principle was one of many popularized by Joe Weider:

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=425660.5;wap2

The one in question:

MUSCLE CONFUSION: Constantly change variables in your workout — number of sets, number of reps, exercise choice, order of exercises, length of your rest periods — to avoid getting in a rut and slowing growth.

Now, I'll stipulate that Weider's principles were not necessarily held out to be scientific - most were based on anecdote, though I'll venture a few have been validated scientifically.

Still, I think I can make a case for "Muscle Confusion":

1) As stated, doing the same exercise day after day can get very boring. Mixing it up can keep things fresh and improve program compliance.

2) Different exercises stress muscles in different ways, stimulating different fibers. Think of bicep curls - wrist position makes a difference. Hence, you can get slightly different results by using different bars or different machines, for example.

3) Similarly, joints, ligaments and tendons are stressed to various degrees by different exercises. By mixing up exercises, one may decrease the frequency of overuse injuries.

As an aside, one other idea that seemed promising - variable resistance - seemed like a good idea, but at least as of the early 1990's had little or no evidence of efficacy. I'm talking about Nautilus machines, Hammer Strength and virtually every machine incorporating a cam. They may feel better, but as far as I know there's no real evidence they do anything beneficial.

I really didn't understand what they were calling muscle confusing training. I did P90x for almost 2 years. You did the same weekly routine for 4 weeks increasing the weight and intensity along the way as much as you could. This sounds like the same thing Cara described as progressive resistance, or whatever she called the science based method. After the 4 weeks you change up the routine with some variations to exercises. Bought I never thought of this as muscle confusion. Like you said, I understood this as trying to target specific muscle groups. For example, if you do a standard bench press and switch to incline bench press the idea is to stress a different part of the pectoral muscles and shoulders. Also I don't think p90x is meant for power lifters or body builders. It is meant to get you into good all around shape and it will. Part of keeping it going is changing things up. Like you said doing the same exact thing for a year would get pretty boring.

Kind of a waste of a segment if they weren't going to explain things better. Cara never really said anything other than that progressively raising resistance and work load is the only thing that really works. What training program doesn't follow this idea?  I came away thinking, OK......?

Offline Ah.hell

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10878
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #32 on: September 06, 2016, 01:03:06 PM »
My first intro to Seth and Seti really was via conspiracy/ghost monger Art Bell.  Next time they interview him, they should ask about Coast to Coast am. 

I don't usually mind ads but yep, the NFL ad was pretty jarring. 

Offline Crash

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 395
  • Dogspeed John Glenn.
    • What I do for fun
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #33 on: September 06, 2016, 05:02:15 PM »
Cara never really said anything other than that progressively raising resistance and work load is the only thing that really works. What training program doesn't follow this idea?  I came away thinking, OK......?

  I had an unusual weight training program for a while in the late 70s.  It was designed by Eddy B. who was the USA national cycling coach at the time.  Fast Eddy was Eddy Merckx of course. Instead of steadily increasing workloads by adding weight you picked up the speed of your reps.  If you were doing leg curls or arm curls then you adjusted the weight so that you could do at least one curl per second.  Lifting weights slowly with maximum weights built bulk but not speed.  The theory was to not bulk up but to build long sinewy muscles.  It attracted some scorn at the time from the regulars but I was doing pretty well cycling at the time so it appeared to pay off.  What they call cardio now was not popular then.  The result was huge bulky  bodies and tiny hearts. 

Offline Harry Black

  • International Man of Mystery
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10279
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #34 on: September 07, 2016, 11:57:08 AM »
Plenty of training programs dont build resistence because hard training is hard and it rarely feels like you are improving. So its more profitable to bring clients over an initial hump and keep them at a comfortable plateau.
I fucking HATE my training plan because i constantly feel like Im doing stuff I cant do. And struggling sucks.

Offline Pertel

  • Brand New
  • Posts: 1
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #35 on: September 08, 2016, 04:31:14 AM »
I'm sorry to say that I really detested that NFL (or was it college football?) ad.  I don't mind the tasteful, NPR-style ads read by the rogues themselves, but that was really jarring and annoying.  There's a reason I haven't been able to listen to commercial radio in decades, and it's the tone and loudness of ads that speak to you as though you were a moron.  Additionally, the vast majority of your listening audience outside the US couldn't give a crap about this.

Please, no more!  It was thoroughly beneath you and this show. I'm currently not in a position to become a contributing member, but I hope to be one day.

I would like to second exactly this, and hope you don't include ads like this in future podcasts. Ads like this are the reason I don't watch flow TV, and use ad-blocking online, it's simply too much crap to withstand, even for great content.
Went to check if membership removed ads, and see that it's only for the 8$/month and up subscriptions. Sadly, that is a bit too much for me to spend on a single podcast. Would love to have a cheaper option, where the only benefit is ad removal.

Still love the content though :)

Offline Harry Black

  • International Man of Mystery
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10279
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #36 on: September 08, 2016, 06:01:11 PM »
I thought it was fine. Easier to space out through than the usual ads actually because its a cadence and tone Im used to zoning out for.
It was easy to skip, didnt last long and Im delighted that the show is getting sponsors.
I think feedback is probably important to Steve on this stuff but honestly I wouldnt ask them to turn down money when I have a skip forward button.

My preference would still be for each rogue to record a personal ad in their personal style for each sponsor and just play one of the 4 possible random ones each episode.

Offline Swagomatic

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2369
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #37 on: September 08, 2016, 06:25:32 PM »
I thought it was fine. Easier to space out through than the usual ads actually because its a cadence and tone Im used to zoning out for.
It was easy to skip, didnt last long and Im delighted that the show is getting sponsors.
I think feedback is probably important to Steve on this stuff but honestly I wouldnt ask them to turn down money when I have a skip forward button.

My preference would still be for each rogue to record a personal ad in their personal style for each sponsor and just play one of the 4 possible random ones each episode.

Yeah, it was unexpected, but it didn't really bother me, either.  My first thought was that there will be a lot of complaining about this.  I can listen to the commercial free version, but I usually just listen from iTunes on my phone.  The commercials just don't bother me.  It seems like all the podcasts have commercials now.
Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.
---George Bernard Shaw

Offline daniel1948

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4657
  • Cat Lovers Against the Bomb
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #38 on: September 08, 2016, 07:13:03 PM »
I thought it was fine. Easier to space out through than the usual ads actually because its a cadence and tone Im used to zoning out for.
It was easy to skip, didnt last long and Im delighted that the show is getting sponsors.
I think feedback is probably important to Steve on this stuff but honestly I wouldnt ask them to turn down money when I have a skip forward button.

My preference would still be for each rogue to record a personal ad in their personal style for each sponsor and just play one of the 4 possible random ones each episode.

Not speaking about the SGU, since I don't get the ads, but I do get a lot of podcasts with ads. My thoughts:

In the early days of radio, a show's host would read ad copy, giving it his/her personal imprimatur. The unsophisticated listeners of the day likely thought that the host, who they liked and trusted, was giving a personal recommendation. At some point this began to be considered slightly improper, and commercials became productions in which the shows hosts did not participate.

Nowadays I hear a lot of podcast hosts who I like, because I enjoy their podcasts, explicitly telling me that they use and love the product. It's the best shave, or the best food, or the best underpants they've ever had, eaten, worn. They personally sleep on this mattress and it's the best they've ever slept on.

As a sometimes skeptic (other times just an unbeliever) I ask myself, "How likely is it that this podcast host managed to get sponsorship from their very favorite razor/food/underwear/mattress ever? Isn't it more likely that these few companies have made a market decision to advertise on podcasts and the hosts have agreed to prostitute themselves, selling their reputation to support their podcasting business or hobby?

Then it saddens me that people I've grown to like are selling me out. I understand the need for advertising. But the tone should be, "Buy this product because they keep this podcast going," rather than "I personally, your beloved podcast host, recommend this product as the best thing ever."

I have no idea how ads work on the SGU. But this trend seems to be sweeping podland. And it's disappointing. Maybe I'll start a thread on stuff advertised on podcasts, if one does not already exist.
Daniel
----------------
"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think long and hard before starting a war."
-- Otto von Bismarck

Offline CKava

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 499
    • God Knows What
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #39 on: September 08, 2016, 08:29:29 PM »
Not speaking about the SGU, since I don't get the ads, but I do get a lot of podcasts with ads. My thoughts:

In the early days of radio, a show's host would read ad copy, giving it his/her personal imprimatur. The unsophisticated listeners of the day likely thought that the host, who they liked and trusted, was giving a personal recommendation. At some point this began to be considered slightly improper, and commercials became productions in which the shows hosts did not participate.

Nowadays I hear a lot of podcast hosts who I like, because I enjoy their podcasts, explicitly telling me that they use and love the product. It's the best shave, or the best food, or the best underpants they've ever had, eaten, worn. They personally sleep on this mattress and it's the best they've ever slept on.

As a sometimes skeptic (other times just an unbeliever) I ask myself, "How likely is it that this podcast host managed to get sponsorship from their very favorite razor/food/underwear/mattress ever? Isn't it more likely that these few companies have made a market decision to advertise on podcasts and the hosts have agreed to prostitute themselves, selling their reputation to support their podcasting business or hobby?

Then it saddens me that people I've grown to like are selling me out. I understand the need for advertising. But the tone should be, "Buy this product because they keep this podcast going," rather than "I personally, your beloved podcast host, recommend this product as the best thing ever."

I have no idea how ads work on the SGU. But this trend seems to be sweeping podland. And it's disappointing. Maybe I'll start a thread on stuff advertised on podcasts, if one does not already exist.

I agree with the general sentiment but I think in a lot of occasions the company approaches the host and then provides them with a free mattress/pair of pants/set of razors every month and then asks them to provide a recommendation that includes a set of given talking points. I don't find that particularly disingenuous as long as the host genuinely agrees that the product is as good, or almost as good, as they are saying. If the razors were super shitty and the host still gives a glowing review then I would have an issue, but in most cases I don't imagine this being the case- then again maybe I am just a dupe! So far it hasn't mattered as I've never bought anything on the basis of a podcast ad and most of the services advertised are only relevant for US people anyway.
If the above nonsense wasn't enough more is available here
http://godknowswhat.wordpress.com/

Online Sawyer

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #40 on: September 08, 2016, 08:42:22 PM »


As a sometimes skeptic (other times just an unbeliever) I ask myself, "How likely is it that this podcast host managed to get sponsorship from their very favorite razor/food/underwear/mattress ever? Isn't it more likely that these few companies have made a market decision to advertise on podcasts and the hosts have agreed to prostitute themselves, selling their reputation to support their podcasting business or hobby?

Then it saddens me that people I've grown to like are selling me out. I understand the need for advertising. But the tone should be, "Buy this product because they keep this podcast going," rather than "I personally, your beloved podcast host, recommend this product as the best thing ever."

I have no idea how ads work on the SGU. But this trend seems to be sweeping podland. And it's disappointing. Maybe I'll start a thread on stuff advertised on podcasts, if one does not already exist.

But if this is the case, then shouldn't pre-packaged ads for stuff like the NFL be a good thing?  In a way it is more honest to just play one of these ads that has nothing to do with the show, rather than the pseudo-personalized advertisements that are given for niche products.

Regardless of what people prefer, I think it's pretty clear that people making free content online have an impossible task in making both advertisers and listeners happy at the same time.  It also seems extraordinarily unlikely that all of my favorite podcast producers have "sold out" all in the same ~2 year time frame, and more likely that they've all realized how unsustainable their product is with zero external support.  The PBS/NPR fundraising model that barely worked for TV and radio is clearly not going to work in a medium with 100X the available programs.  I have yet to hear a serious alternative suggested on this forum (same goes for other podcasts I listen to).

Offline daniel1948

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4657
  • Cat Lovers Against the Bomb
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #41 on: September 09, 2016, 11:55:34 AM »
Not speaking about the SGU, since I don't get the ads, but I do get a lot of podcasts with ads. My thoughts:

In the early days of radio, a show's host would read ad copy, giving it his/her personal imprimatur. The unsophisticated listeners of the day likely thought that the host, who they liked and trusted, was giving a personal recommendation. At some point this began to be considered slightly improper, and commercials became productions in which the shows hosts did not participate.

Nowadays I hear a lot of podcast hosts who I like, because I enjoy their podcasts, explicitly telling me that they use and love the product. It's the best shave, or the best food, or the best underpants they've ever had, eaten, worn. They personally sleep on this mattress and it's the best they've ever slept on.

As a sometimes skeptic (other times just an unbeliever) I ask myself, "How likely is it that this podcast host managed to get sponsorship from their very favorite razor/food/underwear/mattress ever? Isn't it more likely that these few companies have made a market decision to advertise on podcasts and the hosts have agreed to prostitute themselves, selling their reputation to support their podcasting business or hobby?

Then it saddens me that people I've grown to like are selling me out. I understand the need for advertising. But the tone should be, "Buy this product because they keep this podcast going," rather than "I personally, your beloved podcast host, recommend this product as the best thing ever."

I have no idea how ads work on the SGU. But this trend seems to be sweeping podland. And it's disappointing. Maybe I'll start a thread on stuff advertised on podcasts, if one does not already exist.

I agree with the general sentiment but I think in a lot of occasions the company approaches the host and then provides them with a free mattress/pair of pants/set of razors every month and then asks them to provide a recommendation that includes a set of given talking points. I don't find that particularly disingenuous as long as the host genuinely agrees that the product is as good, or almost as good, as they are saying. If the razors were super shitty and the host still gives a glowing review then I would have an issue, but in most cases I don't imagine this being the case- then again maybe I am just a dupe! So far it hasn't mattered as I've never bought anything on the basis of a podcast ad and most of the services advertised are only relevant for US people anyway.

The problem is when the host insist that the product is The Best Thing Ever and goes on and on about how they, personally, believe that no other product can possibly come close.



As a sometimes skeptic (other times just an unbeliever) I ask myself, "How likely is it that this podcast host managed to get sponsorship from their very favorite razor/food/underwear/mattress ever? Isn't it more likely that these few companies have made a market decision to advertise on podcasts and the hosts have agreed to prostitute themselves, selling their reputation to support their podcasting business or hobby?

Then it saddens me that people I've grown to like are selling me out. I understand the need for advertising. But the tone should be, "Buy this product because they keep this podcast going," rather than "I personally, your beloved podcast host, recommend this product as the best thing ever."

I have no idea how ads work on the SGU. But this trend seems to be sweeping podland. And it's disappointing. Maybe I'll start a thread on stuff advertised on podcasts, if one does not already exist.

But if this is the case, then shouldn't pre-packaged ads for stuff like the NFL be a good thing?  In a way it is more honest to just play one of these ads that has nothing to do with the show, rather than the pseudo-personalized advertisements that are given for niche products.

Yes, in my opinion definitely. I just cannot comment on the NFL ad because I have not heard it.

Regardless of what people prefer, I think it's pretty clear that people making free content online have an impossible task in making both advertisers and listeners happy at the same time.  It also seems extraordinarily unlikely that all of my favorite podcast producers have "sold out" all in the same ~2 year time frame, and more likely that they've all realized how unsustainable their product is with zero external support.  The PBS/NPR fundraising model that barely worked for TV and radio is clearly not going to work in a medium with 100X the available programs.  I have yet to hear a serious alternative suggested on this forum (same goes for other podcasts I listen to).

Yes. Good point. I just wish that the hosts would be honest: "This company is supporting this podcast. They gave me free stuff and I think it's pretty good."
Daniel
----------------
"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think long and hard before starting a war."
-- Otto von Bismarck

Offline Harry Black

  • International Man of Mystery
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10279
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #42 on: September 09, 2016, 01:54:22 PM »
Most of the podcasts I listen to handle ads really well and say upfront that its there because they are getting money for it.
I mostly listen to comedy though.

Offline daniel1948

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4657
  • Cat Lovers Against the Bomb
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #43 on: September 09, 2016, 02:31:06 PM »
Among the podcasts I listen to, the worst sustained offender is one of my favorite podcasts: Sawbones. It's a wonderful show. Informative with humor. But the ads are atrocious in their pandering to their sponsors.

But maybe the single most disgusting violation of decency was a recent episode of Car Talk advertising an alternative cancer center. They also advertised Michigan as a low-regulatory state for business. And I've always been annoyed by their long-standing ads for Tire Rack saying that your tires can be delivered "... in as little as one business day." In other words, in any length of time ranging from one day to a hundred years. It sounds like they're promising quick delivery when in fact they are not promising anything at all. There was a period of a decade when I didn't listen to Car Talk so the re-runs seem to be ones I never heard.

I don't watch tv except a few days a year when I'm in a hotel, so I imagine I react more strongly than folks who are used to the truly disgusting ads on tv these days.
Daniel
----------------
"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think long and hard before starting a war."
-- Otto von Bismarck

Offline sidoniealaise

  • Brand New
  • Posts: 5
Re: Episode #582
« Reply #44 on: September 12, 2016, 09:29:15 PM »
so the wheelharp sounds really awesome. It reminded me of the some of the music in Only Lovers Left Alive... I am wondering now if they used a wheelharp in it... been trying to dig around on the interwebs for info but so far no success.