Best products from r/Destiny

Hey Destiny,

I made the switch from a commercial gym and just built a home gym in my garage over this past summer and have a little bit of advice for you. I did a lot of research and reading before finally buying all of my equipment.

For the weights, they will probably be the most expensive part of your gym. I wouldn't recommend paying anything over $1/pound. If you want to take the time and check craigslist regularly, you can find some people desperate to sell their like-new/slightly-used weights from anywhere to $.60-.90 cents a pound. Some people have to move and have no other choice but to sell their weights as soon as possible. Even if the weights do have little bit of rust, you can easily clean that off. Just watch out for major chips/dings in the plates. Rubber plates will be more durable than iron, however rubber usually tends to cost you a lot more. Also weights with grip holes usually cost more than regular round ones. I got a 390lb set of like-new iron plates for only $260 on craigslist. I got pretty lucky but I've read many other stories of people getting even better deals than me.

I think the power rack you linked should be just fine. This is the rack I have for around the same price range . Make sure it has a good weight capacity. Even though you may not ever be squatting 700-800 pounds, if you think about it, when you throw the bar off your back and onto the spotter arms, F=MA and shit turns that 135lb you're squatting to more and more the higher you drop it from, so also keep that in mind.

For the bench, from what I have read and experienced, is one of the single most important parts of your gym. You don't want to go cheap on a bench and get an un-sturdy, wobbly bench. When you are pushing hundreds of pounds of weight over your body, and the bench breaks, the bar can possibly fall on your neck which is dangerous if you are lifting alone. It may be better for you to get a bench that has a flat base, instead of an arm such as this one. It's really up to you if you want to have adjustable positions on the bench for incline/decline, but just know that for better quality arms, you're going to have to spend a lot more money like into the $200-300 range.

For the mats, your rack is pretty much 4x4' so you will most likely need two mats if you want to do some deadlifting.. Some other people mentioned getting horse stall mats. Those are what I have and you can get them anywhere from $30-50 each and they do the job perfectly. I think the ones that you linked are a little bit too expensive.

Some Pros and Cons:

Pros:

• It is very convenient. You can lift shirtless or even naked.
  
• You can find some nice, loud speakers and listen to whatever music you want and not have to wear headphones
  
• It will save you money in the long run...assuming you continue to use it
  
• You can split up your workouts...i.e. instead of going to a gym for 1 hour you can work out 30 minutes in the morning and 30 minutes at night since you don't have to drive back and forth.
  
• You can do some dank live streams and memes for your viewers and have them donate every time you hit a PR.
  
  Cons:
  
  
• It's almost too convenient. You say to yourself, "Oh, I'll just workout first thing tomorrow morning." Then you wake up a little late and have to eat, then tell yourself that you'll workout later that night. Then something comes up later and the cycle perpetuates. The fact that I wasn't actively paying for a gym pass made me less disciplined. But if you can discipline yourself well and find a nice, set schedule, you're good to go.
  
• Gym environment. I don't know if this applies to you, but I would go to the gym with a lot of my friends from school. I definitely started to miss the "gym environment". I thought I would never miss the douchebag bros walking around and having to wait for equipment to free-up, but I just started to feel so lonely working out by myself all of the time. It may be different for you because you have Erin and the chat to workout with you and motivate you.
  
  
  Here is a picture of my friend's home gym that inspired me to make mine.
  
  And here is my own home gym that cost me about $1100.
  
  Sorry if this post is a little jumbled up, my thoughts were kinda all over the place. I hope this helped a little bit.
  
  Feel free to ask me any other questions if you have any.
  

I am a physicist, who enjoyed watching Destiny’s infestor antics as a postdoc and have occasionally watched him the last couple of years when I travelled. I found the falsehoods provided without source by the recent ‘debater’ to be frustrating.

I have always done very well academically, missing only a couple questions in the SAT/GRE and skipped a grade. I had the honour of having a seminar with Prof. Gates in Maryland but was not good enough to work with him as his student. Prof. Gates was one of the leaders of the first string theory revolution. The lack of African Americans in physics is something that racists point to as a reason for their racism, I can respond with personal observations:
Very few AfricanAmerican study physics in the first place, so it isn’t that they try and prove incapable.
One time I was speaking with an AfricanAmerican friend of mine from church (he was very intelligent, was an accountant and had skipped a grade) about his niece. He said something to the effect of ‘she wants to be a scientist, a chemist, isn’t that crazy?’. I use this as an example of the cultural barriers in place even for the middle class African Americans.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvester_James_Gates)

There have been many other summaries, here is one (and surely much better than my post here):
http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/j/jencks-gap.html I am often giving wiki links not because they are the best, but because they provide a summary with links to other places.

The standard tests (like SAT) have a significant racial basis. Basically, they are biased in favour of the intelligence displayed by ‘white' males. This is because their purpose is to measure the population of western communities and not to give an independent measure of intelligence. In fact, if there is a problem that whites of ‘white’ median intelligence have difficulty with but blacks of ‘black’ median intelligence do well on, it would be deselected and not used.
(https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/06/21/sat
http://diverseeducation.com/article/49830/
)

Additionally, all intelligence tests (SAT, GRE, IQ, etc) are made for the ‘average’ and lose applicability for people away from the ‘average’. Most IQ tests just can not be meaningfully interpreted for people outside of one std deviation. By ‘average’ I mean the median person in western countries (Europe/US) and not a world average. Most importantly, the tests assume a given cultural and academic experience and would not test intelligence in an easily interpretable manner for those with a different cultural and academic experience (the score could not be interpreted in the same way). This difference is due both to what ‘type' of intelligence is valued/useful as well as how the variation is understood. These points are noted even in the study of Australian aborigines; are strong at spatial IQ which is very important but not measured well by traditional IQ tests.
(http://wilderdom.com/personality/intelligenceCulturalBias.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1813596
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/recognizing-spatial-intel/)

Race is entirely a social construct. If you were going to divide people into genetic populations you would end up with very different divisions then those made by people who divide by race. Even those academics who think that genetic populations and geographic populations are correlated still say that differences between populations account for 5% of genetic differences while differences within a population accounts for 95% of genetic differences. If there are no correlation between 'race' and genetic populations or minimal correlation, then differences in measured intelligence of different groups should be accounted for by differences in environment and not genetics.
( https://www.amazon.com/Racecraft-Soul-Inequality-American-Life-ebook/dp/B007LCYZCE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_clustering
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC515312/)

Not only the environment of an individual matters, but also the environment of his ancestors. This is not just for the obvious social reasons (does the person value academics/etc?) but also for that persons biology. You can’t just try to make a change in one generation and expect the effects of previous generations (living through famine, apartheid, jim crow, etc) to be unimportant.
(http://www.livescience.com/21902-diet-epigenetics-grandchildren.html)

The total population of people with Indian ancestry in the UK is about 1.5 million people and Pakistan ancestry is about 1.2 million people(UK divides them). The total population of people with Indian ancestry in the US is about 3 million people. This ‘regression to the mean’ argument is just ridiculous. The difference is that those who came to the US in the last couple of decades came into the upper class and so demonstrate the intelligence associated with an upper class environment while those who came to the UK came as shopkeepers/etc (Indians) or factory workers (Pakistanis). Additionally, Pakistani and Indian are classified differently in the UK (despite the two nations being an artefact of the British colonisation). In terms of economic success, Indians are the second highest ‘ethnic’ group while the Pakistanis are one of the lowest ‘ethnic’ groups.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Pakistanis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Indian
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Americans)

I am probably not responding to all of the ridiculousness (I only listened to a bit of the end of the 'debate'), but here is a responce to at least some of it.

Ok, so your best bet is to read a comprehensive set of books on the matter. For the sake of a quick introduction into the matter, your best bet is from the ''a very short introduction'' series. It gets your feet wet at the very least. Now the best and most comprehensive single book on the matter is by a man called Ian Black see here for the book. It is widely acknowledged as being one of the deepest guides on the conflict that goes beyond the current conflict and back to the British Mandate. He was a guardian lead on the conflict for a number of years and now currently works at the LSE. The book itself has a slight pro-Palestinian bias but then it is up to you to judge if that is warranted or not. Other good books on the matter are as follows; On Palestine by Chomsky (obviously very left leaning), A line in the sand By Barr (A historical understanding of how the conflict as it is today can be grounded in past imperialism), and, Belonging the story of Jews by Schama (A history of Jews, one that I can't give too much info on atm because I am reading it myself).

​

Other recommendations that I can give are to subscribe to notifications from the Israelis newspapers etc to get there perspectives on matters. As well as following or subscribing to certain joint peace based groups within the area- my favourites are ''Roots'', ''Combatants for Peace'', and the ''Bereaved families forum''. I've met with all three organisations in the past and I'd say that the second is for sure the most interesting- combining ex-IDF and ex-Hamas forces together to seek a peaceful solution.

​

Also just another thing to add when looking at the region specific to Palestine- make sure to differentiate between the west bank and Gaza- they have very different politics and Palestine- like Israelis are not a monolithic group- as seen by the rise of certain countermovements in both Palestine and Israel that are seeking to challenge the hegemony of Abbas and Bibi respectively.

​

Any other questions please feel free to ask.

Destiny's mic is a condenser AFAIK which means it's more detailed, the SM7B that Reckful has is a dynamic which means it blocks out background noise quite well but requires a lot of gain to power it.

The Blue Bottle that Destiny has is good and so is the SM7B, they're just different. The SM7B definitely has "legendary" status like other mics like the RE-20, U47, etc have even though the Blue Bottle doesn't but it's still a nice mic.

I must say, though, Byron's voice sounds REALLY fucking good on the SM7B and I'd love to know his entire audio and video setup.

edit: Byron has this mixer: https://www.amazon.com/Yamaha-MG10XU-10-Input-Stereo-Effects/dp/B00IBIVL42 it seems really good and has USB.

I think that if the person reports it was her duty so save other soldiers, it's not really a classical case of altruism. So in that case I agree. But that's unique to the reported reason of someone handling out of "duty" rather than "empathy".

On an act being egoistic as soon as some pleasure is derived, allow me to quote these nicely written paragraphs from this book.

> The egoist might respond: if you are doing what you really want, aren’t
you thereby self-interested? It is important to see that the answer may well
be no. For all we know, some of us deeply want to help other people. When
we manage to offer such help, we are doing what we really want to do. Yet
what we really want to do is to benefit someone else, not ourselves.
Now, if people get what they really want, they may be better off as a
result. (But they might not: think of the anorexic or the drug addict. Or
think of the cases of disappointment discussed in chapter 4.) Yet the fact
that a person gains from her action does not prove that her motives were
egoistic [1]. The person who really wants to help the homeless, and volunteers
at a soup kitchen or shelter, may certainly derive pleasure from her efforts.
But this doesn’t show that pleasure was her aim. Her aim may have been to
help those in need. And because her aim was achieved, she thereby
received pleasure.

> As a general matter, when you discover that your deepest desires have
been satisfied, you often feel quite pleased. But that does not mean that your ultimate aim is to get such pleasure. That’s what needs to be shown; we can’t just assume it in trying to figure out whether our motives are
always self-interested.

I also think describing altruistic behavior as epigenetically, deterministically or evolutionarily is as useful as describing love as an influx of dopamine and oxytocine. It's scientifically nice but also kind of restricting in understanding humans.

[1] If I reward you with a cookie for taking the shortest path to work, and you enjoy that reward, that does not prove you took the shortest path to work because of my reward--you would have taken it anyway and under what I understand to be your conception of human behavior there is no accounting for this possibility.

He's in his low 30's, I'm high 20's, so I guess it's less mentor, and more just friends, then.

It would be a lot of effort for sure, but I think it would be interesting to have the discussion with him. I'm so used to judgemental Christians in my family growing up, that it's refreshing to have one that isn't so hardcore that I can have a real conversation about these things with.

I 100% agree with thinking critically. I would only use "Christian light" as the baseline. I don't even know of any kind of church like this, but I wouldn't tell the kids there's a god, I'd use something like the Jefferson bible that strips out all fantasy and myth. I like the fact that the bible is an unchanging source to use as morality, though outdated on things like homosexuality for example that I would change up.

If you use culture or whatever as your moral source (I don't know enough about moral frameworks), that is prone to sways in how culture shifts, this can lead to kids being raised in this worse culture. If you have a moral source that doesn't change that you can always point back to, like the bible in this case, and a community like the church that sticks with it, that is less likely to happen.

Ah, yes, this is a ancient squabble (philosophers v sophists). Have you read Plato's Dialogues? The Phaedrus is really fascinating, it deals with this subject but interestingly Socrates uses rhetorical form to argue his case.

I completely agree with you. Political speech is about persuasion, I hesitate to use win as I think it's inexact, but I was just pointing out that it is not fact free. Meaning, there is an empirical base but framing is interested in how a message is delivered and why people think that way.

I guess my hope for these debates was on how and why people think and not if what they think is technically correct or not. I assume that is way to loose for the analytical mind.

Your last paragraph is delightful :) one of the books I teach in undergrad comp. is called everything's an argument. I of course agree with your sentiment though. <3

Hi, Econ undergrad here!

Econ is a little special when it comes to education because the vast majority of books in bookstores and youtube videos are not based on mainstream orthodox economics as you would learn in a university. Most of it is bunk and if you attempt to learn economic theory from youtube you'll probably end up misinforming yourself(It's happened to me firsthand). I would highly recommend you pirate 1 college micro and 1 macro textbooks and go through the math problems chapter by chapter. If you want a quicker intro to econ I highly recommend reading Naked economics since it summarizes intro micro and macro very well.


I wrote up a small explanation on how to debate economics a few days ago. Here's a edited version of why theory is so important.

• First: If you don't have a foundation in theory you won't understand why a policy is favored even if you understand what economists support. What makes the current generation of new Keynesian macro models so great is that by manipulating the microfoundation a economist can adapt the model for different situations and assumptions to get varying accurate solutions.
  
• Second: Models will oftentimes give welfare maximizing answers. Therefore economists who've gone through the math beforehand can just argue about tradeoffs of policies and picking the right model, and not argue about the equations themselves.
  
• Third: The effects of policies vary heavily the longer they're implemented. Using short term models to describe changes decades in the future will oftentimes give wrong results. Some mechanics and theories from econ 101 are used even in advanced macro but you gotta have the intuition to know what is relevant and what is deceptive in order to pick optimal policies.
  
• fourth(not included in previous post): While theory may tell you roughly the effects of policies and their tradeoffs for different groups at the end of the day you still need to make choices between those tradeoffs. A good example is trade policy as theory will tell you in most circumstances that its unambiguously better to lower tariffs and redistribute the efficiency gains to the losers but in practice those who immediately lose will fight with every part of their being to stop greater free trade even if in the long run they'd be better off. That kind of struggle requires political choices in which it may be better to favor the protectionists even if the economics says its not the optimal answer.
  
  
  Edit:
  
  To answer your question of how to form good economic opinions. If you learn micro and macro theory for the short and long term you can use it to form opinions on a wide variety of policies. It's extremely important that you study the long term growth models immediately after you learn the short term growth models as their policy recommendations oftentimes directly contradict.
  
  Edit 2: Changed "current generation of macro models" to "current generation of new keynesian macro models"

> Thanks for the tip, but I'm not even sure what you mean by "authoritative". A good argument is a good argument and I believe Sam makes a good one, but I will check him out.

Harris's arguments concerning free will are terrible and virtually no one reasonably educated on the issue takes them seriously. See the section "Harris Makes Bad Philosophical Arguments" here.

> But this definition if circular and vague.

It isn't circular, and it is vague only because it is meant to be theory-neutral. A vague definition is all you're going to get when you're arguing against vaguely defined group of people.

> "Responsibility" is something we get from the belief we have free will. The definition of "moral" is vague in that we do have a definitive definition of what is moral and what is not. Utilitarianism? Categoricalism? Communitarianism? Libertarianism?

You don't need any specific account of normative ethics to make the concept of "moral responsibility" intelligible. It can be "being worthy of praise or blame for doing the right or wrong thing, whatever the correct account of right and wrong turns out to be". The question doesn't depend on a specific account of 'right' and 'wrong' just like the question "does 2x^2 > 5 have any solutions in natural numbers?" doesn't depend on what the specific value of 'x' is.

> But are the person and the self separate?

What do you mean by "self"?

> And how do we know that how someone chooses to control himself is not controlled by environment?

What do you mean by "controlled"? What do you mean by "environment"? Why are you asking?

> If there is scientific data that starkly contradicts the concept of knowledge presented, I would reject that also

How can any scientific data contradict the concept of knowledge? Concepts are not physical entities that can be tested in a laboratory. Also, you haven't presented any definition, but you surely believe that there's such thing as "knowledge".

> The concept of knowledge, I'm sure, is not as contested as free will.

There's been an enormous problem with defining what "knowledge" means since Edmund Gettier's 1963 paper showed that there's a serious problem with the widely accepted definition of "knowledge". So we have no good definition of "knowledge", and yet people are not running around screaming "KNOWLEDGE DOESN'T EXIST". We still use the concept every day and the majority of philosophers would agree that "knowledge" is a thing, even if we can't precisely define it. Same goes for free will (or not, because there are several specific account of free will).

> I am not asking that we abandon free will completely. I am suggesting there is no evidence for it, therefore it must be at least be met with more skepticism than something with studies attached.

I'm pretty sure the concept of a "study" and "evidence" doesn't really apply to free will. There are arguments in favour of its existence though, and of course they are met with some skepticism, but it seems that more experts than not think that the arguments are good enough to overcome the skepticism.

> If it's not demonstrable in studies. It's of no use in coming up with solutions.

Is "If it's not demonstrable in studies. It's of no use in coming up with solutions." demonstrable in studies?

> Again, if free will exists (some extra component other than environment and physiology), if we cannot control it or even detect it, why even bring it up in debate?

What do you mean by "some extra component other than environment and physiology"? Is reasoning or desire an "extra component other than environment and physiology"? If not then free will, on some popular accounts, wouldn't be as well.

> In the same way, one should believe systemic racism exists before free will because one is more certain.

Maybe. Perhaps these "conservatives" have counterarguments and reasons to doubt the conclusions that are drawn from the data, that in their view make it less certain. I think you should take it up with one of them and ask for their arguments.

> Well, I don't know what free will implies. That's the point. As I've shown, the definition is circular, vague, and unproven.

All you've shown is that you haven't really researched the subject well beyond listening to Sam Harris. What free will implies depends on the account of free will your interlocutor accepts, and can be learned from the relevant literature like Frankfurt's Freedom of the will and the concept of a person or Fischer and Ravizza's Responsibility and Control. So again, you should take this up with the actual people you're addressing, because otherwise you're arguing against no one, and it's really no wonder that this abstract "Mr. Nobody" has vague beliefs.

https://www.amazon.com/ViewSonic-VP2780-4K-27-Inch-Monitor-3840x2160/dp/B00SHZSXVI $600 VS 27in

https://www.amazon.com/Acer-Predator-XB271HK-bmiprz-Widescreen/dp/B018MYTF4W - $869-27in/32in-$1290


https://www.amazon.com/BenQ-32-Inch-Definition-BL3201PH-3840x2160/dp/B00O1B5M9I - $674 BenQ 32in



https://www.amazon.com/PA328Q-3840x2160-DisplayPort-Ergonomic-Back-lit/dp/B00YWD9ZZM - $900 Asus 32in

You will basically end up with these. The 32in BenQ will work for what you listed. The 32in Asus is $226 more, but is top quality professional. If you want to splurge there is the Acer Predator. If you want a great 27in for the price, then there is the View Sonic.

I would go with 32in because why even go 4k if you aren't using 32in. The Acer and Asus are overkill (predator is for gaming/Asus professional photo editing). So that leaves you with the BenQ, which is perfect for what you want a 4k monitor for.

Sodoge wow 4k such pixel much money.

DANKMEMES

Crazy but true. Order 322 did it. Through coporations like the Union Banking Corporation, Brown Brothers Harriman, and Guaranty Trust Co.

Best to read this book as an introduction.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0972020748/r

I have a small gym at my house that i use for working out in the holidays when im bk home so ill share with you my personal experience and lay down some advise.

1 - Make sure u either buy good quality metal weights or go for rubber protected ones. Reason beeing if u invest in sht quality metal weights they will start degrading super fast and will stain ur shirts and floor.

2 - You will want to always do that last bench press repetition, so get a self spoting bench since u dont wana rely all the time on Erisan or someone else to help u. I prefer the type of power rack that has the bar fixed to the cage, the ones that only let you move the bar in a vertical axis wich makes ur movement for either squats, sholders, arms and chest super clean. The same cage contains 2 security pistons that you can set for self spoting. Not neceraly this model or price but jsut to give you an ideia of wat im talking http://www.amazon.com/Marcy-Diamond-System-Linear-Bearings/dp/B001D78PCE/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1453428177&sr=8-3&keywords=gym+cage

3 - You can try these weights wich will save you some space and time, i have worked with them before and personly they fell a bit wierd in the begining but once you get used to them your set.http://www.amazon.com/Bowflex-SelectTech-Adjustable-Dumbbells-Pair/dp/B001ARYU58/ref=pd_sim_200_2?ie=UTF8&dpID=51nnMxox1bL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=0H7KD5QGQ6XDAG37ANR2

The philosophy of each of economic model as well as their mathematical reasoning is covered in contending economic theories

My definition of happiness here is a measure of achieving your personal desires. While it's possible for somebody to have a entirely utilitarian outlook. I would argue that in obtaining that utility they are achieving their own form of happiness.

You don't exchange produce for things you do not want. You exchange them to maximise the things you do want. These exchanges are the foundations of Neoclassical and Keynesian economics. While buying nuts and bolts might only provide utilitarian value, the reason you're doing it is because somewhere down the line you expect to gain something you want. If that's earning wages to buy tickets to a concert, or travel to a place you want to visit, then you're still doing it for personal happiness.

Good post, only have time to read the 13 points and opening paragraph right now but will finish later. Reminds me of when I read Conservatism: An Invitation to the Great Tradition, it's good to hear it straight from the horse's mouth.

This is a really good book by a conservative about their ideology on their own terms. I suggest you read it to get a better understanding of their thought process.

Conservatism: An Invitation to the Great Tradition

Another good read is The Reactionary Mind

I highly recommend you read "Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy" and seek a good CBT therapist. You're not alone, and stay strong.

https://www.amazon.com/Feeling-Good-New-Mood-Therapy/dp/0380810336

In regards to the Russel bit, I think getting into any of his technical works is a mistake for a noob, but this is necessary foundational reading for an amateur who isn't going to college for it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_History_of_Western_Philosophy

In my view as an autodidact to philosophy, this was an excellent introduction. I think people really should not be reading selected specific academic works like Rem has suggested without guidance from a professor/teacher. One I've seen suggested before for a typical starting out laymen is:

https://www.amazon.com/Tetralogue-Im-Right-Youre-Wrong/dp/0198728883

My Grandma enjoyed it, she's the most educated person in the family with a Master's in English but never engaged in Philosophy before. If she can read into it amateurly and understand it at 82, no one else has got an excuse.

If people really want to dive deeper, they really should go to college, or just buy a bunch of used books and plow through them, read the IEP and SEP articles on the subjects, compare their understanding with peer-reviewed understandings, etc...

Thomas Piketty (of "Capital in the 20th Century" fame) has just published a 1,000 pages opus called "Capitalism and Ideology". I sure hope Destiny will buy and read it.

Will probably hit the US shelves in a few months. Meanwhile everyone should buy Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman: " The Triumph of Injustice: How the Rich Dodge Taxes and How to Make Them Pay"

Note that they are the ones who proved that billionaires pay 23% of taxes when the other classes pay 24% in average, and that Zucman is an economical advisor to Bernie and Warren.

He co-authored a pretty decent book on Economics. I've been reading it, pretty dry tbh.

Other than that, I think he's just been busy doing his political activism, which probably leads to some marginalization by the academic community.

These are great dumbbell sets, good price for the pair if you cant get them used: Bowflex SelectTech 552 Adjustable Dumbbells (Pair)

What do you plan to do for your workout routines?