It would be great if the equipment and muscle selection wasn't mandatory. For example, I have a pull-up bar but I have no idea what muscles I can train with it. Why not let me filter on beginner exercises instead?
This is the number one complaint I have with all of these solutions (and my tone here is friendly, not irritated): they assume you're already far along your fitness journey. Watching Apple's iOS updates talk about AI coaches to "help ensure you stay in your max results zone" or whatever ... my dude, that person doesn't need an AI coach. That person is already optimizing by fractions of a performance percentage point. People need, and benefit from, tools and coaching when they're starting from zero.
> that person doesn't need an AI coach. That person is already optimizing by fractions of a performance percentage point.
But that is the person who will use and pay for the app. If spending $100 will get them a training plan that is 0.01% better they will do it. Couch potatoes know they need to change, but they probably won't pay for a app (if they do they won't use it).
Tbh that's exactly the gap Im trying to fill with Workout.cool. After reading all the feedback here (including yours), I've realized we need to make things even simpler and more beginner-friendly.
not some hyper-optimized tracker, but yeah a simple, open, and welcoming entry point into strength training. Got it. It's faaaar from perfect yet, but it's made with that intention at heart. Trust me !
A pull up bar is the first thing you should get since it can target muscles that are hard to do any other way. For most other muscles you can find some other way to strengthen them just using body weight exercises.
For most people a pull up bar plus body weight exercises will get them everything they want: enough fitness for good health. If you want to win competitions you need the right equipment (different competitions need different equipment).
In my specific case, yes. But you could also flip it around. Maybe select some muscles and not select any equipment. They you can see what kind of equipment you might want to buy.
Take a look at the "Maker Secret Santa" series of video's. It's a yearly collaborative series between a bunch of different maker channels. It can give you a great idea as to what makers you'd like to follow.
At this point using any engine instead of unity is better. Unity has demonstrated time and again that they cannot be trusted and that you cannot build a game (or business) around them.
Sometimes you have to do business with counterparties you don't trust. It's not mature or practical to take an "all-or-nothing" approach while the engine has virtually no competition for many classes of games.
I mean I’ve been using Unity since 2008. I do trust them to be around more than most other tooling/saas companies? Even if they have mode some unsound business decisions
Do you have any developer retrospectives around this? Plenty of my favorite games ever made were made with Unity, I wouldn't call those games failures by any means (Cities: Skylines, Overcooked are immediate examples)
The tech is fine, it's more that the last few years has shown some instability over retroactive license changes, questionable acquisitions, and general sentiments over years of seemingly abandoned support in key subsystems.
Not OP, but when I order take out, I usually pick it up on my way from work. It hardly takes any extra time or mileage. It's often faster than ordering delivery. Also, somehow with delivery the food is always colder than when I pick it up myself.
Isn't webrtc broken in Chrome? Or did they finally fix that? It used to be that everyone supported Chrome's broken implementation, leaving Firefox users with the correct implementation out in the cold.
If you are referring to the standards-based "Unified Plan" vs. the Google proprietary "Plan B" for handling multiple media tracks in SDP, I believe that "Plan B" was finally phased out in 2022.
Yeah, most businesses need window cleaners too. If you're a window cleaner and you complain about all the birds shitting on windows, I dunno what to tell ya.
If you're working in compliance either
A) you're stuck in your compliance job, that sucks, CVSS scores aren't the reason why though.
Often it is a second order impact. This creates a bunch of work for the compliance people, but then the compliance people end up competing a bunch of work for everyone else. If you count anyone who might have to follow compliance as working in compliance, then I purpose that there isn't enough non-compliance jobs to go around.
a) If you are having to do busywork for compliance reasons, you are either disempowered to push back on bullshit work (case A above, unfortunate, but your job was gonna suck anyway), or it's not really a second order effect, you work in compliance in a meaningful way.
b) Compliance bullshit seems to expand into the space available to it. Nobody thinks CVSS scores are meaningful, the fact that they feed into compliance processes is not the CVSS scores' fault it's the compliance machine just globbing onto random bullshit as its expansion continues. If you took away CVSS scores it feels like it would just glob onto something else instead.
Anyway, in the end I think we aren't disagreeing about that much. I think they're silly, if someone wanted to get rid of them I wouldn't try to defend them at all. I just wouldn'e be the person to push for that.
Yes, maybe reach out to Michiel Leenaars from the NLNet foundation. But IIRC NLNet mostly funds shorter development tracks, not ongoing upkeep/maintenance.
reply