Just using rough numbers,shoot for 1g/lb or 2g/kg most days, and your bases are covered

YPE OF WORKYOU’RE DOINGLOWVOLUMEMODERATEVOLUMEHIGHVOLUME5-15 reps15-25 reps25-50 reps30-50 reps/muscle15+ reps25+ reps50+ reps50+ reps/muscleREPS PERSET1-3 reps3-8 reps8-12 reps8+ repsFigure 6.1However, this should give you some good general recommendations to start with.

A H O W-TO GUIDEINCREASED INTENSITYMORE WEIGHT ON THE BAR THAN LAST TIME.150X5 TODAY. 155X5 NEXT TIME.1.2. INCREASED VOLUMEMORE TOTAL AMOUNT OF WORK DONE ON APARTICULAR MOVEMENT. (WEIGHT X REPS X SETS)150 3X5 TODAY. 150 4X5 OR 150 3X6 NEXT TIME.INCREASED DENSITYACCOMPLISHING THE SAME AMOUNT OF WORK IN ASHORTER PERIOD OF TIME.150 3X5 WITH 2 MINUTES BETWEEN SETS TODAY, 1503X5 WITH 90 SECONDS BETWEEN SETS NEXT TIME.3.DO THE SAME THING WITH A SLIGHTLY MORECHALLENGING MOVEMENT NEXT TIME.150 3X5 TOUCH AND GO BENCH TODAY, 150 3X5PAUSED BENCH NEXT TIME.

the term really describes a feeling of physical and emotional overwhelm for mothers who are inundated with the physicality of care work (it’s also sometimes used by those who work in childcare or who have sensory sensitivities). It’s a kind of burnout,

Because, as these women know, natural looks have always been, and still are, more valuable than artificial ones. Partly because of our urge to legitimize in any way we can the advantages we have over other people. Hotness is a class struggle. The beauty of the princess justifies her estate. The symmetry of the wealthy, the sanity of the system. One is never insecure about one’s rightful place, and what could be more insecure than a nose job?

Beauty has always been exclusive. When someone strikes you as pretty, it means they are something that everyone else is not. Oversize lips depend on undersize ones. Thick hair exists only in reference-distance of thin. It’s a zero-sum game, as relative as our morals. Naturally, we hoard of beauty what we can. It’s why we call grooming tips “secrets.”

Social media is awash with the idea that ‘it’s valid not to be productive’, as though productivity were the only manifestation of capitalism and streaming Disney+ all day is a form of resistance. It’s much rarer to encounter the idea that we have a responsibility about what we consume, or that satisfying our own desires whenever we want is not always a good thing: it’s like “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” has morphed into “there is no unethical consumption under capitalism”.

The authentic self is captured when you are monitored like a subject of an experiment, under controlled conditions; it is only in your observed behavior, as parsed by an outside party. By this logic, an even more real version of BeReal would just give your friends access to your cameras and microphones without you knowing it, so they can peep in on you and see how you act when you think no one is watching. If the panoptic gaze is falsifying us, only voyeurism sets us free.

What is perceived as “real,” then, thanks to the app, is the fact of social coordination itself rather than the particular contingencies of any individual’s contribution. The specifics of what anyone else is doing is incidental; what matters is that they are willing to play the game and follow the rules. Did you do the Wordle yet?

It’s not just a means of disinhibiting users who’ve perhaps grown weary of submitting their personal data to tech companies; it’s not just a way to habituate them to a new daily routine where they reveal “ordinary” and thus more commercially useful information about themselves — no, it’s a chance for Gen Z to be “authentic” at last.

But why do we owe our friends more of our “reality,” as the app presumes? Why would anyone assume that posting with less forethought will make us seem more friendly? It’s clear, of course, why tech companies would like us to think like that, but what is actually in it for us?

It apparently goes without saying that how your friends choose to present themselves to you is false and that it’s only natural that you should want to penetrate the veil of their mendacity. What are friends for? If you can’t turn yourself into an object of voyeuristic curiosity for them, are they even really your friends?

In Anderson’s words, “The convergence of capitalism and print technology on the fatal diversity of human language created the possibility of a new form of imagined community, which in its basic morphology set the stage for the modern nation.” In other words, a public that saw itself as united, and could speak of itself as such—with not only a common language  but a common label—was born.

Obviously, relatable things are relatable, but are people interested in this because they identify as a hot, anxious girl?” Alice E. Marwick, an associate professor of communication at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, asked me rhetorically. “Or are they interested in inhabiting the persona of a hot, anxious girl?” She found the accounts’ posts to be “aspirational, in a way,” and suggested there was an emotional component to their success as well. “The ability to articulate sadness, I think, is really highly valued,” she said.

Having a blank yet highly aesthetic and communicative profile picture is an unsurprising move in an era of hyper-self-presentation,” Gerrard told me. “It adds to the appeal of the accounts, because followers aren’t connecting themselves to a persona. Instead, they’re connecting themselves to the familiarity and relatability of the posts.”

Poetry is not a career — it is a state of being. You become poetry or are in a state of becoming with poetry. My chronological map of becoming would not be linear, rather it has been crisscrossed with arcs of events, poems, poets, arts, music, all bound and directed by history and memory.

The process of creation begins years before you approach the page or screen. It is a gathering together of perception and sound as you accumulate experience and knowledge on this road of becoming. A gesture will be evocative and implant itself, such as the eyes of a warrior as s/he turns from the last gaze at her/his beloved. Or a black butterfly who came with a message from someone just departed from Earth. Much is gained through nuance, through what is not said, in what is ineffable.

One of the rules of writing that stands throughout time: do not be complacent. Take risks. And most important, listen. Our ears are bent differently based on the culture, environment, and shape of the forming story as we exist in time and place. We flow from the many lines of ancestry we inherit, from family, practice, and place.

Any labor that is considered “natural” and thus not paid; any labor that is not paid and thus not valuable Work that feminized, invisibilized, and/or associated with the private sphere Anyone with ADHD Any task that resists optimization (see especially: creativity) Any interaction that suffers when bound by time How long it actually takes to have a meaningful, meandering conversation The importance of meaningful, meandering conversation The importance of short, less meaningful, but sustaining conversations Disability, aging, chronic illness Babies, just generally Grief, just generally Feelings, just generallyRest, just generallyLong-term thinking Consensus-building

But exercising your power this way doesn’t change the way things are. It doesn’t slow down the change you’re resisting. It just makes more work for those without the same privileges as you — whether because they’re contingent faculty, tenture-track, staff, students, or anyone else who can’t get away with behaving with the cultural impunity afforded white men.

My newsletter really started growing after I adopted a consistent schedule and format while doubling down on my commitment to create the newsletter I’d want to read—rather than trying to please others.

Launched paid subscriptions: From the start, in October 2021

I posted the issue on the r/nyc subreddit, and it spread from there.

Guest post and shoutout. I wrote a “guest prompt” for Rob Walker’s Art of Noticing Substack, and he gave CAFÉ ANNE a huge plug. My newsletter jumped from 100 to 700 subscribers within a week! 

Is information power? It must have seemed so to Swartz, whose skill in manipulating data via programming rapidly vaulted him into prodigy status at such a young age. But this kind of tunnel vision on the supposedly inherently liberatory nature of information dissemination is eerily similar to early failed visions of the internet, like John Perry Barlow’s Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace. Information might be powerful, but only in the hands of someone whose race, gender, nationality, and socioeconomic status allows them the authority to be taken seriously. 

Letters between her office and then Governor-General John Kerr show that her representatives encouraged Kerr to dissolve Whitlam’s government, a power never before used by a governor-general, as Whitlam gradually moved Australia toward Cold War non-alignment.

think that TikTok’s For You Page and AI art — my two hobbyhorses of late — are set to converge at the same point, positing an audience that can readily be flattered into a kind of compulsive passivity, easily brought to believe that imaginative effort is a matter of waiting to see how machines try to figure out what you want. Everywhere I turn, the field expands; more content magically emerges to plead for my attention, constituting my sense of it for myself in the process. I never knew I had so much attention to give.

This stems from how a gimmick creates confusion about the value of labor time: “It gives us tantalizing glimpses of a world in which social life will no longer be organized by labor, while indexing one that continuously regenerates the conditions keeping labor’s social necessity in place,” Ngai writes.

They are often described as tools that help subjects unlock their creativity, while containing creativity within the parameters established by datafication. In effect, these tools nullify the idea of creativity (everything is already latent in the machine’s capacity to render visualizations) and drain the potency of desire, which is reduced to mechanistic forms of trial and error. Prompt engineering.

This recasts all images as opportunities for exploration that center the experience of the navigator rather than the intended expression of the image maker.

This conception of expanded photography derives from images on screens no longer being representations of something external but the results of a specific request to a database — every photograph is a digital rendering rather than a imprint of some physical reality (which implies the world itself can be represented as a database).

AI images epitomize what Ingrid Hoelzl and Rémi Marie define in Softimage (2015) as “expanded photography”: a photography that is “less bound to a desire for movement (as suggested by realist film history, which presents film as the logical progression of photography) than to a desire for endlessness, a desire for the never-ending view.”

In September 1949, General W.L. Roberts, chief of the Military Assistance Advisory Group to Korea, ordered all available ROK forces to “exterminate” (his words) the “guerrilla bands” that resisted the US presence. By 1950, between 100,000 and 200,000 Koreans had been killed by US occupation forces and their ROK partners, all without a word of protest from Canada.

election as head of state was an outcome orchestrated by occupation forces, but Canada helped form a United Nations commission to validate the stolen election, thereby giving Canada’s stamp of approval to the horrific repression that followed.

As Gowans explains, “[In addition to] putting Washington in a position to orient the Korean economy to Japan, a continued US military presence on the peninsula would facilitate the goal of containing and possibly rolling back leftist movements in nearby China, Russia, and North Korea.

Some of these collaborator families later became the founders of the chaebols of modern South Korea, including Samsung, Hyundai, and LG.

From 1910 to 1945, the Korean peninsula was a colony within imperial Japan’s so-called “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.”

Mathematical proofs, as a medium, don’t just consider ideas about logic; we don’t attach ideas about logic to proofs. The form is made out of ideas about logic.

Academic courses offer more than just metacognitive support for textbooks; their cognitive model is also social and emotional.

By shouldering some of readers’ self-monitoring and regulation, these authors’ efforts can indeed lighten the metacognitive burden. But metacognition is an inherently dynamic process, evolving continuously as readers’ own conceptions evolve. Books are static. Prose can frame or stimulate readers’ thoughts, but prose can’t behave or respond to those thoughts as they unfold in each reader’s head. The reader must plan and steer their own feedback loops.

If we believe that successful reading requires engaging in all this complex metacognition, how is that reflected in the medium? What’s it doing to help?Of course, great authors earnestly want readers to think carefully about their words. These authors form sophisticated pictures of their readers’ evolving conceptions. They anticipate confusions readers might have, then shape their prose to acknowledge and mitigate those issues.

Readers must learn specific reflective strategies. “What questions should I be asking? How should I summarize what I’m reading?” Readers must run their own feedback loops. “Did I understand that? Should I re-read it? Consult another text?” Readers must understand their own cognition. “What does it feel like to understand something? Where are my blind spots?”These skills fall into a bucket which learning science calls “metacognition.”

Of course, most authors don’t believe that people learn things this way, but because the medium makes the assumption invisible, it’s hard to question.

In learning sciences, we call this model “transmissionism.” It’s the notion that knowledge can be directly transmitted from teacher to student, like transcribing text from one page onto another. If only! The idea is so thoroughly discredited that “transmissionism” is only used pejoratively, in reference to naive historical teaching practices

We can ask: if we take a particular cognitive model seriously, what does it suggest will (or won’t) help us understand something?

Books don’t work for the same reason that lectures don’t work: neither medium has any explicit theory of how people actually learn things, and as a result, both mediums accidentally (and mostly invisibly) evolved around a theory that’s plainly false.

All this suggests a peculiar conclusion: as a medium, books are surprisingly bad at conveying knowledge, and readers mostly don’t realize it.

resource of all, an incredible book called The Eighth Day of Creation: Makers of the Revolution in Biology

In biology class, biology wasn’t presented as a quest for the secrets of life. The textbooks wrung out the questing. We were nowhere acquainted with real biologists, the real questions they had, the real experiments they did to answer them. We were just given their conclusions

Rather than art, it’s about selling the parasocial relationship with the creator, the advertised access to her daily experiences and innermost thoughts.

 takes from listening to music, say, is ultimately reducible to a sense of superiority over others; the specific tones and harmonies and whatever are just elaborate pretenses that serve to make the different status positions plain to those with the wherewithal to decode them.

if you didn’t limp your way home, dark house, door sealed tight, all the street with eyes sewn shut, i don’t want to hear it. i want you silent. i want you listening to me.

helen judas, helen stranger, trojan helen, helen of the outside.

helen of troy feuds with the neighborhood

i tell you i was raised among all breeds of weapon—

helen of troy makes peace with the kudzu

Or to de-ideologize that tenet, technological development is directed by and serves capitalism's perpetual demand for growth.

And that’s what the series argued, that the failure of the project didn’t mean that science was “bad,” it’s just that there are certain areas that it cannot be applied to, above all the chaotic and dynamic world of politics and history. But that’s not how the postwar generation took the failure. Two very powerful groups in the West who you would have thought were totally different in outlook—the conservatives and the liberal hippies—both reacted to this failure in a very similar way. They said, well, this means that you can’t plan anything—science is wrong and rationality is wrong. The liberals then sit there and say, “oh dear”, or retreat into mysticism, while the conservatives then grabbed the initiative and said, well, all you can really do is allow the free market to flourish and order will come out of that. And then, in the 1990s, a surprising number of the hippies joined the conservatives in this—especially in Silicon Valley. But I think this is wrong. In the end, I think rationality’s all you’ve got to work with. It’s just that there are areas where you can’t apply it.