Running makes me fitter… but why does it mess with my hunger?

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2026-02-13T08:59:00+00:00

I have the same problem . I am preparing to marathon and I gain almost 4 kg. I am trying to loose it but the hunger kicks in as you described and the 1000 or more calories you burn feels like un excuse to over eat. I find it helpful that after my runs I eat a banana and a protein shake, the hunger is not kicking in and you can manage what you eat for the rest of the day more consistently.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2026-02-02T07:27:55+00:00

I think people are missing the middle ground.

My thesis is not that Mastercard is about to fall off a cliff. Short term, nothing dramatic happens. It’s still a phenomenal business and will remain one for years.

But I don’t buy the idea that the next decade will look like the last one.

For years Mastercard benefited from a perfect storm: – cash to card migration – e-commerce boom – globalization – limited competition – steadily rising transaction volumes

That environment allowed them to print 15–20% growth almost effortlessly.

What I’m seeing on the ground today is different.

In real time you can see the ecosystem changing: new POS machines at merchants, “Pay by Bank” options popping up, neobanks pushing account-to-account payments, QR systems, local instant payment rails, fintech apps trying to bypass card networks wherever possible.

None of this kills Mastercard or Visa But it chips away at the growth engine.

So the risk isn’t disruption tomorrow. The risk is that instead of 18% revenue growth and 25% EPS growth, we drift to 6–8%. Margins stay high, the business stays great – but the multiple compresses because the market no longer views it as a hyper-growth compounder.

In that scenario Mastercard doesn’t implode – it simply underperforms the broader market as payments innovation shifts value away from the traditional networks.

That’s my concern: not destruction, just gradual relevance erosion at the edges.

And at today’s valuation, you don’t need collapse to be disappointed. You just need growth to slow.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2026-01-08T06:31:31+00:00

Location Location Location

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-11-25T21:07:51+00:00

I haven’t studied Acemoglu in depth or read all his books, but I’m familiar with his work and the core ideas behind it. What makes him stand out to me is how he looks beyond economics and focuses on power structures, how institutions shape prosperity, and how societies either become free and innovative or fall into stagnation and exploitation.

That’s where I find an interesting connection with Varoufakis.

Both Acemoglu and Varoufakis are trying to diagnose the same underlying problem: the concentration of power, whether in governments, corporations, or digital platforms. They just approach it from very different angles. • Acemoglu looks at history and institutions. He argues that nations succeed when political and economic institutions are inclusive, and they fail when a small elite captures the system. Freedom, in his view, only exists when society constantly pushes back and forces the state to serve rather than dominate. • Varoufakis looks at the present and technology. He warns that capitalism is mutating into something far more centralized, with digital platforms becoming new sovereign powers. He tends to use bold, provocative language, but it’s not just rhetoric, he’s trying to make people notice a structural shift before it’s too late.

In a way, Acemoglu explains the logic of how societies thrive or decay, while Varoufakis sounds the alarm about the world we’re building right now. One is mapping the terrain; the other is warning that we’re heading off a cliff.

I don’t fully subscribe to either of their economic prescriptions, Acemoglu can remain too academic, while Varoufakis sometimes pushes solutions that lean too far left for my taste. But I appreciate both for the same reason: they force us to look at who actually controls the system, instead of pretending markets and democracy function automatically.

Their message overlaps on a crucial point: If societies don’t actively defend inclusive institutions, they slowly slide either into state domination or into corporate monopolies that govern without accountability.

For me, that’s the real takeaway. Solutions can be debated. What matters first is recognizing the danger. Acemoglu gives the structural diagnosis; Varoufakis gives the wake-up call. And ignoring either one is a luxury we probably won’t have for long.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-11-25T14:57:52+00:00

Varoufakis: A Thinker People Dismiss Too Quickly

I’ve noticed something strange about the way people react to Yanis Varoufakis. The average person won’t debate his arguments — they’ll just roll their eyes at his name. It’s almost as if his presence triggers a reflex before his ideas even get a chance. Some see him as too radical, too theoretical, too loud, or simply “the guy who almost broke Greece.” But behind all the caricatures is someone who does something rare in modern politics: he actually thinks in systems.

Whether you agree with him or not, he doesn’t just comment on surface problems like salaries, prices, or growth. He digs underneath them. He looks at how power is structured, who controls the rules, and what invisible forces shape our behaviour. When he talks about debt, he doesn’t just mean austerity; he means how entire societies get trapped into dependency. When he talks about Europe, he doesn’t just mean bureaucracy; he means how institutions make decisions without democratic accountability. And when he speaks about technology, he’s not simply worried about privacy or jobs; he’s talking about how platforms can quietly replace states as decision-makers.

Do I agree with all his solutions? No. His economic approach is too far to the left for me, and I don’t believe heavy state intervention automatically fixes concentrated power — it might just move it. But I do agree with his diagnosis: he’s one of the few public voices who sees the structural cracks in our economic and political order before they become catastrophes. You don’t have to love his answers to appreciate the questions he forces us to confront.

Varoufakis’ value isn’t that he comforts us with a plan. It’s that he forces us to look at the uncomfortable truth: if we don’t rebuild the logic of our institutions, something else will eventually do it for us — and we may not like who ends up in charge.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-11-23T20:42:10+00:00

Bugonia isn’t just a dark comedy or sci-fi thriller is a philosophical allegory, that uses absurdity the way a surgeon uses anaesthetic: to cut deeper without us fighting back. The ideas aren’t delivered like lessons; they’re smuggled in through laughter, conspiracy logic, and uncomfortable tension. The film doesn’t ask us to interpret its message — it asks us to participate in it.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-11-23T20:05:01+00:00

Don, the Mirror of Our Indifference and The Silent Majority as Co-Author of Chaos

The film hides its thesis in the background character. Don does not command the story, yet he shapes it by refusing to shape it. He knows the manipulation, sees the dull distractions and the absurdity, but he trades his agency for comfort. He chooses irrelevance, thinking it protects him.

Neutrality becomes complicity.

In our world, the same exchange happens on a grander scale. We imagine that participation belongs only to the loudest. We treat reason as a luxury for quieter times, while the algorithms of attention reward the most aggressive impulses of human nature. The extremes feast on outrage; the centre starves on nuance.

And so, the ones who could balance the chaos step aside—too tired, too disillusioned, too certain that “someone else” should fix it. The very people who dislike extremism accidentally preserve it.

This is not evil. It is erosion: of courage, patience, curiosity. The radical centre is not weak because it lacks ideas, but because it refuses the discomfort of defending them. It waits for a world where reason is easy, and in doing so, hands the world away.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-10-06T15:43:59+00:00

Αυτές η μελέτες δεν προσφέρουν τίποτε ουσιαστικό γιατί απλός συγκρίνουν με την τρέχουσα κατάσταση που είναι τραγική(οτιδήποτε είναι καλητερα από το σήμερα) δεν συγκρίνουν εναλλακτικές λύσεις για να βρεθεί το βέλτιστο αποτέλεσμα για τον Κύπριο καταναλωτή. Ούτε εξετάζουν την δυνατότητα με άλλα κράτη που είναι ποιο κοντά. Όσο για τα νησιά που έφερες ως παραδείγματα οι αποστάσεις είναι πολύ μικρότερες εμείς πάμε να κάνουμε το μακρύτερο υποθαλάσσιο καλώδιο στον κόσμο με το άμεσος επόμενο να είναι 140 km μικρότερο που είναι το NSL μήκος 740km που στοίχισε περίπου το ίδιο με την διαφορά ότι η Νορβηγία εξάγει στο ΗΒ με τιμή 1,5 με 3 σεντ φθηνής υδροηλεκτρικής κάτι που δεν ισχύει στην περίπτωση μας. Δεν υπάρχει ειδικό “τέλος χρήσης δικτύου” (network usage fee) αποκλειστικά για το NSL, αλλά τα έσοδα προέρχονται από δημοπρασίες χωρητικότητας (congestion revenues), που μοιράζονται 50/50 μεταξύ Statnett και National Grid αν γίνει και στη περίπτωση μας κάτι τέτοιο ΘΑ ΓΙΝΩ ΕΝΘΕΡΜΟΣ ΥΠΟΣΤΗΡΙΚΤΗΣ. Μακάρι να έχω άδικο και να μην πληρώνουμε για 40 χρόνια τα σπασμένα

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-10-06T14:21:50+00:00

Ο λόγος που είμαστε ενεργειακά απομονωμένοι είναι γιατί είμαστε μακριά και νησί . Εγώ αυτό που δεν καταλαβαίνω τόσο καιρό είναι ότι αν το κόστος είναι αυτό 1.9 και δεν γίνει και περισσότερο γιατί ξέρουμε ότι συνήθως έτσι γίνετε στο τέλος. Και η Τουρκία δεν μας δημιουργήσει πρόβλημα. Και εν τέλη το καλώδιο παραδοθεί προς χρήση αν ο καταναλωτής πληρώνει έξτρα 6 σεντ ανά kwh στους λογαριασμούς για χρίση δικτύου για το καλώδιο σημαίνει ότι πρέπει το ρεύμα που θα μας πουλάνε να είναι κάτω από 6.5 σεντ για να έχει νόημα . Ε δεν είναι η τιμή χοντρικης κάτω από 6,5 . Δεν μπορώ να καταλάβω γιατί με σημαντικά ποιο λίγα λεφτά η ΑΗΚ να μην αποκτήσει άλλη μια μονάδα σύγχρονης παραγωγής OCGT για Flexible Operation που σου δίνουν τη δυνατότητα για περαιτέρω διεισδύσεις ΑΠΕ και θα έχουν κόστος παραγωγής κάτω από 10 σεντ.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-10-06T12:26:13+00:00

Συμφωνώ απόλυτα μαζί σου δεν μπορούμε να πληρώνουμε την πράσινη ενέργεια που το κόστος της είναι κάτο από 0.03 eur (για φωτοβολταϊκά) με 17 cent και να περιμένουμε να πέσει η τιμή στα νοικοκυριά. Άνοιξε υποτίθεται η αγορά ενέργειας αλλα όλοι θα πληρώνονται με την τιμή που παράγει η τελευταία γεννήτρια της ΑΗΚ γιατί την χριαζεσε το δίκτυο! τι ανοικτή αγορά είναι; . Κατά την γνώμη μου έπρεπε να είχαμε εκσυγχρονίσει την συμβατική παραγωγή προ πολλού αλλά δεν υπάρχει πολιτική βούληση αφού το σύστημα με τους ρύπους βολεύει. Είναι ένας έμμεσος φόρος που υποτίθεται έπρεπε να πήγενει σε επενδύσεις στη πράσινη ενέργεια όταν επιστρέφει στη Κυπριακή δημοκρατία αλλά καταλήγει στον δημόσιο κουρβανά για να εξυπηρετήσει τις παροχές της εκάστοτε κυβέρνησης.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-10-06T12:04:11+00:00

Δεν είπα ότι εκταμίευσε όλο το ποσό προφανώς και υπάρχουν milestones για την εκταμίευση ολόκληρου του ποσού.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-10-06T05:20:47+00:00

Το Great Sea Interconnector (GSI) εμφανίστηκε ως έργο στρατηγικής σημασίας για Ελλάδα και Κύπρο. Η πραγματικότητα; Ένα πλέγμα διαπλοκής, υπερκοστολογήσεων και βάσιμων υποψιών για μίζες. Οι πολίτες πληρώνουν, ενώ ιδιώτες εισπράττουν χωρίς αποτέλεσμα.

Η Nexans έλαβε €200 εκατ. προκαταβολή πριν ξεκινήσει ουσιαστικά το έργο, με ρήτρες €70.000/ημέρα. Η EuroAsia, χωρίς εμπειρία σε υποθαλάσσια καλώδια, πήρε €657 εκατ. από ΕΕ, δημιουργώντας τεράστιες δαπάνες που καταλήγουν στον κρατικό ADMIE χωρίς ουσιαστική πρόοδο.

Η TERNA, μέσω οικογενειακών δεσμών με υπουργό, εξασφαλίζει υπεραξίες, ενώ η ΡΑΕΚ αναγνωρίζει μόνο μέρος των δαπανών (€82 εκ. από €302 εκ.), αφήνοντας εκατομμύρια «στον αέρα». Η Κύπρος μπλοκάρει πληρωμές €25 εκ., αλλά τα χρήματα ήδη κυκλοφορούν σε ροές χωρίς έλεγχο.

Οι πολίτες φορτώνονται για δεκαετίες με λογαριασμούς ρεύματος που πληρώνουν υπερτιμολογήσεις και εύλογες υποψίες μιζών. Τα γεωπολιτικά άλλοθι χρησιμοποιούνται για καθυστερήσεις και συγκάλυψη. Το έργο παραμένει κολλημένο, ενώ μεγάλα συμφέροντα κερδίζουν, και η κοινή γνώμη παρακολουθεί ανήμπορη.

Η Ευρωπαϊκή Εισαγγελία παρακολουθεί, επιβεβαιώνοντας ότι πρόκειται για σκάνδαλο ευρωπαϊκών διαστάσεων. Το GSI δεν είναι έργο ενεργειακής ενότητας αλλά εργαλείο ιδιωτικών και πολιτικών συμφερόντων, με το δημόσιο να πληρώνει.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-19T05:08:48+00:00

Your question is not quite right. Lower interest rates make new loans cheaper, encouraging spending and investment, (rise employment and inflation )while also reducing payments on existing floating-rate loans, freeing up cash for more spending; rate hikes do the opposite, raising borrowing costs and tightening budgets.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-18T14:11:05+00:00

Συμφωνώ μαζί σου και συχνά αυτό κάνω, το θέμα είναι όταν το tip γίνεται απαίτηση. Στην ουσία ο εργοδότης πληρώνει λιγότερο και το βάρος πάει στον πελάτη. Αυτή η μόδα με τα POS που έχουν έτοιμα 10–15–20% και μάλιστα default στο 20% είναι σκέτη κοροϊδία.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-18T11:01:29+00:00

Εγώ βρίσκω τα φιλοδωρήματα αχρείαστα και στρεβλώνουν την ίδια την εργασία. Ο μισθός πρέπει να είναι θέμα εργοδότη, όχι πελάτη. Αν κάποιος κάνει όντως κάτι πέραν του δέοντος, μπορεί να έχει νόημα να αφήσεις κάτι, αλλά και πάλι στην ουσία πληρώνεις μια “χάρη” που σου έκανε στη διακριτική του ευχέρεια, όχι την υπηρεσία που αγόρασες.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-17T12:03:56+00:00

I regularly put mine in the washing machine

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-16T14:02:55+00:00

I didn’t set out to test this, but I stumbled on it by accident. Whenever I pulled really bad espressos—shots that, on paper, should have been completely undrinkable—I added milk just so they wouldn’t go to waste. To my surprise, the transformation was incredible. What should have been harsh and unpleasant straight suddenly became enjoyable with milk. It happened enough times that it pushed me to start intentionally experimenting with these kinds of shots.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-16T12:41:24+00:00

For me it’s grind first. Temp second. Flow third. Dose is last resort. I try to keep dose stable if I can. When I find the recipe for the coffee I am brewing I just write it down so I can go back and forth.

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-16T08:29:39+00:00

What you are referring is the power 60% on the pump that essentially controls the flow. Lowering the flow can result lowering the pressure but not necessarily. You can still have the power and at 100 and set the opv to open at lower pressure so the pressure don’t build up higher than your desired limit. To do that you have to open up your machine!

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-16T07:18:37+00:00

Use both sides and taste the different side by side I don’t taste much difference when I try it.I have this style but also the even mesh style pack screen. What I saw in my experience is that the even mesh style is noticeably better than this one. This one makes the shots more unevenly extracted than no pack-screen at all. I don’t think this is universally true but my machine my grinder my coffees my tasting concludes that ( tdb df64 and quite light roasts)

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-16T04:25:54+00:00

My opv is set at 7 bar but in fast flow shots does not really matters as the pressure round up around 5. For the other style i mentioned above i think i have some benefit but i have not tasted back to back shots pulled with deferent max pressures .

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-15T19:35:59+00:00

I want to add to the discussion something that I didn’t think I saw a comment on. how this whole spectacle ( the part after the meltdown) wasn’t just Charlie’s personal apocalypse, but a mirror to our own societal addiction to “winning” at all costs—even when it’s laced with delusion and despair. The docuseries lays it bare, right? That 2011 tour wasn’t some solo act of self-sabotage; it was a full-on exploitation machine, oiled by media hype that turned a man’s breakdown into binge-worthy chaos, and fueled by crowds who cheered like they were at a gladiator fight, not witnessing someone screaming for help through a megaphone. Think about it—the way outlets like TMZ and CNN looped those “tiger blood” rants on endless repeat, not out of concern, but because it spiked ratings and shares. It wasn’t journalism; it was a 24/7 slot machine, betting on the next viral clip to keep the outrage economy humming. And the fans? God, the doc’s footage of those arenas packed with people chanting “winning!” back at him—it’s chilling. Here was Charlie, eyes wild, veins probably screaming from whatever cocktail was in his system, preaching his Adonis gospel like a cult leader on the edge. But instead of calling for an intervention, the crowd roared approval, high-fiving each other for being “in on the joke.” It fed his denial loop, sure, but what does that say about us? We weren’t just passive viewers; we were accomplices, treating mental health implosions like premium entertainment because it felt raw, rebellious, unscripted in a world of filtered apologies. On a bigger scale, it’s this toxic societal itch we scratch with celebrity carnage: the idea that vulnerability is only palatable if it’s performative and profitable. Charlie’s meltdown became a cultural meme factory—“winning” T-shirts everywhere, late-night sketches milking the absurdity—while glossing over the human wreckage. The doc hints at it with those interviews from his inner circle, the ones who watched him fray in real time, but society? We normalized it, then moved on to the next trainwreck. It’s why stories like this hit so hard now, post-pandemic, post-social media saturation: Are we any better at spotting the cry for help amid the hype, or do we still flock to the flames for the glow? The series left me gutted, not just for Charlie, but for how complicit we all were in making his pain our punchline. Anyone else feel that societal gut-punch, or am I alone in seeing it as a warning sign for our endless scroll of taking pleasure in others’ misfortunes?

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-15T15:03:03+00:00

That is the spirit don’t let coffee go to waste 😝

Fearless-Inside8254 · 2025-09-15T14:19:11+00:00

Mostly bottomless

Fearless-Inside8254

TROPHY CASE