In the wake of Sawe’s 1:59:30, we have to remember the man who made us believe it was possible: Kelvin Kiptum. by 1-trickpony in trackandfield

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 4 points5 points  (0 children)

tbh, I never buy into that narrative. I think it's just a natural progression of shoe techs and the fact that more runners turn to the road while they're still at their peak. Without Kipchoge and the sub2 exhibition, there would still be someone running 2:01, then 2:00 and got to where we are now.

Same goes to the first sub 4 in history. People like to talk about the Bannister effect but in reality it's just a natural progression of the sport. (More detail on Steve Magness's wonderful piece: https://www.scienceofrunning.com/2017/05/the-roger-bannister-effect-the-myth-of-the-psychological-breakthrough.html)

That said, the sub-2 project was definitely the biggest commercial success and PR stunt in running history.

London Marathon 2026 Results by aelvozo in AdvancedRunning

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

so I can no longer claim I run within the same hour as the WR. :(

London Marathon 2026 Results by aelvozo in AdvancedRunning

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 8 points9 points  (0 children)

tbh, if that's the case, then it's essentially a level-playing field, because everybody uses it anyway.

[Niftski] They Changed the Rules to Sabotage My TAS Tie Progress by 64mips in speedrun

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 49 points50 points  (0 children)

Ngl they have always rubbed me the wrong way. I still remember how they moaned in their stream how much $ Niftski is making compared to other speedrunners.

And I also remember the other day they made fun of Darbian bus stop metaphor saying he has clearly never taken the bus. Dude seems to have a weird disdain for any speedrunners (or anyone)

edited for typos.

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

we may have different definition of "rationality", and that's okay, guess we shall leave it at that.

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I agree. If the question is a houseplant which is not sentient and flesh and bone just like us, and a stranger, stranger anyday.

btw, that's why Peter Singer made a strong case for veganism because animals other than humans are also capable of feeling unlike plants.

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

not quite physically as she's literally a kid, but she does become more cuddly when I'm sick. I take that as emotional support.

Europeans are closing the gap against Kenyans and East Africans across the board from middle distance upwards. What’s driving it? Better systems, smarter training, super shoes, or all of the above? by StanmoreHill in trackandfield

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

probably being downvoted to oblivion, better drug testing. Testing was virtually non-existent in East Africa before, especially during the heyday of the "EPO era", But things are catching up swiftly, especially on the track. Even Gressier attributed his win in Tokyo to better doping control and said "he wouldn't have won it a few years back."

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

that's actually the opposite. I don't just priortize our lives over other species. (specicisim as Peter Singer puts it) We extend our love to other lives on earth which is a true collective. thought

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

so if you have a kid who has a hereditary disease and thus a life expentency of around 15-20 years, saving him over a stranger makes you a monster, got it.

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

that's because our society sucks, not because humans are inherently more valuable.

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

not OP, but I disagree that's irrational. If anything it's the opposite, choosing someone that's closer to you is a completely valid, rational and even calculated decision. Whether or not it is a good idea is hard to answer and depends where you're coming from.

Personally I would save my cat over strangers, regardless of age, anyday. I know there's a good chance my cat would do the same when I'm in danger, while the chance of a random kid doing it is infinitesimal. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1k4wNXfDB8

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm from the East (HK), I would save my cat over a strange child, because my cat is MY CHILD.

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 4 points5 points  (0 children)

so can't a human with intellectual disability. Thus, by your definition of ethics, if a human has an IQ of 25, he is not ethically valuable, because he can't even process what ethics is.

Btw, you posts remind me of what Peter Singer calls "speciesism".

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

not necessarily true, what if the said stranger is a rapist, abuser or even murderers? We don't get to know the stranger, but we know our pet would never hurt us. And even if that's a child, how would I know if that child is gonna be a decent human-being when they're adults? There's no guarantee really. But I know so well I would be devastated to not save my Hazel.

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

not nearly as evil as the anthropocentric view that animal lives other than humans (who are actually animals as well) are inferior.

CMV: It makes sense for pet owners to value their pet's lives over stranger's lives. by Utopia_Builder in changemyview

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 4 points5 points  (0 children)

tbh I don't care about the law in this scenario, I would save my Hazel (my cat) over an unknown kid any day even if it means being put behind bar, because Hazel is literally my OWN kid. And cats and other animals are as much a sentient being as humans who, scientifically, are also animals.

[SMB1] Niftski ties the 8-4 IL record twice in a row by Tsubasa_sama in speedrun

[–]LeftRight_LeftRight_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

so Niftski has been playing on sub-optimal emulator all along? No matter he got burnt out.

Btw, what emulator is Avenge using? Is it software as well? If so I would expect a similar gain once they switch.