Comments by "lordsneed" (@lordsneed9418) on "Testosterone, Status, Tate u0026 Why The Billionaires Got Buff" video.

  1. 17:52 re greece and rome, I don't think it was just labourers and gladiators who were expected to be strong. I seem to remember a famous philosopher saying that it was good to exercise mind and body and when the upper classes sent their kids for tutoring, they were usually taught athletics and combat e.g. alexander the great and his friends getting tutored by aristotle. So it was seen as a good , expected thing for young men to be strong and athletic even among upper classes, but it didn't matter for the older statesmen and older elite. This is probably the most sensible way it should be. If you're in your 40s and you have big muscles you still won't be athletic at all compared to a 20 year old man and for equal amounts of unarmed combat training, the 20 year old will totally dominate you with his far better joints, tendons, explosivity, agility and mobility. So it makes sense to stop caring about that stuff after that age. if you miss the boat then it's too bad, focus on longevity instead.
    3
  2. Once you start that up, doesn't your body lose the ability to produce testosterone naturally and so you permanently need weekly access to the chemical or doctor for the rest of your life? What if you have to move country or want to go travelling for several months or there's a war or something?
    1
  3. I wonder if it's just because muscles are hard to fake or if its because nerds such as Bezos and Zuckerberg have always had insecurity about jocks , and now that they've climbed to the top of the tower, they might as well address that insecurity . And yeah it's very hard when you're already 40 to put on muscle naturally so taking some extra testosterone helps a lot.
    1
  4. Hey Simone and Malcolm, What do you think about that allegedly leaked text interview Sam did with an effective altruist reporter Kelsey Piper where he allegedly admitted to not caring about effective altruism or ethics at all ? It seems to me like that's exactly what SBF would do in order to take away blame from the effective altruism ideology, since admitting that his attitude towards, risk, longtermism, consequentialist utilitarianism, honesty etc. were in line with his beliefs about effective altruism would be more damaging to the movement he believed in. I mean he was heavily involved in the movement for 10 years, nobody pulls the long con for that long and making your main social life with people who really care about something that you have to pretend to care about is exhausting.
    1