BRYGS

Author: Brygs

  • Zwift vs Rouvy vs MyWhoosh

    Zwift vs Rouvy vs MyWhoosh

    ABOUT ZWIFT:

    Zwift is a leading virtual cycling and running platform that has revolutionized indoor fitness by combining interactive technology with immersive gameplay. Designed for cyclists and runners of all levels, Zwift transforms stationary training into a social and engaging experience. Users can connect their smart trainers or treadmills to the platform, allowing Zwift to adjust resistance or incline based on the virtual terrain they’re traversing. This dynamic interaction provides a realistic and challenging workout, mimicking the feel of outdoor cycling or running.

    At the heart of Zwift is its vast virtual world, featuring stunning landscapes inspired by real locations. Users can explore these visually rich environments, ranging from city streets to picturesque countryside, while interacting with other participants from around the globe. Zwift’s social aspect is a key component, enabling users to join group rides, participate in races, or embark on solo adventures. The platform also supports structured training plans and workouts tailored to individual fitness goals, making it a versatile tool for both casual enthusiasts and competitive athletes seeking effective indoor training.

    Zwift has cultivated a vibrant and supportive community, fostering a sense of camaraderie among users. Whether engaging in friendly competitions, collaborative group rides, or pursuing personal fitness objectives, Zwift brings together individuals with a shared passion for cycling and running. Its seamless integration with various devices, compatibility with popular smart trainers, and regular updates to enhance the virtual experience contribute to Zwift’s status as a leading platform in the realm of interactive indoor fitness.

    ABOUT ROUVY:

    Rouvy stands out as a dynamic and immersive indoor cycling platform designed to elevate the indoor training experience for cyclists of all levels. What sets Rouvy apart is its emphasis on augmented reality routes, offering users the opportunity to ride through real-world locations via a library of video routes and virtual routes. This unique feature allows cyclists to experience the thrill of cycling on iconic roads, enhancing the realism of their indoor training sessions. Whether navigating challenging ascents or cruising through scenic landscapes, Rouvy strives to bring the outdoor cycling experience indoors.

    The platform’s focus on realism extends beyond just visuals. Rouvy enables users to compete against fellow cyclists in real-time multiplayer races, fostering a sense of competition and camaraderie. With compatibility for various smart trainers and devices, cyclists can seamlessly integrate their equipment with the platform, allowing for responsive adjustments to resistance and terrain changes. Rouvy also provides structured training plans and workouts, catering to users seeking targeted and effective training sessions.

    Rouvy’s community aspect thrives on the shared love for cycling. Users can participate in multiplayer races, challenges, and events, creating a social and engaging environment for indoor training. The platform’s commitment to delivering a realistic and challenging experience, combined with its diverse library of routes and community-driven features, positions Rouvy as a compelling choice for cyclists looking to stay motivated and connected while training indoors. For those seeking a virtual cycling experience that goes beyond basic simulations, Rouvy offers an exciting and authentic alternative.

     

     

    1. **Zwift:**
    – **Type:** Virtual Cycling and Running Platform.
    – **Key Features:**
    – Offers an immersive virtual environment for cycling and running.
    – Provides interactive workouts, group rides, races, and social features.
    – Compatible with various smart trainers and sensors.
    – Integrates with third-party apps and devices.
    – **Community Aspect:**
    – Boasts a large and active user community worldwide.
    – Allows users to ride with friends, join group rides, or participate in organized events.
    – **Training Plans:**
    – Offers structured training plans and workouts for different fitness levels.

    2. **Rouvy:**
    – **Type:** Indoor Cycling Platform.
    – **Key Features:**
    – Focuses on realistic augmented reality routes for cycling.
    – Provides a library of real-world video routes and virtual routes.
    – Enables users to compete against other riders in real-time.
    – Compatible with various smart trainers and devices.
    – Offers training plans and workouts.
    – **Community Aspect:**
    – Rouvy has a community of cyclists sharing and riding real video routes.
    – Users can participate in multiplayer races and challenges.

    3. **MyWhoosh:**
    – **Type:** Fitness Tracking and Virtual Challenges.
    – **Key Features:**
    – A fitness app that allows users to set and track fitness goals.
    – Offers virtual challenges, allowing users to compete against others.
    – Users can sync their activities from various fitness trackers.
    – Provides a social platform for connecting with friends and other users.
    – **Community Aspect:**
    – MyWhoosh fosters a sense of competition and community through virtual challenges.
    – Users can engage in friendly competition and share achievements.

    **Comparison Points:**
    – **Focus:**
    – Zwift and Rouvy focus on virtual cycling and running experiences.
    – MyWhoosh focuses on fitness tracking and virtual challenges.
    – “Systm” (if a specific platform) would need more details for a comparison.

    – **Features:**
    – All platforms offer features like virtual challenges, social aspects, and compatibility with fitness trackers.

    – **Community:**
    – Zwift and Rouvy have active user communities, emphasizing group rides and events.
    – MyWhoosh fosters a sense of competition and community through challenges.
    – “Systm” needs clarification to provide specific details on its community aspects.

    Since I don’t have specific details about “Systm,” consider checking its official website or documentation for the most accurate and up-to-date information. Additionally, features and offerings may evolve, so it’s always a good idea to check the latest details directly from the platforms.

  • Pro-business EATS act threatens animal protections

    Pro-business EATS act threatens animal protections

    The “Ending Agricultural Trade Suppression Act”, HR 4417, was introduced in June 2023 by Ashley Hinson of IOWA, seeks to roll back a number of state protections for animals, such as California’s Proposition 12. As you may guess from its libertarian-sounding name, this proposed law would curb individual states’ ability to set certain standards for animal welfare.

    The bill aims to promote agricultural trade by prohibiting state and local governments from imposing standards or conditions on the pre-harvest production of agricultural products if the production occurs in another state and the standard or condition is in addition to the standards and conditions set by federal law and the laws of the state and local government where the production occurs. It also establishes a federal cause of action to challenge state regulation of interstate commerce related to agricultural products.

    Among other groups, the The ASPCA opposes EATS and encourages like-minded people to voice their opposition.

  • Dog Law to be amended, raising fees and funding

    Dog Law to be amended, raising fees and funding

    Senate Bill 746, aimed at strengthening Pennsylvania’s Bureau of Dog Law Enforcement (BDLE) has passed. The legislation, introduced by Sen. Elder Vogel, facilitates the online sale of dog licenses in all counties, increases penalties for violations of Pennsylvania’s Dog Law, and raises dog license and kennel inspection fees. The bill aims to stabilize the BDLE, which has been facing financial challenges and staffing shortages. It also introduces tiered license fees, with discounts for senior citizens, and imposes fines for unlicensed dogs. The bill now awaits the governor’s signature.

    UPDATE: OCTOBER 24, 2023 – 
    SB746 bill is signed into law.

  • Replacement Peloton Seat Post – What’s the difference?

    Replacement Peloton Seat Post – What’s the difference?

    Today I received my replacement Peloton seat post and had a chance to see first-hand what the changes are.

    To recap, back in May of this year (102 days ago, to be exact) I, like many owners of the original model Peloton bike, received an email titled “Important Recall Notice”. This email read, in part:

    Today, Peloton is announcing a voluntary recall of original Peloton model Bikes sold from January 2018 to May 2023 in the US. This voluntary recall is being conducted in cooperation with the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). 

    …

    REASON FOR THE RECALL: The original Peloton Bike seat post can break unexpectedly during use, creating a potential fall and injury risk. Peloton has identified 35 reports of seat posts breaking out of 2,160,000 units sold in the US. There have been 13 reports of injuries, including a wrist fracture, lacerations and bruises.

    Because my Peloton bike gets used nearly every day, I ordered my free replacement right away. A few weeks later I got an email saying that due to high demand, they were prioritizing riders above a certain height or weight. I didn’t meet either criteria, so I was in the last group to get a replacement post.

    Evidently, Peloton fielded 750,000 requests for replacement seat posts, so it has taken them a bit of time to meet that demand. Anyway the post arrived via FedEx today, and only took a couple of minutes to install (Phillips-head screwdriver required). I examined the new post against the old, and they appear to be made of the exact same materials (powder-coated steel of the same gauge, as far as I can tell. The heft is similar). The only difference I could tell is that the welds between the segments (there are two welds) were significantly beefier on the new post.

    Here are photos of the two posts, with the old post in the foreground. The difference in the thickness of the welding bead is pretty noticeable.

    Peloton seat post front Peloton seat post top

    Examining the old post, there are several spots where the powder-coating has worn off, but certainly no cracks, corrosion, or anything else that looked worrisome. Near as I can tell, it looks completely solid (though perhaps the ones that have broken looked that way, too!)

    My Peloton bike has gotten years of daily or near-daily use, and it’s held up well. The only part I have needed to replace (apart from the pedals) are the plastic water-bottle holders (which are unfortunately made of very brittle plastic), and even these were a no-cost fix (I can’t remember exactly when I did that or how old the bike was at the time.) The bike is still quite and there has been no need to replace bearings or belts or anything. Sure, my wife and I are not particularly big or powerful riders, but this bike has had a lot of virtual miles on it, and it’s still going strong.

  • Zwift Point System Flaws

    Zwift Point System Flaws

    I am slowly closing in on Zwift level 50 which was (until recently) the highest level attainable. Alas, I suppose enough people had hit level 50 that Zwift HQ decided it needed to raise the roof to level 60, but I suppose it’s just as well. After all, my zeal for Peloton started to wane after ride #1000, and for Hydrow once I got my t-shirt for rowing a million meters, well, it was just hard to get psyched to do another million meters to get the hat. So if past is any indication, if they hadn’t raised the maximum level I probably would have started looking around for another platform.

    Not that there’s a whole lot to be gained by maxing out Zwift. All you really get is some kit you’re probably not going to wear. There was sort of a cool Mondrian kit that I got a little while ago (level 40?) and wore for a while but mostly it’s not stuff you really want anyway. There are also some frames and wheels that are unlocked at later levels but once you have the Tron bike, the marginal gain from some of these super-high-end upgrades is pretty marginal. I guess you still need a time trial bike and a mountain bike, but there’s not a ton to differentiate any of them, really. 

    (NB: And that’s a good thing. Zwift and similar platforms should really be about the rider and the effort and not things that you can buy. So if anyone is actually reading this, please don’t take anything I’m saying as an argument to have more differentiation between frames and wheels. Let the rider make the difference, I’m good with that.)

    Still, there are levels, and where there a levels there are people like me who have an irrational need to get to the top. So I’d like to talk about how that’s done, and talk about a couple of very big flaws in Zwift’s system of awarding points.

    Fundamentally, you get points for riding. The farther you ride, the more points you get. Zwift Insider has a good guide to the basics of the Zwift points system, so instead of rehashing those basics here, I’ll just point you to their site.

    Did you actually go and read that page? The part about how riders using the metric system get points faster? I quote:

    Sorry, Imperials: you will accumulate XP 7.3% faster if you ride in metric units. (100km=2,000 XP, while the equivalent mileage, 62.13=1864 XP.)

    So, that by itself is a pretty big inequity right there. Why not give riders using the imperial system 32 xp instead? That’s still a fraction less than the metric system users get, but it’s a lot smaller difference than what they have today. That 7% or so difference between metric and imperial is absolutely huge when you start to think about the distances that you’ll be riding to level up.

    The other big flaw in the awarding of Zwift points has to do with the fact that, outside of workout mode, Zwift points are awarded based on distance and not on effort. This means that to level up, one is behooved to do a lot of riding on flat roads in large groups where you can get the maximum speed for your effort. So, we’re talking a lot of Fuego Flats with the robot-pacers, which is about as boring as this game can get.

    As I write this, the Tour of Watopia ’23 is drawing to a close. For the past month, I’ve been doing ToW rides because those rides give double points. So, for a month now, I’ve been seeking out the longest, flattest routes that are offered, because that is how I can gain the most points. Stages 3 and 4 (mountains and dirt, respectively) are the least valuable. Now that we’re into the “makeup week” it’s all Stage 1 (the flats) for me. Yawn.

    As the saying goes, “What gets rewarded gets repeated.” So that’s why you’ll find me on the flats.

    PS: Interested in “XP Farming”? There’s a good Reddit post here that uses the Crit City route and a time trial bike (capitalizing on the short length of the route and the fact that on the time trial bike you always get the XP bonus rather than another “power-up”). A much more elaborate (but more rewarding) strategy is offered by Shane Miller, involving interval workouts on the Alpe d’Zwift. You do need to complete the climb for it to work, and the big payout happens if you both own the lightweight wheels and then are awarded them at the top (so you are instead awarded 1000xp bonus). Shane says this happens often but frankly it has never happened to me. I’m always getting the helmet or some other prize that really should be accompanied by the “sad trombone” sound effect.

  • New Flyers Uniforms

    New Flyers Uniforms

    Word has reached my desk that the Philadelphia Flyers are getting new uniforms for next season. While this really seems to be a case of fixing something that doesn’t need to be fixed, it’s probably going to happen anyway, so I might as well let everybody know what they should do. 

    First, at least from the descriptions that have leaked, it seems that the Flyers at least have avoided doing something radical to their uniforms. While some sports teams in the past have made radical changes to their uniforms for better (exhibit a: The Tampa Bay Buccaneers in ’97), most changes —particularly those intended to modernize the look of the team— leave them worse off (exhbit a: The Tampa Bay Buccaneers in ’14). Uniform redesigns yield at least as many misses as hits, but a team can greatly improve their chances of at least not screwing it all up buy looking to the team’s history. That seems to be (if reports are to be believed) what the Flyers are doing.

    (Aside: if the Flyers were interested in making a big change, they could do a whole lot worse than going with the Stadium Series uniforms from a couple years back. Those were excellent. )IMG 8566

    The new uniform design hasn’t been released and I won’t comment too much on it until I get to see it, but I’ll tell you what I’d like to see the next go-round.

    Arm stripes that can accommodate two-digit numbers: I’m not sure that widening the stripes on the arms (which is evidently part of the plan) is going to make the uniforms look better, but on today’s uniforms the numbers (except on the players with single-digit numbers, of which there are few) are wider than the stripes, and the overall effect looks like the stripe team and the number team didn’t talk to each other before the design was rolled out.

    Numbers somewhere on the front of the uniform: I’m not in favor of adding things to the front of the jerseys (especially sponsor logos!), but it would be nice to have the player numbers somewhere on the front of the uniforms, like maybe one of the thighs. Right now, the only forward-facing number is the one on the helmet, and that’s too small to do much good for the spectator.

    Smaller numbers on the back: Maybe after saying that we should put numbers on the front of the uniform and fixing the sleeve numbers it may seem like I’m contradicting myself regarding the numbers on the back, but I believe that the jersey numbers will actually become easier to read if they were a little smaller. At the size they are now, the are subject to wrinkling when tucked into (or, at least partially into) the player’s pants. Reduce the numbers by maybe 10 or 15% and I think that actually gets easier. At least worth trying out somewhere.

    Color-coordinate the name plate: I’m not sure why the name plate is white or black on the current uniforms, but it feels like a leftover from the days in which you couldn’t apply the name directly to the jersey. I mean, it has a retro feel to it, I guess, but it seems like needless ornamentation. You can never go wrong simplifying things.

    All this being said, nothing makes a uniform look good than putting it on a winning team. If that part gets fixed, then I think people will embrace the uniforms, too.

  • Pigs today, everything else tomorrow

    Pigs today, everything else tomorrow

    Not too many animal welfare issues make it to the Supreme Court, but that is where we will find California’s Proposition 12 today. Proposition 12 is in the spotlight more because of its implications for interstate commerce than for what it means for animal welfare per se, but it’s a big deal on both fronts.

    To recap, California voters approved, by about a 60/40 majority, new minimum standards for the treatment of pigs raised for food. If your pens don’t meet a new minimum size (24 square feet, which some seem to feel is extravagantly generous), you can’t sell your pork in California.

    The reason this has become a hot issue is because these rules would apply to all pork, not just from pigs raised in California. You could interpret this (as some do) as California legislating the treatment of pigs in other states, and would be violation of the Commerce Clause which reserves the regulation of interstate commerce to the federal government.

    But is California —which actually produces almost no pork— actually legislating the treatment of pigs in other states? That would seem to be a difficult argument to make. After all, farmers are not required to sell their products in California, it’s simply a market that can be open to them if they meet certain minimum standards.

    The implications of a defeat of Proposition 12 would be tremendous. It would open the door to a kind of rent seeking to industry. In this case, the pork industry could become concentrated in the state that allows the lest expensive means of production, which would probably be the least humane at the same time. The state that allows the smallest pens, cheapest food, fewest inspections, and least regulation would “win” the business, and pork would be shipped out to all the other states for consumption. Of course, this outcome would not by any means be limited to pork, but to every imaginable product. 

    As for who is choosing sides, for the most part the liberal and blue states support California as a matter of state autonomy, while the conservative, red states oppose it as a matter of state sovereignty. Remember that this is America, where everyone has their own definition of “freedom”. Perhaps surprisingly (or maybe not), the Biden administration backs industry on this one, I suppose because pigs don’t vote.

    More on the situation at the Supreme Court, and Public Citizen’s take.

  • Allentown Bans Declawing Cats

    Allentown Bans Declawing Cats

    Following Pittsburgh’s ban on declawing cats passed in late 2021, Allentown this year has also banned the practice ($500 fine for violations). The vote in the city council was unanimous.

    Allentown has recently become one of the state’s leaders in animal protection, after banning puppy/kitten/bunny mill sales in October of 2022 ($600 fine for violations). For some reason Allentown is cat crazy, with an impressive 23% of the city residents owning one, according to census data.

    Laws criminalizing the declawing of cats have also passed in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Denver, and New York.

    Animal rights activists have been working hard to educate the public on the practice of declawing, which many believe is an essentially harmless for of nail trimming but is actually an amputation of bones from the feet. It would be like having your fingertips cut off.

     https://youtu.be/MXpxmiH95Tw

  • Pennsylvania Dog Law

    Pennsylvania Dog Law

    The Pennsylvania Dog Law of 1982

    Just about everything having to do with dogs in Pennsylvania goes back to Public Law 784, enacted on December 7th, 1982 and commonly just called “The Pennsylvania Dog Law of 1982”.

    The Pennsylvania Dog Law of 1982 is a piece of legislation that governs various aspects of dog ownership and control in the state of Pennsylvania. It covers issues such as dog licensing, rabies vaccinations, kennel regulations, and rules related to dangerous dogs. This law is aimed at promoting responsible dog ownership, ensuring the health and safety of both dogs and the public, and addressing concerns related to dog-related incidents.

    Read the law (pdf)

    The Puppy Lemon Law

    The Pennsylvania Puppy Lemon Law, officially known as the Pennsylvania Dog Purchaser Protection Act, is a state law that provides certain protections to consumers who purchase puppies from commercial kennels, breeders, or pet shops. The law is designed to address issues that may arise when individuals buy puppies that later develop health problems or congenital defects.

    Key provisions of the Pennsylvania Puppy Lemon Law include:

    Health Guarantee: The law requires sellers to provide a written health guarantee for the puppy. This guarantee typically covers the puppy’s health for a specified period, often 14 days after the purchase.
    Veterinary Examination: If the puppy is found to be ill or have a congenital defect within the specified period, the law often allows the buyer to return the puppy for a refund or exchange, including reimbursement for veterinary expenses.
    Disclosures: Sellers must disclose certain information about the puppy’s health, including any known congenital or hereditary conditions.
    Remedies: The law outlines the remedies available to buyers, which may include a full refund, replacement puppy, or reimbursement of veterinary expenses, depending on the circumstances.
    It’s important to note that the specific details and requirements of the Pennsylvania Puppy Lemon Law can change over time, so it’s essential to consult the latest version of the law or consult with legal professionals for the most up-to-date information and guidance if you have concerns about a puppy purchase.

  • Gutenberg vs. Divi

    Gutenberg vs. Divi

    In late January (2022), I upgraded this site to WordPress 5.9 and, on impulse, I decided I would go full-Gutenberg. The Gutenberg block-based editor is the future of WordPress, to be sure, and it seemed like maybe even in its less-than-fully-mature state it would be up to the demands of this very modest site.

    I had been using the “Neve” theme, which I like because it is a very lightweight, basic theme. For my Gutenberg experiment, though, I decided I would roll all the way back to “Twenty Twenty-Two”, the current default theme for new WordPress installs.

    The short version of the story: my Gutenberg experiment lasted about a week before I decided that having my site look good was more important to me. Out went Twenty Twenty-Two, in came Divi.

    Why Gutenberg?

    For all that WordPress has been able to do on the road to capturing something like 1/3rd of the website market, it has never had strong WYSIWYG editing capabilities, particularly when compared to other “them builders”. Many (and given the sheer number of WordPress installations, I can dare say “most”) people who edit WordPress sites do not have much background in web technologies — and why should they need to? Creating a web page really shouldn’t be harder than creating a word processing document. Format your text, insert some graphics, link to wherever you need to link to, and there you have 98% of website pages. If you need a web design certificate to do that, then your software has room for improvement.

    Enter Gutenberg, WordPress’ first whole-hearted attempt at creating a true what-you-see-is-what-you-get editing environment. Central to Gutenberg (and competing page editors) is a drag-and-drop, modular interface. Want a text block? Drop in a text block. Want an image? Drop in an image. An image carousel? etc., etc. WordPress comes with a couple dozen pre-built blocks, and developers can create more through plugins.

    All in all, it’s very promising. It’s not reasonable to expect that web page editors have a deep understanding of HTML tags and CSS styles, and when you use Gutenberg you can see where WordPress is going. It all looks good, if you can project far enough.

    Why not Gutenberg?

    As excited as I was to be a Gutenberg pioneer, it wasn’t long at all before I started running into trouble, and it was trouble of a predictable sort. Gutenberg suffers from the same challenges that have plagued WYSIWYG editors from the beginning of time.

    The problem with WYSIWYG

    WYSIWYG editors, when they work, are terrific. It is extremely satisfying to jump into an editor, spot the thing you want to change, change it, and see the changes exactly as how they’ll appear in the final, published work. After that sort of experience, you say to yourself, “why doesn’t everything work that way?”

    Unfortunately, there is a reason why not everything works that way, and that is that while WYSIWYG editors can do a great job letting you edit the things you see on the screen, they all have the same achilles’ heel when it comes to things you don’t see on the screen. Things like margins, padding and conditional formatting (such as the way thing might react to a click or some other interaction) are extremely vexing for WYSIWYG editors. This has always been the case. Everybody remember the “show invisibles” command from Microsoft Word?

    In my humble opinion, WYSIWG editors can be judged on how well they let you edit the things that you can’t see. Generally, there are controls in a side bar that let you adjust things. At worst, there’s a box where you can hand-write any CSS that you feel needs to be applied.

    Actually, I take that back. At worst, there isn’t a box where you can hand-write your CSS. And that’s what I found with Gutenberg. Your CSS makes Gutenberg uneasy. In fact, it will strip out even valid HTML and CSS from blocks you add if they’re not considered orthodox. As a web developer, there is nothing more frustrating than to know that something can be done — indeed, even know how to do it– but to be stifled by the development environment. Gutenberg, in an effort to make things simple and to make everything predictable, does this.

    Will I ever go Gutenberg?

    When it comes to web tools, most of them are bad before they’re good. I did not fully embrace Divi for a few years after its arrival because of all of the things it couldn’t do. Yet, over time, the makers of Divi (Elegant Themes, who did not compensate me for this) kept adding to the toolset, and little by little the number of workarounds needed to accomplished my task got smaller and smaller. Indeed, these days if I want to do something new I start by asking myself “how does Divi want me to do this?” Often, there is a Divi-style approach, and even when there isn’t it’s not particularly troublesome to get inside and do what I need to do.

    I can see Gutenberg heading in that direction. The use of the “block” to build pages is logical and modern, and the number of things you can do without having to start hacking shrinks with every version. At this point in time, however, I can’t even really do a basic site like this one without jumping though a lot of hoops. It is just a matter of time until that changes, so until then I’ll stick with Divi.