Jokes aside, this is actually a very interesting study. We all know that physical characteristics are developed specifically by different activities (endurance for runners, strength for weightlifters). But I think most people would think this is due to local effects at the level of the muscle or specific neural circuits for different movements. This study suggests that a more general physical adaptation is at play, since the tongue isn't involved in running or weightlifting.

It's not entirely true that the tongue isn't involved, because of breathing patterns. If differential tongue strength/endurance is just an incidental effect of different breathing patterns, I'm not sure there's much further to go with this.

Not just breathing patterns, but during the brief but intense period of a lift, the muscles of your tongue are engaged in a way they are not normally.

Yeah, this is neat. I suppose it does make sense - running is going to have an effect on the whole cardiovascular system, the legs being just a part of that, and weightlifting will affect the whole of the CNS's ability to recruit muscle fibers, so it does stand to reason their would be systemic changes. The body becomes better in totality at what it practices, and it's neat to see evidence of this.

There may also be some self-selection when it comes to people who choose to be weightlifters or runners. Tongue strength differences may be a genetic correlation with particular body types rather than a result of training.

Exactly what I was thinking. Did the study control for genetic effects? The study compared "weightlifters" and "runners" - people who have presumably already been pursuing the activity for some time, instead of of being randomly assigned to such an experimental condition.

So we might expect that genetically stronger people (with stronger tongues) would gravitate toward weightlifting, with the same trend for self-identified "runners" and endurance.

Hard to confirm without studies on anus strength cross correlation.

I like the idea here, but see one significant problem that will prevent me from using these aliases. The git publish alias doesn't take a branch name, so if you have multiple remotes for the repository it will just publish to one of them. Which one? Well, the code in legit/scm.py reads

return repo.git.execute([git, 'push', repo.remotes[0].name, branch])

so it just pushes to whichever remote is first in its array. What if I want to publish to a second remote?

Then use `git push second-remote foo`. There's nothing stopping you from using the existing commands.

It's complementary.

What happens if flying green monkeys attack just before you hit "Enter"... I contend most people only use a single remote.

I am a graduate student in a math-heavy field, so I thought you might be interested in some feedback. Just yesterday, I was embedding LaTex-derived images into an HTML email in order to collaborate, and I thought: this is just so stupid. Your service definitely fills a need in the research community. I love it. What is the envisioned freemium model? A problem I can see is that very few users would need more than the service you are already offering.

That is a problem tbh. At the moment my number 1 objective isn't to make money but we will see what the service costs me to run. Ideas for things for premium

- unlimited private projects / free accounts only have public projects like cloud9 - multiple compilers - unlimited collaborators per project - background compile looking for errors - git pull access

any other ideas are welcome.

Sweave support? You could hand off to an EC2 instance and include n hours of computation time in tier x.