Top Five Successful Strategies For Trading Binary Options
Top Five Successful Strategies For Trading Binary Options
Binary.com Review - trading strategy, app and bonus info
Full Review of the Double Stochastic Strategy for Binary
Binary Options Edge - Trading Forums
TR Binary Options | Binary Trading
A trans person's measured take on the trans sports issue
So first of all this post was inspired by GGExMachina's brief statement on the issue:
For example, it is objectively the case that biological men have a physical advantage over women. Yet if someone points this out and suggests that transgender people shouldn’t be allowed to fight in women’s UFC, or women’s soccer or weightlifting competitions or whatever, suddenly you’re some kind of evil monster. Rather than saying that of course trans people shouldn’t be bullied and that we could perhaps have a trans olympics (like the Paralympics and Special Olympics), we are expected to lie.
I've found that this position is incredibly popular among liberals/left-leaning people, especially here on reddit. It seems like, once or twice a month, like clockwork, a thread stating more or less the same thing on /unpopularopinion or /offmychest will get thousands of upvotes. And while I completely understand the thought process that leads otherwise left-leaning people to come to such conclusions, I feel like the issue has been, broadly speaking, dishonestly presented to the general public by a mixture of bad-faith actors and people who have succumbed to the moral panic. And, as I've seen, there are plenty of people in this subreddit and elsewhere who are itching to be as supportive as they possibly can to the trans community but find themselves becoming very disillusioned by this particular issue. By making this post I hope to present a more nuanced take on the issue, not only in regards to my personal beliefs on what kinds of policies are best to preserve fairness in women's sports but also in regards to shining a light on how this issue is often times dishonestly presented in an attempt to impede the progression of pro-trans sentiments in the cultural zeitgeist.
Sex & Gender
The word "transgender" is an umbrella term that refers to people whose gender identities differ from those typically associated with the sex they were assigned at birth. According to the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey, the approximate composition of "the trans community" in the United States is 29% Transgender men (Female-to-Male), 33% Transgender women (Male-to-Female), and 35% non-binary. (The remaining 3% were survey respondents who self-identified as "crossdressers", who were still included in the survey on the grounds of being gender non-conforming) While non-binary people, as a group, are probably deserving of their own separate post. the focus of this post will be on trans men and trans women. I will also be primarily focusing on transgender people who pursue medical transition with Hormone-Replacement-Therapy, as they are most relevant to the issue of sports. (Mind that while the majority of binary trans people fit into this camp, there is a sizable minority of trans people who do not feel the need to medically transition.) What do trans people believe about Gender? The views of transgender people in regards to Gender are actually pretty varied, although the most prominent positions that I've personally seen are best summed up into two different camps:
The "Trans-Medical" camp
Transgender people who fall into this camp usually consider Gender Dysphoria to be the defining factor of what makes somebody trans. The best way I can describe this camp is that they sort of view being transgender akin to being intersex. Only whereas an intersex person would be born with a disorder that affects the body, a trans person is born with a disorder that affects the brain. Trans people in this camp often times put an emphasis on a clinical course for treatment. For example, a person goes to a psychologist, gets diagnosed with gender dysphoria, starts hormone replacement therapy, pursues surgery, then emerges from this process of either cured of the gender dysphoria or, at the very least, treated to the fullest extent of medical intervention. This position is more or less the original position held by trans activists, back in the day when the word "transsexual" was used instead of "transgender". Though many younger trans people, notably YouTuber Blaire White, also hold this position. Under this position, sex and gender are still quite intertwined, but a trans man can still be considered a man, and a trans woman a woman, under the belief that sex/gender doesn't just refer to chromosomal sex and reproductive organs, but also to neurobiology, genitalia, and secondary sex characteristics. So someone who is transgender, according to this view, is born with the physical characteristics of one sex/gender but the neurobiology of another, and will change their physical characteristics, to the fullest extent medically possible, to match the neurobiology and therefore cure the individual of gender dysphoria. Critics of this position argue that this mentality is problematic due to being inherently exclusive to transgender people who do not pursue medical transition, whom are often times deemed as "transtrenders" by people within this camp. Many people find it additionally problematic because it is also inherently exclusive to poorer trans people, particularly those in developing nations, who may not have access to trans-related medical care. Note that there are plenty of trans people who *do* have access to medical transition, but nevertheless feel as if the trans community shouldn't gatekeep people who cannot afford or do not desire medical transition, thus believing in the latter camp.
The "Gender Identity" camp
I feel like this camp is the one most popularly criticized by people on the right, but is also probably the most mainstream. It is the viewpoint held by many more left-wing trans people, (Note that in the aforementioned 2015 survey, only 1% of trans respondents voted Republican, so trans people are largely a pretty left-wing group, therefore it makes sense that this position would be the most mainstream) but also notably held by American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, GLAAD, and other mainstream health organizations and activist groups. While people in this camp still acknowledge that medical transition to treat gender dysphoria can still be a very important aspect of the transgender experience, it's believed that the *defining* experience is simply having a gender identity different from the one they were assigned at birth. "Gender identity" simply being the internal, personal sense of being a man, a woman, or outside the gender binary. Many people in this camp, though, still often maintain that gender identity is (at least partially) neurobiological, but differ from the first camp in regards to acknowledging that the issue is less black & white than an individual simply having a "male brain" or a "female brain", but rather that the neurological characteristics associated with gender exist on more of a spectrum, thus leaving the door open to gender non-conforming people who do not identify as trans, as well as to non-binary people. This is where the "gender is a spectrum" phrase comes from. "52 genders" is a popular right-wing meme that makes fun of this viewpoint, however it is important to note that many trans and non-binary people disagree with the idea of quantifying gender identity to such an absurd amount of individual genders, rather more simply maintaining that there are men, women, and a small portion of people in-between, with a few words such as "agender" or "genderqueer" being used to describe specific identities/presentations within this category. It's also noteworthy that not all people in this camp believe that neurobiology is the be-all-end-all of gender identity, as many believe that the performativity of gender also plays an integral role in one's identity. (That gender identity is a mixture of neurobiology and performativity is a position held by YouTuber Contrapoints) Trans people and biological sex So while the aforementioned "Gender Identity" viewpoint has become quite popularized among liberals and leftists, I have noticed a certain rhetorical mentality/assumption become prevalent alongside it, especially among cisgender people who consider themselves trans-allies: "Sex and Gender are different. A trans woman is a woman who is biologically male. A trans man is a man who is biologically female" When "Sex" is defined by someone's chromosomes, or the sex organs they were born with, this is correct. However, there is a pretty good reason why the trans community tends to prefer terms like "Assigned Male at Birth" rather than "Biologically Male". This is done not only for the inclusion of people who are both intersex and transgender (For example, someone can be born intersex but assigned male based on the existence of a penis or micropenis), but also due to the aforementioned viewpoint on divergent neurobiology being the cause for gender dysphoria. Those reasons are why the word "Assigned" is used. But the reason why it's "Assigned Male/Female At Birth" instead of just "Assigned Male/Female" is because among the trans community there exists an understanding of the mutability of sexually dimorphic biology that the general population is often ignorant to. For example, often times people (especially older folks) don't even know of the existence of Hormone Replacement Therapy, and simply assume that trans people get a single "sex change operation" that, (for a trans woman) would just entail the removal of the penis and getting breast implants. Therefore they imagine the process to be "medically sculpting a male to look female" instead of a more natural biological process of switching the endocrine system form male to female or vice versa and letting the body change over the course of multiple years. It doesn't help that, for a lot of older trans people (namely Caitlyn Jenner, who is probably the most high profile trans person sadly), the body can be a lot more resistant to change even with hormones so they *do* need to rely on plastic surgery a lot more to get obvious results) So what sexually dimorphic bodily characteristics can one expect to change from Hormone Replacement Therapy? (Note that there is a surprising lack of studies done on some of the more intricate changes that HRT can, so I've put a "*" next to the changes that are anecdotal, but still commonly and universally observed enough among trans people [including myself for the MTF stuff] to consider factual. I've also put a "✝" next to the changes that only occur when people transition before or during puberty) Male to Female:
Breast development and nipple/areolar enlargement, including in some people, the development of mammary glands and the ability to breastfeed
Thinning/slowed growth of facial/body hair
Cessation/reversal of male-pattern scalp hair loss
Softening of skin/decreased oiliness and acne
Decreased muscle mass/strength
Widening and rounding of the pelvis
Changes in mood, emotionality, and behavior (anecdotally crying is way easier to do)
Decreased sex drive (anecdotally, taking progesterone helps a lot in regards to regaining sex drive, though attraction is often noted as being experienced a bit differently than how it feels with testosterone)
Decreased sperm production/fertility
Decreased testicle size
Decreased penis size
Decreased prostate gland size
Voice changes (As far as I've heard, most people only experience minor changes from transitioning in adulthood, so it's common to do vocal training on top of everything to actually get a female-passing voice. I'll add a ✝ here since vocal changes seem to be a lot stronger in people who transition before/during puberty)
Changes in body odor (It's been documented that men and women often times have different smelling body odor, and trans people commonly notice a change in this regard) *
Changes in how arousal, sexual pleasure, and orgasms are experienced *
Changes in facial complexion *
Slight changes in hair color, texture, or curl *
Slight changes in eye color *
Changes in alcohol/drug tolerance *
Experiencing pubescent skeletal development and bodily growth along female-typical lines, including both bodily size/shape and facial bone/cartilage features ✝
Female to Male:
Growth of facial/body hair
male pattern scalp hair loss (in some individuals)
Roughening of the skin and prominence of veins
Increased muscle mass/strength
Changes in mood, emotionality, and behavior (I forget the source for this sadly but I remember reading that trans men are significantly more likely to commit crimes and get into fights after starting HRT)
Increased sex drive
Cessation of ovulation and menstruation
Acne (especially in the first few years of therapy)
Alterations in blood lipids (cholesterol and triglycerides)
Increased red blood cell count
Deepening of the voice
Enlargement of the clitoris
Changes in body odor *
Changes in how arousal, sexual pleasure, and orgasms are experienced *
Changes in facial complexion *
Slight changes in hair color, texture, or curl *
Slight changes in eye color *
Changes in alcohol/drug tolerance *
Experiencing male pubescent skeletal development and bodily growth along male-typical lines, and closure of growth plates ✝
Often times, when the whole "transgender people in sports" discussion arises, a logical error is made when *all* transgender people are assumed to be "biologically" their birth sex. For example, when talking about trans women participating in female sports, these instances will be referred to as cases of "Biological males competing against females". As mentioned before, calling a trans woman "biologically male" strictly in regards to chromosomes or sex organs at birth would be correct. However, not only can it be considered derogatory (the word "male" is colloquially a shorthand for "man", after all), but there are many instances where calling a post-HRT transgender person "biologically [sex assigned at birth]" is downright misleading. For example, hospitals have, given transgender patients improper or erroneous medical care by assuming treatment based on birth sex where treatment based on their current endocrinological sex would have been more adequate. Acute Clinical Care of Transgender Patients: A Review
Conclusions and relevance: Clinicians should learn how to engage with transgender patients, appreciate that unique anatomy or the use of gender-affirming hormones may affect the prevalence of certain disease (eg, cardiovascular disease, venous thromboembolism, and osteoporosis), and be prepared to manage specific issues, including those related to hormone therapy. Health care facilities should work toward providing inclusive systems of care that correctly identify and integrate information about transgender patients into the electronic health record, account for the unique needs of these patients within the facility, and through education and policy create a welcoming environment for their care.
Some hosptials have taken to labeling the biological sex of transgender patients as "MTF" (for post-HRT trans women) and "FTM" (for post-HRT trans men), which is a much more medically useful identifier compared to their sex assigned at birth. In regards to the sports discussion, I've seen *multiple threads* where redditors have backed up their opinions on the subject of trans people in sports with studies demonstrating that cis men are, on average, more athletically capable than cis women. Which I personally find to be a pathetic misunderstanding of the entire issue. Because we're not supposed to be comparing the athletic capabilities of natal males to natal females, here. We're supposed to comparing the athletic capabilities of *post-HRT male-to-females* to natal females. And, if we're going to really have a fact-based discussion on the matter, we need to have separate categories for pre-pubescent and post-pubescent transitioners. Since, as mentioned earlier, the former will likely have different skeletal characteristics compared to the latter. The currentInternational Olympic Committee(IOC) model for trans participation, and criticisms of said model (I quoted the specific guidelines from the International Cycling Union, but similar guidelines exist for all Olympic sports)
Elite Competition At elite competition levels, members may have the opportunity to represent the United States and participate in international competition. They may therefore be subject to the policies and regulations of the International Cycling Union (UCI) and International Olympic Committee (IOC). USA Cycling therefore follows the IOC guidelines on transgender athletes at these elite competition levels. For purposes of this policy, international competition means competition sanctioned by the UCI or competition taking place outside the United States in which USA Cycling’s competition rules do not apply. The IOC revised its guidelines on transgender athlete participation in 2015, to focus on hormone levels and medical monitoring. The main points of the guidelines are: Those who transition from female to male are eligible to compete in the male category without restriction. It is the responsibility of athletes to be aware of current WADA/USADA policies and file for appropriate therapeutic use exemptions. Those who transition from male to female are eligible to compete in the female category under the following conditions: The athlete has declared that her gender identity is female. The declaration cannot be changed, for sporting purposes, for a minimum of four years. The athlete must demonstrate that her total testosterone level in serum has been below 10 nmol/L for at least 12 months prior to her first competition (with the requirement for any longer period to be based on a confidential case-by-case evaluation, considering whether or not 12 months is a sufficient length of time to minimize any advantage in women’s competition). The athlete's total testosterone level in serum must remain below 10 nmol/L throughout the period of desired eligibility to compete in the female category. Compliance with these conditions may be monitored by random or for-cause testing. In the event of non-compliance, the athlete’s eligibility for female competition will be suspended for 12 months.
Valid criticisms of the IOC model are usually based on the fact that, even though hormone replacement therapy provokes changes to muscle mass, it does *not* shrink the size of someone's skeleton or cardiovascular system. Therefore an adult-transitioned trans woman could, even after losing all levels of male-typical muscle mass, still have an advantage in certain sports if she had an excessively large skeletal frame, and was participating in a sport where such a thing would be advantageous. Additionally, the guidelines only require that athletes be able to demonstrate having had female hormone levels for 12-24 months, which isn't necessarily long enough to completely lose musculature gained from training on testosterone (anecdotally it can take 2-4 years to completely lose male-typical muscle mass) So the IOC guidelines don't have any safeguard against, for example, a trans woman training with testosterone as the dominant hormone in her body, and then taking hormones for the bare minimum time period and still having some of the advantage left. Note that, while lower level sports have had (to the glee of right-wing publications sensationalizing the issue) instances of this exact thing happening, in the 16 years since these IOC guidelines were established, not a single transgender individual has won an Olympic medal Also note that none of the above criticisms of the IOC policy would apply in regards to the participation of pre-pubescent-transitioned trans women. After all, male-pubescent bone structure and cardiovascular size, and male-typical muscle levels, can't possibly exist if you never went through male puberty to begin with. What could better guidelines entail, to best preserve fairness in female sports while avoiding succumbing to anti-trans moral panic?
The most extreme way for female sports to reasonably go about addressing this issue would be to only allow for the participation of transgender women who are documented to have, with puberty blockers, carried out their transitions without having gone past Tanner Stage II or III of male puberty.
Sports leagues willing to be a bit looser could accept adult transitioners under the stipulation that their bodily measurements in regards to certain skeletal features fit within a standard deviation of the cis-female average
Sports leagues willing to be even looser could copy the IOC guidelines, but require documentation of having gone through HRT for a greater period of time rather than just the 12 months, (3 years would probably be better) to guarantee full loss of male muscle mass
In my personal opinion, sports leagues should pick one of the three above options depending on what best fits the nature of the sport and the eliteness of the competition. For example, extremely competitive contact sports might be better off going with the first option, but an aerobic sport such as marathon running would probably be fine with the third option.
How this issue has been misrepresented by The Right
Right-wing rhetoric surrounding this issue assumes that the issue exists as an innate consequence of trans activism (Ie. "This is what the left is pushing!") rather than as a result of individual sports leagues failing to have solid rules for participation. Often times, certain low-level sports leagues have failed to even measure trans athlete's hormone levels, and have, in some cases, let completely male-bodied athletes participate as women. This is obviously the fault of these specific sports leagues failing to implement or enforce reasonable rules for participation, but right-wing articles surrounding such instances will act as if these occurrences are an ideological goal of the pro-trans left. This runs off of the assumption that a majority of trans people and "the left" are specifically pushing for muscular males (who merely "identify" as women, and nothing more) to dominate female sports. When, in reality, we really had nothing to do with these occurrences, and the majority of trans people would even likely agree with the sentiments expressed in this post. Additionally, accepting the gender identities of trans people is something you can do irregardless of your opinion on the sports issue.
Over-exaggeration of the problem. The issue is often sensationalized to the extent of coming off as a call to action, to stop the trans activists and their SJW bullies from ruining female sports! They're coming after your daughter's lacrosse team! In reality, out of the hundreds of thousands (perhaps even more) of sports competitions that exist in the United States and throughout the world, an incredibly small percentage of them are actually ruined by trans participants. You hear the stories of the 6'5'' trans woman with the broad frame winning a weightlifting competition, but not of the hundreds of more average-sized trans-female athletes turning out more mediocre performances. This isn't to say that the niche cases don't present a problem that indeed needs to be fixed, but presenting the problem as more prevalent than it actually is acts as a rhetorical strategy meant to provoke anger as well as a more dramatic response. Buying into this rhetorical strategy, especially if you're is already somewhat ignorant to the issue to begin with, will make it much easier to convince you of accepting drastic solutions to the problems. Ie. "ONLY XX CHROMOSOMES ALLOWED IN FEMALE SPORTS", instead of any of the three more measured approaches suggested above. The provoked response of anger is also meant to turn people off of accepting trans rights in general.
Infuriatingly, I've noticed that right-wing rhetoric usually doesn't even mention pre-pubescent transitioners at all. Like, these people are fine with acknowledging the existence of puberty blockers when they're trying to make them illegal, but they refuse to talk about them in regards to the sports issue. There have been cases where conservative jurisdictions have banned the participation of all transgender students in girl's sports, period. Meaning a transgender girl who never went through male puberty at all, and has pre-pubescent hormone levels as a result of puberty blockers, could be banned from participating in girl's sports, while in reality said trans girl could possibly even be at a disadvantage compared to the cis girls, as a result of not even having started puberty yet. Nonsensical. And liberal allies are at fault of this too, I've noticed. I've seen countless reddit threads where left-leaning people voice their take on the trans sports issue without mentioning the existence of pre-pubescent transitioners. It's honestly ridiculous.
The sports issue is also used as an excuse to say derogatory things about trans women that would be less justifiable in other instances.
I'll use Joe Rogan as an example of this last thing:
She calls herself a woman but... I tend to disagree. And, uh, she, um... she used to be a man but now she has had, she's a transgender which is (the) official term that means you've gone through it, right? And she wants to be able to fight women in MMA. I say no f***ing way. I say if you had a dick at one point in time, you also have all the bone structure that comes with having a dick. You have bigger hands, you have bigger shoulder joints. You're a f***ing man. That's a man, OK? You can't have... that's... I don't care if you don't have a dick any more... If you want to be a woman in the bedroom and you know you want to play house and all of that other s*** and you feel like you have, your body is really a woman's body trapped inside a man's frame and so you got a operation, that's all good in the hood. But you can't fight chicks. Get the f*** out of here. You're out of your mind. You need to fight men, you know? Period. You need to fight men your size because you're a man. You're a man without a dick. I'm not trying to discriminate against women in any way, shape, or form and I'm a big supporter of women's fighting. I loved watching that Ronda Rousey/Liz Carmouche fight. But those are actual women. Those are actual women. And as strong as Ronda Rousey looks, she's still looks to me like a pretty girl. She's a beautiful girl who happens to be strong. She's a girl! [Fallon Fox] is not a girl, OK? This is a [transgender] woman. It's a totally different specification.
Calling a trans woman a "man", and equating transitioning to merely removal of the dick, and equating trans women's experiences as women as "playing house" and "being a woman in the bedroom". These things are obviously pretty transphobic, and if Rogan had said these things about just any random trans woman his statements would have likely been more widely seen in that light. But when it's someone having an unfair advantage in sports, and the audience is supposed to be angry with you, it's much more socially acceptable thing to say such things. But the problem is, when you say these kinds of things about one trans woman, you're essentially saying those derogatory things about all trans women by extension. It's the equivalent of using an article about a black home invader who murdered a family as an excuse to use a racial slur. Now, I'm not saying that Rogan necessarily did this on purpose, in fact I'm more inclined to believe that it was done moreso due to ignorance rather than having an actual ideological agenda. But since then, many right wing ideologues who do have an ideological agenda have used this issue as an excuse to voice their opinions on trans people while appearing to be less bigoted. Ie. "I'm not trying to be a bigot or anything and I accept people's rights to live their lives as they see fit, but we NEED to keep men out of women's sports", as a sly way to call trans women "men". Additionally, doing this allows them to slip in untrue statements about the biology of trans women. I mean, first of all in regards to the statement "You have bigger hands, you have bigger shoulder joints", obviously even in regards to post-pubescent transitioners, not every trans woman is going to have bigger hands and shoulder joints than every cis woman (My hands are actually smaller than my aunt's!). It's just that people who go through male puberty on average tend to have bigger hands and shoulder joints compared to people who go through female puberty. But over-exaggerating the breadth of sexual dimorphism, as if males and females are entirely different species to each-other, helps to paint the idea of transitioning in a more nonsensical light. I hope this thread has presented this issue in a better light for anyone reading it. Let me know if you have any thoughts/criticisms of my stances or the ways I went about this issue.
[Eustacchio Raulli] Simmons is the main reason Philly has a real shot this year
Very long thread from an NBA scout discussing Simmons' value and the way defense in general is played in high leverage games, worth the read imo.
Simmons is the X-factor that could put PHI over the top this year, and it has nothing to do with whether he starts taking 3s. Let's start by discussing rim protection, which typically is the primary battleground between offense and defense. Most of the time when discussing rim protection we talk about degree of impact at the rim (lower opp FG% in the paint) or degree of deterrence (lower frequency of FGA in the paint). Behemoths like Gobert and Embiid shine in these areas. 6 of the Top 7 in 3 yr RA-DeFG% are bigs. From a macro perspective, these are the factors that matters most. Whatever plus-minus variant you prefer, or whichever angle you tend to watch film from, these are the players that will consistently make the highest impact defensive plays (outside the occasional pick-6). There is a 3rd factor, however, that often goes overlooked. Moreover, it has much greater relative importance in the playoffs than the regular season -- under what circumstances can a defense maintain a measure of rim protection? This is at the core of why versatility matters. Rudy Gobert makes the greatest degree of impact when protecting the rim of any NBA player. He also provides no rim protection when forced to defend 26 feet from the basket. The goal of the offense, then, is to create situations where he cannot protect the rim. This isn't easy, and most offenses can't do so consistently within a 24 second shot clock. However, if you remove the subset of bad teams things change. Only the 8 best teams remain in R2 of the playoffs. Within this context sustainability of rim protection grows more important. As far as I can tell, two key factors influence sustainability of rim protection for a defensive unit: 1) Point of attack defense 2) Rim protection redundancies Let's discuss each in more detail. 1) Point of attack defense Questions that are tested for each defensive unit in each matchup:
How frequently will the on-ball defender require help?
What degree of help is needed?
How predictable is the ensuing defensive rotation?
There are many layers to this subject. First, how many worthwhile angles of attack does the offense have at their disposal? It's not always possible to match up the best POA defender with the ball-handler, so redundancies are needed in this area as well. Moreover, much of the offensive strategy for each possession involves manipulating the point of attack. Pick-and-rolls, DHOs, etc are all methods of creating an advantage at the point of attack, with the value measured in X time spent to create advantage Y. The reason teams spend so much time manipulating the point of attack is that most high value shot attempts stem from winning that battle and driving into the paint: driving layups, dump offs to bigs, kick outs to spot-up shooters. A brief aside about how we think about what constitutes a good shot: We need to think less about individual shots, and more about the network of shots produced by an action. A pull-up jumper may not be ideal, but if each one opens up two drives it's a good network of shots. So, the battle at the point of attack is very important to the eventual outcome of the possession. The difficulty is in determining how much value to ascribe to individual POA defenders in this regard. One point that needs to be made: Unless there is a significant talent gap, most POA defenders will 'lose' on most possessions. What we're really looking for is whether they lose slowly enough for the help rotation to arrive, or if they get burned and give up an easy shot. Moreover, the results in any individual matchup will be... not quite binary, but certainly polarized. A player either holds up against his assignment, or he doesn't. I'm not certain of this, but my inclination is that it's less of a spectrum than many other facets of basketball. A good example of this is the 2015 NBA Finals. Despite the injuries to 2/3 of the CLE Big Three, GSW had major problems at the POA early in the series. Barnes, Klay, Liv just weren't strong enough to check LBJ. Dray wasn't fast enough. CLE managed to go up 2-1. What changed? In short, Andre Iguodala happened. He certainly didn't 'win' at the point of attack. But he did consistently lose more slowly than his teammates. This allowed Dray and Bogut to time their help defense more effectively. This illustrates why POA defense can vary greatly in value. The right defender for LBJ or KD is unlikely to be the right defender for Dame or Kyrie. This can dilute its value over the course of 82 games in +/- metrics. But in a playoff series, having the right guy matters a lot. This is why versatility is a key characteristic for good POA defenders. Avery Bradley can defend the POA... if that POA is under 6-4, and not too strong (AKA not a playoff initiator). Teams relying on narrow players need guys that can match up with various sizes & speeds.
Bringing this back around to the original subject: Ben Simmons, the single most versatile defender in the league. He can guard almost anyone, which makes it very difficult (or simply sub-optimal) for the offense to shift the POA away from him. This allows Philly to dictate the terms of the engagement far more than most defenses when they choose to do so. They have the personnel to pit their No. 1 POA defender against the opp No. 1 option, No. 2 vs No. 2, etc. That's rare, valuable, and could swing a postseason matchup. The specific type(s) of POA defenders that carry the most value in a given year are dictated by the most dangerous offensive threats on contenders that season. In 2020, that's Giannis, LeBron, and Kawhi primarily, then to a lesser extent Luka, Harden, Kemba, Jimmy, Siakam, and... whomever Philly decides to run their offense through when the playoffs start. The supporting casts matter here, too, of course. But in general how your defense matches up with MIL, LAL, and LAC is what matters most this year. Any other team will have to go through at least two of them to win. For 4 years, this was largely about Curry and LeBron. And for 4 years, there was never a defense that was equipped to handle both Curry and LeBron.
POA defense as a unit has significant value. Typically, that value is divided among many players due to varied angles of attack, skewing toward guard size players. Versatility can concentrate that value somewhat. In the playoffs, wing & forward POA defense matters most Re: versatility, the key trait is strength for smaller players (e.g. Marcus Smart, Kyle Lowry), and lateral agility for larger players (e.g. Ben Simmons, Paul George) Ultimately, what matters most in a team vs team matchup is how quickly the offense forces a help rotation, also, 'losing slowly' at the POA produces little value without good help defense around the POA defender. This make it a secondary trait for good team defense, but one that has magnified importance when only good defenses are left The 2nd key for sustainable rim protection is having rim protection redundancies as a team. How much of a gap is there between the primary (5) and secondary (4) rim protector in a lineup? Is there any tertiary rim protection provided by 1-3? The answers to these questions impact how appealing it is for an opposing offense to try and draw the 5 out to the perimeter to defend primary actions. How much value is there drawing Dwight Howard out to the 3 point line knowing that AD will still be lurking in help defense? On one hand, if you can force the switch a pull-up jumper vs a big does raise the baseline for a HC possession. But that's the catch-22, because pull-ups are typically a baseline rather than a desired endpoint. If that's the entirety of the plan, it rules out higher EV looks. While that higher baseline is nice, it's more valuable used as a tool to create higher EV looks. If the big is afraid of a pull-up, it will open driving lanes. However, with redundant rim protection, the big can 'sit' on the jumper without worrying much about getting blown by. Think Kevin Love defending Steph Curry in the closing minutes of G7. He never holds up in that situation without knowing that Curry is chasing a 3PA. That's an extreme example, but it illustrates how redundant rim protection can change the dynamic of that situation and alter the network of shots it can produce. In turn, that alters the amount of effort the offense will put into creating that situation in the first place.
So, then, what types of players create the most value in this regard? Players that provide a measure of rim protection while also being capable of holding up in perimeter defense. Draymond is the ultimate example, but also Giannis, AD, Siakam, Tucker, Isaac, Millsap, etc. Notice a theme here? Pretty much every elite defense has one of these connecting pieces, a player that overlaps between rim protection and perimeter defense. Moreover, these players are at the root of every successful form of small-ball. The key isn't going smaller just for the sake of more speed & skill. It's adding that w/o sacrificing rim protection. GSW was so successful because they had Dray, KD, Iggy, and Klay to defend the rim. Bringing this back around to Ben Simmons & Philly, in addition to being the most versatile POA defender in the league he also provides a (small) measure of secondary rim protection when away from the POA. So do Horford, Tobi, and J-Rich. Also Matisse, if he gets any PS burn. From a tactical perspective, what this means is that Philly has rim protection that is impactful, deterring, and sustainable. This will make them a tough out for any postseason opponent, regardless of their RS struggles. Joel Embiid will likely make the highest impact defensive plays for Philly in the postseason. Just realize that the multi-faceted skill set of Ben Simmons (and the rest of the supporting cast) is key role in keeping him in a position to make those plays. Also, generally speaking, this is part of why I value versatile POA defenders like PG or Klay and connecting pieces like Siakam and Giannis more highly than +/- metrics. They help their defenses run at peak efficiency in varied circumstances. I don't care how much you shut down bad teams in the RS. I care if you can hold up against good teams in the PS. For example, I thought Paul George deserved DPOY last year, with Giannis 2nd, and Gobert 3rd. Maybe this POV is too slanted toward versatility, but it is what it is.
The historic task of cultural change is to resolve throughout the dominant culture the distortions of rationalist human/nature dualisms that deny our ecological embodiment and membership of the global ecological community.
For (Moses) Hess, the cardinal sin of the Judaic people was to abandon their heritage, while the cardinal objective of his Communism was to persuade all other people to abandon theirs… Communism was the means for achieving Judaic supremacy over the gentiles. The gentiles were fated to be reduced to a faceless, deracinated mass. Capitalism was also capable of producing this effect, through free trade and the unfettered financialization of society, in which the management of money becomes a vast business in itself, and where the highest virtue, after obeisance to Judaism, is profit.
ve’ahavta (“love your neighbor as yourself”) admonition to Goyim for regarding their Jewish neighbors; as for the Jews themselves, haba le-horgecha, hashkem le-horgo (“he who comes to kill you, rise early and kill him first” as told in 3 Little Pigs))
(wolf) attempts to trick third pig out of his (brick) house by asking to meet him at various places, but he is outwitted each time (3rd pig rises early, does the suggested task, and saves himself from being eaten)
Garrett Hardin writes: "The essential characteristic of a tribe is that it should follow a double standard of morality -- one kind of behavior for in-group relations, another for out-group." -Wild Taboo "It is a tragic irony that discrimination has produced a species (homo sapiens) that now proposes to abandon the principle responsible for its rise to greatness."
Competitive Exclusion Principle In the competition for living space and resources between two species (or two groups that occupy the same ecological niche), one will inevitably and inexorably eliminate the other. “In a finite universe – and the organisms of our world know no other – where the total number of organisms of both kinds cannot exceed a certain number… one species will necessarily replace the other species completely if the two species are “complete competitors, i.e., live the same kind of life.”
The reputation of the world’s best-known lingerie retailer is under growing threat as the brand has been repeatedly accused of being anachronistic and disconnected from the current sociocultural zeitgeist.
The recent media discussion around Victoria’s Secret focused on its issues with body inclusivity, LGBTQ and diversity, sexual harassment and its ties with infamous financier Jeffrey Epstein.
The reputational damage has led to significant financial loses, with the stock of L Brands, Victoria’s Secret’s parent, falling more than 28% from the start of the year.
Victoria’s Secret is lagging behind competitor brands, such as American Eagle Outfitters, ThirdLove and Rihanna’s Savage X Fenty, whose marketing strategies revolve around inclusiveness and comfort.
Victoria’s Secret, the largest lingerie retailer in the US, has been one of the most iconic apparel brands since the 1990s, not least because its sexually charged imaging set the industry’s standard for decades and exerted a strong influence on body image norms. But since 2015, the shares of its parent company L Brands have been dropping as sales keep taking hits from shifting consumer tastes, executive turnovers and emerging competition. The Victoria’s Secret brand, built on skinny girls and scantily clad lingerie, is now largely perceived as inadequate for a time when consumers’ preferences have moved away from sex appeal and towards empowerment, inclusiveness and comfort. To many, the brand’s traditional marketing strategy, which bets on fashion shows where supermodels walk in stiletto heels and angel wings, seems tone-deaf in the era of #MeToo, which condemns all forms of objectifying women and imposing hard-to-achieve beauty standards. The Victoria’s Secret Angels, once considered symbols of sexiness, have now started to alienate consumers: a recent study found that 68% of them like the brand “less than they used to” and 60% feel that Victoria’s Secret is “forced” or “fake.” Demand for its products has cooled as up-and-coming rival brands have become more attractive by promoting themselves through unedited images featuring women of more diverse shapes and sizes. The retail giant reported that it will close 53 stores in North America this year, citing a “decline in performance.” The brand itself admitted that it relied on hypersexualised imaging for far too long and it needs to rethink its identity. At L Brands‘ recent investor day, John Mehas, head of Victoria’s Secret Lingerie, asserted that the company needs to evolve and to reconnect with consumers by launching new products, hiring new executives and using new marketing strategies. An essential part of the narrative shift would be a more diverse group of models, improving the merchandise, replacing the brand’s marketing chief and “rethinking” its annual Victoria’s Secret fashion show, the only fashion show regularly broadcast around the world, whose ratings keep falling. The brand hinted that network television would no longer be the “right fit” for the event, which has been criticised for being focused on empowering the models who walk in it instead of trying to relate to consumers. Inclusivity, Diversity and Epstein Many specialised fashion publications and business outlets embarked on questioning how the once-beloved brand managed to garner such a bad reputation. Analysing the media conversation around Victoria’s Secret in the top-tier English language publications from October 2018 to September 2019, we found that the most often discussed topics were body inclusivity, the company’s ties with Jeffrey Epstein and gender diversity: The strongest coverage drivers for both the “Body inclusivity” and “LGBTQ+ diversity” topics were the comments which 71-year-old chief marketing officer Ed Razek made in a 2018 interview with Vogue that quickly went viral. Razek, who reportedly has final say over who’s in the televised fashion show, said that he didn’t think Victoria’s Secret‘s fashion event should include transgender or plus-size models because it is supposed to be “a fantasy”. “Shouldn’t you have transsexuals in the show? No. No, I don’t think we should,” he said. “Well, why not? Because the show is a fantasy. It’s a 42-minute entertainment special. That’s what it is. It is the only one of its kind in the world, and any other fashion brand in the world would take it in a minute, including the competitors that are carping at us. And they carp at us because we’re the leader.” The remarks prompted a strong backlash from consumers. As with the most severe social media crises, Victoria’s Secret was embroiled in an outrage cascade — outbursts of moral judgment which start to drive the conversation around brands, their products and their corporate messages. In these cases, the virality of moral judgements is facilitated by the fact that most of the content on social media feeds and timelines is sorted according to its likelihood to generate engagement. The fact that fashion brands in particular face a growing number of crises could be explained by the supposition that fashion items are often taken to be markers of cultural and social identity, and thus are susceptible to be perceived as controversial across social networks. For instance, designers often draw inspiration from other cultures’ traditions, which has recently given rise to accusations of “cultural appropriation”. Razek later used the company’s Twitter account to issue a formal apology, saying that his remark “came across as insensitive.” In August 2019, Razek retired just days after the lingerie brand hired its first openly transgender model for its teen label PINK: Brazilian Valentina Sampaio. The hire was generally welcomed by commentators – for instance, Kendall Jenner, daughter of trans icon Caitlyn Jenner, posted “celebrate trans women” to her 98 million Instagram followers. Meanwhile, media monitoring organisation GLAAD, which deals with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues, said Sampaio’s move comes as transgender people are becoming more visible in advertising. Examples of the trend include recent campaigns by Calvin Klein, Gap and H&M, while Playboy’s first transgender Playmate appeared in 2017. Another strong coverage driver within the ‘Body inclusivity‘ topic was the protest outside Victoria’s Secret‘s store on Oxford Street in London, in which protesters stripped to their underwear and held signs demanding more diversity in fashion. To address such concerns, the latest investor meeting saw Victoria’s Secret deciding it will no longer rely on a small group of supermodels to promote its sexy lingerie, in a bid to use more inclusive marketing. An example of this new strategy was an Instagram post of model Barbara Palvin, which was celebrated for being more body-inclusive, as social media users perceived Palvin to be curvier than the other supermodels. The post received over 780,000 likes in two days, generating 4.2 times the average number of likes, with users commenting that the model looks “normal” and “healthy”. But the brand wasn’t that successful in managing another crisis:the widely publicised tiesbetween L Brands founder Les Wexner and financier Jeffrey Epstein, an accused child sex trafficker who committed suicide in jail. Although Epstein didn’t actually work for Victoria’s Secret or L Brands, he had control over Wexner’s finances and personal life, according toreporting byThe New York Times, and used his connections with Victoria’s Secret to facilitate his alleged crimes. L Brands tried to distance itself from Epstein, saying it had cut ties with him nearly 12 years ago anddisclosing that it had hired outside counselto review the case. Wexner said: “Being taken advantage of by someone who was so sick, so cunning, so depraved, is something that I’m embarrassed that I was even close to. But that is in the past.” In many media reports, the ‘Epstein ties‘ topic was closely related to the ‘Sexual harassment‘ topic, which was dominated by a petition urging Victoria’s Secret to take a stand againstsexual harassment and violence. Theopen letterwas addressed to Victoria’s Secret CEO John Mehas and signed by more than 100 models,many of whom have worked with the brand in the past, and also by the Model Alliance, an advocacy organisation in the fashion industry, and the Time’s Up movement against sexual harassment which was founded in response to the Weinstein effect and #MeToo. The petition cited “numerous allegations of sexual assault, alleged rape, and sex trafficking of models and aspiring models”. Several of the company’s photographers have been accused of misconduct, on top of the links with Jeffrey Epstein. A Victoria’s Secret spokesperson said the firm has beenin conversations with the Model Alliance “for some time”: “We are always concerned about the welfare of our models and want to continue to have dialogue with the Model Alliance and others to accomplish meaningful progress in the industry.” Crisis mode Ed Razek‘s aforementioned controversial comments regarding transgender and plus-size models made him the most often quoted spokesperson in the discussion around Victoria’s Secret: Razek’s dominance in the conversation underlined the crisis of perception the brand suffers: his remarks were taken by many media outlets as a sign that the brand is unwilling to adapt to the current sociocultural climate. Models who have previously worked with the brand and who had a relatively large share of voice in the media conversation were quick to criticise him. For example. Karlie Kloss and Lily Aldridge posted a photo reading “Trans and GNC [gender non-conforming] people are not a debate” to their Instagram stories. Karlie Kloss was one of the most vocal critics: she recently told Vogue that she had decided to terminate her relationship with Victoria’s Secret because the image was not “truly reflective” of who she was and the “kind of message I want to send to young women around the world about what it means to be beautiful.” Model Tess Holliday was harsher, leaving a message to Razek on Twitter following his Vogue interview: “Who needs VS anyway? They never supported plus ladies & now they are trying to dis my trans sisters? Hell nah. Kiss my fat ass, [Victoria’s Secret].” The majority of media reports on Razek’s retirement announcement cited these remarks as one of the key points in his career and highlighted that he was one of the main figures in the highly sexualised beauty ideal put forth by the brand. The crisis of perception was also emphasised by the fact that L Brands CEO Les Wexner, another major corporate spokesperson in the conversation, was quoted primarily in relation to the Epstein scandal. However, some of the spokespeople portrayed Victoria’s Secret in a positive light. Adriana Lima, one of the best-known Angels, quit the label after two decades and 18 fashion shows with the brand, sharing the news on Instagram with a heartfelt caption: “Dear Victoria, Thank you for showing me the world, sharing your secrets, and most importantly not just giving me wings but teaching me to fly.” And while she presented the brand positively, some media publications reminded their readers of a an interview she gave to Grazia in 2011 in which she outlined the physical challenges she went through in order to be in shape, especially after her pregnancy. Angel Behati Prinsloo tried to defend the Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show against the criticism for its lack of transgender models and diverse body types. In an interview with Elle, she explained what the show stands for: ‘There’s a lot of talk about everything but I think people need to also understand that it’s a show. It’s not saying negative or positive about any body type, it’s ‘this is who they are’.” In the meantime, Barbara Palvin was named as a Victoria’s Secret Angel after the successful Instagram post which customers perceived to be more body-inclusive. She announced the news to fans also via Instagram and her hire was generally interpreted by the media as a sign that the label is finally starting to listen to its critics. CEO John Mehas‘ comments about the brand’s marketing shift were met with similar enthusiasm, especially his plans to include messaging that responds to the #MeToo movement. But the most warmly welcomed move was the hire of Valentina Sampaio: although some publications suggested that the brand’s first openly transgender model came too late, most commentators said that the retailer has finally moved in the right direction. Lingerie wars While Victoria’s Secret is caught up in a fierce discussion, L Brands‘ other flagship label, Bath & Body Works, a personal-goods retailer, continues to report strong earnings, supporting its struggling parent. Many reports on Victoria’s Secret‘s controversial reputation outlined this development, making Bath & Body Works the most frequently mentioned brand in the conversation: While L Brands is firmly focused on the Victoria’s Secret turnaround story, Bath & Body Work is perceived as staying relevant with updated stores and new product tests, maintaining a wholesome image as “America’s sweetheart of beauty brands.” Its loyal core consumer base of millennial women is boosted by fan blogs and YouTube accounts dedicated to sharing new products. The brand also plans to ramp up volume by having a digital makeover for the first time in India. Investors have even started pressuring L Brands to make Bath & Body Works a standalone company which would not be associated with Victoria’s Secret. Hedge fund Barington Capital, whose CEO James A. Mitarotonda was one of the few corporate spokespeople in the conversation, sent a lengthy letter to L Brands CEO Les Wexner arguing for a spinoff. But after Bath & Body Works posted its first unchanged quarter of store traffic in five years during 2019’s second quarter, Jefferies analyst Randal Konik suggested that the best days for the bath and candle retailer may be over. Konik also said that the teen brand PINK is the next sore spot for L Brands, with sales falling by low double digits in the fourth quarter, as the label is “without fans and rudderless.” ThirdLove, American Eagle Outfitters and Savage X Fenty were identified as the main competitors which have capitalised on Victoria’s Secret’s reputational struggles. ThirdLove, an online bra startup which was launched in 2013, was perceived as coming head to head with Victoria’s Secret as it focuses on inclusive sizing and marketing, which have helped its annual sales to grow at a rate of 180% for the past four years. The brand opened its first pop-up store in New York in July 2019, putting itself in direct competition with Victoria’s Secret as the lingerie giant had a store less than a 10 minutes’ walk away. ThirdLove also joined the discussion around Razek’s comments, taking out a full-page ad in The New York Times, in which co-founder and co-CEO Heidi Zak said she was appalled when she read them: “I’ve read and re-read the interview at least 20 times, and each time I read it I’m even angrier. How in 2018 can the CMO of any public company — let alone one that claims to be for women — make such shocking, derogatory statements?” When asked whether Victoria’s Secret was worried its customers might now be looking for something different, Razek mentioned ThirdLove: “We’re nobody’s ThirdLove,” Razek said. “We’re their first love. And Victoria’s Secret has been women’s first love from the beginning.” American Eagle Outfitters was also viewed as one of the main companies to break Victoria’s Secret‘s grip on the apparel industry by offering fitting bras and using messaging which pitches inclusiveness and comfort over sex appeal. Its activewear and lingerie brand Aerie has built an image of an “anti-Victoria’s Secret” label with untouched ads featuring models of all shapes and sizes. Kyle Andrew, American Eagle’s CMO, said the company’s success is due to its willingness to experiment and find ways to better listen to its teen customer base. Rihanna’s Savage X Fenty recent show, streamed on Amazon Prime, has been making headlines everywhere, with commentators saying it was everything that Victoria’s Secret’s annual runway show wishes it could be by featuring models of all shapes, sizes, and ethnic backgrounds, with a clear focus on body inclusivity and acceptance. Meanwhile, retail corporation Target also tried to capitalise on Victoria’s Secret’s struggles with a strategy similar to ThirdLove, American Eagle Outfitters and Savage X Fenty: it launched a new bra and underwear brand called Auden with a campaign featuring women “in all different shapes and sizes.” Nike was mentioned as one of the brands which have gotten ahead of the curve with their socially-conscious marketing efforts featuring ex-NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who had participated in racial justice demonstrations during national anthem ceremonies. Fast-fashion brand H&M got involved in the discussion for selling a $199 bra similar to Victoria’s Secret’s $1 million Fantasy Bra as part of its collaboration with Moschino. Victoria’s Secret‘s reputational woos come at a time when the fashion and apparel industries occupy a central place in the extensively covered #MeToo movement and play a major role in ongoing media discussions around gender and identity. Since such issues naturally polarise consumers, brands which are dealing with products directly related to them are regularly caught up in fierce debates. The growing importance of the debates around gender in the fashion industry has also been highlighted in the accelerating gender-neutral trend. The latest seasons have seen luxury brands like Gucci, Saint Laurent and Haider Ackerman combining menswear and womenswear runway shows, Others, such as Proenza Schouler and Rodarte, have started showing women’s pre-collections or women’s ready-to-wear during the back-to-back menswear and couture calendar. Meanwhile, fast-fashion labels such as Zara started releasing ungendered collections with models of both sexes dressed in the same clothes. There are also a growing number of new brands like the Phluid Project, Agender and Rebrand which are built around the concept of non-binary dressing. Beyond fashion houses, the trend has also been recently reinforced by the Council of Fashion Designers of America (CFDA), which added a unisex/non-binary option for New York Fashion Week. Spokespeople for the CFDA explained that this decision came as a response to “a growing number of designers whose collections are not delineated by gender”, which “reflects the cultural momentum.”
This All-In-One Thread is still undergoing correction. Feel free to post below and let me know if something needs to be corrected. What is Waltonchain? Waltonchain is the only truly decentralized platform combining blockchain with the Internet of Things (IoT) via RFID technology. Their blockchain is implemented in the foundational layer, through their unique, patented RFID chips, which are able to read and write directly to the blockchain, creating a genuine, trustworthy, and traceable business ecosystem, with complete data sharing and absolute information transparency. Click here for the News, PR & Awards Thread. Official Sources
Fashionchain-Fashionchain- Fashionchain restructures the strongly-centralized pyramid structure inherent in the fashion industry ecology into a decentralized structure in which all parties connect point to point directly.
Frequently Asked Questions Q: When will Token Swap Happen? Did Mainnet Release? Waltonchain has launched mainnet, token swap has not happened yet in progress. Token swap from Ethereum to Watlon's own chain is trending to occur complete in Q2 2019 Q4 2019-?. To prepare for swap you can hold your tokens on any of the listed exchanges. For additional information as it becomes available one should follow Walton on twitter. Q：What's the Total Supply of Waltoncoin (WTC)? The Total Supply is 100 million coins with no further issuance in any case. The Max Supply is currently 70 million coins, with the remaining 30 million left to be mined over the course of many years. Currently, the Circulating Supply is around 25 million. Q：I hear Walton is moving to its own blockchain? Main net has just been launched. Stay tuned for details about the token swap and transition to the new chain! Q：How do I convert my ERC20 WTC tokens to the real thing? You can either leave your coins on the exchange, and they will take care of the switch for you, or you can leave them in your MEW wallet, and the team will provide details on how the tokens will be swapped over. Just sit tight! Details are coming. Q: How do I move my WTC to MEW (or the new Walton Wallet)? For MEW: I. Send your WTC to your wallet address. II. Add a custom token using the information below: Address: 0xb7cb1c96db6b22b0d3d9536e0108d062bd488f74 Name: WTC Decimals: 18 For Walton Wallet: Do not send ANY coins to this wallet yet. Wait for instructions from the team. Once everything is safe, you will be able to just create a wallet on the Walton Wallet and send your coins to the public address generated. Q：What if I want to keep them on my Ledger Nano? You can do that, and the team will still snapshot your wallet and copy it along with your coins; however, the the Ledger may not support WTC currently. Don't fret. Your coins are 100% safe. What that means is, if there is no Ledger support, the only way to transfer your coins out of the wallet will be to expose your Ledger's private key. I don't recommend doing this, as it will make the ledger no more secure than a paper wallet (still very secure, but a waste of money now). So basically, your coins are safe. You can still mine to the address. You just won't be able to move them until Ledger support comes. But if you really need access to the coins, you can break out the Ledger's private key on MEW and log into your wallet. Ledger support will come, we just don't know exactly when. Walton is also making their own Walton hardware wallets. I'll update this with more information as it comes. Q：My GMN is on MEW. Will I ever be able to secure GMN in a hardware wallet? As you know, moving your GMN will void your Guardian status because it is attached to the wallet containing at least 5000 WTC; however, the team has stated that they are working on a solution for this and have reassured us that our coins will be safe. We will have to wait for more information regarding whether the transferring of a GMN to a new address will be possible in the future. Q：What is the utility of WTC? What gives the coin value? In the WaltonChain Ecosystem WTC will have multiple functions:
Issuing sub chains
Credit and mortgage system
Distributed asset exchange
Distributed voting and governance system.
More in depth coverage of each point here Q: Is Waltonchain a platform? Yes. Waltonchain is a smart contract platform that will have ICOs and dApps. Q: But I thought Walton just tracked clothing in the supply chain. What else can it do? Walton is capable of implementation in smart cities, smart waste management systems, and things of that nature. That's certainly beyond supply chain. Walton isn't so much a "supply chain" coin as it is a Big Data coin. The RFIDs are used to gather data, which is very useful in supply chain management. But it can also be used to combine with smart devices and make an Internet of things network. Q: Why does this need a blockchain? "It is difficult for the Internet of things under the current central structure to accomplish real autonomous cooperation and effective transactions, because the relevant parties of such cooperation and transactions often belong to different stakeholders with complex and uncertain trust relationships. Therefore, the collaboration and transactions of the current Internet of Things devices can only be carried out under the same trust domain. That is to say, the devices to collaborate and trade must be provided or verified by the same Internet of Things service provider, which significantly reduces the true commercial value of the Internet of Things applications." (Page 2 of the Whitepaper) To expand, counterfeiting is an obvious answer to this question. There needs to be a way to truly authenticate an item. Blockchain is that answer. Walton's blockchain also removes data silos. Companies won't have to manage any database anymore. Everything is handled by Walton. Walton uses child chains which are separate from the parent chain. Companies can keep proprietary information secret and private on their child chain, and only broadcast necessary information to the parent chain for public viewing. Blockchains make the sharing of info between companies easy and fast, too. And then obviously, blockchains have perfect transparency and are immutable. Smart contracts are also extremely useful. In the supply chain industry, after perfectly counting and storing inventory, things can be auto-ordered and paid for simultaneously with wtc, just as an example. Your mind can come up with a whole host of other ideas related to automation. Furthermore, decentralized, transparent, and immutable data for things like smart waste management systems, which Walton has designed, and air-pollution monitoring systems in smart cities would benefit greatly from the blockchain, for reasons explained in the first point from the whitepaper. You could also imagine on the customer end that wanting to know where all their goods come from is important. This is in line with counterfeiting, but also with things more benign. Imagine wanting to return an item to a store, but can't remember which grocery store it was from. Lots of simple improvements like that are all use cases for blockchain. Q: I heard Waltonchain has patented technology. What are the patents? The Walton team has filed filed for 13 patents, 7 of which have been approved so far. The patents cover many inventions in chip design, but the main one of interest is the Transaction ID-reading RFID chip with memory storage. This allows the blockchain to be implemented in the Foundational layer through the RFIDs themselves. The chips can generate their own random ID hash within a secure Key Generation Center within the chip, and the hash along with the data are uploaded simultaneously to the blockchain via their RFID reader. This makes WaltonChain fully decentralized and secure. Q：What are the advantages of the RFID IC tag chip designed in this project? Existing RFID chip industry cannot meet the development of Internet of Things applications, especially applications for the Value Internet of Things:
There are few options available while the prices are high
The transmission power and stability need to be improved
The reception sensitivity is low
The anti-interference ability is poor and the transmission power is low
The existing RFID ICs have many problems such as high power consumption, poor matching with antennae, and difficult system integration, etc.
The project’s IC design has the following significant advantages:
High security: The chip integrates asymmetric random password pair generation logic, uses a core asymmetric encryption algorithm with independent intellectual property rights, and an optimized design without increasing the cost and power consumption of the chip, enabling higher communication security
Tamper-resistant: A dedicated storage space is integrated into the tag chip for the storage of hash value of tag status and key information
Optimized anti-collision design: The chip uses a binary tree anti-collision algorithm with independent intellectual property rights and a time division multiple access design, significantly improving the tag recognition success rate and the number of identifiable labels at the same time
High sensitivity: The chip uses an optimized noise suppression technology to improve the noise figure at the receiving end and the overall receiver sensitivity, which plays an important role in increasing the recognition success rate
Good compatibility: The chip can achieve high-frequency and ultra-high frequency functions at the same time, so the end customer can read the information through their smart phone and inquire about reliable product information
Long lasting: The chip adopts a low voltage and low power-consumption design, allowing the chip to last more than 20 years
Q：How much do the chips cost? Waltonchain in a nutshell with COO Monitor Chan:"We develop and produce hardware such as chips ourselves. This really differentiates us from other companies at the moment. Basically, Silitec, our technical support company, was founded in 2015 and is specialized in manufacturing chips. They already have a R&D team of around 20+ people, so in that way we are not 'increasing' cost. Next important detail is that Waltonchain’s blockchain technology is written into our chips. This means that unlike traditional RFID chips that have their own specific ID and cost around $0.15 to $0.20, the chips we develop will be below 5 cents. With the volume of sales increasing, the overall cost will spread over many units, and the system's cost and ID’s cost will go down consequently, or simply put, economics of scale will do the work." Q：I need help with mining. What resources are out there? WaltonchainMining is for this purpose. Community members here have done testing with many different configurations and have provided ample information for anything you need with setting up your cpu/gpu rig. Q：How many GMNs are left? The Waltonchain Explorer now tracks these addresses. Q：Who are the Knights?
Male-to-Female Transsexuals: Hormonal therapy is prescribed for male-to-female transsexuals to induce breast formation and a more female distribution of fat and to reduce male-pattern hair growth.19 To achieve these goals, the biologic action of androgens must be almost completely neutralized. Administration of estrogens suppresses gonadotropin output and therefore androgen production, but combining this treatment with a progestational agent, a gonadotropin-releasing-hormone (GnRH) analogue,20 or other medications that suppress androgen action (e.g., cyproterone acetate, flutamide, nilutamide, or bicalutamide) appears to be more effective.21 Supplemental Table 1. Cross-sex hormone administration to transsexuals: Male-to-female transsexuals: 1) Drugs suppressing testosterone levels and/or testosterone action: Non-steroidal pure antiandrogens: flutamide 250 mg twice daily, nilutamide 150 mg twice daily, or the more recent bicalutamide 50 mg once daily (fewer side effects).
Anti-androgens such as flutamide, bicalutamide and cyproterone acetate are also used in patients with prostate cancer and sometimes in male-to-female transgender individuals; these anti-androgens bind to the androgen receptor and do not tend to markedly alter serum testosterone concentrations.
Male-to-Female Transsexual Subjects. [...] Several agents are available to inhibit androgen action. In Europe, the most widely used drug is cyproterone acetate (50–100 mg/day), a progestational compound with antiandrogenic properties. If not available, medroxyprogesterone acetate (5–10 mg/day), probably somewhat less effective, is an alternative. Nonsteroidal antiandrogens, such as flutamide ([500–750] mg/day) and nilutamide (150 mg/day), are also used, but they increase gonadotropin output with a rise of testosterone and estradiol; the rise of estradiol is a desirable effect in this context. Spironolactone, a diuretic with antiandrogenic properties, widely used in the USA, has androgen receptor-blocking properties and also decreases testosterone production.
As there is no FDA approval of cyproterone acetate, many centers in the United States use spironolactone, a diuretic with mainly anti-androgen but also a weak estrogenic  and progestational activity . Other agents with anti-androgenic properties used are nonsteroidal androgen receptor blockers, such as flutamide and bicalutamide or 5-alpha reductase inhibitors such as finasteride and dutasteride.
Male-to-Female Transsexual Treatment. [...] For suppression of androgen secretion/action, several agents are available. In Europe, the most widely used drug is cyproterone acetate (usually 50 mg twice daily), a progestational compound with antiandrogenic properties. If not available, medroxyprogesterone acetate, 5 to 10 mg/day, is a less-effective alternative. Nonsteroidal anti-androgens, such as flutamide and nilutamide [and bicalutamide], are also used, but they increase gonadotropin secretion, causing increased secretion of testosterone and estradiol. The latter is desirable in this context, as it has feminizing effects. Spironolactone (up to 100 mg twice daily), a diuretic with antiandrogenic properties, has similar effects and is widely available.
In many countries, cyproterone acetate, a synthetic progestagen with strong anti-androgen activity is commonly used. Cyproterone has been associated with uncommon episodes of fulminant hepatitis. Bicalutamide, a direct anti-androgen used for the treatment of prostate cancer, also has a small but not fully quantified risk of liver function abnormalities (including several cases of fulminant hepatitis); while such risks are acceptable when considering the benefits of bicalutamide in the management of prostate cancer, such risks are less justified in the context of gender affirming treatment. No evidence at present exists to inform such an analysis.
Table 1: Drugs for cross-gender hormonal replacement therapy used in the male to female (MtoF) transsexual population: Drug: Non-steroidal anti-androgens: Bicalutamide, flutamide, nilutamide. Dosage and routes of administration: 750 mg/day (flutamide), per os. Mechanism of action: Androgen receptor blockers.
Objectives: GnRH analogs are first-line treatment for halting pubertal development in gender variant youth. However, this medication is often denied by third party payors. The pure androgen receptor blocker bicalutamide represents a potential alternative approach to blocking puberty in natal males. Here, we describe the use of bicalutamide in MTF transgender patients. Methods: Medical records for patients with gender dysphoria (GD) followed in the pediatric endocrine clinic at Riley Hospital for Children were reviewed. All MTF transgender patients treated with bicalutamide were included. Variables evaluated comprised age, duration of follow up, timing of estrogen initiation, laboratory studies and physical exam findings including change in breast Tanner stage during treatment. Results: Of 77 patients with GD identified, 29 were MTF, of whom 14 (48%) aged 15.8 ± 1.9 years (range 12–18.4 yr) were treated with bicalutamide 50 mg daily between 2013 and 2017. Of these, 3 were started on estrogen concurrently whereas 11 received bicalutamide alone, 7 of whom have returned for follow up thus far. After an average of 5.7 ± 1.5 months, 86% of the patients (n=6) had breast development consisting of Tanner stage III in 4, Tanner stage II in 1, and Tanner stage III/II of the right and left breast in 1. The 7th patient was noted to have Tanner Ill breasts at her 2nd follow-up clinic visit 12.5 months after starting bicalutamide. LFTs were obtained on 4 patients, estradiol on 3 patients and testosterone on 2 patients while exclusively taking bicalutamide. LFTs were unremarkable and concentrations of estradiol and testosterone were 26–61 pg/mL and 524–619 ng/dL, respectively. Conclusions: Bicalutamide is used in rare forms of precocious puberty in males and has a known side effect of gynecomastia. Here, we report the novel use of bicalutamide as a puberty blocker in MTF patients with GD in whom it also results in feminization by causing breast development. Additional studies are needed to further evaluate the potential role of bicalutamide in the therapeutic armamentarium for the treatment of transgender MTF adolescents.
As a class, the antiandrogens (bicalutamide, flutamide, and nilutamide bind directly to the androgen receptor, thereby inhibiting its availability and increasing the receptors' degradation.50 The primary indication is for metastatic prostate cancer, although it has been used in the transfeminine population.52 These three agents differ primarily by pharmacokinetics, bicalutamide having the longest duration of action. While on the medication, testosterone levels are expected to rise dramatically but do not have an effect. Gynecomastia is a recognized side effect and could be desired in the transfeminine population. There are cases of fulminant hepatitis described, and it is recommended that transaminase levels are checked prior to initiation and then at 4-month intervals.53 The use of antiandrogens has not been rigorously studied in the gender nonconforming population, but its use is recommended for consideration in some transgender-health related publications.54-56 (p. 98) Spironolactone, a weak androgen receptor antagonist, can also be used in [adolescent transgender girls] if GnRH agonists are not used. The medication, prescribed at dosing ranging from 100 to 300 mg/day orally,7 blunts the effect of androgens and can be helpful at slowing development of unwanted facial and body hair, or other masculinizing effects of male puberty. Other medications that suppress androgen action, including cyproterone acetate, flutamide, nilutamide, and bicalutamide, have been reported for use in transgender women as well.38 (p. 81)
Bicalutamide (Casodex®) This antiandrogen is used by some clinicians in the United States, it is not used in the UK. Its primary use is in the treatment of prostate cancer, but may effectively block testosterone production at much lower doses than are given in that context. Bicalutamide is associated with some risk of liver function abnormalities (Kolvenbag and Blackledge 1996), which are deemed acceptable in the context of prostate cancer but less so in gender affirming medical intervention because of the range of other options available (Deutsch 2017). (pp. 158–159) There has been specific publication of a case of prostate cancer in a transgender woman, 41 years after accessing HRT (Miksad et al. 2006). In this case, oral bicalutamide and dutasteride were prescribed, which were effective in their antiandrogenic functions while also being maintainable with the patient's estrogen regimen. Indeed, bicalutamide may be an option as part of transfeminine HRT due to its antiandrogenic properties, such that synergy may be obtained in specific treatment circumstances. (p. 115–116)
ANDROGEN RECEPTOR BLOCKERS Androgen receptor blockers bind directly to the androgen receptor and either competitively inhibit binding by testosterone or DHT, or irreversibly bind and induce variable antagonist/agonist effects. The prototype drug in this class is flutamide, a competitive inhibitor of the androgen receptor infrequently used clinically today due to complications including liver failure and death. Bicalutamide is a safer, longer acting alternative with a more favorable safety profile, although a small percentage of users will show elevated liver enzymes and rare cases of liver failure have been reported. Bicalutamide is approved for use in prostate cancer at an oral dose of 50 mg daily, but has been used in the treatment of hirsutism, polycystic ovary syndrome, precocious puberty, persistent erections, and in sex offenders. Studies in transwomen are quite limited, but bicalutamide appears to be effective and induces an actual increase in serum estradiol levels, a welcome adjunct effect in transwomen (Table 4). TABLE 4. Available Antiandrogens/Androgen Suppressors and Routes of Administration: [...] Bicalutamide Oral 50 mg daily
Purpose: The purpose of the study was to describe the novel use of bicalutamide in transgender youth. Methods: This is a retrospective review of patients with gender dysphoria followed in the pediatric endocrine clinic at Riley Hospital for Children. Results: Of 104 patients with gender dysphoria, 23 male-to-female adolescents received bicalutamide 50 mg daily as a second-line puberty blocker after insurance company denial of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog. Six patients received estrogen concurrently. Of 13 patients treated exclusively with bicalutamide seen in follow-up, 84.6% had breast development within 6 months, the majority being ≥ Tanner stage III. Conclusions: Bicalutamide may be an alternative to gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs in transgender male-to-female youth who are also ready to undergo physical transition. Keywords: Bicalutamide, Transgender care, Gender dysphoria, Puberty blocker
And some additional excerpts from the Introduction and Discussion sections of the paper:
The potent androgen receptor blocker bicalutamide represents a potential alternative approach to GnRHas in natal males. Other antiandrogens used in transgender females include spironolactone and cyproterone acetate. However, both are far less potent than bicalutamide and their use has primarily been limited to adults [1,3]. In contrast, bicalutamide has been used in the treatment of familial male precocious puberty and other forms of peripheral precocious puberty in young boys [4-6]. One of the most common side effects of bicalutamide is breast development due to an alteration in the ratio of androgens to estrogens. Our experience with the use of bicalutamide in precocious puberty formed the basis for the use of this medication in male-to-female (MTF) patients with GD as a strategy for blocking puberty when GnRHas are denied. Interestingly, the resulting “side effect” of breast development has been welcomed by these patients, all of whom are eager to receive cross-hormone treatment (in this case, estrogen) and to undergo feminizing changes. We are not aware of any previous reports of utilizing bicalutamide as a way to block puberty and promote feminization in the transgender MTF population. We have found that bicalutamide appears to be effective in decreasing androgen exposure with the welcome side effect in these adolescents of promoting feminization. We suspect that the relatively rapid breast enlargement is because of the high potency and purely antagonistic action of bicalutamide on the androgen receptor, leading to increased testosterone levels that are subsequently aromatized to estrogen. In those tested, liver enzymes remained normal, and estradiol levels were above 20 pg/dl with only one exception. There were no apparent adverse effects of bicalutamide in our patients. However, our results must be considered extremely preliminary, and additional data are needed. How bicalutamide might compare to other androgen receptor blockers in terms of safety and efficacy in the adolescent age group is unknown, and the risk for liver toxicity needs to be investigated in larger sample sizes and over a longer duration of time. The limitations of this study are its small size, minimal laboratory testing, and retrospective nature. Another limitation is that the efficacy of androgen suppression can only be monitored clinically, as testosterone levels actually increase. However, our results suggest that bicalutamide may be an option for transgender MTF adolescents who are denied GnRHas and are also ready for physical feminization. Bicalutamide is also significantly less costly than GnRHas, which costs thousands of dollars per dose. Larger, prospective studies with a more diverse patient population are needed to further evaluate the safety and potential role of bicalutamide in the therapeutic armamentarium for the treatment of transgender MTF youth.
Non-steroidal selective androgen receptor antagonists, developed as a treatment for androgen-sensitive prostate cancer, are occasionally used in transgender females who do not achieve their desired results or do not tolerate alternative drugs . There are isolated reports of successful outcomes with flutamide (Eulexin), though reportedly not as effective as cyproterone acetate in reducing testosterone levels . Both flutamide and bicalutamide (Casodex), in conjunction with oral contraceptive pills, have shown significant improvements in hirsutism in natal females with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) [53, 54, 55, 56, 57]. The use of these agents as antiandrogens in transgender patients has been limited by concerns of hepatotoxicity. However, at low doses, these agents have shown to be both well tolerated and effective when used for the treatment of hirsutism . Table 8.2. Antiandrogens: [...] Type: Bicalutamide. Route: Oral. Dose: 25–50 mg/day.
Spironolactone, an antiandrogen, has a risk of causing hyperkalemia and is contraindicated in patients with renal or hepatic disease, or cardiovascular disease susceptible to arrhythmias. [...] Bicalutamide has been associated rarely with liver abnormalities. For these reasons, a complete metabolic profile is included in the pretreatment assessment and monitoring of antiandrogen therapy . Table 2 Estradiol and Anti-Androgens Management for MTF [5,15,16]: [...] Formulation: Bicalutamide. Route of Administration: Oral. Usual Effective Dose: 50 mg daily. Monitoring: Complete metabolic profile every 3 months in first year, then annually.
Antiandrogen Therapy (Spironolactone, Cyproterone Acetate, Finasteride, and Bicalutamide) [...] Androgen receptor antagonists (eg, bicalutamide) do not reduce testosterone levels and are not recommended as a first-line therapy because of potentially serious hepatotoxic effects.17
Data on bicalutamide, an androgen receptor antagonist used in the treatment of prostate cancer, in [transgender women] are nonexistent, but Neyman and colleagues42 recently published on bicalutamide’s feminizing effects (particularly breast development) in AMAB trans adolescents. Another recent study in cisgender (cis) women, with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) showed some improvement in hirsutism when bicalutamide was added to an oral contraceptive pill (OCP).43 It should be noted, however, that bicalutamide has been associated with an increase in liver enzymes.
Table: Trans Feminine: Medications to Supplement Estrogen. [...] Less Frequently Used Anti-Androgens: Bicalutamide Oral (Casodex). Start/Usual Dose: 50mg (1x 50mg tablet). Typical Max Dose: 50mg (1x 50mg tablet). Frequency: Daily. Pros: • Non-steroidal androgen receptor antagonist. Cons: • Potential risk of rapid onset, severe, life-threatening liver toxicity; use extreme caution and monitor closely. Don't use if +G6PD, or increased risk of methemoglobinemia (e.g. smokers); caution if other hepatotoxic drugs or alcohol. Notes: If utilized must check LFT at baseline, 1 mo, 2 mo, then every 6 mo for lifetime. Flutamide Oral (Eulexin): Start/Usual Dose: 250mg (2x 125mg tablets). Typical Max Dose: 250mg (2x 125mg tablets). Frequency: Daily. Pros: • Non-steroidal androgen receptor antagonist. Cons: See Flutamide Cons; however, Bicalutamide has less hepatotoxity, so if choosing between non-steroidal androgen antagonists, choose Bicalutamide over Flutamide. Notes: If utilized must check LFT at baseline, 1 mo, 2 mo, then every 6 mo for lifetime.
I often get asked about Casodex, or Bicalutamide, which is the other one, the other name for it, sorry, the generic name. It’s prescribed in other countries. It’s more famously known for its work against prostate cancer. When I say that, I mean it’s usually prescribed for patients who’ve had prostate cancer to suppress the testosterone to prevent the prostate cancer from recurring. Of course, a lot of those medicines that block testosterone then have been experimented with blocking testosterone in gender diverse populations. However, it comes with this nasty side effect, which I have not prescribed this medication before for this very reason. One of the things that I set out on a mission for when I got to Fenway was to find out if I could start prescribing this or not. The answer is no, unfortunately, for my patients. The risk of liver toxicity, or as us in the field called hepatic toxicity, is just too large. There is just too much data supporting sudden liver failure and irreversible liver damage related to this drug. Now people then say, “Well, how come people who’ve had prostate cancer can take it?” Well, it’s risk versus benefit. When it’s the risk of cancer coming back and consuming their body and metastasizing versus the risk of liver damage and liver failure, they take the risk of liver damage and liver failure in order to optimize their life and longevity. But when it comes to hormone replacement therapy and we have a safer option, albeit maybe more uncomfortable option because of side effects, but I can sleep well at night knowing that my patients aren’t going to have spontaneous liver failure or irreversible liver damage. We’re going to go with that one. Like, we’re going to continue to prescribe spironolactone. But what I also reassure my patients is even though spiro has this nasty side effects, you don’t have to stay on it forever.
Commonly utilised hormone therapies by transgender women are either oral or transdermal Oestradiol with or without an anti-androgen, such as cyproterone acetate, spironolactone, or bicalutamide. Bicalutamide Bicalutamide is a non-steroidal anti-androgen, without any other endocrine activity. Bicalutamide is extensively metabolised by the liver and is an inhibitor of CYP3A4. It has been shown to increase plasma concentrations of midazolam by up to 80% and has also been shown to displace warfarin from its protein binding sites, which can lead to an increased warfarin effect. Common side-effects also relevant to the anaesthetist include GI upset and vomiting, anaemia, and hepatic dysfunction. Uncommonly, interstitial lung disease has been reported.56
Spironolactone and bicalutamide are hormone blocking medications used in patients desiring feminization that selectively block androgen receptors, creating a relatively estrogenic hormonal milieu. They induce development of breast tissue and decrease androgen-dependent terminal hair, often on the face and trunk. Spironolactone is taken in divided doses twice daily when used to block the effects of testosterone and to stimulate breast development.48 Breast tissue resulting from this medication is unlikely to fully regress, making this intervention as well as a newer agent, bicalutamide, “partially reversible” interventions. Bicalutamide has been described in a small sample as a possible alternative to GnRH agonists for patients desiring feminization.54 This medication, like leuprolide and histrelin, has been used for precocious puberty.54 There is notable breast tissue development with the drug and a theoretic risk of liver toxicity that was not found in the small (n = 13) sample studied.54
Other options may include nonsteroidal antiandrogens, such as flutamide (50–75 mg/daily) and bicalutamide (25–50 mg/daily), which block the AR and, therefore, reduce androgens action. On the other hand, these compounds increase gonadotropin secretion, compromising the reduction of circulating testosterone levels observed with steroidal antiandrogens. The lack of data about their efficacy and safety in the transgender population, as well as the high risk of hepatotoxicity described in ciswomen, do not allow their use to be recommended . Androgen lowering compounds can be included among hormonal treatment strategies in both non-binary AFAB and AMAB people (Figure 1). Indeed, in the case of AMAB agender persons—wishing only to attenuate masculine characteristics, without inducing any feminization—only nonsteroidal or steroidal anti-androgens can be considered. The choice between decreasing androgen production (with steroidal antiandrogens) or only androgen peripheral action (with nonsteroidal ones) may be based on individual phenotypical goals. As androgen-deprivation therapy results in a deleterious effect on bone mineral density , a lower dosage of estrogens can be discussed with clients. However, no data are available regarding long-term critical effects when estrogen levels during gender-affirming hormonal treatment do not reach the usual therapeutic goal for binary transgender individuals. Theoretically, nonsteroidal antiandrogens do not compromise estrogen synthesis, because testosterone levels are high and aromatase activity is still efficient.
Table 1: Overview of gender affirming hormone therapy regimens [1, 5••, 7••, 9–25]. [...] Medication: Bicalutamide. Route: PO. Typical dose: 50 mg daily. Disadvantages: • Risk of hepatotoxicity. Relative cost: $$. Another class of anti-androgen drugs, androgen receptor blockers, work by binding directly to the androgen receptor. Flutamide and bicalutamide are both competitive androgen receptor antagonists used primarily in the treatment of prostate cancer . Data on the use of these agents in feminizing hormone therapy are scarce, but it is important to note that both bicalutamide and flutamide have been associated with hepatotoxicity, so are rarely used today [19, 21].
I figured I would create a general glossary to make it easier for players to learn the "ABCs" of playing 40k in a more cutthroat manner. :) Feel free to suggest any other terms of course. "1 + 1": An army-building adage where for each infantry unit you take, the transport in question should fulfill a complementary role, thus providing proper threat saturation in your army. As an example, rather than placing Trueborn with Blasters in a Raider (AT infantry in an AT transport), and Trueborn with Splinter Cannons in a Venom (AP infantry in an AP transport), put the Blaster Trueborn in a Venom and the Splinter Cannon Trueborn in the Raider. See also: Duality. "4 + 2": Another army-building adage that when creating an army, you should take four of a given "mainline" unit, and two of its secondary supporting unit. A notable example of 4 + 2 was Tony Kopach's list from Nova 2010 and Nova 2011, where he included 4 units of 10 Grey Hunters w/ 2 Meltaguns in Rhinos, supported by 2 units of Grey Hunters w/ Flamers in Razorbacks. Another example would be his 2015 Nova list, where he ran 4 units of Avengers in Serpents, and 2 units of Dragons in Serpents. All-Comers: Aka "Take All Comers" or TAC. A list designed to cover its bases and have reasonable odds of winning regarding of matchup or scenario. All-Comers is the ideal for building a list, especially since 40k does not use sideboards. Contrast with "Tailoring." Alphastrike: An army playstyle that operates on getting the drop on your opponent first, and inflicting disproportionate casualties in one go to obtain an unstable equilibrium. Alphastrikes tend to be popular in 40k due to its "I Go, You Go" turn structure. Bandwagon: Aka "Flavor Of The Month", the boogeyman idea that some players instinctually gravitate towards the latest, greatest, shiniest codex, and that shortly after said codex comes out, they have a full tournament-ready pro-painted army at their disposal! In practice, although many armies do get a grace period where players don't know how to handle them, this usually is less the result of the codex being powerful so much as the "haha gotcha" factor of certain rules; sometimes this is aggravated by willful misinterpretations of rules, tailoring, etc. Beta Strike: An army designed to weather an alpha-strike, then counter-alphastrike. Such builds historically revolved around going second and bringing in a disproportionate amount of Reserves. Such armies are endangered in 8th, due to both players being able to choose when to place Reserves down, combined with Reserves being restricted to specific units. Blob: A large unit, one that is not necessarily a deathstar or a tarpit. Bubblewrap: The act of screening your "big guns" with throwaway units, either to act as a roadblock versus melee, or to artificially deny your opponent's ability to Deep Strike. Bubblewrap is a form of defense-in-depth. Castle: A defensive deployment/battleplan, usually characterized by deploying in full force on one corner of the board with multiple layers of bubblewrap. Castles are meant to negate horde or Deep Strike armies, but can risk losing the Objective Game as they get hemmed in. This term comes from Chess, where Castling was a special move a King and Rook would do. Chipmunk: In events where sportsmanship is scored, chipmunking is the act of giving your opponent a poor rating in order to torpedo their chances for winning. Chipmunking is generally frowned upon, and many events keep sportsmanship semi-independent of a person's final rating as a result. Comp: A "scoring handicap" where a tournament/event will assign points to a list to determine how "hard" it is, usually based on what is popular at the time. Thus, it's possible to win every every battle in a comped event yet lose simply because your list is "better." Comp is a divisive topic, alongside whether certain options should be banned or not. More contentious is the idea that such events promote a "race to the bottom", where players seek to choose the hardest possible army that can evade penalties, or play a weak army and hope that the scoring system compensates for losing. Daisy Chain: The act of stretching a unit's coherency out so that a thin line of models reaches back to your Deployment Zone as the mass remainder keep pushing forward. This term got its name due to the resultant mass of models looking akin to a "flower", or an angry letter T. Daisy-Chaining's first notable use was in 4th edition 40k, when the Ork Codex said that if at least one model from a unit of Orks was within 6" of a Kustom Force Field, the entire unit benefitted from it! Other notable causes for Daisy Chains prior to 8th edition included 4th Edition Fateweaver, 5th edition Tervigons, or a 6th Guard Company Commander with Kurov's Aquila. Sometimes also called a "Conga Line." Dakka: Firepower. More commonly, firepower that relies on weight of fire/lots of attacks coming from a single source. As an example, a Dakkafex is a Carnifex with two Devourers, which historically could put anywhere from 8 to 12 attacks out at range. DAVU: Aka "Dire Avenger Vehicle Upgrade." In 5th edition, only Troops or a Transport carrying Troops could score. Since Eldar infantry was generally overcosted and fragile, but their tanks swift and deadly, a common way to build Eldar lists was to take a Wave Serpent or Falcon and stuff 5 Dire Avengers (the cheapest troop option) inside. Made obsolete in 7th edition, since Eldar Jetbikes became far and away the best Troop Choice for Eldar, as well as universal scoring being a thing. Although Wave Serpents remain the best Tank Eldar get in 8th, the term remains obsolete since Serpents can score regardless of any troops inside, and can be taken as standalone vehicles. Deathstar: The original Deathstar was the penultimate glass cannon, a giant planet-destroying laser mounted on a space station that was surprisingly easy to kill with a single Proton Torpedo. A Deathstar in 40k ironically is the reverse of the Star Wars Definition, a unit that has had extreme amounts of points invested into making it nearly-indestructible, while letting it have a non-insignificant amount of damage. Notable examples of this include Nob Bikers from 5th edition (at least before mass S8 became popular) and the Draigostar, Screamerstars from 6th, and the Barkbarkstar from 7th. Deathstar can refer both to super-buffed units, or any armybuild that revolves around buff-stacking to a certain extreme. Defense-in-depth: The practice of running your army in multiple lines of defense, to mitigate the effects of a blitzkrieg army. For example, rather than running 3 units of Conscripts side by side, run each unit as a separate line, one after the other, and ideally spaced out to prevent consolidations. Notable real-life examples of defense in depth include the Soviet Army at Kursk, or the Eritreans at Zalambessa. Duality: The idea that each unit should be capable of at least two battlefield roles without compromising their efficiency. Duality works because overspecialization serves to make target priority easier for your opponent. (See also: "1 + 1"). EQ: Short for "Equivalent", as in possessing similar statlines and armor save. The most common examples are MEQ (Marine Equivalent), GEQ (Guard Equivalent), and TEQ (Terminator Equivalent). This term usually gets used in the context of the ability to kill said targets. As an example, Vespids are supposedly anti-MEQ but overcosted for the task. Personally, I consider thinking of units in this paradigm a potential trap, and the term is fairly endangered in 8th anyway due to a flattened wound chart and non-binary save modifiers. Flying Circus: Has nothing to do with Monty Python. Back in 4e, the Flying Circus was a notable Eldar build that involved stuffing a lot of Harlequins (the deadliest Eldar melee unit at the time) in Falcon Grav Tanks (a disproportionately hard-to-kill transport), and sending them across to murder your opponent. Such lists lost their competitive viability in 5e due to mass mechanization. The term got revived in 6e to refer to any army that revolves around having way too many Flying Monstrous Creatures; the two notable armies being Chaos Daemons, and Tyranids. Lynchpin: A critical unit, that if taken out seriously jeopardizes chances of victory. Competitive lists try to ensure redundancy, and avoid having a single lynchpin unit. MSU: Short for "Multiple Small Units," MSU is based on the idea that "more" units is better than "bigger" or "better" units. In 3rd-7th edition, this was usually based on the fact that in those games, shooting was "one unit shoots at one and only one other unit." In 8th edition, the main advantages are that it makes it harder for your opponent to obtain economy of force, it minimizes the effects of Battleshock, and it makes it easier to cap multiple objectivese or fill out Detachments for maximal Command Points. Null Deployment: A deployment strategy where you don't start the game with anything on the table, instead having everything come in from Reserves. An interesting tactical curiosity in 5th, pure Null Deployment became extinct in 6th due to a clause that a player with no models on the board at the end of a turn automatically lost. However, the term survives to refer to keeping the overwhelming majority of an army in Reserve. Pincering: A particular trick a player can use when assaulting a spread-out enemy. The enemy must maintain coherency whenever it moves, including when it attempts to pile in or consolidate into melee. Thus, if you attack a unit spread out in a single line, charging it from both ends of the line would effectively prevent your opponent from piling in to counter-attack you! Rifleman: A term borrowed from Battletech, the Rifleman is a particular Loyalist-exclusive Dreadnought configuration, where said Dreadnought takes two sets of two Autocannons. In 5e/7e, this meant 4 shots re-rolling to hit. In 8th, this means 8 shots (which probably reroll to hit if there is a nearby Chapter Master). Back in 5th edition, Grey Knights got a notoriously tricked-out variant with Psybolt Ammo (making it effectively +1 Strength), and fans called it...the Psyfleman. (I'm not joking.) Scalability: The ability for a particular strategy/army build/ability to work as point levels increase. Some options (Defensive/shooting buff auras) scale exponentially for linear investment. Some options (Psychic Powers and Stratagems) do not scale at all, due to restrictions on their use in matched play. A relatively limited number of abilities scale linearly, the most notable example being Imperial Guard orders. Seal Clubbing: Aka noobslaying. The act of picking on inexperienced players to inflate your own sense of being a capable player. Seal Clubbers tend to yell "gitgud" without taking the time to actually help out. Arguably an anti-competitive attitude, as you're tailoring your opponents. Shenanigans: Game options that come as a result of wonky game mechanics or unintended rule interactions. Shenanigans range from the comedic yet impractical, to surprisingly dangerous. Skornergy: Aka "fake synergy." This term actually comes from Hordes, and is an inherent problem in modern game design. Skornergy is what happens when units grant specific buffs or have specific interactions with specific units, resulting in the illusion of synergy (that you, the player, are oh-so-smart to figure out!). This became notable in Hordes Mk 2 because the Skorne (think Hellraiser Cenobyte Samurai with Eldar soulstones and Graeco-Roman nomenclature) had numerous units that granted buffs to each, but ironically had poor synergy with each other in-game. Immortals could move faster if near an Ancestral Guardian, and the Ancestral Guardian got extra actions from collecting souls from friendly fallen warriors. However, said Immortals had no souls (due to being Constructs), and were thus useless for the Guardian in turn, and both units were melee-only infantry-speed units, so taking them together ironically resulted in a poorly-functioning army. Many unit combos in 40k can be accused of having Skornergy. Slingshooting: The act of attaching Independent Characters to units in order to get said units in Assault faster, or vice-versa. As an example, attaching Abaddon to a unit of Chaos Spawn, so the Spawn can assault a unit, and "pull" Abaddon into melee. Rendered extinct in 8th edition with the removal of Independent Characters. Solo: A unit that consists of a single model; this usually refers to a single non-HQ unit that is not a Vehicle or Monstrous Creature. As an example, a "solo" Hive Guard or a "solo" Obliterator. This option is endangered in 8th edition, as many units which could historically be taken "solo" now require minimum unit sizes of 3+ models, but you can always run "solos" if you're willing to use Auxiliary detachments... Superfriends: Although first introduced in 6th edition due to Allies, the term really didn't take off until 7th. Superfriends referred to any build that cherry-picked power units, buffs, psychic powers, etc. from assorted allied codexes in order to make something that was offensive both in-game (Eldar Jetbikes with a Riptide Wing) as well as to the fluff (Space Wolves and Dark Angels combining into a sneaky shadowy Wolfstar). Other than the Taudar example, most Superfriend builds were usually Imperial of some sort or another, and were usually for some Deathstar or another. Arguably endangered for 8th edition, in practice Imperials got off lighter than most other armies. Table: An extremely victory, where one player completely wipes out the other player, that they have no models remaining on the table. Tailoring: Building a particular list by knowing you are going to be facing a specific opponent or group of opponents. This is a subjective term, as while some armies may be more common than others, an "All Comers" list should in theory require little adjustment in actual equipment to handle it. List-Tailoring is frowned upon when it's blatantly obvious ("My opponent has no tanks, so my list will take no anti-tank at all"), and arguably does little to improve your own skills! Tanking: The process of forcing your opponent to waste close combat targets on suboptimal targets. Ever since 5th edition did away with the idea of "Killzones" from 4th edition, the rules have consistently stated that whenever a model is in base-to-base with only one enemy unit, it may only direct attacks against that unit. Armies with extreme variance in saves (Meaning Orks and Tyranids) are the most capable of taking advantage of this rule, and there's little more hilarious than watching a Swarmlord mulch through an enemy mob while the Nob is forced to waste Power Klaw attacks against a unit of Termagants! This ability has arguably become even better in 8th, due to Battleshock being on a "per unit" basis, rather than 5e-7e Combat Resolution affecting all units on the losing combat's side. Tarpitting: In theory, a "tarpit" was a unit that by itself was ineffectual but dirt-cheap that could mostly be used to "slow down" bigger slower assault units for a turn. In practice, "Tarpitting" seldom worked in 40k. Be it Tank Shock, combat resolution (Ex: No Retreat wounds), Hit and Run, etc, there were usually multiple ways to avoid a Tarpit. Alternately, a Tarpit could just be a particularly annoying Blob. For example, a blob of Brimstone Horrors parked on top of an objective. Termicide: A particular oddity of Chaos Space Marines from 4th-7th edition (and Space Wolves in 7th) was that they could take Terminators in units of 3 instead of 5, and said Terminators could take Combi-Weapons on the cheap. Such a unit would Deep Strike in, shoot everything, then not care that said weapons were "one-shot" because they were expendable anyway. This is critically endangered (if not competitively extinct) in 8th edition, since Chaos Terminators require a minimum of 5 models instead of 3, said Combi-Weapons got a notable point hike because they're no longer one-shot weapons, and you can't even Deep Strike close enough to get in Melta Range or use Flamers anymore! Train: Introduced in 5th edition, a "Train" (sometimes also called a Car Park) was an informal formation of Rhino or Chimera-chassis vehicles; rather than advancing side-by-side, they would advance in an echelon or line, vehicles in the back benefitting from the 50% cover rule; since you measured weapon LOS from the turrets of said vehicles, your opponent did not necessarily gain cover in turn. Functionally endangered in 8th if not extinct, since 8e vehicle cover rules state you must also be in cover as well as 50% obscured. A vehicle that is 99% obscured from 2 buildings away but is on a road gets no cover. X Wing: No, not that X-Wing! Rather, this term refers to an army that treats a normally elite/heavy-duty supporting unit as the core part of the army everything else is built around, where X refers to the central thing in questiom. This term fluff-wise referred to Dark Angels and their previously-unique ability to run all-Terminator armies (Deathwing) or all-Biker armies (Ravenwing), but was since co-opted either based on the unit-type (example: Deffwing armies have a disproportionate amount of Mega-Armor Nobz) or the character allowing for such builds (ex: Loganwing, Draigowing). In 7th, "Wing" could also refer to two infamous Tau formations, the Ghostkeel Wing and the Riptide Wing. WAAC: "Win At All Costs." Normally used as a snarl word, usually related to "cheese", "beardiness", or any general disparagement of powergaming. Some players counter, saying that people slandering "WAAC" are "Casual At All Costs" or throw down "gitguds" and the whole thing turns into a mudslinging contest. Truth be told, it's not necessarily the list a player brings that determines if they're awful to play against, so much as their attitude and general sportsmanship towards the whole affair.
Binary Options Edge was established to help traders by openly sharing indicators, strategies, methods, trading journals and discussing the psychology of trading. Join today for free! 5 May 2015 • Binary options strategies • BOS • Comments Off on Binary Option trading strategy – April 29, 2015 Binary Option trading – April 29th, 2015 At the moment, OB60’s most successful strategy for Binary Options trading with high market volatility is OBIF (from Italian Opzione Binaria Intervallo Fuori – “Binary Option Out It is in the basic strategies category because it only uses the stochastic indicator but it is far from simple. It is also highly effective and anyone can use it with a little practice! If you are familiar with binary options trading you already know that the stochastic oscillator is one of the best and most popular tools we can use. We discuss trading strategies as well as the binary option industry including brokers, signals and scams. Binary Options Date: Sun Jul 26 2020 Tokyo: 20:29 Sydney: 21:29 New York: 7:29 London: 12:29 CET: 13:29 TR Binary Options is very reasonable when it comes to withdrawing your money. There is a minimum withdrawal threshold, but it is only $10 if you are using a credit or debit card. The threshold for a wire transfer is $100. On most other binary options sites, $100 is typical as a minimum threshold for all methods.
binary options trading system tutorial, best binary options trading system, successful binary options trading system , free binary options trading system, binary options trading system 2015 ... Descriptionbinary options trading strategy, binary options trading strategies, ... How To Design Login And Register Form In Java Netbeans ... 2015 WINING STRATEGY ON ADVANCE TOUCH NO TOUCH ... How to test Binary Options Strategies and Signals ... 2015. Go Here: http ... Backtesting allows you to check to see how a binary option performs before you actually put it into the real market ... Published on Jul 2, 2015 Learn how to trade binary options with a weekly expiry, brought to you by Investoo.com. Join Investoo.com today and learn to trade in more than video lessons and trading ... Binary options are form of options trading based on a yes or no question. Try binary options today at: https://www.wallstreetsurvivor.com You're either right or you're wrong in this all or nothing ...