https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.10002
Abstract (emphasis mine):
The concept of a 'Ballmer Peak' was first proposed in 2007, postulating that there exists a very specific blood alcohol content which confers superhuman programming ability. More generally, there is a commonly held belief among software engineers that coding is easier and more productive after a few drinks. Using the industry standard for assessment of coding ability, we conducted a search for such a peak and more generally investigated the effect of different amounts of alcohol on performance. We conclusively refute the existence of a specific peak with large magnitude, but with p < 0.001 find that there was a significant positive effect to a low amount of alcohol - slightly less than two drinks - on programming ability.
I think this may be true for many things.
I'm a better dirt bike rider after a couple of beers. The beer relaxes you and your body just does what it needs to do, instead of tensing up with fear.
Maybe that's true, but is it really worth the risk?
Yes! I don't drink any more though, but it sure was fun when I was younger. I should clarify in the original post that I was talking about dirt bikes.
That does make it sound a little better. At least then you were probably only risking harming yourself.
We were never harmed in a decade of doing that, so I'd call it a win. I'm not talking about getting hammered, I'm talking about having a couple of beers before you go riding.
You sound like a donorcycle rider. One who is casual about potentially traumatising and/or injuring others.
I'm talking about riding in the dirt.
To be fair, if they really, honestly, stick to one or two drinks, they should be under the legal limit in most places in the US. This depends on their weight and the strength of the drinks, too, but anyone over 120 pounds is normally still under the limit after 2 average strength beers.
The problem is that it's easy and tempting to overdo it, but as long as they have self discipline to not ever drink too much, it can be fine.
Legal doesn't mean safe; it just means the lawmakers are too corrupt, stupid, cowardly, or weak to tighten the limit.