I use something similar that I bought in Taiwan as a backup to paper filters, since I am often traveling and can’t always find v60-style filters. Some thoughts:
It can be annoying to clean
When I want more than a rinse, I wash it extra by boiling it in tea; that seems to work well.
It does have a bit of a different flavor compared to paper. As a light-roast drinker who grinds with a Timemore C3, I prefer paper for taste. In the James Hoffman vid other people linked, he describes it as “extra richness and body” for light roasts, but I kinda describe it more as “clouding some of the bite and clarity”. It’s definitely still quite good, and I still prefer the cloth over French press.
I do find it quite convenient for my use as a backup to paper filters in my “ultra-portable” setup.
It’s certainly not, there are other iso to USB drive tools for Linux. But the only way to make a Windows To Go USB from Linux is with rufus on a Windows VM with USB passthrough.
It’s not possible to dd a Windows ISO to a USB stick.
What way too many people fail to understand, because Linux ISOs are applying this method, but this is essentially a MAJOR HACK CALLED ‘ISOHYBRID’, is that, in most cases, you cannot simply take an ISO image and copy it byte for byte to a USB drive, and expect that to boot.
Of course not, because why would we stare at Excel sheets when it’s easier to write a Python script and use pandas to automate the staring part instead?
Literally every meme I’ve ever made was done in GIMP. I can say that the software needs non-destructive editing that applies to transforming layers. So far there’s only non-destructive effects on the layers, but discarding 20 years of work because the software is not a 1:1 copy of Photoshop seems silly.
GIMP is an odd project, one that I’m not sure is actually being held back by money, considering they’ve been sitting on a donation of bitcoin since 2014 that now amounts to 1.3 million, and just… haven’t used it, at all?
I think it should be clarified that GIMP’s structure isn’t able to make use of donations to GIMP as a single entity. Edit: or at least wasn’t, I hear they can now.
I agree that Krita is more promising though, I switched to Krita years ago and have never looked back.
I remember Windows XP coming out and we all mocked it as Windows but with an interface by Crayola. But I’d gladly have that Crayola interface back rather than the flat modern crap we have now.
This, but to some degree, unironically. If studies aren’t reproducible (or deemed worthy of reproduction) then there’s definitely a disconnect between the folks handing out research assignments and the folks engineering applicable solutions to scientific problems.
That goes two ways. You could be a guy who successfully formulates a mathematical model to support the existence of Neutrinos and face a funding board that has no interest in building a LHC. That’s arguably a problem of malinvestment within the scientific community. Or you could be a guy who successfully formulates a mathematical model for a new kind of mouse trap that’s 10% less efficient than traditional mouse traps. That’s more of a university research assignment problem. Or you could have a researcher who claims he’s the only one who can do a particular thing, because he’s got the magic touch. If the research is unfalsifiable by design, that’s an entirely new kind of problem.
i think you bring up valid instances where this is fair.
but i think i’m speaking to the very obvious and important ones that are worthy of reproduction. like i’ve seen articles be like “these corporations are responsible for 99% of climate change” or something
and the comments will be like “duh we knew that”
which true, but not empirically. being able to cite data from actual research from professionals is so valuable and far better than anecdotes or guesses. edit: and also informs meaningful policy.
that said, is there some way for a layperson like me to identify when research is not deemed worthy of reproduction? or is it a lost cause
which true, but not empirically. being able to cite data from actual research from professionals is so valuable and far better than anecdotes or guesses.
While its certainly helpful to get the raw numbers down on paper, you don’t need a filing cabinet full of documents to recognize that fossil fuel consuming electricity producers and airliners and manufacturing centers the but-for cause of climate change. Fossil Fuel goes in. Carbon emissions come out.
We can definitely use a more meticulous bit of R&D to find exactly where and when these emissions peak, in order to reduce total emissions without sacrificing an abundance of economic productivity. But “did you know burning the fuel makes the pollution?” isn’t a shocking conclusion.
Where things get annoying (and where in-depth research genuinely comes in handy) is in the functional policy that follows this recognition. Once you know a widget factory in China is 10x less efficient than its counterpart in the US, you can formulate a trade law to limit imports contingent on reform. But as soon as you start impacting some retailer’s bottom line, you get some screamer ad “Congressman Greenpeace Wants To Make Your Widgets 10x as Expensive to Save The Stupid Spotted Owl! In Truth it is the Spotted Owl that produces all the emissions! Kill the Spotted Owl!” financed by the worst people you know.
And that’s when you get some facebook troll group (or marketing team or bot army) spamming “Spotted Owl Farts Killed The Environment While Joe Brandon Clapped!!!” And then it becomes orthodoxy in the denialist community such that you’ve got Sunday Morning talk shows with people arguing over Spotted Owl emissions rather than trade law.
is there some way for a layperson like me to identify when research is not deemed worthy of reproduction?
Not practically, no. As soon as you’ve got that kind of info, you’re no longer a lay person.
At some level, you need a network of trust with someone who does know and does have a serious take on this. And that network is going to be informed by who you already trust and listen to. And that’s going to be informed by who they trust and listen to.
That’s the real terror of the modern mass media system. We’ve corrupted so much of our information stream that its genuinely hard to find a serious media venue that’s not been gobbled up by a for-profit marketing firm.
So what’s the harm of doing research on subjects with “obvious” no-surprise conclusions? The basic reality that it provides foundation for meaningful policy should be enough to justify it, no?
You kind of lost me with your spotted owl hypothetical? Not disagreeing I just genuinely got lost there was a lot if layers to it lol.
And thanks for the details on identifying problematic research as a layperson. Good to know, even if it’s depressing.
Anything could have enough significance to warrant further study. If it has societal implications or environmental concerns, it could be deemed worthy. I’ve read some guidelines on how to read scientific papers, but don’t have the link on me. The scientists are supposed to list their biases, but it’s kind of on the honor system, I think.
Don’t think it’s exactly Dunning Kruger. We all think about the curve of gathered knowledge and perceived knowledge.
But they didn’t even start to gather knowledge, they just respond with something that sounds truthful and fits their world view in order to feel better without doing anything.
But hey maybe that’s just my Dunning Kruger talking.
So… proprietary data collecting thing owned by Google, service that requires phone number to sign up, or service that does not even pretend to be E2EE and (worse) routes chat traffic through multiple potentially-adversary-controlled servers on its way to you?
Reality check: nobody cares about you if you do not comply with societal “common denominator” norms.
As unfortunate and bullshit as that sounds, it will always hold true. This is the reason I have Whatsapp and Discord work profile sandboxed and highly restricted running through custom HOSTS ruleset + NetGuard. I concluded these are the 2 platforms needed to minmax information “freedom” and social compliance.
The average person just has no idea about RCS or protocols in general and are incidental adopters of it just like SMS. Sometimes these nerd debates about platforms and protocols emphasize technology features over actually connecting with people or doing something productive on said technology.
I’m a nerd. I know vaguely what RCS is because I had a discussion in 2019 with a friend about it. Do I have it? Do I use it? I have no idea. Is it an app or just a protocol that happens behind the scenes? I would assume the latter. My phone’s a few years old, isn’t everyone’s? Probably that means I don’t have it. No way to tell and I’m not going to bother trying to find out.
Most of my friends use Signal. Honestly hadn’t heard of RCS till now. Either my phone only supports SMS or I’m too technologically incompetent to enable RCS.
Some people are passionate about always doing the best they can, and they get a great deal of satisfaction from it. I love being excellent at what I do.
I don’t have a wife or kids. My jobs are a huge part of my identity. Heck - my night job teaching is something I do because I want to do it, not for the little bit of extra money.
But I also know that I’m weird. Most people just want to do their job and go home to their families, and that’s great. They’re doing the job, so they should be compensated every bit as much as the people like me who are devoted to their work.
Nah, I get it. I’m much the same way - I don’t do things half assed - just not made that way.
That said, I’m also not going to eat the corporate brainwashing gruel. The higher up you go the more you see people just flat accept stupid corporate decisions as ‘enlightened’ and they heavily adopt the corporate lexicon. Who needs a critical eye when you fit in?
Fuck that noise.
While I realize there are rules, structures, and culture in place. They shouldn’t hinder people. IDGAF about how someone does something as long as the product is technically sound, reads like Tolstoy, and was efficiently created.
I work a shit ton of OT, but I get paid 1.5x or 2x based on circumstances for that extra time
I deliver the same quality of work on ST and OT—my best, but I would never work unpaid OT (e.g. some of my salaried engineers have been living at the job during our system upgrades) or do things well beyond the scope of my job.
I inderstand fully. I used ti go through the same. At the same time I noticed a big difference when i got married. And a huge one when i had kids. Having a child and being responsible for it is a life changing situation. I tell my self that i became an adult not when i turned 18 but when i became a parent. When this happened to me, my perspective about work stoped revolving about being the best, and turbed to be just and help others be better. That made me soon to realize that those 2 cannot get always together.
I have a friend that will only chat with me on Instagram. I have his number, but he will never respond to text. He only engages in insta, it’s mildly infuriating.
slrpnk.net
Top