Is there something like an abacus but for cooking? A simple device to keep track of the different tasks for a dish that can be used in the kitchen while cooking? I’m guessing there are apps
Another pet peeve (which this doesn't solve): Recipes that include "marinate overnight" or some such in the middle (which can be easy to miss), instead of telling you up front that you have to start the day before.
You're supposed to read through the recipe before you start. Also, most modern recipe books and websites put prep/cook/total times at the very top, so if you have to marinate overnight it'll say "total: 13h" or something like that.
> Steps that don't repeat the quantities, making me scroll back and forth between the step and the quantity list.
Julia Child's cookbook has the recipe in two columns, one for ingredients and the other for directions. As soon as I saw it I wondered why every cookbook doesn't do something similar.
Julia Child would also be in favor of doing mise en place--measuring out your ingredients before you start doing anything.
Personally, and I say this as someone who has been trained to do recipe editing, I find this tabular system to be not entirely clear. Consider the first example--the instruction to mix is applied to several ingredients at least twice. The instruction to 'fold in' seems to apply to all the ingredients at once, which makes no sense. Normally, you'd mix the dry ingredients together first. Also, in this case, you'd probably want to whisk the eggs and sugar together first so the sugar starts to dissolve. It also doesn't give you a clue as to what 'done' means.
Have always loved cookingforengineers. We should really just be linking to it directly instead of whatever this “having to scroll through a life story f other people’s tweets” spam is.
> even though the system had existed the whole time.
But it didn't. Isn't that the point of someone inventing it? If the system existed the whole time then it would most likely be much more realized.
Also people don't use this system because 99% of people don't right things down in tables. I know not many people hand write things anymore but even typing up ingredient lists on a machine I don't begin by creating a table.
Also this article format of numbered tweet responses as images is just terrible. What am I reading Buzzfeed? I had to stop reading.
Also isn't "viral" 100k or more? Not 10's of thousands? This is a clickbait article. But it brings up a bigger question: why claim that something is viral with 100,000+ views/likes/shares/responses/whatever when we know damn well Twitter is full of bots?
Did you look at the original? I assumed it was censoring "killer" which also meshes with my perception that "trigger words" get censored in certain social media circles now.
Most of this is self-censorship by people who believe they are being oppressed by all-powerful dark forces, whose malevolent schemes can nevertheless be foiled by simple character substitutions.
My favorite example of this is people self-censoring “shooter” as “sh**ter”, which I can’t help myself from always parsing as “shitter”.
“The shitter in Virginia has been apprehended”, etc.
I assume it's just people mimicking/cargo culting content creators, who are indeed being oppressed by the dark forces of the algorithm and the de-mometizer.
> Most of this is self-censorship by people who believe they are being oppressed by all-powerful dark forces,
What a ridiculous take. Many platforms and games actually prevent you from posting certain words, or flag or otherwise penalize posts if you include them. In some cases, this is completely explicit, i.e. you'll get a message saying "cant' post that."
Instead of playing a guessing game of which platform censors what, it's common just to avoid such words by censoring, euphemisms, or synonyms.
ok, so i misread the censored word. Maybe i'm old; the concept of "trigger words" doesn't seem to be solved by making it harder to communicate in my opinion.
It not /all/ about triggers it's partially driven by the algorithms on some social sites like TikTok or Youtube where there's some evidence and a lot of speculation that mentioning or including certain words can cause the recommendation algorithm to suppress your videos etc. That leads to a lot of homophones etc popping up like "sewer slide" or odder non mentions like unalive popping up. Because the really big channels care about maximizing reach for monetization reasons it shows up strongly in peoples feeds which drives wide adoption.
Definitely agree. I don't understand how "thinking harder" about what the word MIGHT be solves any problem. I might just be part of this older generation who is hard trained on reading and not skimming, I don't know. I've never found anyone who appreciates this sort of censorship to ask them to help me understand.
Nobody appreciates it. It's in the Nash Gap -- the difference between the true optimum and the reality that emerges from each involved party optimizing for their incentives.
People: complain to politicians when egregious content starts trending
Politicians: bug Platform to do something about the egregious content
Platform: quickest fix for egregious content is dumb pattern matching
Content Producers: avoid becoming a false positive by using dumb substitutions to dodge the dumb pattern matching
The most direct fix would be the platform getting smarter about censorship, but this would not be without its own tradeoffs.
Um, friend of mine in her handwritten "my favorite recipes" book has used that layout for decades, using curly braces to group things. I'm doing that too since seeing her book a long time ago. I thought it's standard to do it that way.
Sorry, is there supposed to be an actual article somewhere hiding behind this giant collection of embedded whatever-the-hell-X-calls-posts quotes? Because there does not appear to be one. "Someone said X and then someone else said Y and then even more folks said Z" was slop well before AI existed.
Is there something like an abacus but for cooking? A simple device to keep track of the different tasks for a dish that can be used in the kitchen while cooking? I’m guessing there are apps
Some of my pet peeves about regular cookbooks are:
- Steps that actually include many different steps.
- Steps that don't repeat the quantities, making me scroll back and forth between the step and the quantity list.
The diagrams in this post very cleanly solve both.
Another pet peeve (which this doesn't solve): Recipes that include "marinate overnight" or some such in the middle (which can be easy to miss), instead of telling you up front that you have to start the day before.
You're supposed to read through the recipe before you start. Also, most modern recipe books and websites put prep/cook/total times at the very top, so if you have to marinate overnight it'll say "total: 13h" or something like that.
Definitely.
But I might not read it super carefully when recipe planning at the start of the week, which can result in scheduling mistakes.
Yeah except they often don’t.
My favorite is the ‘30 minute recipes’ that involve overnight marinating, carmelizing onions, etc.
You can caramelize onions in 10 minutes https://youtu.be/yt_0e72fs9M
Whew, good thing i have 20 minutes left over to do everything else!
(That is great gaslighting in that vid, lol)
[dead]
> Steps that don't repeat the quantities, making me scroll back and forth between the step and the quantity list.
Julia Child's cookbook has the recipe in two columns, one for ingredients and the other for directions. As soon as I saw it I wondered why every cookbook doesn't do something similar.
Julia Child would also be in favor of doing mise en place--measuring out your ingredients before you start doing anything.
Personally, and I say this as someone who has been trained to do recipe editing, I find this tabular system to be not entirely clear. Consider the first example--the instruction to mix is applied to several ingredients at least twice. The instruction to 'fold in' seems to apply to all the ingredients at once, which makes no sense. Normally, you'd mix the dry ingredients together first. Also, in this case, you'd probably want to whisk the eggs and sugar together first so the sugar starts to dissolve. It also doesn't give you a clue as to what 'done' means.
The engineer's name is Michael Chu, he made a website with cooking recipes structured as tables.
https://www.cookingforengineers.com/
The recipes are a little bit too clever i think. Turning the text on the actions saves space but it makes the instructions off-putting.
Have always loved cookingforengineers. We should really just be linking to it directly instead of whatever this “having to scroll through a life story f other people’s tweets” spam is.
This is not new at all: https://www.cookingforengineers.com/
Look at the site design! It went viral on Digg! That's how old this is.
> even though the system had existed the whole time.
But it didn't. Isn't that the point of someone inventing it? If the system existed the whole time then it would most likely be much more realized.
Also people don't use this system because 99% of people don't right things down in tables. I know not many people hand write things anymore but even typing up ingredient lists on a machine I don't begin by creating a table.
Also this article format of numbered tweet responses as images is just terrible. What am I reading Buzzfeed? I had to stop reading.
Also isn't "viral" 100k or more? Not 10's of thousands? This is a clickbait article. But it brings up a bigger question: why claim that something is viral with 100,000+ views/likes/shares/responses/whatever when we know damn well Twitter is full of bots?
one of the tweet screenshots censors the word "kosher", which I completely don't understand. Why are screenshots online so agressively censored?
Not just screenshots. Look at the modern social media trend of using "unalived" as a euphemism for "died", for example.
Did you look at the original? I assumed it was censoring "killer" which also meshes with my perception that "trigger words" get censored in certain social media circles now.
Most of this is self-censorship by people who believe they are being oppressed by all-powerful dark forces, whose malevolent schemes can nevertheless be foiled by simple character substitutions.
My favorite example of this is people self-censoring “shooter” as “sh**ter”, which I can’t help myself from always parsing as “shitter”.
“The shitter in Virginia has been apprehended”, etc.
I assume it's just people mimicking/cargo culting content creators, who are indeed being oppressed by the dark forces of the algorithm and the de-mometizer.
To be fair, YouTube (and probably other platforms) used to literally block stuff like that, and the substitutions did get by it.
> Most of this is self-censorship by people who believe they are being oppressed by all-powerful dark forces,
What a ridiculous take. Many platforms and games actually prevent you from posting certain words, or flag or otherwise penalize posts if you include them. In some cases, this is completely explicit, i.e. you'll get a message saying "cant' post that."
Instead of playing a guessing game of which platform censors what, it's common just to avoid such words by censoring, euphemisms, or synonyms.
How did "kosher" become one of those words?
ok, so i misread the censored word. Maybe i'm old; the concept of "trigger words" doesn't seem to be solved by making it harder to communicate in my opinion.
It not /all/ about triggers it's partially driven by the algorithms on some social sites like TikTok or Youtube where there's some evidence and a lot of speculation that mentioning or including certain words can cause the recommendation algorithm to suppress your videos etc. That leads to a lot of homophones etc popping up like "sewer slide" or odder non mentions like unalive popping up. Because the really big channels care about maximizing reach for monetization reasons it shows up strongly in peoples feeds which drives wide adoption.
Beenaminute did an experiment about this and found it didn’t really matter. Algospeek would be caught by the same filters people try to avoid anyways.
Definitely agree. I don't understand how "thinking harder" about what the word MIGHT be solves any problem. I might just be part of this older generation who is hard trained on reading and not skimming, I don't know. I've never found anyone who appreciates this sort of censorship to ask them to help me understand.
Nobody appreciates it. It's in the Nash Gap -- the difference between the true optimum and the reality that emerges from each involved party optimizing for their incentives.
People: complain to politicians when egregious content starts trending
Politicians: bug Platform to do something about the egregious content
Platform: quickest fix for egregious content is dumb pattern matching
Content Producers: avoid becoming a false positive by using dumb substitutions to dodge the dumb pattern matching
The most direct fix would be the platform getting smarter about censorship, but this would not be without its own tradeoffs.
Um, friend of mine in her handwritten "my favorite recipes" book has used that layout for decades, using curly braces to group things. I'm doing that too since seeing her book a long time ago. I thought it's standard to do it that way.
For another super condensed shorthand system for recipes, see Thermomix cookbooks (requires a Thermomix though)
Sorry, is there supposed to be an actual article somewhere hiding behind this giant collection of embedded whatever-the-hell-X-calls-posts quotes? Because there does not appear to be one. "Someone said X and then someone else said Y and then even more folks said Z" was slop well before AI existed.