@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

southsamurai

@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

I’ve always enjoyed chips as a quasi palate cleanser for dishes that run fatty and have sauerkraut. Which is a fairly small range of foods. But it’s because the flatness of the potatoes, the single note saltiness, and the relatively lower fat levels do a good job of refreshing the palate alongside something else pickled and/or a beverage.

But it seems like that would make this dog have less “oomph” to the taste buds. That’s one of the great things about kraut on a wiener, how bold it is. It makes a great texture and taste contrast with the usual dogs out there.

It’s an interesting choice, but not one I would have made because of that.

I think if I did this, I’d have to do a side by side with and without the chips. The difference isn’t going to be massive, but it could be enough to shift the enjoyment level.

Now, chips on a dog is something I’ve done before. Plenty of times, actually. That crunch, and the mild flavor do indeed help cut through some flavors. But, typically, that’s going to be most desirable with things like simple condiments and maybe a bit of relish.

You know, a bit of mustard and/or ketchup is a good basic dog. You then add a little something extra to kick it up a notch without killing the simplicity of it. Some crumbled chips, even if it’s a pile on the plate and you dip into it (which is my preferred way with simple dogs), and it changes things just enough that each of the individual flavors gets separated and then melds on the tongue.

I dunno, maybe I’m just weirdly into hotdogs lol.

Lemmy, is there a treasured piece of content that you stop yourself from going back to "too often" so as to not dilute it?

I do this for a few things, movies in particular. For me most recently, I’m planning on watching Bo Burnham’s Inside this weekend, for the first time since I watched it shortly post-release. I wasn’t really intending to wait checks watch nearly 3 years on that one, but I definitely felt it needed some space before a...

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

Ehhhh, to a limited extent, Christmas movies. But it’s only partly so it doesn’t get diluted, it’s also because they’re kind of meant to be something to make the season a bit happier. They don’t work as well outside of the holidays, so why bother?

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

If you want to enjoy distro hopping, go find a cheap thinkpad as a secondary device, and have fun. Otherwise, you try out live discs/drives to see if you get full compatibility with your main device.

Truth is that you’ll have more difference in user experience DE hopping than distro hopping.

You only distro hop until you find what works right with an your hardware and preferred software, unless you’re doing it as a hobby. Now, the desktop environments? That’s where you’ll see the big difference.

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

I dunno, he’s a little farther left. Not much, but a little.

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

Fair enough :) please forgive my duslexia driven error

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

I’ve wondered that myself. Afaik, there’s no real information about historical vision acuity beyond the extreme end where it amounts to being blind.

I have to think that some percentage of people had vision deficits that were bad enough to need glasses and from there up to being not-quite-blind. I know that we hover around 20+ percent of the world population being myopic nowadays. If it was even half that for millennia, how could that not influence damn near everything?

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

If I had a penny for every time this happened to me, I would still be broke, but it’s interesting anyway.

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

I would have loved that at our wedding lol

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

Nah, I’ll sit there eating chicken, and give her a bit. Seriously, if you look up lists of food that’s okay/good for them, chicken and eggs are on almost every list. She very much enjoys both.

Now, would I eat her? Nah, and not only because of the breed not being very good as meat, nor that I hope she lives to be very old, which makes for not good meat. She’s part of the family, and you don’t eat family unless it’s life-or-death. Like, I have no objection to eating dog, but I wouldn’t eat my dog.

Hell, I don’t even object to the idea of eating one’s own pets in general, I can see the way it could be a respectful and good thing. I just can’t do it lol.

I will say that I’m pickier about sourcing my chicken for food now though. I’ve always preferred non industrial meat sources when possible, but now that “when possible” has turned into “well, I guess I’ll just skip it this time”.

The DCEU ends not with a bang, but a wimper. (lemmy.ml)

10 years after Zod’s snapped neck, Martha, “some kinda Suicide Squad”, CGI moustache, rennouncing your wish, the hiearchy of power changing, and Speed Force PS1 graphics, the DC Extended Universe finally comes to a close. And it ends the same way it started - with a Rotten score....

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

Hopes? None. Warner Bros. has no fucking clue how to use DC characters and ideas in theaters. They may get lucky with specific movies being decent, but the best movies are not even as good as the worst of the animated movies and series. They keep throwing money and names at live action, instead of focusing on telling good stories that stay true to the essence of the characters.

I don’t see Gunn doing any better tbh. For one, he’s going to be hamstrung by whatever Warner decides is the goal. For another, he’s going to end up limited by whatever flawed view executives have of the servers characters. And then he still may not have a grasp of what either comics fans or non comic fans need from a movie featuring DC characters.

southsamurai, (edited )
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

Well, your question as asked has the answer of yes, and then no.

Canning absolutely does not destroy or otherwise remove “nutrition” totally. And, as such, if the food that is canned was not empty calories to begin with (which is a kinda bullshit term tbh, since the only thing that covers is sugars only, and maybe fats only, which nobody cans), then the food inside the can is not empty either.

As others have said, the process of canning does break down some nutrients. However, so does cooking to some degree. But, cooking also makes some things easier to extract from the food as it goes through digestion, so it isn’t like raw things are inherently better than their cooked versions by virtue of being raw.

So, in general, canned foods are going to be “good enough” on average, when it comes to vitamins and minerals. Some things will be better than others in that regard, so you’d have to look things up as you go and figure out what is going to be reduced enough to merit going through extra effort to obtain and store frozen/raw.

How wealthy are those elderly people who hire someone to be with them at all times, instead of moving into a nursing home?

I guess I don’t care how wealthy they are, my question is how much would it cost to hire someone to be your caretaker 24/7 and go with you everywhere you want to go like the grocery store etc

southsamurai, (edited )
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

Man, I’m just happy to see a skyclad reference in the wild, away from a metal dedicated community :)

Edit: also, this needs a playlist so that anyone not familiar with all the albums listed can enjoy the discovery :)

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

And here’s the realistic explanation for why and why now:

"…Orin Kerr, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, wrote on X on Wednesday that “from a public policy standpoint, that seems like a bummer.”

“Geofencing has solved a bunch of really major cases that were otherwise totally cold,” he wrote.

“And there are lots of ways of doing the legal process (including Google’s warrant policy, although that’s just one way) that are a lot more privacy protective than ordinary warrants. But I can see why this might be in Google’s business interest. If there isn’t a lot of economic value to Google in keeping the data, and having it means you need to get embroiled in privacy debates over what you do with it, better for Google to drop it.”

It’s a good thing! It never should have been allowed in the first place. But, Google didn’t give a fuck until it caused them enough hassle. Doing this is just a way to avoid something more expensive later, it isn’t a strong principled stand. And I’d bet small amounts that they’ll still have a way to use the data anyway. It won’t be some magic wand that means Google can’t make money off of it.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #