• 0 Posts
  • 39 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle




  • In the cheaper price point, IEMs are probably the way to go for noise isolation. If you can get ear tips with a good seal, then the passive noise isolation should be good enough. I’d recommend something like the kz zsn pro (~$20) or the kiwiears cadenza (~$30), along with comply foam tips (~$15) for a perfect seal into your ear. If you have smaller ears like me, then kz IEMs can be a bit uncomfortable, so keep that in mind. If your budget stretches further, then you can try Etymotic ER2SE IEMs (~$100), which have triple flange tips that really plug your ears deep, but I definitely don’t find them comfy enough for long sessions.

    If your device doesn’t have a headphone jack, an Apple USB C dongle (~$10) is plenty good enough for any IEMs, or you could get a Bluetooth DAC from Fiio starting at around $40 (for the longest time I had one doing double duty for my headphones and for Bluetooth audio in my car).



  • Division Bell! It’s punchy and tart with the citrus and slightly bitter aperol, and the mezcal gives a really welcome smoky flavor. I add just a quarter oz simple to the standard recipe, otherwise I find it a little dry.

    -1 ounce mezcal -3/4 ounce Aperol -1/4 ounce Luxardo maraschino liqueur -3/4 ounce lime juice, freshly squeezed -1/4 ounce simple syrup

    -Add ingredients to a shaker with ice, shake well before straining into a coupe and garnishing with a grapefruit twist




  • Cooking is an inherently manual task, and as such any meaningful improvements to cooking tools are enhancements to the manual capabilities of the tools. These are improvements to things like speed/precision/durability of mixing, heating, weighing, etc. Often times the most meaningful improvements are improvements in mechanisms in cooking machines or the materials they are made of, but there are definitely examples of electronics or software contributing in this way. Good examples would be fuzzy logic applied to electric kettles to make the act of heating to a specific temperature more precise by controlling the heating element so the water is brought to temperature without overshoot, or PID controllers in espresso machines controlling pumps to follow a specific pressure curve instead of requiring complex mechanical systems to accomplish the same thing. The problem with many of these internet-connected or heavily software-dependent appliances is that their added features do not improve the manual capabilities of the appliance in any way, sure the machine will tell you how much weight of flour you need for your cake, but your cake won’t be better than one produced by a “dumb” machine because the scale isn’t any more precise than any other scale that would be used for that purpose.

    The other issue with these devices is a fallacy that’s really common in kitchen equipment, which is the idea that more functions = better. Fundamentally, a device designed to do both task A and task B will be worse than an equivalently priced combination of one device for task A and one device for task B, because there is a cost associated with engineering the device to accomplish both tasks. This effect is especially noticable on all-in-one devices that mix, weigh, and heat because there’s a lot more complexity, and thus a lot more cost spent on integrating the components together









  • I mean, it’s pretty scummy but “working with” could refer to just being in communications with those charities about what a potential donation would be used for. Given what Jirard has said, I assume he was completely negligent about checking in on any of the foundation’s activities, and was probably just handed a paper with the names of “partners” on it for the stream. That said, I feel like the quotes about being a “major” or “main” partner with some specific organizations could get them into trouble, even if it’s legal for them to hold the money that long and they pass IRS audits


  • I would love to see an actual lawyer’s take on this. Jirard’s response is basically “we mislead everyone and were shitty for not donating before now, but it was perfectly legal for us to hold the money until now, and it was also legal for us to use donations for operating expenses of the foundation/events”. While Karl presents a lot of evidence of misleading statements by Jirard, his usage of the encyclopedia brittanica to define charity fraud instead of any actual legal definition, and presentation of evidence as more damning than it actually is (and in a very hostile manner) leads me to view both sides in a negative light. At this point, I have no idea whether either side has any legal grounds for the accusations made toward the other, and I don’t see that changing unless someone with actual legal knowledge weighs in