5 ms·

Octopus is a pretty great cooked food, not as a sashimi. In Korean cuisine, at least, you find it stir fried, with noodles, in rice bowls, in soups...all sorts

• seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  > But Americans are largely people who consider seafood to start and stop at canned tuna so... That isn’t very accurate. Coastal Americans have had plenty of seafood to choose from, consider when they would serve lobsters to prisoners. Alaska is full of seafood to the point that it is a staple (and considering many of the Inuit communities who have been on that diet for thousands of years). Just because the customs are different from other coastal communities in other countries doesn’t make America’s any less sophisticated.
  • bane 5y ago
    Yeah, I'm being reductive. But my impression as an American is that you don't have to get very far from a coastal area for seafood to pretty quickly diminish on the plates of the average person...and there's a lot of the U.S. that is very far from any coastal area. In other words, it's not unusual at all to hear people say "I don't really like seafood" or will eat it very minimally like in fried fish sticks and tuna salad only.
    • seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      And you can’t go very much anywhere in Greece or Japan and be away from the coast. What do you think they are eating deep inland in Russia, China, and Kazakhstan? That’s not even getting into range. You won’t find lobster or octopus on the west coast unless it’s imported from a far away place. Better luck on the gulf coast, but you would have to be used to Cajun food (which is distinctly American with French influence) or Caribbean (ditto). Never try and Google Cajun and octopus together.
    • pc86 5y ago
      I've lived in the Midwest US for years and this doesn't track with anyone I've ever met.
      • bane 5y ago
        Meet more people? The gross statistics back it up. The average American eats about as much seafood as the average Russian, which is surprising considering one has ample fisheries and coastal areas and the other doesn't. Both countries are about mid-line per capita globally at something like 20-30 lbs (9-13 kg) per person per year (vs 60-80 pounds (27-36 kg) for countries like Korea, Japan, etc.) More detail, if you look by locale in the U.S. the average Midwesterner eats something like under 1/4th the seafood of their coastal countrymates. That's not 1/4, that's again less than 1/4th so we're talking from zero to 7.5 pounds per capita. Since population distribution in the U.S. is heavily skewed towards the coasts, you can estimate that for example, the average of 20lbs per person per year is representative of the average coastal person. This means that the average Midwesterner eats less than 5 pounds of all types of seafood per person per year or about something like less than 1 small shrimp per day. The thing is, modern logistics make it possible to eat fresh Sushi in the middle of Kansas. Being away from the coasts isn't really an excuse as the availability is or can be approximately the same. *sources: something something forgot to copy paste use the google or DDG it's like 2 minutes of searching plus some math
        • seanmcdirmid 5y ago
          > The thing is, modern logistics make it possible to eat fresh Sushi in the middle of Kansas. Being away from the coasts isn't really an excuse as the availability is or can be approximately the same. Flash freezing is relatively new technology (I assume that’s what you mean by “fresh”). It is not surprising midwesterners go all out on sushi (the real kind, not Californian roles) just because the logistics are easier now. Food is local because it has been that way for the last hundred or so years.
  • hackernewds 5y ago
    When you mention a quintessential US state I wouldn't arrive at Alaska or New Orleans
    • seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      America is a huge country. Europe is huge as well, it’s not surprising that there are regional differences in our diet, and trying to generalize is always going to tick someone off.
  • kuhewa 5y ago
    > Just because the customs are different from other coastal communities in other countries doesn’t make America’s any less sophisticated. On average it is less sophisticated though. Most coastal Americans (US) only consume a subset of the breadth of diversity of seafood available to them relative to many other regions of the world.
    • seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      80% of America's seafood is imported, so it is not like Americans are producing. a lot of seafood along their coasts. The frozen tilapia we ate last night I think was from Chile. See: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/aquaculture/us-aquaculture https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/aquaculture/us-aquac...
      • kuhewa 5y ago
        Thats true, partially because of economics, but also because Americans' seafood palette involves farmed salmon, farmed tilapia and swai (not coastal seafood btw), etc. doesn't mean more diversity isn't available.
• deutschewelle 5y ago
  From your comment one might be inclined to picture that Koreans add it into everything which they do no more or less than other countries that consume it. You would have to specifically ask for this ingredient at a restaurant and it is only kept alive if it is prepared in a seafood restaurant specifically which they keep them alive and fresh to be consumed usually raw since its a bad idea to consume already dead raw fishes. I guess what you wrote does a really great job of illustrating the subtle passive aggressive tones often used by journalists in the West to mock or bring their personal stereotype views of the world while virtue signaling, constantly thinking and telling others what a great, upright, outstanding set of moral upbringing you've had, will have as a result of the perceived quality of life you might be experiencing. Following such mindset I can see why somebody in the West might be construed as uppity and condescending, they are not able to see at all the bubble that they've constructed not through actually perceiving things as they are but how it makes you FEEL informed, intelligent, morally superior being that you believe yourself you are. Which really leaves to little debate as to what the PURPOSE of these articles are: They are specifically brought to light to make the reader believe they are morally upright descent human beings that the rest of the world simply isn't. THE question to ask here is why is the population constantly subject to such reminders through mass media and why is there so much deliberate and urgency that can't be found in other parts of the world? Does it strike you that what we lack is probably what we are taught to believe as it would not fit with the reality that has been constructed in this country?
  • bane 5y ago
    I think it's interesting that there are comments even here that say something along the lines of "once I learned that the octopus is capable of thinking I stopped eating them (even though I eat other animals much higher up the evolutionary ladder)". What it says to me is that some people stopped eating them because it was surprising that octopuses have a complex sensory response system, because they never thought about it. But it's not surprising that a cow does so they keep eating them.
    • deutschewelle 5y ago
      > once I learned that the octopus is capable of thinking I stopped eating them (even though I eat other animals much higher up the evolutionary ladder)" Yes and this is exactly the issue here, that people in the world are increasingly incapable of being grounded in principle, its whatever in that moment is trendy to believe, do etc., through group thinking. Social media does a great job of trust in large numbers. And going back to the original parent comment, this is largely cultural is it not? We are simply using the ideas that arise from one culture to impose it on the other only to be disappointed. > What it says to me is that some people stopped eating them because it was surprising that octopuses have a complex sensory response system, because they never thought about it. But it's not surprising that a cow does so they keep eating them. It is insane to me that the people arguing octopus lives matter essentially, are not seeing the irony of their reaction, that they would continue to tolerate the farming of foods that they regularly consume (beef, chicken) but not under the same amount of vigor and without the same level of virtue signaling attached with such dangerous thought exercise. The craziest take away is that literally people will stop doing a behavior that is inconsistent with their own values, as long as they are made to FEEL informed. If the documentary was mostly powerpoint slides it is NOT possible to FEEL because it does not try to pander or manipulate the emotions of the audience. The sad matter of the fact is that being informed with facts that you have to weigh yourself and reach your own conclusion is too difficult, (boring even!) that the individual living in the so called "First World" CANNOT/MUST NOT be burdened with because they are too busy with whatever ephemeral activities they are engaged in at any given time. Remember! Original Parent noted eating octopus NEVER bothered him UNTIL he saw a Netflix documentary. Or one can reduce this to an outsider: Individuals in the West are increasingly growing dependent on for-profit motivated organizations to think and judge for them. The more obfuscated and difficult it is to follow the cui bono chain, the increasingly emotional and tribal they become. ex) If YC startup selling imitation crustacean meat was behind the Octopus Lives Matter, one would immediately deduce there are biases and conflict of interest and such narrative would lose credibility. However, if the distance between whoever benefits and the narrative is wide and uncertain (multiple beneficiaries) it becomes increasingly credible (must be of good non-profit social cause) and resilient against Truths that challenge it. Often explanations that deviate from the narrative are labelled with hostility and written off as conspiracy... and on HN, such contrary views are quickly downvoted and censored outright.