9 ms·

Pro chefs debate cooking tips and tricks

77 points by RafelMri 5y ago

0xbadcafebee 5y ago
I can feel Kenji's subconscious rage bubbling just looking at the title
- aerostable_slug 5y ago
  His rage seems to bubble for the silliest things, though. He won't even call kaffir lime leaves by their name because someone somewhere might take offense — which is ridiculous given the fact that the most likely etymology of the term isn't what some ignorant individuals assume. It's like never describing anyone as "niggardly" because stupid people exist. Now, his recipes are generally great, and I appreciate his generosity in giving away some recipes from the restaurant he co-founded.
  - djur 5y ago
    It's kind of odd that your example of his rage bubbling is that he uses one word rather than another. I'd have expected at least something like going around the internet criticizing people for using the word he doesn't prefer for reasons he disagrees with.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - unmole 5y ago
    > which is ridiculous given the fact that the most likely etymology of the term isn't what some ignorant individuals assume. What do you think is the most likely etymology that doesn't do back to Arabic for infidel?
    - aerostable_slug 5y ago
      I hate to cite the Wiki, but here goes (and it notes the attachment to the Arabic insult is not well supported in the literature): > The most likely etymology is through the Kaffirs, an ethnic group in Sri Lanka partly descended from Bantu slaves. The earliest known reference, under the alternative spelling "caffre" is in 1888 book The Cultivated Oranges, Lemons Etc. of India and Ceylon by Emanuel Bonavia, who notes, "The plantation coolies also smear it over their feet and legs, to keep off land leeches; and therefore in Ceylon [Sri Lanka] it has got also the name of Kudalu dchi, or Leech Lime. Europeans call it Caffre Lime." Similarly, H.F. MacMillan's 1910 book A Handbook of Tropical Gardening and Planting notes, "The 'Kaffir Lime' in Ceylon." [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir_lime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir_lime
      - unmole 5y ago
        > Kaffirs, an ethnic group in Sri Lanka partly descended from Bantu slaves. Which is again derived from the same Arabic root. Sure, it's not considered offensive in Sri Lanka but it's very offensive pretty much everywhere else.
  - giraffe_lady 5y ago
    I was reading the beginning of this thinking "oh god here we go again this is like that few years when everyone on reddit was slobbering to say the word niggardly and explain why it's good" and then you just did exactly that lmao. If a word is bothering someone why don't you find out why, instead of explain to them why it shouldn't?
    - doc_gunthrop 5y ago
      They didn't make any indication that it's good to use the word, but rather that self-censoring to mitigate the knee-jerk reaction of ignorant people is not good. > If a word is bothering someone why don't you find out why, instead of explain to them why it shouldn't? It's perfectly fine to explain why a word is not malicious because the person who initially misunderstood then acquires that knowledge and can then make the distinction. To go with the alternative promotes a pattern of behavior where, eventually, many words end up being forbidden from use all due to ignorance. Just because two words sound kind of similar, or are even homophones[1], doesn't make them synonymous. This should be common knowledge. 1: Even the word "homophone" is a prime example, as it was used by someone on the Ellen show which led to the host getting upset because she mistook it to mean something completely different.
tptacek 5y ago
Are any of these people "pro chefs"? It looks like they all either work for Bon Appetit, or do catering and private chef work. A "chef" runs a kitchen; it's like being the VP/Engineering of a cooking team.
- giraffe_lady 5y ago
  Eh it doesn't carry that meaning outside of the industry. You can fight it if you want but in english people seem to commonly understand "chef" to mean "professional, or maybe just fancy, cook."
bloqs 5y ago
If kitchen nightmares has taught me anything, it's that "Pro" is an incredibly low bar. Pass.
- radus 5y ago
  You don't think that these chefs and the ones featured on Kitchen Nightmares might be selected differently?
- jimbob45 5y ago
  https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sI7E8J1sGvw https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sI7E8J1sGvw There’s good content out there for you to learn from. I agree that it can be hidden behind mainstream garbage shows.
mark-r 5y ago
The transcript of that was totally unreadable, and did NOT motivate me to watch the video.
- Biganon 5y ago
  Reading part of the transcript made me realize how a huge percentage of your average entertainment video is just... nonsensical filling material. I mean.... like... you know... totally... like....... OK so... word.
baby 5y ago
Entertaining video, but I feel like a lot of cooking is pseudo-science and hear say. For example, everybody tells you to salt during cooking, when it's much better to salt, add paper, and olive oil, after cooking. Yet, everybody will argue with me like they can really tell a difference. It's interesting that this was not asked during the video though.
- aynyc 5y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0v32jYkSi0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0v32jYkSi0
  - baby 5y ago
    It depends how you like your food to taste. If you need ingredients to be as salty as possible, then sure, but when they hit your mouth with the salt that you added at the end it's not going to make much difference.
    - aynyc 5y ago
      I can't speak for your taste, but I can taste the difference, particularly with meat. I don't usually salt veggie that much.
      - baby 5y ago
        I suggest trying to add salt flakes on the already-grilled meat VS salting during cooking. To me it's much better.
        aynyc 5y ago
        I salt steaks for at least 4-5 hours before I grill them, then add a bit of salt when serving. I don't salt burgers before grilling. Like I say, certain people prefer different taste, and that's what make cooking an art rather than a science. But I'm surprised that you can't taste the different.
- 5y ago
radus 5y ago
Summary: 1. Fruits ripen faster if placed in a paper bag with apples or bananas. > Agree x 6 2. Marinating for 30 minutes achieves the same goal as marinating for 24 hours. > Disagree x 6. Tested on pork tenderloin. 3. Adding oil to pasta water prevents pasta from sticking. > Disagree x 6 4. Adding citrus to guacamole will stop it from oxidizing. > Agree x 6 5. You should wash your mushrooms before cooking. > Disagree x 6 6. Silpat baking mats are better for even baking versus parchment versus foil. > Agree x 5, Sideways x 1. Tested on chocolate chip cookies. 7. Beans need to be soaked overnight before cooking. > Disagree x 5, Agree x 1 8. The best way to get crispy bacon is to start with a cold pan. > Agree x 4, Disagree x 2. Tested on bacon. 9. The reverse-sear method is the best way to cook a perfect medium rare steak. > Disagree x 6 10. You should rinse your meat before cooking. > Disagree x 6 11. Hard boiled eggs should be started in cold water. > Disagree x 5, Agree x 1
- Semaphor 5y ago
  > 2. Marinating for 30 minutes achieves the same goal as marinating for 24 hours. I wonder if they confused the marinating with salt/vinegar softening? Marinating for taste should make no or barely any difference, salt/vinegar will need more time to work.
- zdragnar 5y ago
  Regarding #2, it is a shame they only had half hour and 24 hour options. Most marinade taste tests I've seen top out at around 3 hours, IIRC.
  - tptacek 5y ago
    The logic they're all using on #2 is verkakte; the aromatics they're talking about penetrating the meat don't penetrate at all (the molecules are too large). Salt penetrates, which is why brining works, but flavors generally don't.
    - zdragnar 5y ago
      Acidic components can also make a difference with time, especially with certain enzymes like in pineapple and I think maybe soy sauce. Personal taste test, chicken breast marinated in Italian salad dressing (or vinegar, oil, aromatics and a dash of mustard) definitely is best with at least an hour.
Mikeb85 5y ago
Pro chefs aren't the ones to ask here. It's a craft you learn through repetition and doesn't necessarily require much scientific knowledge. It's like the idea that you sear a piece of meat to 'seal in juices'. It's absolute nonsense, but you can sear a piece of meat and have it still be juicy. So it's one of those things that is widely believed to correlate when it doesn't. It's something done for flavour and texture and doesn't actually affect juiciness.
- resters 5y ago
  The perceived "juiciness" is actually the additional saliva produced as a result of the additional flavors.
  - Mikeb85 5y ago
    Maybe but there's definitely a difference in the amount of water content left when cooked say, MR vs MW (and final weight would reinforce that as well). And I find fattier cuts are perceived to be more 'juicy' as well.
ARCarr 5y ago
It's wild how unscientific this video was, and how all of them were basically going off of their gut feelings for answers.
- russfrank 5y ago
  That's Bonappetit for you. All of their videos of this nature have wildly unqualified folks. One of them featured Alex Delaney who I think was the editor in chief's assistant before he became drinks editor. I'm sure the guy cooks, but they lost my respect when they put him in a video about "Pro chefs". (I didn't watch this one, sorry, but I hope he's not in it)
- ehsankia 5y ago
  To me the point was how even pro chefs don't agree or know the answer. People like Kenji or Ragusea showed me how much of existing tricks aren't based in any real food science.
  - vncecartersknee 5y ago
    Helen Rennie is another good one
  - Xcelerate 5y ago
    Ragusea’s video about how searing in extra virgin olive oil is perfectly fine (and in fact healthier than more neutral oils due to the monounsatured fats) was eye-opening. My dad always liked to sear in olive oil and said he didn’t believe the claims that it would impart a burnt taste to the food (but it indeed gives the crust a non-neutral flavor if that’s what you’re going for). Personally, I never thought soaking dried beans overnight made sense. I eventually found a blog post where a chef did a blind taste test of soaking overnight vs directly boiling dried beans and found that they taste better without the soaking (but take longer to cook). Ever since then I have made what I think results in the tastiest hummus by skipping the soaking, skipping the baking soda (which imparts a weird aftertaste), and just straight boiling dried Umbrian chickpeas, followed by passing the final product through a #60 lab-grade sieve. Saves time, is much smoother, and tastes better than any recipe I’ve found online. The only item that I am surprised about on the list is the chefs’ collective opinion on reverse searing. Personally I’ve found it works better than almost anything else if you’re not looking for a technique that imparts additional flavor (e.g., grilling over binchotan is my ultimate favorite approach for many types of meat but that is due to the unique smoky flavor rather than grilling per se). Reverse searing tough cuts for 6-7 hours at a very low PID-controlled temperature even seems to work much better than braising for flavor. I would like to see some blind taste tests for claims about methods that work better than the reverse sear.
mdoms 5y ago
All I get is a black box that says "we're sorry something went wrong".
vncecartersknee 5y ago
As I've gotten more into cooking as I've gotten older it's frustrating how often people don't really understand why they do things the way they do when they cook something, yet will doggedly insist that it must be done that certain way. As I've started to watch more and pay attention to youtubers who explain why they do things in a logical and rational way, even if you're not interested in that particular recipe, the correctly explained and justified techniques will be beneficial in many other things you cook.
- pottertheotter 5y ago
  The problem is the pros do this all the time as well. There are plenty of top chefs that were taught something when they were young and they continue to do it and preach it despite evidence that it’s not true.
  - giraffe_lady 5y ago
    There are also cases where the thing the chefs were doing was correct, even if they didn't know why or had the wrong reason. This is both the pro and the con of tradition-based crafts. Anyway where were they even to get this information? Kenji has been influential the last few years, and he builds very heavily off of McGee, which came out in the mid 80s. It's been only like two generations of chefs here since evidence like this was even partially available. Before that, and still mostly, the intersection of science and cooking is driven by the needs of the industrial food system. Whether you can apply that to restaurant cooking probably depends a lot on your personal background and skill set, but most cooks I've worked with would be lost trying to read an academic food science paper and apply it to their work. I definitely would be.
  - jghn 5y ago
    That's a big part of the problem. Another issue is they're working in professional kitchens, and things aren't the same as they are for a home cook. Yes there are things a home cook can learn from pro kitchens, but a lot of other things don't translate. One thing I love about folks like Kenji, Brown, Gritzer, McGee, Cooks Illustrated, et al is they approach their experiments from the perspective of a reasonable home kitchen.
waswaswas 5y ago
A few other commenters have mentioned Kenji or Alton, but somehow Modernist Cuisine hasn’t yet been mentioned. 2500 pages packed with science, engineering, and stunning photography all in the name of making food as good as it can be, with an emphasis on rigorous empiricism and first principles analysis. After skimming it the first time, you begin to take a lot of other food media with a grain of salt.
- giraffe_lady 5y ago
  It's an incredible artifact but not very useful as a cooking resource, even the "at home" variants. It is more the kind of thing you have on hand to occasionally reference as you're developing a recipe. I'm trying to be charitable here but that series is laser-targeted at appealing to people who think science and engineering are virtues, rather than people who actually do cooking. Not that there isn't useful info in it, but it's more of a vanity project than something driven by a real need.

77 points by RafelMri 5y ago

0xbadcafebee 5y ago

I can feel Kenji's subconscious rage bubbling just looking at the title

aerostable_slug 5y ago
His rage seems to bubble for the silliest things, though. He won't even call kaffir lime leaves by their name because someone somewhere might take offense — which is ridiculous given the fact that the most likely etymology of the term isn't what some ignorant individuals assume. It's like never describing anyone as "niggardly" because stupid people exist. Now, his recipes are generally great, and I appreciate his generosity in giving away some recipes from the restaurant he co-founded.
- djur 5y ago
  It's kind of odd that your example of his rage bubbling is that he uses one word rather than another. I'd have expected at least something like going around the internet criticizing people for using the word he doesn't prefer for reasons he disagrees with.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- unmole 5y ago
  > which is ridiculous given the fact that the most likely etymology of the term isn't what some ignorant individuals assume. What do you think is the most likely etymology that doesn't do back to Arabic for infidel?
  - aerostable_slug 5y ago
    I hate to cite the Wiki, but here goes (and it notes the attachment to the Arabic insult is not well supported in the literature): > The most likely etymology is through the Kaffirs, an ethnic group in Sri Lanka partly descended from Bantu slaves. The earliest known reference, under the alternative spelling "caffre" is in 1888 book The Cultivated Oranges, Lemons Etc. of India and Ceylon by Emanuel Bonavia, who notes, "The plantation coolies also smear it over their feet and legs, to keep off land leeches; and therefore in Ceylon [Sri Lanka] it has got also the name of Kudalu dchi, or Leech Lime. Europeans call it Caffre Lime." Similarly, H.F. MacMillan's 1910 book A Handbook of Tropical Gardening and Planting notes, "The 'Kaffir Lime' in Ceylon." [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir_lime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir_lime
    - unmole 5y ago
      > Kaffirs, an ethnic group in Sri Lanka partly descended from Bantu slaves. Which is again derived from the same Arabic root. Sure, it's not considered offensive in Sri Lanka but it's very offensive pretty much everywhere else.
- giraffe_lady 5y ago
  I was reading the beginning of this thinking "oh god here we go again this is like that few years when everyone on reddit was slobbering to say the word niggardly and explain why it's good" and then you just did exactly that lmao. If a word is bothering someone why don't you find out why, instead of explain to them why it shouldn't?
  - doc_gunthrop 5y ago
    They didn't make any indication that it's good to use the word, but rather that self-censoring to mitigate the knee-jerk reaction of ignorant people is not good. > If a word is bothering someone why don't you find out why, instead of explain to them why it shouldn't? It's perfectly fine to explain why a word is not malicious because the person who initially misunderstood then acquires that knowledge and can then make the distinction. To go with the alternative promotes a pattern of behavior where, eventually, many words end up being forbidden from use all due to ignorance. Just because two words sound kind of similar, or are even homophones[1], doesn't make them synonymous. This should be common knowledge. 1: Even the word "homophone" is a prime example, as it was used by someone on the Ellen show which led to the host getting upset because she mistook it to mean something completely different.

tptacek 5y ago

Are any of these people "pro chefs"? It looks like they all either work for Bon Appetit, or do catering and private chef work. A "chef" runs a kitchen; it's like being the VP/Engineering of a cooking team.

giraffe_lady 5y ago
Eh it doesn't carry that meaning outside of the industry. You can fight it if you want but in english people seem to commonly understand "chef" to mean "professional, or maybe just fancy, cook."

bloqs 5y ago

If kitchen nightmares has taught me anything, it's that "Pro" is an incredibly low bar. Pass.

radus 5y ago
You don't think that these chefs and the ones featured on Kitchen Nightmares might be selected differently?
jimbob45 5y ago
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sI7E8J1sGvw https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sI7E8J1sGvw There’s good content out there for you to learn from. I agree that it can be hidden behind mainstream garbage shows.

mark-r 5y ago

The transcript of that was totally unreadable, and did NOT motivate me to watch the video.

Biganon 5y ago
Reading part of the transcript made me realize how a huge percentage of your average entertainment video is just... nonsensical filling material. I mean.... like... you know... totally... like....... OK so... word.

baby 5y ago

Entertaining video, but I feel like a lot of cooking is pseudo-science and hear say. For example, everybody tells you to salt during cooking, when it's much better to salt, add paper, and olive oil, after cooking. Yet, everybody will argue with me like they can really tell a difference. It's interesting that this was not asked during the video though.

aynyc 5y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0v32jYkSi0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0v32jYkSi0
- baby 5y ago
  It depends how you like your food to taste. If you need ingredients to be as salty as possible, then sure, but when they hit your mouth with the salt that you added at the end it's not going to make much difference.
  - aynyc 5y ago
    I can't speak for your taste, but I can taste the difference, particularly with meat. I don't usually salt veggie that much.
    - baby 5y ago
      I suggest trying to add salt flakes on the already-grilled meat VS salting during cooking. To me it's much better.
      - aynyc 5y ago
        I salt steaks for at least 4-5 hours before I grill them, then add a bit of salt when serving. I don't salt burgers before grilling. Like I say, certain people prefer different taste, and that's what make cooking an art rather than a science. But I'm surprised that you can't taste the different.
5y ago

radus 5y ago

Summary: 1. Fruits ripen faster if placed in a paper bag with apples or bananas. > Agree x 6 2. Marinating for 30 minutes achieves the same goal as marinating for 24 hours. > Disagree x 6. Tested on pork tenderloin. 3. Adding oil to pasta water prevents pasta from sticking. > Disagree x 6 4. Adding citrus to guacamole will stop it from oxidizing. > Agree x 6 5. You should wash your mushrooms before cooking. > Disagree x 6 6. Silpat baking mats are better for even baking versus parchment versus foil. > Agree x 5, Sideways x 1. Tested on chocolate chip cookies. 7. Beans need to be soaked overnight before cooking. > Disagree x 5, Agree x 1 8. The best way to get crispy bacon is to start with a cold pan. > Agree x 4, Disagree x 2. Tested on bacon. 9. The reverse-sear method is the best way to cook a perfect medium rare steak. > Disagree x 6 10. You should rinse your meat before cooking. > Disagree x 6 11. Hard boiled eggs should be started in cold water. > Disagree x 5, Agree x 1

Semaphor 5y ago
> 2. Marinating for 30 minutes achieves the same goal as marinating for 24 hours. I wonder if they confused the marinating with salt/vinegar softening? Marinating for taste should make no or barely any difference, salt/vinegar will need more time to work.
zdragnar 5y ago
Regarding #2, it is a shame they only had half hour and 24 hour options. Most marinade taste tests I've seen top out at around 3 hours, IIRC.
- tptacek 5y ago
  The logic they're all using on #2 is verkakte; the aromatics they're talking about penetrating the meat don't penetrate at all (the molecules are too large). Salt penetrates, which is why brining works, but flavors generally don't.
  - zdragnar 5y ago
    Acidic components can also make a difference with time, especially with certain enzymes like in pineapple and I think maybe soy sauce. Personal taste test, chicken breast marinated in Italian salad dressing (or vinegar, oil, aromatics and a dash of mustard) definitely is best with at least an hour.

Mikeb85 5y ago

Pro chefs aren't the ones to ask here. It's a craft you learn through repetition and doesn't necessarily require much scientific knowledge. It's like the idea that you sear a piece of meat to 'seal in juices'. It's absolute nonsense, but you can sear a piece of meat and have it still be juicy. So it's one of those things that is widely believed to correlate when it doesn't. It's something done for flavour and texture and doesn't actually affect juiciness.

resters 5y ago
The perceived "juiciness" is actually the additional saliva produced as a result of the additional flavors.
- Mikeb85 5y ago
  Maybe but there's definitely a difference in the amount of water content left when cooked say, MR vs MW (and final weight would reinforce that as well). And I find fattier cuts are perceived to be more 'juicy' as well.

ARCarr 5y ago

It's wild how unscientific this video was, and how all of them were basically going off of their gut feelings for answers.

russfrank 5y ago
That's Bonappetit for you. All of their videos of this nature have wildly unqualified folks. One of them featured Alex Delaney who I think was the editor in chief's assistant before he became drinks editor. I'm sure the guy cooks, but they lost my respect when they put him in a video about "Pro chefs". (I didn't watch this one, sorry, but I hope he's not in it)
ehsankia 5y ago
To me the point was how even pro chefs don't agree or know the answer. People like Kenji or Ragusea showed me how much of existing tricks aren't based in any real food science.
- vncecartersknee 5y ago
  Helen Rennie is another good one
- Xcelerate 5y ago
  Ragusea’s video about how searing in extra virgin olive oil is perfectly fine (and in fact healthier than more neutral oils due to the monounsatured fats) was eye-opening. My dad always liked to sear in olive oil and said he didn’t believe the claims that it would impart a burnt taste to the food (but it indeed gives the crust a non-neutral flavor if that’s what you’re going for). Personally, I never thought soaking dried beans overnight made sense. I eventually found a blog post where a chef did a blind taste test of soaking overnight vs directly boiling dried beans and found that they taste better without the soaking (but take longer to cook). Ever since then I have made what I think results in the tastiest hummus by skipping the soaking, skipping the baking soda (which imparts a weird aftertaste), and just straight boiling dried Umbrian chickpeas, followed by passing the final product through a #60 lab-grade sieve. Saves time, is much smoother, and tastes better than any recipe I’ve found online. The only item that I am surprised about on the list is the chefs’ collective opinion on reverse searing. Personally I’ve found it works better than almost anything else if you’re not looking for a technique that imparts additional flavor (e.g., grilling over binchotan is my ultimate favorite approach for many types of meat but that is due to the unique smoky flavor rather than grilling per se). Reverse searing tough cuts for 6-7 hours at a very low PID-controlled temperature even seems to work much better than braising for flavor. I would like to see some blind taste tests for claims about methods that work better than the reverse sear.

mdoms 5y ago

All I get is a black box that says "we're sorry something went wrong".

vncecartersknee 5y ago

As I've gotten more into cooking as I've gotten older it's frustrating how often people don't really understand why they do things the way they do when they cook something, yet will doggedly insist that it must be done that certain way. As I've started to watch more and pay attention to youtubers who explain why they do things in a logical and rational way, even if you're not interested in that particular recipe, the correctly explained and justified techniques will be beneficial in many other things you cook.

pottertheotter 5y ago
The problem is the pros do this all the time as well. There are plenty of top chefs that were taught something when they were young and they continue to do it and preach it despite evidence that it’s not true.
- giraffe_lady 5y ago
  There are also cases where the thing the chefs were doing was correct, even if they didn't know why or had the wrong reason. This is both the pro and the con of tradition-based crafts. Anyway where were they even to get this information? Kenji has been influential the last few years, and he builds very heavily off of McGee, which came out in the mid 80s. It's been only like two generations of chefs here since evidence like this was even partially available. Before that, and still mostly, the intersection of science and cooking is driven by the needs of the industrial food system. Whether you can apply that to restaurant cooking probably depends a lot on your personal background and skill set, but most cooks I've worked with would be lost trying to read an academic food science paper and apply it to their work. I definitely would be.
- jghn 5y ago
  That's a big part of the problem. Another issue is they're working in professional kitchens, and things aren't the same as they are for a home cook. Yes there are things a home cook can learn from pro kitchens, but a lot of other things don't translate. One thing I love about folks like Kenji, Brown, Gritzer, McGee, Cooks Illustrated, et al is they approach their experiments from the perspective of a reasonable home kitchen.

waswaswas 5y ago

A few other commenters have mentioned Kenji or Alton, but somehow Modernist Cuisine hasn’t yet been mentioned. 2500 pages packed with science, engineering, and stunning photography all in the name of making food as good as it can be, with an emphasis on rigorous empiricism and first principles analysis. After skimming it the first time, you begin to take a lot of other food media with a grain of salt.

giraffe_lady 5y ago
It's an incredible artifact but not very useful as a cooking resource, even the "at home" variants. It is more the kind of thing you have on hand to occasionally reference as you're developing a recipe. I'm trying to be charitable here but that series is laser-targeted at appealing to people who think science and engineering are virtues, rather than people who actually do cooking. Not that there isn't useful info in it, but it's more of a vanity project than something driven by a real need.