6 ms·

For the same reason devs lie about installing arch linux without any problem. When you are good at something, you don't realize how much you do anymore. This

For the same reason devs lie about installing arch linux without any problem. When you are good at something, you don't realize how much you do anymore. This article is unrelated, but has a good explananation of the problem in one section : Why not tell people to simply use x https://bitecode.substack.com/p/why-not-tell-people-to-simply-use https://bitecode.substack.com/p/why-not-tell-people-to-simpl...

dj_mc_merlin 3y ago
This is different. If you learn enough about Linux, you can install Arch in 15-20minutes no problem. Especially since learning about Linux means reinstalling your OS many times until you finally learn how to keep it clean and rescue it from any situation. You are not going to be able to cook chicken in 3-4minutes per side like so many recipes claim. It's just not possible to have a good outside temperature and a good inside temperature no matter how you cook it if you only have that amount of time. They're lying to make it seem easier and to get more clicks on their recipes.
- Broken_Hippo 3y ago
  Exactly this. You simply aren't going to speed up the chemical reactions that happen during cooking. Even if you do find a way, your result will often be different or the result of using ready-made ingredients at the store. (I can buy frozen caramelized onions, for example).
  - secondcoming 3y ago
    I think cooking times assume the ingredients are already at room temperature. If you cook chicken taken straight from the fridge it'll take longer and cook more unevenly than room temperature chicken.
    - fendy3002 3y ago
      it also depends on the cut and what you cook too. If you only stir-fry chickens that has been diced small with high heat, (I think?) you can achieve it 3-4 minutes, however that requires extreme precision and I think also require good utensils with precise heating. Cooking it longer, ex 7-8 minutes with lower heat usually bring better result and far easier. Deep-fry or boiling? I'm unsure. Steaming one? Surely you can't
      - tbossanova 3y ago
        Apparently, boiling one in clarified butter works OK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Biy5776ec https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Biy5776ec
- maccard 3y ago
  > You are not going to be able to cook chicken in 3-4minutes per side like so many recipes claim. Sure you are. meat thermometer, hot pan and a butterflied breast [0] will give you evenly cooked chicken in about 8 minutes. [0] https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/howto/guide/how-butterfly-chicken-breasts https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/howto/guide/how-butterfly-chicke...
  - dj_mc_merlin 3y ago
    OK, I'll admit butterflied chicken can be cooked that quickly. But basically all other forms of chicken take longer. For curry for example, even though I cut it into small pieces and it could be cooked only 8 minutes since you're going to cook it in the paste later, it's just not going to brown properly and the flavour is not going to be as good. Normal breasts or thighs take longer as well.
    - maccard 3y ago
      It's been a while since I made a meat-based curry (vegetarian now), but from when I was cooking with meat regularly there were a few things that helped hugely with that - hot pan (common theme, heh), and cooking in batches/not overcrowding the pan. You _definitely_ can't brown chicken for 6 portions of curry in one pan in 6-8 minutes, but you _can_ brown it in 2 (maybe 3) batches in 6 minutes per-batch. Honestly though, by the time you're accurately gauging browning vs cooking meat, and eyeballing batch size vs pan size, you've moved well past the point of relying on cooking times from recipes.
  - walthamstow 3y ago
    Preheating the pan is part of the cooking time, IMO. In your recipe I would heat my pan for a good 3-4 mins to be sure the temp stays high after the chicken goes in.
    - maccard 3y ago
      I don't agree, in the same way that preheating an oven isn't considered part of the cooking time, or vegetable prep isn't considered part of the cooking time.
- BiteCode_dev 3y ago
  True, in this extreme version that goes clearly against the laws of physics. But without going there, I can clearly hear my mother answering me that once again "it's very simple honey, 20 minutes top", when asked how she did the lunch. She consistently does this, yet when I copy everything she does, I'm lucky to get 40 minutes.
- eru 3y ago
  > Especially since learning about Linux means reinstalling your OS many times until you finally learn how to keep it clean and rescue it from any situation. Surely, you are dramatizing a bit here. Or are you assuming that everyone shares the same need to fiddle with everything?
  - dagw 3y ago
    Are you trying to actually learn Linux or just how to use Linux to get other work done. Learning how to use Linux to get work done doesn't require a 'need to fiddle' as you put it, but you're not going to really learn actual Linux (as in how the kernel and core operating system works and hangs together) without getting your hands dirty and breaking a lot of things along the way.
    - eru 3y ago
      Agreed. Well, these days you can do use VMs to destructively 'learn Linux' without messing up your real system.
    - Gordonjcp 3y ago
      Yes, but do you actually need to know that? I know that, I've been using Linux since the whole thing fitted on four 1.44MB floppies. I don't *care* though, and if my machine is fatally screwed up I just bust out the latest Ubuntu LTS, flatten, and reinstall. I haven't got time to muck about with rescuing a broken system. I've got stuff to do.
      - dagw 3y ago
        Yes, but do you actually need to know that? Do you actually need to know JavaScript? Or C? Or Japanese? As I said, if Linux is just the OS you use to do something else, then no. If your job/hobby is to actually develop Linux or tools that tie very tightly to Linux and how Linux operates, then yes.
        Gordonjcp 3y ago
- denton-scratch 3y ago
  > They're lying to make it seem easier and to get more clicks on their recipes. Doesn't make sense to me. I certainly don't choose a recipe based on the estimated time-to-complete. In fact I generally click through a bunch of recipes, and pick and choose the ideas that sound as if they'll work. Felicity Cloake does this, in her "How to cook the perfect..." series. She consults a bunch of top cookbooks, tries several mash-ups, and feeds the results to a tasting panel. At least, that's what she says she does; I'm inclined to believe her.
  - wartijn_ 3y ago
    Does make sense to me. I don’t want to combine recipes rely on my creative cooking skills, because I don’t have those skills. If I want to make a certain dish I look for recipes, pick one and follow that. If a recipe takes 2 hours to prepare and I don’t want to spend 2 hours in the kitchen, I pick something that doesn’t take as much time. I would be surprised if that isn’t the way most people use recipes. But I usually pick a recipe from a cook book I own. Searching for recipes online is a shitty experience.
  - Marsymars 3y ago
    Not familiar with Felicity Cloake, but as a non-professional home-cooking enthusiast, mash-ups are my go-to when I'm trying new recipes that I'm pulling from online. Results are usually pretty good! Did a Greek pasta salad a couple nights ago that turned out really nicely. Have been thinking about signing up for, or self-hosting some kind of recipe app to make managing it easier... as-is, I have a "recipes" bookmark folder, where each recipe gets a sub-folder with a bookmark for each referenced recipe. However, this approach suffers from linkrot, recipes are often poorly formatted, and it doesn't have anywhere for my notes to go.
- chrsjxn 3y ago
  > You are not going to be able to cook chicken in 3-4minutes per side like so many recipes claim. It's just not possible to have a good outside temperature and a good inside temperature no matter how you cook it if you only have that amount of time. They're lying to make it seem easier and to get more clicks on their recipes. Some of this is probably a difference between home and commercial kitchen equipment. I know my stove doesn't have the same kind of heat output that a commercial stove would, let alone specialty equipment like pizza ovens or wok burners. And lots of home range hoods are awful for ventilation, which makes it even more impractical to cook at a high heat.
  - dj_mc_merlin 3y ago
    It's not just about the heat output, although that does make a difference (cooking edit: thin* steak on a weak electric stove is hell). There is no amount of heat that will penetrate the inner part of the chicken while not burning the outside cooking only 3-4 minutes per side (unless you reduce the thickness of the chicken via butterflying, as another commenter pointed out, but you don't want to always to do that).
    - chrsjxn 3y ago
      I'm mostly thinking outside the scope of just this one example. Even good recipes have a lot of variability in cooking time. The differences between how hot people cook at home and how hot they cook in commercial spaces is one of the ones that's hardest to control for (unless you want to remodel your kitchen...)
- pkilgore 3y ago
  Just FYI you can easily cook a room temp chicken breast or thigh (or lots of them) 4 minutes a side directly below a broiler on a broiler pan, letting them rest covered for 5 afterwards. Add a minute for the genetic freak 2+ inch thick ones. You will need to pat the moisture off them first and brush with oil.
  - grumple 3y ago
    You may have changed the color of the meat and killed off the bacteria to make it safe to eat, but you didn't make good chicken. It takes time and lower heat to cook through, create good flavor, and get good texture. Sure you can put any food in an incinerator for 2 minutes and it's "cooked", but not really.
    - zamnos 3y ago
      How do your want to define cooked then? cooked != tasty it just means it's no longer pink and will kill you with salmonella inside. Doesn't mean it's not dry or bland or any other implications
      - bluGill 3y ago
        I want cooked to be something I want to eat. I don't eat at McDonalds, while the food is safe to eat, it is also gross.
      - grumple 3y ago
        Well, if we're getting into semantics we could maybe say cooked vs prepared, I'm not sure. There's obvious physical differences between burnt onions and caramelized onions. Similarly, there's obvious physical differences between scorched, dry, but safe to eat chicken, and chicken that has been prepared properly and is tender and juicy. In the context of this thread, we've been talking about cooking things as part of recipes, so the end result and quality is obviously important.
      - Broken_Hippo 3y ago
        Considering that we are talking about cooking from recipes, I' assume that "cooked" means "palatable" - or at least, an attempt as such. It still might be dry or bland, mind you, but more than the minimum needed to make it safe to eat.
- Gordonjcp 3y ago
  > Especially since learning about Linux means reinstalling your OS many times until you finally learn how to keep it clean and rescue it from any situation. People bother to do that? Just wipe, reinstall, and run your postinst scripts to restore everything you need.
codeflo 3y ago
Python packaging is a special kind of dependency hell, you get the feeling that forward compatibility is an unknown idea and everything depends on the precise version of anything else. Last time I checked, some of the most popular packages hadn’t even been ported yet to a stable Python release that was six months old at the time, forcing me to downgrade. It’s essentially the most unpythonic aspect of working in Python: a zillion incompatible ways to do things, and nothing works out of the box.
bittercynic 3y ago
They might differ on what's a problem, too. I've installed arch a few times, and there were some things I had to do, but I wouldn't say I had problems. It was generally a pretty enjoyable experience.
- Gordonjcp 3y ago
  I love the way the packaging system works. I dislike the rolling release thing.
konionio 3y ago
[dead]

dj_mc_merlin 3y ago

This is different. If you learn enough about Linux, you can install Arch in 15-20minutes no problem. Especially since learning about Linux means reinstalling your OS many times until you finally learn how to keep it clean and rescue it from any situation. You are not going to be able to cook chicken in 3-4minutes per side like so many recipes claim. It's just not possible to have a good outside temperature and a good inside temperature no matter how you cook it if you only have that amount of time. They're lying to make it seem easier and to get more clicks on their recipes.

Broken_Hippo 3y ago
Exactly this. You simply aren't going to speed up the chemical reactions that happen during cooking. Even if you do find a way, your result will often be different or the result of using ready-made ingredients at the store. (I can buy frozen caramelized onions, for example).
- secondcoming 3y ago
  I think cooking times assume the ingredients are already at room temperature. If you cook chicken taken straight from the fridge it'll take longer and cook more unevenly than room temperature chicken.
  - fendy3002 3y ago
    it also depends on the cut and what you cook too. If you only stir-fry chickens that has been diced small with high heat, (I think?) you can achieve it 3-4 minutes, however that requires extreme precision and I think also require good utensils with precise heating. Cooking it longer, ex 7-8 minutes with lower heat usually bring better result and far easier. Deep-fry or boiling? I'm unsure. Steaming one? Surely you can't
    - tbossanova 3y ago
      Apparently, boiling one in clarified butter works OK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Biy5776ec https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Biy5776ec
maccard 3y ago
> You are not going to be able to cook chicken in 3-4minutes per side like so many recipes claim. Sure you are. meat thermometer, hot pan and a butterflied breast [0] will give you evenly cooked chicken in about 8 minutes. [0] https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/howto/guide/how-butterfly-chicken-breasts https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/howto/guide/how-butterfly-chicke...
- dj_mc_merlin 3y ago
  OK, I'll admit butterflied chicken can be cooked that quickly. But basically all other forms of chicken take longer. For curry for example, even though I cut it into small pieces and it could be cooked only 8 minutes since you're going to cook it in the paste later, it's just not going to brown properly and the flavour is not going to be as good. Normal breasts or thighs take longer as well.
  - maccard 3y ago
    It's been a while since I made a meat-based curry (vegetarian now), but from when I was cooking with meat regularly there were a few things that helped hugely with that - hot pan (common theme, heh), and cooking in batches/not overcrowding the pan. You _definitely_ can't brown chicken for 6 portions of curry in one pan in 6-8 minutes, but you _can_ brown it in 2 (maybe 3) batches in 6 minutes per-batch. Honestly though, by the time you're accurately gauging browning vs cooking meat, and eyeballing batch size vs pan size, you've moved well past the point of relying on cooking times from recipes.
- walthamstow 3y ago
  Preheating the pan is part of the cooking time, IMO. In your recipe I would heat my pan for a good 3-4 mins to be sure the temp stays high after the chicken goes in.
  - maccard 3y ago
    I don't agree, in the same way that preheating an oven isn't considered part of the cooking time, or vegetable prep isn't considered part of the cooking time.
BiteCode_dev 3y ago
True, in this extreme version that goes clearly against the laws of physics. But without going there, I can clearly hear my mother answering me that once again "it's very simple honey, 20 minutes top", when asked how she did the lunch. She consistently does this, yet when I copy everything she does, I'm lucky to get 40 minutes.
eru 3y ago
> Especially since learning about Linux means reinstalling your OS many times until you finally learn how to keep it clean and rescue it from any situation. Surely, you are dramatizing a bit here. Or are you assuming that everyone shares the same need to fiddle with everything?
- dagw 3y ago
  Are you trying to actually learn Linux or just how to use Linux to get other work done. Learning how to use Linux to get work done doesn't require a 'need to fiddle' as you put it, but you're not going to really learn actual Linux (as in how the kernel and core operating system works and hangs together) without getting your hands dirty and breaking a lot of things along the way.
  - eru 3y ago
    Agreed. Well, these days you can do use VMs to destructively 'learn Linux' without messing up your real system.
  - Gordonjcp 3y ago
    Yes, but do you actually need to know that? I know that, I've been using Linux since the whole thing fitted on four 1.44MB floppies. I don't *care* though, and if my machine is fatally screwed up I just bust out the latest Ubuntu LTS, flatten, and reinstall. I haven't got time to muck about with rescuing a broken system. I've got stuff to do.
    - dagw 3y ago
      Yes, but do you actually need to know that? Do you actually need to know JavaScript? Or C? Or Japanese? As I said, if Linux is just the OS you use to do something else, then no. If your job/hobby is to actually develop Linux or tools that tie very tightly to Linux and how Linux operates, then yes.
      - Gordonjcp 3y ago
denton-scratch 3y ago
> They're lying to make it seem easier and to get more clicks on their recipes. Doesn't make sense to me. I certainly don't choose a recipe based on the estimated time-to-complete. In fact I generally click through a bunch of recipes, and pick and choose the ideas that sound as if they'll work. Felicity Cloake does this, in her "How to cook the perfect..." series. She consults a bunch of top cookbooks, tries several mash-ups, and feeds the results to a tasting panel. At least, that's what she says she does; I'm inclined to believe her.
- wartijn_ 3y ago
  Does make sense to me. I don’t want to combine recipes rely on my creative cooking skills, because I don’t have those skills. If I want to make a certain dish I look for recipes, pick one and follow that. If a recipe takes 2 hours to prepare and I don’t want to spend 2 hours in the kitchen, I pick something that doesn’t take as much time. I would be surprised if that isn’t the way most people use recipes. But I usually pick a recipe from a cook book I own. Searching for recipes online is a shitty experience.
- Marsymars 3y ago
  Not familiar with Felicity Cloake, but as a non-professional home-cooking enthusiast, mash-ups are my go-to when I'm trying new recipes that I'm pulling from online. Results are usually pretty good! Did a Greek pasta salad a couple nights ago that turned out really nicely. Have been thinking about signing up for, or self-hosting some kind of recipe app to make managing it easier... as-is, I have a "recipes" bookmark folder, where each recipe gets a sub-folder with a bookmark for each referenced recipe. However, this approach suffers from linkrot, recipes are often poorly formatted, and it doesn't have anywhere for my notes to go.
chrsjxn 3y ago
> You are not going to be able to cook chicken in 3-4minutes per side like so many recipes claim. It's just not possible to have a good outside temperature and a good inside temperature no matter how you cook it if you only have that amount of time. They're lying to make it seem easier and to get more clicks on their recipes. Some of this is probably a difference between home and commercial kitchen equipment. I know my stove doesn't have the same kind of heat output that a commercial stove would, let alone specialty equipment like pizza ovens or wok burners. And lots of home range hoods are awful for ventilation, which makes it even more impractical to cook at a high heat.
- dj_mc_merlin 3y ago
  It's not just about the heat output, although that does make a difference (cooking edit: thin* steak on a weak electric stove is hell). There is no amount of heat that will penetrate the inner part of the chicken while not burning the outside cooking only 3-4 minutes per side (unless you reduce the thickness of the chicken via butterflying, as another commenter pointed out, but you don't want to always to do that).
  - chrsjxn 3y ago
    I'm mostly thinking outside the scope of just this one example. Even good recipes have a lot of variability in cooking time. The differences between how hot people cook at home and how hot they cook in commercial spaces is one of the ones that's hardest to control for (unless you want to remodel your kitchen...)
pkilgore 3y ago
Just FYI you can easily cook a room temp chicken breast or thigh (or lots of them) 4 minutes a side directly below a broiler on a broiler pan, letting them rest covered for 5 afterwards. Add a minute for the genetic freak 2+ inch thick ones. You will need to pat the moisture off them first and brush with oil.
- grumple 3y ago
  You may have changed the color of the meat and killed off the bacteria to make it safe to eat, but you didn't make good chicken. It takes time and lower heat to cook through, create good flavor, and get good texture. Sure you can put any food in an incinerator for 2 minutes and it's "cooked", but not really.
  - zamnos 3y ago
    How do your want to define cooked then? cooked != tasty it just means it's no longer pink and will kill you with salmonella inside. Doesn't mean it's not dry or bland or any other implications
    - bluGill 3y ago
      I want cooked to be something I want to eat. I don't eat at McDonalds, while the food is safe to eat, it is also gross.
    - grumple 3y ago
      Well, if we're getting into semantics we could maybe say cooked vs prepared, I'm not sure. There's obvious physical differences between burnt onions and caramelized onions. Similarly, there's obvious physical differences between scorched, dry, but safe to eat chicken, and chicken that has been prepared properly and is tender and juicy. In the context of this thread, we've been talking about cooking things as part of recipes, so the end result and quality is obviously important.
    - Broken_Hippo 3y ago
      Considering that we are talking about cooking from recipes, I' assume that "cooked" means "palatable" - or at least, an attempt as such. It still might be dry or bland, mind you, but more than the minimum needed to make it safe to eat.
Gordonjcp 3y ago
> Especially since learning about Linux means reinstalling your OS many times until you finally learn how to keep it clean and rescue it from any situation. People bother to do that? Just wipe, reinstall, and run your postinst scripts to restore everything you need.

codeflo 3y ago

Python packaging is a special kind of dependency hell, you get the feeling that forward compatibility is an unknown idea and everything depends on the precise version of anything else. Last time I checked, some of the most popular packages hadn’t even been ported yet to a stable Python release that was six months old at the time, forcing me to downgrade. It’s essentially the most unpythonic aspect of working in Python: a zillion incompatible ways to do things, and nothing works out of the box.

bittercynic 3y ago

They might differ on what's a problem, too. I've installed arch a few times, and there were some things I had to do, but I wouldn't say I had problems. It was generally a pretty enjoyable experience.

Gordonjcp 3y ago
I love the way the packaging system works. I dislike the rolling release thing.

konionio 3y ago

[dead]