Minor things that bother you

[Big John]

i don't get food stamps, i get an 'electronic benefits transfer' card.

EBT is the electronic system. SNAP, also called food stamps, is the program.

That is carryover for when they had paper vouchers.

[hbelkins]

i don't get food stamps, i get an 'electronic benefits transfer' card.

EBT is the electronic system. SNAP, also called food stamps, is the program.

But were they ever really stamps? I remember "food coupons" that came in booklets, and the recipients weren't allowed to detach the coupons from the book. They had to give the book to the cashier to tear out the coupons.

[formulanone]

When restaurants sprinkle some sort of green garnish on top of food. Seriously, this has been an annoying trend in the last few years. It's not just fancy restaurants that do it anymore.

Fancy restaurants are actually less likely to do this.  Having worked in a bunch of them, one of my favorite quotes is "one you use parsley or kale as a garnish, you've lost all inspiration".  Garnishes should add flavor or texture, not just make a crappy dish look 1% less plain.

Chris

I think the original purpose of garnish was to cleanse the palate between courses or types of food. Putting it directly on the main course does not serve much purpose, so it's probably just for  color balance.

[Scott5114]

words. words bother me, tho this might be more of a 'thing that moderately bothers me':

at some point recently, we started on this 'lets nice-up potentially offensive things' kick.

i am no longer an ex-con. now i'm a 'justice-involved person'. the guy hanging out in front of wal-mart hitting me up for change isn't a homeless person. he's a 'person who is experiencing homelessness'.

whats the point of all this, really?

Both of these constructions are done to make the word "person" the primary focus. This is considered desirable by those who feel that terms like "ex-con" dehumanizes the person it's referring to, and "homeless person" makes it sound like "homeless" is an inherent, immutable quality of the person.

I don't necessarily feel like it's necessary, especially since it tends to be less concise, but that's the rationale.

[formulanone]

words. words bother me, tho this might be more of a 'thing that moderately bothers me':

at some point recently, we started on this 'lets nice-up potentially offensive things' kick.

i am no longer an ex-con. now i'm a 'justice-involved person'. the guy hanging out in front of wal-mart hitting me up for change isn't a homeless person. he's a 'person who is experiencing homelessness'.

whats the point of all this, really?

Both of these constructions are done to make the word "person" the primary focus. This is considered desirable by those who feel that terms like "ex-con" dehumanizes the person it's referring to, and "homeless person" makes it sound like "homeless" is an inherent, immutable quality of the person.

I don't necessarily feel like it's necessary, especially since it tends to be less concise, but that's the rationale.

Or re-programming.

https://youtu.be/vuEQixrBKCc

[JayhawkCO]

When restaurants sprinkle some sort of green garnish on top of food. Seriously, this has been an annoying trend in the last few years. It's not just fancy restaurants that do it anymore.

Fancy restaurants are actually less likely to do this.  Having worked in a bunch of them, one of my favorite quotes is "one you use parsley or kale as a garnish, you've lost all inspiration".  Garnishes should add flavor or texture, not just make a crappy dish look 1% less plain.

Chris

I think the original purpose of garnish was to cleanse the palate between courses or types of food. Putting it directly on the main course does not serve much purpose, so it's probably just for  color balance.

I've heard the palate cleansing thing re: parsley before although I've never seen anything to confirm that.  But on any course, you can have a garnish that does a bunch of different things: adds texture (think crispy noodles in egg drop soup), adds color (as you alluded to), adds aroma (a mint sprig in a mojito), adds flavor (any sauce or something like sesame seeds), etc.

Chris

[formulanone]

When restaurants sprinkle some sort of green garnish on top of food. Seriously, this has been an annoying trend in the last few years. It’s not just fancy restaurants that do it anymore.

Fancy restaurants are actually less likely to do this.  Having worked in a bunch of them, one of my favorite quotes is "one you use parsley or kale as a garnish, you've lost all inspiration".  Garnishes should add flavor or texture, not just make a crappy dish look 1% less plain.

Chris

I think the original purpose of garnish was to cleanse the palate between courses or types of food. Putting it directly on the main course does not serve much purpose, so it's probably just for  color balance.

I've heard the palate cleansing thing re: parsley before although I've never seen anything to confirm that.  But on any course, you can have a garnish that does a bunch of different things: adds texture (think crispy noodles in egg drop soup), adds color (as you alluded to), adds aroma (a mint sprig in a mojito), adds flavor (any sauce or something like sesame seeds), etc.

Chris

Long ago, I used to be the ordering clerk and That Computer Guy* for the food service departments at UF. When he told me he needed more parsley for next day's order, I asked why, and was told to try it between sampling different types of food.

I'm no food aficionado, but it seemed to do the trick, if you don't mind the plasticky notes and texture of parsley in the first place. But it does seem to empty out a flavor. (Maybe I was just susceptible to all the free samples on a college student's budget.)

* in mid-1990s, nobody I knew in the mainstream public really used the term I.T., but almost nobody else really felt comfortable around a PC.

[JayhawkCO]

When restaurants sprinkle some sort of green garnish on top of food. Seriously, this has been an annoying trend in the last few years. It's not just fancy restaurants that do it anymore.

Fancy restaurants are actually less likely to do this.  Having worked in a bunch of them, one of my favorite quotes is "one you use parsley or kale as a garnish, you've lost all inspiration".  Garnishes should add flavor or texture, not just make a crappy dish look 1% less plain.

Chris

I think the original purpose of garnish was to cleanse the palate between courses or types of food. Putting it directly on the main course does not serve much purpose, so it's probably just for  color balance.

I've heard the palate cleansing thing re: parsley before although I've never seen anything to confirm that.  But on any course, you can have a garnish that does a bunch of different things: adds texture (think crispy noodles in egg drop soup), adds color (as you alluded to), adds aroma (a mint sprig in a mojito), adds flavor (any sauce or something like sesame seeds), etc.

Chris

Long ago, I used to be the ordering clerk and That Computer Guy* for the food service departments at UF. When he told me he needed more parsley for next day's order, I asked why, and was told to try it between sampling different types of food.

I'm no food aficionado, but it seemed to do the trick, if you don't mind the plasticky notes and texture of parsley in the first place. But it does seem to empty out a flavor. (Maybe I was just susceptible to all the free samples on a college student's budget.)

* in mid-1990s, nobody I knew in the mainstream public really used the term I.T., but almost nobody else really felt comfortable around a PC.

I guess I don't understand why it was/is common to put a sprig of parsley on a plate to cleanse the palate in between bites.  If something on the plate doesn't pair well with everything else and wasn't meant to be eaten together, why is it on the plate in the first place?

Chris

[formulanone]

When restaurants sprinkle some sort of green garnish on top of food. Seriously, this has been an annoying trend in the last few years. It's not just fancy restaurants that do it anymore.

Fancy restaurants are actually less likely to do this.  Having worked in a bunch of them, one of my favorite quotes is "one you use parsley or kale as a garnish, you've lost all inspiration".  Garnishes should add flavor or texture, not just make a crappy dish look 1% less plain.

Chris

I think the original purpose of garnish was to cleanse the palate between courses or types of food. Putting it directly on the main course does not serve much purpose, so it's probably just for  color balance.

I've heard the palate cleansing thing re: parsley before although I've never seen anything to confirm that.  But on any course, you can have a garnish that does a bunch of different things: adds texture (think crispy noodles in egg drop soup), adds color (as you alluded to), adds aroma (a mint sprig in a mojito), adds flavor (any sauce or something like sesame seeds), etc.

Chris

Long ago, I used to be the ordering clerk and That Computer Guy* for the food service departments at UF. When he told me he needed more parsley for next day's order, I asked why, and was told to try it between sampling different types of food.

I'm no food aficionado, but it seemed to do the trick, if you don't mind the plasticky notes and texture of parsley in the first place. But it does seem to empty out a flavor. (Maybe I was just susceptible to all the free samples on a college student's budget.)

* in mid-1990s, nobody I knew in the mainstream public really used the term I.T., but almost nobody else really felt comfortable around a PC.

I guess I don't understand why it was/is common to put a sprig of parsley on a plate to cleanse the palate in between bites.  If something on the plate doesn't pair well with everything else and wasn't meant to be eaten together, why is it on the plate in the first place?

Chris

Probably not so much that they don't pair well, but to appreciate the differences in between a few bites. Otherwise, the plate might be one-third garnish.

[JayhawkCO]

Probably not so much that they don't pair well, but to appreciate the differences in between a few bites. Otherwise, the plate might be one-third garnish.

But coming from a former chef and restaurant GM at some high level places, I want everything to be a composed dish.  Wine should be the thing consumed in between bites to refresh the palate and allow for different enjoyment of the various components, not a leafy green.  If we're doing a whole tasting menu where you're doing multiple courses, it's very common to have something called an intermezzo which is a whole course designed to cleanse the palate.  I guess I'd rather see something like that than an afterthought that's tossed on the the side of the plate.

Chris

[jeffandnicole]

Things that bother me:

• People whose mantra is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", even though the technology is technologically obsolete, and it's replacement is both cheaper to operate, more efficient, and more productive. Plus, there is the issue of actually finding the replacement parts.
• In a similar brush stroke, people who cling on to the "old way of doing things", and resist even learning how to do things "the new way" because it is "too different" and perceive it to be "too complicated", even though the "new way", once learned, will be actually faster and less expensive.

While I get this, it also ignores the upfront cost to doing things.  If someone could save $50 a month by doing it the new way, but it's going to cost them $1,000 to buy the equipment, or days more time to learn the new way, most people aren't going to worry about it.  If someone *needs* to buy the new equipment or *have* to learn the new way because the former version just doesn't exist anymore, that's different.

Think of it in terms of LED lighting - it's cheaper to operate, but many people aren't going to remove their good working light bulbs to spend more money on LEDs.  As their existing light bulbs go dead, they'll change over.

[formulanone]

Probably not so much that they don't pair well, but to appreciate the differences in between a few bites. Otherwise, the plate might be one-third garnish.

But coming from a former chef and restaurant GM at some high level places, I want everything to be a composed dish.  Wine should be the thing consumed in between bites to refresh the palate and allow for different enjoyment of the various components, not a leafy green.  If we're doing a whole tasting menu where you're doing multiple courses, it's very common to have something called an intermezzo which is a whole course designed to cleanse the palate.  I guess I'd rather see something like that than an afterthought that's tossed on the the side of the plate.

Chris

Well you definitely worked at a fancier place than some university's hotel (we didn't serve alcohol, though I was responsible for ordering quite a lot of it for cooking or for premises such as the stadia).

[LilianaUwU]

I guess the thing is sorta road-related, but it's when people go considerably slower than the flow of traffic to enjoy the scenery. Just because the maximum speed is 90 km/h doesn't mean it's safe to go 60...

[Scott5114]

But coming from a former chef and restaurant GM at some high level places, I want everything to be a composed dish.  Wine should be the thing consumed in between bites to refresh the palate and allow for different enjoyment of the various components, not a leafy green.

What if the diner is a teetotaler or otherwise doesn't like wine?

[Scott5114]

Things that bother me:

• People whose mantra is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", even though the technology is technologically obsolete, and it's replacement is both cheaper to operate, more efficient, and more productive. Plus, there is the issue of actually finding the replacement parts.
• In a similar brush stroke, people who cling on to the "old way of doing things", and resist even learning how to do things "the new way" because it is "too different" and perceive it to be "too complicated", even though the "new way", once learned, will be actually faster and less expensive.

While I get this, it also ignores the upfront cost to doing things.  If someone could save $50 a month by doing it the new way, but it's going to cost them $1,000 to buy the equipment, or days more time to learn the new way, most people aren't going to worry about it.  If someone *needs* to buy the new equipment or *have* to learn the new way because the former version just doesn't exist anymore, that's different.

Think of it in terms of LED lighting - it's cheaper to operate, but many people aren't going to remove their good working light bulbs to spend more money on LEDs.  As their existing light bulbs go dead, they'll change over.

One of the first things I do when I move into a place is replace all of the bulbs with LED bulbs. Reason being, it's a lot easier to access the light fixtures when the house is newly moved-into, rather than after it's having been lived in for a while and accumulated clutter, etc. Second, I would rather get all the fixtures done at once and then not have to worry about it for a few years rather than have to intermittently replace them all here and there as they blow one by one. Third, I want to reduce the amount of energy loss due to incandescent usage as much as possible.

I usually keep the incandescent bulbs in a cabinet or whatever as "spares" but I'm not sure why. LEDs usually fail gradually rather than blowing out, so even when a bulb starts flickering I can deal with it until I can get around to getting a replacement.

In re "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", there are some cases where it makes sense to use technically obsolete equipment. Newer equipment may be optimized for a use case that didn't apply when the older equipment was in use, or the operator may well be more efficient with older equipment. An example is phones with physical keyboards; while touchscreens are cheaper and a more efficient use of space than physical keyboards, someone used to touch-typing on a physical keyboard can output far more text than if they were forced to upgrade to a touchscreen.

[J N Winkler]

I've seen parsley advocated as a way of killing garlic breath after eating dishes that contain garlic.  It's also one of the key ingredients in tabbouleh.  Otherwise, pretty much the only recipe I fix that uses it is a potato-and-onion soup.

[JayhawkCO]

But coming from a former chef and restaurant GM at some high level places, I want everything to be a composed dish.  Wine should be the thing consumed in between bites to refresh the palate and allow for different enjoyment of the various components, not a leafy green.

What if the diner is a teetotaler or otherwise doesn't like wine?

Just saying for an "ideal" dining experience.  Obviously not everyone drinks, but a) I'm dubious parsley does much and b) I think refreshing the palate is a somewhat unnecessary step.

Chris

[zachary_amaryllis]

I guess the thing is sorta road-related, but it's when people go considerably slower than the flow of traffic to enjoy the scenery. Just because the maximum speed is 90 km/h doesn't mean it's safe to go 60...

i live on a mountain road in a touristy area and experience this literally every day, tho in mph

speed limit on the road varies from 45 to 35, the 'real' speed most of us that live here go is more like 45-55 with the exception of some of the curves.

our specific problem is that said touristy mountain road is also a working state highway that people use to actually get places and commute to/from work.

[ZLoth]

While I get this, it also ignores the upfront cost to doing things.  If someone could save $50 a month by doing it the new way, but it's going to cost them $1,000 to buy the equipment, or days more time to learn the new way, most people aren't going to worry about it.  If someone *needs* to buy the new equipment or *have* to learn the new way because the former version just doesn't exist anymore, that's different.

If it costs $1,000 to purchase the new equipment, and there is a savings of $50 per month, then after 20 months, the equipment upgrade will pay for itself. Yes, there is a period of reduced productivity as there is a slight adaption period. You want to make sure that the disruption is minimized, and there is a good cost-benefit analysis.

One example I can think of is when I worked in a small family-owned machine shop in the late 1980s-1990s. At the time of purchase, the owner (my father) ignored my recommendations and overspent on a 80386-20Mhz system for AutoCAD for parts blueprints (this is the late 1980s) with a pen plotter for generating A and B-size drawings. As the drawing became more complex, it would take longer and longer to render the drawing on the screen. Four years after that system installation, I began recommending that we replace it with a 80486-66 MHz system to increase productivity by reducing rendering time by at least 50%. As it was still MS-DOS, it would have been a in-place copying of files over. The response was beyond "if it ain't broke", it was the owner comparing his age and throwing him away because he was "old". He was also tight-fisted, meaning that he used a graphics tablet (nicknamed the ouija board) to create the drawings. I have no problem with the graphics tablet.... until there was a technical issue where the pointer starts dancing around on the screen, potentially causing inaccurate input. It took some major jumps around before I got the release of funds to purchase a new one. Eventually, he did purchase a ink jet plotter which generated prints up to "D" size, and reduced the generation time for "A" and "B"-sized prints from several minutes to under one minute.

Eventually I left being a machinist and retrained for a full-time career in IT. After my departure, the system was replaced with a Pentium system under Windows. However, within two years of my departure, the owner has died, and the shop was subsequently shut down in 2000.

Another example involves my frugal German mother. She wanted to live with me as part of the move to Texas, so I made sure that I installed Roku televisions for the streaming capabilities. I am also a physical media collector and have a vast collection of older films on both DVD and Bluray, most of which have been ripped to a Plex media server. You would think that she would utilize resources that, from her perspective, were "free" to her. Oh no! She wanted her Lifetime channel fix for her nightly Golden Girls, and is paying for DirecTV Stream, although most of the time, it's just for background noise. Did I mention that I have the entire Golden Girls series on DVD without commercials? Yet she wants to pay $70 per month for a single channel.

Think of it in terms of LED lighting - it's cheaper to operate, but many people aren't going to remove their good working light bulbs to spend more money on LEDs.  As their existing light bulbs go dead, they'll change over.

One of the first things I do when I move into a place is replace all of the bulbs with LED bulbs. Reason being, it's a lot easier to access the light fixtures when the house is newly moved-into, rather than after it's having been lived in for a while and accumulated clutter, etc. Second, I would rather get all the fixtures done at once and then not have to worry about it for a few years rather than have to intermittently replace them all here and there as they blow one by one. Third, I want to reduce the amount of energy loss due to incandescent usage as much as possible.

The advantages of LED light bulbs over the legacy incandescent bulbs is the reduced power cost, longer life, and less energy wasted due to heat generation. Although they were expensive when LED bulbs first came out, the price has come down significantly. When I moved to Texas, I made sure that all of the bulbs in my home were replaced with LEDs before the movers arrived, although there may be a closet or two where an incandescent light still lives. I know I have incandescent bulbs in my pool, but those are rarely lit, and will be replaced as part of a pool equipment automation process some time in the future.

[jeffandnicole]

While I get this, it also ignores the upfront cost to doing things.  If someone could save $50 a month by doing it the new way, but it's going to cost them $1,000 to buy the equipment, or days more time to learn the new way, most people aren't going to worry about it.  If someone *needs* to buy the new equipment or *have* to learn the new way because the former version just doesn't exist anymore, that's different.

If it costs $1,000 to purchase the new equipment, and there is a savings of $50 per month, then after 20 months, the equipment upgrade will pay for itself. Yes, there is a period of reduced productivity as there is a slight adaption period. You want to make sure that the disruption is minimized, and there is a good cost-benefit analysis.

This also ignores that if the person doesn't have the $1,000 up front. Yes the payback maybe what to some people is a short period of time, but if a person doesn't have the thousand dollars to begin with, they will make due with the cheaper per-month option they already have.

And don't get stuck on the example amount here. If it's $10,000 or $100,000, fact is if the person doesn't have the money, they can't just simply upgrade because the technology is there.

No doubt you aren't buying a new car every time some new technology comes out, or a new phone every time something is improved. Even you have your limits on when you're going to go out and upgrade or purchase something new.

[hotdogPi]

I still have the original iPhone SE (the one between 5 and 6). It works perfectly fine except sometimes the ding for a text message doesn't occur. (I previously thought it was whenever I was in class based on my computer's calendar, but that's not the case, and it appears to be just a bug.) It can even run something that says it only works on the latest devices quite well. I see no need to upgrade.

Unrelated: minor things that bother you: if your username contains your first name, and it's a well-known name, why do you need to list your pronouns? (I've seen this on at least three unrelated websites.)

[jeffandnicole]

Unrelated: minor things that bother you: if your username contains your first name, and it's a well-known name, why do you need to list your pronouns? (I've seen this in on at least three unrelated websites.)

Name and perferred pronouns are unrelated.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Unrelated: minor things that bother you: if your username contains your first name, and it's a well-known name, why do you need to list your pronouns? (I've seen this in on at least three unrelated websites.)

Name and perferred pronouns are unrelated.

Yes. And not every trans/non-binary person changes their name, even after they come out as such in daily public life.

[J N Winkler]

People often refuse to upgrade to the latest and newest not just because they don't have the money in hand (and are unwilling to use some mechanism for spreading the cost in time, such as a loan, mortgage, or rent-to-own), but also because it is not, in fact, the best.  One non-IT-related example is cars:  if the one you're driving now runs well, is new enough to have multiport electronic fuel injection, and does not burn oil, then buying a brand-new replacement risks leaving you worse off in terms of deposits on intake valves (a common problem with gasoline direct injection), oil burning (often a result of designing in slow drainback to accommodate lower viscosities; otherwise, engine manufacturers have understood since the 1920's what it takes to achieve zero oil consumption), and even constrained outward visibility (the tradeoff for expanded airbag provision).

And even in cases where the willingness to upgrade exists, many people stall on transitioning to a new technology until it reaches a subjective threshold of maturity in terms of market availability.  With LED bulbs, for example, it is a lot easier to avoid compromising on color temperature and illumination pattern now than it was five years ago.

[Scott5114]

Unrelated: minor things that bother you: if your username contains your first name, and it's a well-known name, why do you need to list your pronouns? (I've seen this in on at least three unrelated websites.)

Name and perferred pronouns are unrelated.

Yes. And not every trans/non-binary person changes their name, even after they come out as such in daily public life.

It also normalizes the practice of listing pronouns, such that someone is not necessarily backdoor-outing themselves as trans or drawing attention to their transness by listing preferred pronouns. Thus, doing such also serves as a marker to show support for the trans community, even if the correct pronouns to use match up with what people would expect.