It's more like waiting 2-3 days after roasting. Beans should ideally be used within 2-4 weeks of the roast date, with darker roasts/blends being more forgiving.
For espresso at least, the advice is to let it rest for 1-2 weeks after roasting. Roasting traps CO2 in the beans, and the aim with resting the coffee is to let some of it escape. It’s especially important for espresso but resting filter blends up to 2 weeks after roasting is becoming common advice too.
the grind needs to be adjusted for room conditions (temperature and humidity). What typically happened in the cafes I've worked in is the barista would dial it in in the morning (by taste) and then adjust in the afternoon. Worth mentioning that these places use grinders with much smaller increments than your typical domestic grinder.
For the record, single origin beans for black coffee have lost most of their top notes 2-3 weeks after roasting
I got into manual lever espresso during the pandemic, and was shocked at how different the same coffee on the same grind setting would act under pressure at 10am and 3pm. Settings would be perfect for 10am, but a complete mess barely able to hold pressure as the water gushed through the puck at 3pm.
> single origin beans for black coffee have lost most of their top notes 2-3 weeks after roasting
nah. Sey coffee, one of the top roasters in the country (who also buys very high quality green coffee to roast), puts on the package "best after 2 weeks"
and it's relative, top grade coffee after it gets "old" (for whatever value of old) is still better than lesser quality that never tasted that good in the first place. I'm talking about aromatics, tea like fruit notes, etc.
Agreed, GNOME is so user-hostile that I'm actually a little impressed.
Personal example from trying GNOME out recently: I have an external webcam, which means I need to move the GNOME panel clock since it's in the top middle of the screen (and thus blocked by the base of the webcam). You would _think_ that would be easy, but you have to get an extension just to move the clock! Apparently each panel "widget" (this may or may not be the official term) defines its own position on the panel. So, to move something, you need to either find an extension that does it (Frippery Move Clock[0] in this case) or edit the widget code yourself.
Maybe someone can chime in with a technical explanation, but my cynical take is that the GNOME devs don't even trust users to be smart enough to customize their own panel without breaking things.
They're not really user-hostile, they just have limited development resources and making a polished interface for editing the positioning of top bar widgets would be way too much work. If you want to try things on your own, that's what unofficial extensions and tweaking tools are for.
Can’t really blame them for not producing the slick configuration GUI for every option. But it is annoying that they always go for the slick configuration GUI, as if they were a for profit company with a bunch of full time devs. Meanwhile every other open source program, recognizing that it has limited developer time (and interest in boring grunt work), just sets up easier text-centric config first…
The text-centric config for GNOME is dconf/gsettings. But what people like to complain about is graphical configuration, which adds enough maintenance burden that it's only worth doing if it's going to be friendly enough for most novice users.
There are several full time paid developers working on it which is plenty of resources (AFAIK more than KDE). They are not only actively user-hostile but also community-hostile. Every library or project they have under their umbrella receives updates all the time that only serve GNOME and potentially break all software dependent on it that are not part of GNOME (e.g [1]).
The example doesnt seem to support your argument. The rationale the developer gives here is reasonable and looks like good stewardship of a shared library - the patch added a new API that was tightly based on termites' needs and provided little benefit for other terminal programs. What the maintainer wanted was a more complete API for the feature. The termite dev said he did not want to implement this feature in the library. This is also reasonable. Its his code and his time. So we have two people who can't find/commit to a solution everyone is happy with. It doesn't really seem user hostile at all, just that something couldnt be worked out. Sure, its frustrating when its an app you really like, but sometimes interests wont align even when it seems from the outside like they should.
That reading doesn't really agree with the maintainers' responses at all.
They say this is desirable functionality, but that they would want to subsume termites features in VTE and Gnome Terminal, and that was their rationale for rejecting the patch. Then they didn't deliver those features in a timely fashion.
What you're saying is simply that GNOME developers don't want to pick up development and maintenance burden that isn't going to directly benefit their project. If you think there's opportunities to share projects or libraries across DE's, the proper venue for that would be freedesktop.org not really GNOME itself. Then the maintenance load can be shared as well.
This has been tried. All you will get is rejected pull requests. What makes it even worse is that GNOME has usurped many projects that were original not part of GNOME but that the community relies on (one example is the "GIMP Tool Kit"). This led to the death of many long tail niche projects which are the actual strength of Linux/FOSS.
Nah a bunch of clowns funded by private companies used their salaries to boost their egos to develop stupid anti-user centric desktop software starting after gnome 3 launched. Remove all options, treat everyone like an iPad baby and try to leverage the existing desktop to do a radical paradigm shift, when all people wanted was GNOME2+. This is actually different than KDE3->KDE4 transition, which while it was a total disaster in terms of usability and reliablity, continued to keep the roots of a power desktop in terms of flexibility configuration and software customization.
GNOME2+ is still around, that's what Mate is. GNOME 3 and later releases has great support for convergence, which is incredibly popular among users - while also being very easy to use via the keyboard, for a more traditional workflow. Ubuntu's Unity interface was built with similar goals, so this is quite far from a pure GNOME thing.
Many high-end laptops have touchscreens these days. So the resemblance is quite appropriate. I would like to see a "compact", non-touchscreen mode in case no touch hardware is being used but it should be optional, for users who are okay with that level of fine-grained control.
Dude, please. You're posting a shallow dismissal of a project that's doing a lot of work to make *nix-like OS's more usable for novice and non-technical users. HN deserves a lot better than this.
I used GNOME for a long time, but I didn't like the bloat, among other things, such as the "I know better than you" attitude from the devs. At the same time KDE has a tendency to get me into rabbit holes, and then inevitably something breaks at some point that I don't know how to repair because it is rather too complicated of a system. (This is ~2017, not sure if things have changed). For now, I just use bspwm, polybar and a set of GUI applications. While they are less friendly to set up, they are much easier to understand for me.
Things have changed a lot since 2017. In 2017, I wouldn't touch KDE with a barge pole because I had work to do and it would disassemble itself if I looked at it funny.
Now I'm writing this reply from KDE, quite comfortably, and it's quite stable. Comfortable, even. And it doesn't get stupid and die when I plug/unplug monitors and stuff.
Similarly, nowadays I use XFCE but could have been KDE as well, JavaScript everywhere and having killed design tooling for Gtk4, doesn't really make it appealing, and once upon a time I wrote an article for "The C/C++ Users Journal" advocating for Gtkmm.
Detecting gravitational waves requires extreme precision. Pastries are in the ordinary precision range. :)
Joking aside I suspect if you are good enough where the limiting factor in your baking is the precision of butter specified as opposed to sloppy techniques you are better off using a recipe written by a professional pastry chef for other proficient bakers. In my experience they usually write quantities in terms of weight and recommend measuring it that way.
For example Claire Saffitz calls in her Confetti Cake recipe for "3 sticks unsalted butter (12 oz / 340g), at room temperature". That would indicate that the 100g approximation is 13% low.
I make a lot of pastry, actually. I've even gone to school for it, though I don't do it professionally now. Variable moisture content of flour is a bigger variable. I can't think of a case where someone would be using sticks of butter and 100 grams is not close enough.
If you're a commercial food manufacturer with a factory then yes. For everyone else up to "professional with a pastry shop" it's way less dire then you make it seem.
When you care about "extreme precision", you should also buy the same brand over and over again. In such case, the difference in sticks will not exist.
GNOME has a major governance problem; the devs don't seem to care about anyone else in the GNOME ecosystem. Thumbnails in the file picker is such an egregious example it's become a huge joke in the linux community.
It amazes me that GNOME is still the default DE on so many distros, especially as KDE has so many sane defaults and makes for a smoother transition for users coming from Windows.
I see many comments to this effect, but I think it's a misconception. I really doubt changing the governance is going to get issues like thumbnails fixed. From my perspective, what is actually missing is a lack of money and/or qualified volunteers.
Maybe if they'd quit genuflecting to boondoggles like OPW to the point of bankruptcy they'd have more money? And even better, maybe more people would donate?
I don't understand how this is related, the FAQ explains that was a one time accounting error that was resolved.
"As a result of these issues, we have only just now finalized our 2014 budget. In the meantime, we made assumptions based on previous years' incomes and expenditures, and we authorized expenditures for this year based on those assumptions. Those assumptions proved to be more optimistic than reality. In addition, while our outgoing payments to interns must be strictly timed, the incoming payments from sponsoring organizations are very fluid, thus we have had to front the costs of OPW. Fronting these costs has resulted in a budget shortfall.
"The situation has already improved as some 2014 Advisory Board fees and outstanding OPW invoices have been paid. The board expect more to be paid within the next 4 weeks. If there are no unexpected issues and no delays, the freeze should be lifted by July."
The foundation didn't go bankrupt. Also:
1. The foundation doesn't (currently) even fund any developers despite having resolved those issues, because developers are pretty expensive.
2. I wasn't referring to the foundation specifically anyway. If you don't want to support the foundation you can just donate to a developer/project individually, if they are open to it.
3. I don't think the issue can be reduced to lack of donations. Donations are good but aren't really a reliable funding source. A healthy project usually needs other funding sources than just donations.
I got a long way upgrading an old X220 but recently purchased a 51nb X210 (modified X201 with a new mobo) and it's excellent. USB 3, heaps of RAM and a 3k x 2k display
Heraclitus, a Greek philosopher, is quoted as saying "change is the only constant in life."
Cutting my teeth with computers from the 80s through to the 00s, it's bemusing to see people resorting to hotrodding ancient shells of computers that in times previous would have been replaced every two years.
Maybe this slower rate of change is more sustainable, or maybe it is a temporary blip. At least the new Apple chips were good, but I'd rather wait for everybody else to catch up, however long it takes.
I am increasingly uncomfortable with how slowly things are moving. I don't remember generations past complaining about decceleration, rather the opposite.
It'd be awesome if new computers weren't missing so many desirable features.
With a modded old thinkpad I can get 95Wh of battery, I can get another 75Wh in 10 seconds by swapping the external battery.
I can get a 1440p 400nits matte display, even a version with HDR support or in 4K exists.
I can get as much RAM as I desire, thunderbolt 3 support, USB ports, ethernet port, hdmi, smartcard reader, sd card reader, LTE support, charging via usb c and via the old style connector.
I can use old docks and thunderbolt docks.
All that's missing is upgrading the CPU and the thunderbolt port to more lanes.
Which modern PC offers in 1.1kg-1.3kg 95Wh of battery, such a good display, such great reliability and connectivity, with 16 or 32GB of ddr4-3200mhz ram, 2TB NVMe storage, for less than 500€?
Which modern PC can even compete at all with that offer?
If you could replace the motherboard with these chinese mods, and add the ThinkPad 25 keyboard (with minor mods it fits into the T470) you could turn a T470 into the ultimate ThinkPad.
Which modern PC can even compete at all with that offer?
Excepting the price the m1 macbook air is a strong contender. It is roughly the width and depth of an x220 but half the height, 1.3 kg, P3 400 nits high dpi IPS display, insane battery life (to the point of not needing a spare), P series performance, trackpad so good I don’t miss a trackpoint. It is missing the great keyboard and the ports though, although in practice the only thing I really miss going to the mba from a thinkpad is usb-a.
Even if you ignore the keyboard and the ports, the M1 has significantly worse battery.
The M1 13" has 58Wh, the M1 14" has 70Wh. And while the M1 does use less power in idle, under load it's just as power hungry as all the other processors, so for serious usage the battery would become a bottleneck.
The aforementioned thinkpad can get 95Wh, and you can swap batteries if you carry a spare. That's 170Wh of power in just 1.6kg. You can get a LOT of mileage out of that.
Now imagine an updated T470 with a more power efficient processor, e.g. a recent ryzen or an M1. Such a hypothetical device would last you forever, even if your system is at full load.
"There's a sucker born every minute." -- Somebody in the 1800s marketing Ye olde Apple® Pro Stand™.
I expect the trend to continue, as individuals find it more and more difficult to keep up with the marketing induced conspicuous consumption cycles - they'll accidentally rationalize an already reasonable position: treating durable goods like consumables is stupid and should be scorned instead of aped.
It was not always conspicious consumption, but certainly yes consumer buying power has gone down and so has the price performance ratio, particularly over the last ten years.
There were legitimate improvements between every generation of thinkpad I am aware of up to the Tm30 series, the Tm40 series was a a sidegrade and so was each that followed up until the arrival of the Ryzen chips.
I was speaking about the broader electronics market. I don't really view anything post Lenovo sale to be a thinkpad - there is practically zero design continuity. I think the [T|W]520 was the last IBM design, the product of a left seat right seat transition, where Lenovo's contribution was restricted to basically slapping their badge on it. After that the consistent method of segmenting by travel/performance design consideration was replaced by an explosion of confusing product offerings that seem to be a lot of distinction without difference. Oh, and they immediately (no joke, the first order of business) got rid of the most iconic thing about the brand: the nice keyboard. It really makes you wonder why they even bother pretending.
Also fwiw DataGrip asks for confirmation before running an update or delete without a where clause