acjacobson

> No, that is not the prep step.

Then they shouldn't label it prep.

> And it makes sense: the prep time can vary wildly (e.g. peeling and chopping veggies) making the "actual time" quite useless and in professional kitchens other people do this prep work.

This is a recipe for home cooks not professional kitchens. Both cook time and prep time are always going to be estimates. Labeling a step as "prep" and excluding all of the actual prep tasks isn't useful for someone trying to plan their day. This 5 min step ads nothing of value to the recipe as far as I can see.

The beginning of the word "cute" is about as close as you can get to the ch in "ich" in English.

Completely agree on F1 - it's super easy and I get more than I could ever consume. Between highlight episodes, multiple commentary tracks, live data, and race archives including seasons 10 years ago they've done a great job. I don't even question buying again each year.

The Firefox extension still works for the moment.

Posted 5 years ago, and even the list of movies he cataloged is now gone - the Google sheet link is dead.

IANAL - but reside generally means you established a residence there as opposed to just visited.

It's the quality of the image for me. I remember when DVD looked phenomenal (because compared to broadcast and VHS it was) but now it feels barely watchable.

I have a NAS in my home, and my parents have a NAS in theirs. Everything is on Tailscale and I can SSH into either machine whenever I need. I've needed to do this a few times when I am on the road, but more commonly when I use Tailscale when I do a little remote tech support for my parents.

It took minutes to set up - dead easy.

Not OP, but I use Figma to do this. There are lots of templates in the community, or you can make your own pretty easily.

If you don't want to do it as manually there are paid tools that will help. Google "app store screenshot maker" for options.

This is often intentional as it's a way of bridging a foreign cuisine to the local palate - which feta certainly would do. I don't personally like it but I think that's why it sometimes happens. It's not very difficult to make paneer so anyone that is serious about replicating proper Indian flavors could do it.

Nice! These "books-like" lists feel and resonate better with me. From the first list I've read Notes from a Small Island, Into the Wild, and Wild, and now some of the others on the list that I don't know, like Llama Drama, look promising. I think you're on the right track.

I like the idea of pulling as many threads out of a book to drill into why you might like something. Especially if those threads are not necessarily related to each other as that should widen the recommendation pool.

I still think there is something worth doing with author links as well. I played around with gnooks.com after someone else posted a link and within a few minutes found authors I had never heard of that had books that looked interesting.

I'm echoing my other comment a little bit but I've been following Shepherd and thought I would comment since you're here. I like a lot of your ideas but I haven't quite managed to get recommendations that consistently sound interesting. I think it has something to do with authors and it would be interesting to know how you're thinking about how authors or writing styles are related.

For example, I like Bill Bryon and have read most everything he has written. He's good at making subjects I am not interested in captivating. For example medical history and anatomy in his book The Body.

I would love to read other books that make the uninteresting interesting but when I put The Body into Shepherd (or most recommendation engines) I mainly get other books about anatomy. This makes sense on the surface, but I've already read a book on anatomy. I'm ready for something else interesting.

I realize that might not be very actionable or useful, but when I am looking for something new to read I don't know what I am looking for. I just know the "vibes" books and authors I like, and often find that recommenders default to similar subjects only. Maybe this is difficult or impossible to capture, but it's been nagging me as something missing.

Promising idea (and a real unsolved problem for me) but at the moment I am getting the same as kind of recommendations others are experiencing. Mostly books I already know well or would see in other recommendation lists. Maybe three books isn't enough?

FWIW I've noticed I tend to gravitate more to authors than specific subjects, and finding a new author whose catalog I can mine is somewhat rare.

It's a good one and if you enjoy it I can recommend most of Pollan's other books.

I am not sure that I would conflate the success of your course to mean much about the relative success of your startup.

I think there are a few other things to consider that are specific to your situation (as an outsider it's been interesting to watch). In my mind, your course has a few extra things going for it - one it's aspirational and people like to imagine the best version of themselves, two the solution you're selling people has the potential to give them a lot of leverage (building an audience has provided you leverage after all), and three you have credibility in the space by virtue of having already done the thing. Of these, I think the promise of giving your customers leverage is the most important value, and people trust you enough to buy it due to your credibility.

I think these aspects don't apply quite as cleanly to Logology. It has a different kind of problem to solve - the "I need a logo and am willing to spend some money getting something decent but not a lot of money to hire a designer to do it for me" problem. It solves something specific, but doesn't provide potential leverage in the same way (once I have a logo, I have a logo - how many of those will I need in my life?). It also may be a narrow niche that you've more fully exploited. So if you're thinking about how to apply your lessons with Logology I would personally tack on how to add leverage too as they all go hand in hand in my mind.

Taking $30m that will wipe out most of your stake, and still not carry the business through to profitability seems like a tough road to go down. You've said you're not sure you have the energy, and I expect that your energy will go down even further with a much lower ownership stake.

If that's the case then I would be looking for any option to not do that which seems to be either selling asap or cutting your burn rate drastically. You have 6 months of runway. Can you cut your burn rate to 0, or 2/3 or something that will give you a meaningful runway without raising the additional $30m?

It may also be a case of walking away. You own a good chunk of the business and if you think the board is going to fire you anyway, perhaps it's better to let someone else take the CEO job, you keep your stake and do something else?

And sadly industry dwarfs the CO2 emissions of this frequent flyer (and the rest of us personally). While it's admirable to work on ways of ways to reduce your personal footprint (especially as a way to communicate the problem to others) - actually impacting CO2 levels needs to come from broad regulation. The numbers are just too large and skewed.

Flour is clearly the winner vs. peanut butter when comparing price per calories. At Walmart.com it is $2.12 for a 5lb (2.26kg) bag which is about 8250 calories. But yeah, processing that into bread (home energy cost and time cost) is tough to calculate and probably depends on your situation.

Still there are in-between options - pasta for instance is more bang for your buck than peanut butter and is much easier to prep yourself than bread.

Or make all compensation public information for everyone. I believe in Norway you can see anyone's tax return, which isn't exactly the same because it aggregates all earnings from all sources into one, but it doesn't appear, as far as I can tell, to have had many ill effects.

> You should care about your total compensation anyway and neither cash bonus, nor equity is covered in the disclosure, although especially for senior positions, those are very substantial part of your compensation.

Even if you do get a bonus or equity as part of your TC, it doesn't necessarily mean you're going to get anything for it. I've had options several times that ended up worthless as well as bonuses that were never paid or partially paid due to nebulous company-wide performance metrics.

Unless you're working for a very well established tech company, ideally public, I'd give those parts of your TC a discount to what's written in your contract.

And changing ones. I imagine once a skyscraper's plan is set it really doesn't change much at all.

I don't know if it is enough yet but there has been an explosion of this kind of content on Youtube over the last 10 years. For typical home repairs it seems most topics are pretty well covered.

If bandwidth wasn't a limiting factor would it be worth it or still make sense to use big machines onsite?

In the US there are strong incentives for light trucks / SUVs and that's the result we see - they're the most popular vehicles. In Europe / Japan the incentives are different and we see an entirely different class of vehicles on the road.

The point is that marketing and incentives matter. Trucks are not objectively better, they are subjectively preferred among certain demographics in the US because of marketing. He addresses very clearly that manufacturers make more money selling SUVs due to regulation - so it tracks that those are the vehicles pushed by manufacturers

> People are different and they prefer different things. That's what makes our lives interesting and varied.

Agree, however, I think the a key point of the video is about how we balance our own experience vs. that of the community we live in. SUVs and light trucks have a cost and it's fair to question if that cost is worth it. He shed light in areas where I wasn't so familiar such as blind spots and child fatalities.

> It feels like the author wants to fix the problem by just saying "Hey people, don't buy SUVs. Hey corporations, don't manufacture SUVs", whereas a more strategic and "backward" approach is needed.

I thought his main argument was that people respond to incentives. That's why 40 years ago the Ford Escort was so popular vs. the F150 today. These incentives are driven by government regulation. He acknowledges that it is rational to buy an SUV when everyone has one because it's game theory. The way out is for society to regulate trucks more fairly according to their broader costs. There are reasons we need trucks and we should have trucks, but perhaps we shouldn't incentivize that to be the primary vehicle for everyone.

He addresses this point when he talks about how the most popular car 40 years ago was the Ford Escort.

You're right there aren't any quick fixes, but regulation can change things over time. While there may be tons of SUVs on the road now, we could incentivize different vehicles and within 10-15 years the balance would be completely different (as it was not that long ago). Grandfather in whatever has already been sold, and require a different standard for the future. This is the exact pattern we use for emissions and safety standards.

He addresses the size of vehicle issue and explains how station wagons or vans are more practical than SUVs for most families. Perhaps your situation is different, but I felt he made a compelling case.

That's what this round is for - to allow employees to sell some of their shares.

Personally I don't mind working remote or onsite, but what I'm noticing is much more competition for remote roles. I live in Munich which has a tech sector, and isn't LCOL, but isn't a hub the way Berlin or Amsterdam is.

Onsite / hybrid roles in my area get 10-20 applications in the first day, while remote roles often get 150-200. This is for regular everyday startups and companies, not FAANG which I expect gets much more interest.

There are also fewer available remote roles to apply to. So I would say yes, if you have to be remote because of your location I expect it is more challenging. Companies (at least here) have more leverage at the moment, and the majority have not fully embraced remote, while at the same time remote jobs are the most desirable ones.