whereisk

I see. The first mistake I was making if I remember correctly was using the same continuous high heat as I would in a non stick and not wait long enough for the pan to heat evenly.

The difference in the amount of mass it carries makes it a different beast to cook in: it takes a while to warm up but also for the same reason it maintains and exceeds the temperature a non stick if you maintain high heat under it.

So try either starting at a low heat and waiting a while to warm up - maybe 3-5min. Or start at a high heat wait 2 mins to get it warm fast and then lower the stove to what would have been a simmer so you don’t overshoot.

Look, realistically, it’s never going to be less work than a new non stick pan - it’s heavy, might need some oil now and then and can’t put it in the dish washer.

But if you are like me, once you settle into a routine that you’re happy with you’ll be glad with the freedom that you don’t have to babysit this thing: that it can take a beating the non stick never could, that you don’t eat pfas, that you can stab it, scrape it, wash it, stack it, throw it in the oven, cook at any temperature, heavy mass means even heat and that you’ll never have to buy another one and will probably pass it on to your grandkids or even let it rust and come back to it and will be fine with a bit of love.

Also “car” - can my local mechanic service it and give it a flying certificate? If not, it’s not a car.

More like a barely road-worthy airplane.

“Where are you coming from?”

..suspect smoking pipe…

“Alright then, keep your secrets”

“Amiable” is not “very friendly” - complete nonsense.

Brill. One of us.

A fallacy matters if it’s central to proving the argument, otherwise it probably doesn’t. Eg Bringing up an anecdote, or a subjective experience as a way of illustrating a point could be said to be fallacious, but is not, if the argument is well supported enough that would stand without it.

I just had an argument where I ended my point with the words “this is a pure could have been:” and added a very likely scenario that may well could have come to pass it some events were different. Obviously it was speculation and not central to the previous argument, but in my estimation likely.

Then other person instead of responding to actual points took the last part and accused me of should’a, would’a, could’a.

Dude, yes! But not the point, also I was the one that pointed it out. The type of person that would explain to a comedian their own joke.

More not so fun facts: Israel is also asking, you Europeans did it in the Americas, Australia and Russia, and sit pretty on top of stolen land but now you have yours are playing holier than thou? It’s quite the sinking feeling that we had some moments when we thought we’ll escape our fucked up nature. I hope we can find a way to put the genie back in cause I’m hating this.

Most people here: Yes, I bought an advertiser’s device, hooked up in a million ways to that advertiser’s services, who’s well known for monitoring every aspect of the life of every person they can, but how dare they monitor this part?

“No give, only take“ - stack overflow’s license.

All of it, they’re human estimates.

In this timeline he already killed Trotsky and Che is female (or I can’t tell who the person in the beret is).