Fair point.

As a note, I don’t recall all of them saying ‘Windows Server’ in the top left of that page.

For non-stickiness though it’s basically on the tolerable end - put oil in it and most stuff will slide around but sometimes you don’t want too much oil so its a trade off

Not sure if you are saying the non-stick surface of a seasoned (carbon steel or) cast iron pan is inferior to PFAS options, that’s how I’m responding below.

Speaking from experience, I’ve screwed up seasoning pans before I got it what I’d call right.

A poorly seasoned polymerized surface on any metal (cast iron, carbon steel, stainless steel, or titanium) will always fair poorly, though more healthy than teflon style pans.

A properly seasoned polymerized surface on any smooth metal is easily on par or superior (regarding stickiness) with non-stick PFAS or metalized ceramic.

It absolutely requires minimal oiling when properly seasoned. I absolutely use less oil in my carbon steel pans than I would with ‘non-stick’ pans.

Another issue I see frequently is putting food into a pan that is too cold.

I think stainless steel is a great option in its own right - it’s not really non stick but it can be made tolerable with oil and can be scrubbed back to condition and thrown in the dishwasher.

Stainless steel can be non-stick using either the Leidenfrost effect or seasoning/oil polymerization. I do like being able to put my dishes through the auto-wash. My carbon steel and cast iron surfaces being the exception.

I sometimes coat my cast iron pan in oil, but more often than not I don’t.

I’m telling you what my experience is. I have pans that have a self healing non-stick surface. I don’t put soap on my cast iron or carbon steel unless planning to re-season. I boil water and may agitate it with salt if something sugary stays stuck to the surface. The flame/heat sterilizes, and the water+salt granules removes particulate.

I can fry an egg with less than a light spray of oil and produce a picture perfect egg consistently.

I’m in process of removing all of our PFAS or newer titanium ceramic gear due to it failing from scraping or flaking.

I am not eating out of your kitchen, not trying to tell you how to manage the tools. Offering suggestions, I feel could make life easier for you.

If it works for you, and you’re happy - carry on.

It seems obvious you purchase equipment for restaurants. /s

Quite a hot take there. You ignored carbon steel in the conversation.

A large number of restaurants use rolled carbon steel or cast iron for searing and shallow frying.

I’ve heard from several sources that the iron is supposed to be good for the diet. I love my carbon steel and cast iron kitchenware. All of the studies I’ve seen show it as a superior option to PFAS cookware and will still outlast the latest ceramic options. I have a very non-stick carbon steel pan and griddle from avocado oil seasoning.

You didn’t mention that you’re oiling it after drying it. It’s recommended that you lightly oil the surface upon storage.

One Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px6jqcYFdFs

Mostly agree. I want to add, there are ways to make your stainless steel produce a non-stick effect.

Very similar to the method used to produce a non-stick surface on carbon steel, cast iron, and other heated cooking surfaces. Essentially you apply a light coat of oil and created a polymerized surface on the pan.

One source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXEt-fhyCis

Edit: Another Source (Leidenfrost effect): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUwaOnCd1h0

You’re a breatharian? No corpse munching from you.

Are you pure enough that you feed the bacteria in your body without suffering?

I can’t read the article, first paragraph gives a subscription scroll over popup.

You can replace the OS on most Android devices.

Specifically- devices made by Google have been unlocked allowing replacement of the software.

You still have to put together a working kernel and drivers, environment, etc.

Not much stopping folks from doing that though.

GrapheneOS, Ubuntu, and others have made headway for some devices.

Each device potentially uses different hardware implementation and features.

Or, maybe writing firmware and code that doesn’t make money is the opposite of profit.

Where is the incentive to write code that reduces security and costs money they won’t recover ?

This is a crowdstrike issue specifically related to the falcon sensor. Happens to affect only windows hosts.

Not to be pedantic, commercial systems do go through lock replacements if they are budgeting properly.

A guest wouldn’t notice unless they were watching maintenance teams replacing lock internal components.

All of this ignores this is not happening in a vacuum. Project 2025, trump, the supreme court selection of limited precedent and ignorance of other precedent…

This is a brick in the pavement of our descent into fascism. Hand waving it away as a wonderful clarification that enabled prosecution of the office is unreasonable.

They already ruled the Constitution and clear discussion in Congress during the original Amendment, invalid when the insurrection clause and States rights were revoked… Colorado ballot decision ftr.

They’ve shown their hand. They’re willing to select evidence, much like your review, that fits the narrative - ignoring any other facts.

It’s already being used to delay adjudication in clear abuses of power.

Law requires a certification from a board to practice. You’re of the opinion that examination that proves ones understanding of the law(bar exam, exhaustive study followed by proving that knowledge)— puts you on equal footing with that majority?

I continue to firmly dissent your assertion regarding the validity of your opinion, you have firmly claimed not to be a bar certified individual.

Being an expert in law here has weight. A majority of them feel this is a power grab. You’re welcome to hold opinions. Spouting endless review to make responses difficult isn’t helping you.

This is akin to you saying you know better how to file legal paperwork or act as a defense attorney because you read about it.

Do you also dospense medical advice?

Except in the future - If you’re part of the official staff for the president - A defense wouldn’t be needed. The fact that the president told them to do it wouldn’t even be able to come up. It’s privileged communication now.

yearse ?

Your argument seems to be, they already had this power - now the Supreme Court can stop them. When will that ever happen?

You’re glossing over the fact that they’ve declared entire sections of communication off limits going forward. This is new. This is not same old, same old. The Supreme Court is currently compromised. No-one is going to prosecute a republican president in this environment.

Everything they could do can be construed as official, immune, business after being elected when viewed through the right lens.

If this the president previously had immunity, why was Nixon pardoned?

The Supreme Court was free to interpret this as they saw fit. They’ve demonstrated that they’re not following precedent and are marching to their own beat.

Regarding the clear power grab, Denying the facts that the other changes the court has made will have untold effects on the ability of states that are gerrymandering based on race:

https://www.npr.org/2024/05/23/nx-s1-4977539/supreme-court-ruling-makes-it-harder-to-bring-racial-gerrymandering-claims

It’s ok to insurrection, if you do it right, also while president:

https://www.npr.org/2024/06/14/nx-s1-5005999/supreme-court-jan-6-prosecutions

It’s also ok to use your official employees as president to carry out illegal acts and prevent them from testifying:

https://www.npr.org/2024/07/01/1198912764/consider-this-from-npr-draft-07-01-2024

Denying that folks who actually understand the law, like law professors, and Supreme Court Justices. There’s a difference between laypersons and experts in some fields. I’m not claiming to be an expert in neurology, law, or other fields. I’m deferring to people who have studied these field(s) and asking for their logic and expertise. You’re responding and relying on your logic.

The court is currently controlled by one party. One person openly claims credit for this, and definitely pushed the balance towards one direction.

Our congress is deadlocked by republicans when it comes to anything related to the former president.

They will not pass anything or see cases against their preferred president making them literally immune in practice.

The word soup from kava seems to indicate they feel, that because the president had so much power already, what’s the big deal if a little bit more gets added?

Folks who are scholars on the topic seem to think accumulating more power to the Executive and Judicial branches to be a bad thing.

As noted in Supreme Court rulings: The only parties who get to decide if a president is acting incorrectly would be if A. Congress successfully impeaches the president, B. They passed the supreme court’s review of what constitutes (non)presidential acts.

In reality both of these branches have been corrupted and owned by ‘conservative’ interests.

Rulings on SuperPACs, Citizens United, gerrymandering, presidential immunity, insurrection and more are laying the groundwork to remove additional freedoms or protections.

So this has the result of essentially making it possible for the controlling party of these to have a literal dictator whose communications with officials can’t be reviewed or considered in prosecution.

Folks who have a lot of experience working with legal matters are voicing concerns on this. This isn’t an appeal to authority, rather a matter of consulting folks who are experts and considering their opinions.

Fair. Thanks. Was mobile and trying to wade through and reply.

They can’t impeach if they can’t assemble a quorum.

So your answer to why your opinion is more valid than everyone else is; Because I say so?

Thanks for providing clear sources as to why your opinion is more valid than the dissenters with credentials.

Odd, please cite your qualifications.

You know, the ones that makes your opinion more valid than the opinion expressed by the (dissenting) supreme court justices directly involved in the case?

what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence