deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Clean the bottom of your pan and the coil, you nasty bugger. The only thing that stops heat from getting to the pan is insulation, aka all that stuck on grease and muck you constantly fail to actually get off the pan when you fail to actually get it clean. Did you know there’s no reason your pans can’t be shiny for decades after you get them, except your own lazy habits?

Elitist and I’m arguing against the flamboyant and expensive option that only exists to enrich the wealthy?

That rule breaking part of your comment aside, and since we’re on a science adjacent page;

Thermal inertia isn’t a bad thing, and most chefs utilize it during cooking explicitly. No chef, on earth, in any professional kitchen, leaves a pan on a burner and just turns off the burner. None of them. If you need heat to stop building, you remove the food from the pan. If you just need the inertia from the pan’s material, you move it to a dead burner. All stoves have thermal inertia. Even gas stoves. No stove on earth stops transferring heat immediately. That’s not how thermodynamics works.

Gas ‘appears’ to change temperature faster because the range of heat is higher, since it is so much less efficient. The typical gas stove can output 1300c at it’s max (usually largest burner on a four burner stove). An electric, properly working, should never get above 900c. No food on earth is edible for any known lifeform once it has reached 300c, even when cooled down after. So yes, you can make a pan hotter faster by subjecting it to nearly enough heat to melt iron, but you won’t be cooling it down realistically any faster if you go up to that point.

This paired with the lower amount of control over temperature for nearly all gas stoves results in less efficiency every where. Actual chefs use predictable heat. Anyone pretending gas is better in anyway is the same type of person that still believes they can switch gears faster in a manual car or that its cheaper to just take your shoes down to a cobbler to get new soles.

…The element ‘clicks off’ when the element is at (or usually around 105%) of the temperature set for that number. It ‘clicks on’ when it is below or (or within 5%) of that temperature. This actually provides MORE accurate and even heating than gas stoves, which can be effected by room temperature, slight breezes, variations in pressure in the line, or mismatched regulators.

The heat is never off during cooking, it just isn’t applying more temperature to the coil. Which means your pan and food aren’t pulling enough heat to cool down the coil.

It’s easier to cook with electric when you know what you’re actually doing, and what the stove is supposed to be doing. It’s easier to cook with gas when you have no idea what anything is supposed to be doing and you just fiddle with the knobs until you brute force the heat you think you need.

If this were 'murica, just 2 two bedoom apartments. But it’d have to be uniformly distributed.

Electric heating is 100% efficient in general, as in 100% of the energy used is converted to thermal energy. No other heating method can claim this period (except geothermal and other heat pumps which can be several thousand percent effective but are impractical for spot heating.)

So the real difference is induction versus resistive coil efficiency at transferring that energy to the food…

Luckily a ridiculous amount of research has been done to show:

Gas is about 40% efficient

Electric coil is about 74% efficient.

Induction is 80-90% efficient.

So not only are you using more efficient methods of creating heat than combustion, you are getting more heat transferred to your food per unit of energy used. By double.

Gas stoves are great for two things, and only two things:

Jet-Gas stoves for Woks.

And Charring vegetables when you’re too lazy to start a grill.

He hates consistent and predictable heat cycles that are 100% efficient heating instead of 80% of the heat escaping to everywhere but the pan?

So the US, by your definition, is totalitarian. There is not a single possible legal opposition to the federal government, what it decides wins. Ditto for European countries.

This is why adults do not use the term totalitarian, all states, by virtue of being a single entity are inherently totalitarian.

To hint at the answer for your first question so you can do some research while trying to prove me wrong, realize you’re wrong, and learn something;

No. Like China the ‘communist party’ is a conglomeration of several different parties that all have one single overarching ideology. Think of it like the US requirement to pledge allegiance to the US constitution. You legally cannot be in any political office without that pledge.

Similarly in Communist-focused people’s republics, you are a ‘member of the communist party’ by proving you have read the material of the party, its constitution, and pledge to uphold it and work towards communism. That’s all it is. It’s called ‘one party’ because the alternatives want to dissolve the state entirely and replace it with something the people objectively did not want.

Define totalitarianism in a way that includes Cuba but excludes the United States or any European country. Keep in mind the Communist party in Cuba is not one political party or entity.

Do you have a single source for this belief or is it something you intuited from the aether?

…North Korea has local elections and the candidates, plural, have to live in the community they’re running to oversee.

Juche is set up pretty similar to China’s democracy at the lower levels, which isn’t surprising because of the influence of Mao.

To me, the real tragedy is that a shared identity really could be forged between these two groups. In another world, I can imagine a beautiful fusion between the Israelis and Palestinians, like two trees growing around one another.

That existed before 1929.

The idea that people breaking the law do not always get caught means there is no law is ridiculous, especially when you state people are being arrested for it.

Israel is not israeli people, the former of which has no right to exist, the latter of which exists as a temporary and exceedingly new political fiction.

Supporting any Palestinian group in Germany in public will get you arrested. All Palestinian charities are banned due to links to ‘terrorism’ (aka the actual government of the gaza strip which any organization would have to work with in order to do things, you know, like how all states work.)

Pretty much all anti-China articles are AI written these days. It’s cheaper than funding the NED.

Well China has good taste at least.

Except that’s not freedom.

It is not freedom to have a, and this really isn’t an exaggeration, more than 10,000x personal cost for transportation. It’s freedom for the rich, but the rich aren’t a part of society and cannot be generalized into society.

It is not freedom to have to personally rely on the US to do the right thing.

It is not freedom to take on the massive legal and financial risk that is driving a death machine.

It is only freedom in the most infantile, ‘Anarkiddie’ sense of the word freedom. The ‘Hurr durr we’d all be more free if we had less laws’ kind of idiocracy most humans abandon by the age of 15 when they learn about the concept of government.

Except there is absolutely no reason it has to be like that in rural areas. Period. At all. Even a little. Look at China (or if you still believe the NED puts out legitimate stories, Denmark or Sweden or Norway) which has public transit to nearly all rural areas at least a couple times a week, and inter-village public transit in pretty much all villages that have more than a dozen people.

Busses are more efficient than independent vehicle ownership in all settings. All of them.