At least the video by James Hoffman I watched yesterday (too lazy to find the link, it's somewhere else in the comments) wasn't about experience, but about objective measures: How charged were the particles, how long did it take X amount of water go through the same amount of beans? The guy in the video even said he wasn't sure if the resulting coffee was better or not, just that it slowed down extraction, which usually ends up with more chemicals in your espresso afterwards.
"Extraction yield" may be a good thing, but that hypothesis goes untested.
Distilling, one wants to control extraction yield to isolate the best flavors. Done carefully, one makes armagnac. Maximizing extraction yield makes moonshine.
Depends on which chemicals and what your taste is. I think the main idea of espresso is that by that method you get more of the tasty chemicals and less of the bitter chemicals compared to (say) a French press (aka cafetiere). Since this is just a few seconds longer, you'd hope that the resulting brew would be less watery and have more of the "good" chemicals without getting the "bitter" chemicals. But as OP said, without an A/B/X test, you can't really say for sure.
No, more chemicals isn't necessarily what you want.
Coffee beans contain diterpenes, which have been shown to increase cholesterol. Paper filters significantly reduce the quantity of diterpenes in the end product.
Oh, the infamous "/s" – the internet's neon sign flashing "ATTENTION: SARCASM AHEAD." Where do I even start with this? It's like we've collectively decided that the art of understanding sarcasm needed training wheels.
First off, let's talk about how it completely annihilates the fun of sarcasm. Sarcasm is like a secret handshake; it's supposed to be subtle, a little game of wit between the speaker and the listener. But no, we had to slap a big, fat "/s" at the end, just in case someone's sarcasm radar is as effective as an ashtray on a motorcycle.
And then there's the snobbishness of it all. It's like saying, "Oh dear, I better put this here because you might not grasp the advanced concept of sarcasm." It's patronizing! We're basically assuming that people online have the emotional range of a teaspoon and can't catch a sarcastic comment unless it's gift-wrapped with a "/s".
But wait, it gets better. The safety of "/s" makes a padded playground look like an extreme sports event. It's like we're afraid of a little scrape or bruise from a misunderstood joke. Remember when playgrounds were made of concrete and we survived? Now, it's all about safety first, even in our online conversations. "Watch out, don't hurt yourself on that sharp wit!"
And as we progress down this ridiculous road, let's envision a world where everything is as blatantly obvious as sarcasm with a "/s" tag. Imagine going to a comedy show where the comedian has to pause and explain each joke. "And that, ladies and gentlemen, was a joke about marriage. You can laugh now." Or picture reading a book where every metaphor is followed by an explanation. "The curtains were blue, which symbolizes the character's deep sadness, in case you didn't catch that."
We could even take it further. How about emotional cue cards for everyday conversations? "I'm about to tell a joke – please prepare to laugh" or "Warning: sarcasm in 3, 2, 1..." The possibilities are endless in our brave new world of over-explained humor.
In the spirit of this absurdity, let's just put disclaimers on everything. "Warning: This rant may contain traces of hyperbole and a pinch of irony. Please consume responsibly." And don't forget, if you didn't find this funny, it's probably because I didn't put a "/s" at the end. My bad.
I wonder if, thanks to Reddit’s karma economy, the usage of /s is some kind of learned behavior that acts as hedge against downvotes. Did people use /s as much or at all back in the days of forums or other platforms where the visibility of a person’s content didn’t correlate with upvotes?
It doesn’t seem like you’ve considered that people do a better job discerning sarcasm in person than via the written word. In person, you can judge tone of voice and facial expressions. I once heaped praise on someone by email, and they became really upset, because they thought the email was dripping with sarcasm.
Including the “/s” helps to ensure that one is understood. To me, that seems more important than whatever it is you think has been lost.
Sarcasm itself is not banned here. The community pushes back against sarcasm because it is often associated with poor quality comments. I've quoted some comments by dang about sarcasm with links to his source comment - it helps to read his well-thought-out opinions within their context.
The guidelines don't rule out sarcasm. They ask for comments to be civil and substantive. The Venn diagram of those things may not have a lot of common area but there's definitely some. Just don't ask me to specify what it is—that's probably too hard.[1]
The community here avoids sarcasm not for the reasons you so condescendingly note, but because sarcasm tends to reduce discussion quality.
Readers here recognize sarcasm, but they also recognize what happens to a web forum where it is allowed to proliferate.
We don't have any problem with satire and sarcasm as such, but on a large public forum like HN, with everything a mile wide and an inch deep, they are nearly always associated with really low-quality discussion.[2]
The logic is similar to why jokes are discouraged[3].
I've often wondered why jabs, swipes and sarcasm are so corrosive on HN when anyone who knows about the history of discourse knows what a lively role they have played. [The lack of sarcasm] makes the discourse a little more bland, but the alternative is not lively exchanges of high wit, it's YouTube comments.[4]
I think sarcasm is more of a problem on HN than lame humor is. Humor doesn't always succeed, but at least it's intended to make others feel good. (Think "good humor".) Sarcasm is only marginally related to humor. It's really about scorn. Sarcasm is verbal bile. It feels good to let it out, but it acidifies the environment. It feels like you're being smart[5]
Like you, I love sarcasm (New Zealander's tend to slather it on) and when used well it is a often a subtle compliment to the receiver. Over the years I have learned to tone my sarcasm down because I tended not to use it helpfully and respectfully.
Note that Dang seems to personally like to use sarcasm[6].
Note that my comment is directed specifically at /s and not at sarcasm in general. I understand very well that given the diversity of opinions on internet it can be challenging to tell it appart. So I agree that in many case one should abstain. But if you go ahead and still use it, please, by all mean, don't botch it. Better to double down and make it obvious or ridiculous than this silliness.
You seem to be really upset about this, and I feel for you how much you will suffer over the years when people don’t do things the way you think they should.
