No, judging by his last attempt, he'll fail miserably, it will still be widely reported without good cause, and the same idiots who believe him now will still be idiots and still believe this garbage.
That's exactly why there is so much hype surrounding the new Impossible product - it is supposed to be a lot better than their old product, and WAY closer to real beef than older and competing substitutes. Other non-meat burgers can be okay in their own right, but the ones that actually tried to imitate meat were never very good, so I can't wait to try the new Impossible one.
Shut up. Why cook or season anything, ever? Or why not just eat vitamin pills and protein isolates? People enjoy food. And you are perpetrating the lamest socially permissible (not permissive) form of communication - the intentionally anonymous, stupid comment on an internet forum.
A Human Burger hitting the market would be a huge step in the right direction,in multiple ways. It would surely cook up nice, and would probably taste good, as well helping with our population problem.
Tried Carl Jr's beyond burger. Not bad. However $9.99 for a double burger is way too much. Come on people the veggie burger should cost less than a meat burger.
If they want it to catch on, yes, they need to get the pricing down to the same level as for beef burgers. But if you think the production costs should necessarily be less, you simply don't know what you're talking about. These aren't like the Original Gardenburger, for instance, which is a bunch of rice, soy, mushrooms, etc., just smashed together.
You can eat steak rare, but you should never eat ground beef rare: It's not at all safe, when you grind meat, exterior parts of meat covered in bacteria get pushed to the inside and cooking rare doesn't kill them off. If anyone sold bleeding hamburgers that were real meat- I would worry.
Please, feel free to eat your steaks rare as that's enough to kill off the bacteria on the surface... just don't eat burgers rare.
They mean bleeding while it cooks, duh, although plenty of people eat undercooked burgers all the time, however inadvisable that is. The game changer with the new version Impossible Burger, at least versus competing beef substitutes, is the flavor and the browning - they taste pretty much like beef and you can get a proper texture and "crust" on the outside, neither of which are there with most soy-based pretenders.
In other news Wendy's is relaunching it's "Where's the beef?" campaign.
They should just go back to the days when getting a meal at Wendy's didn't set you back close to ten bucks. Their food isn't horrible, but sorry, I can't stomach their prices anymore.
Eat more cows!!! If we stop eating them, think of all the cows that will never be born and will never know any life at all, however shitty. I'm Pro Cow (short)Life!
Putting aside the fact that the "fat is BAD, mkay?" movement died a richly deserved death some time ago, Impossible's most recent recipe has 240 calories, 3 grams of fiber, and a lot less sodium than the original. It'll be interesting to see if they really were able to hold the line on flavor/texture/etc.
I haven't tried the new version yet, but the reports I've read claim that it is much closer to real beef in taste, appearance, and texture. The reviews I've seen pretty much indicate that it is ready for mass market roll out, and can stand up to just about any fastfood burger. That sounds like a big jump to me, and at least a couple of reviewers acknowledged that previous iterations were lacking, so I'm very curious to try the new stuff. It actually does look like meat as it cooks, with the initial color, the "bleeding," and the browning. I'd like to try one plain and one loaded with toppings and judge for myself.
Somehow they've managed to improve the subjective quality of their product while slightly lowering the calories, fat, saturated fat, sodium, protein, and net carbs, all at once. If they did indeed get close on appearance and texture, the flavor and price will be the only questions. Get those right and there's no reason the masses won't eat tons of them. This is particularly interesting to me because I've been limiting my carb intake (with great success), and most meat substitutes are pretty carbohydrate-laden. I'm not really interested in going vegan, but it would be nice to be able to eat a ketogenic diet with fewer animal products.
I'm still not sure if I would like the Impossible Burger as much as a real hamburger.
The only way to determine this is to try it, obviously. I'm a fan of meat, and beef and burgers in particular, but I've noticed that reviews of the new generation of Impossible Burger have been pretty fantastic. People seem pretty amazed that they have finally been able to replicate the texture, look, and browning of ground beef fairly well now, in addition to the taste. You might not mistake it for real beef yet but they're getting close.
I've tried plenty of veggie burgers and various meat substitutes, and while some of them are legitimately pretty tasty, none of them are perfect beef substitutes. That has begun to change, and I can see fake meat getting even better in the near future and beginning to replace real meat even for people who aren't willing to give up tasty cows over ethical or environmental concerns. This could actually go over very well with burgers that are aggressively topped or dressed, like a BK Whopper. Add cheese, mayo, ketchup, pickles, onion, etc., whatever you like, and the more you add on the less important the "meat" becomes. Hell, McDonalds manages to sell billions of terrible burgers made of actual beef, so the sky's the limit for good beef substitutes.
The G in GIF stands for GRAPHICS, which doesn't start with a J sound. Therefore I, and many others, have pronounced GIF with a "hard" G since its inception as a file format, and we are not wrong to do so. I will argue this until I die, I am not kidding.
Perhaps players who invest more in hardware (higher FPS players) are more dedicated than average (lower FPS) players, and their better stats are explained by their time spent, experience, and skill. This is obvious, and I bet NVIDIA didn't control for it in any statistically scientific way.
Is anyone actually surprised that a gaming hardware manufacturer says that better/newer/more expensive gaming hardware makes gamers better at games? You know they cherry-picked stats in an obvious way, right? This is marketing, not news.
I wonder how many citizens consider their country being a "state" in the EU. I know it is the politician's wet dream, and something they lied about would not happen, to have the United States of Europe.
The term state has been used to refer to countries in a generic sense for generations. Deal with it, and don't apply a USA-centric model to this when you know that meaning was not intended. You're reading something into the terminology, incorrectly.
What's the difference between permanent DST and just permanent non-DST with everyone getting up an hour earlier? Plus, with non-DST at least noon happens when the sun is directly overhead, which has some real meaning.
Do you really think employers are just all going to agree to change people's working hours to better align with non-DST? Good luck with that - I guarantee we won't start and end our work days earlier if we get rid of DST, resulting in us losing an hour of daylight from Spring through Fall, when we all have things to do outside.
So everyone should be punished because some of you choose to live at ridiculously high latitudes? DST isn't your problem, living unnaturally far North is.
Roads are fine here, and not 500 years old. I want permanent DST. Removing an hour of evening light in the summer is a bad idea imho as it will lead to even less productive social and family time outdoors and unnecessary loss of life.
If you go to bed before 9 or 10 PM in July (depending upon how far East or West you are in your timezone), that's your problem. Rather than getting rid of Daylight Saving Time, I want it instituted year round as our regular time. Those late evenings in the summer are the best, and are a productive time for many, many of us. I don't care if it's dark when I get up in the Winter - plenty of people get up early enough that it's dark anyway, even on Standard Time. Most people aren't agricultural workers anymore who benefit from light at 5 AM.
SpaceX is essentially irrelevant if you are talking about monopolies, since they don't own access to space. You can pay someone else to launch your competing satellites, or do it yourself without them stopping you.
Slashdot Mirror
No, judging by his last attempt, he'll fail miserably, it will still be widely reported without good cause, and the same idiots who believe him now will still be idiots and still believe this garbage.
Why does this crackpot need to go to Antarctica? If the Earth were flat, you could travel in any direction and find an edge.
Better question: Why do we spend so much time talking about this stupid shit?
The real information here is that Prince Harry sucks at Fortnite and is a whiner. The end, move along.
That's exactly why there is so much hype surrounding the new Impossible product - it is supposed to be a lot better than their old product, and WAY closer to real beef than older and competing substitutes. Other non-meat burgers can be okay in their own right, but the ones that actually tried to imitate meat were never very good, so I can't wait to try the new Impossible one.
K, byeeee!
Shut up. Why cook or season anything, ever? Or why not just eat vitamin pills and protein isolates? People enjoy food. And you are perpetrating the lamest socially permissible (not permissive) form of communication - the intentionally anonymous, stupid comment on an internet forum.
A Human Burger hitting the market would be a huge step in the right direction,in multiple ways. It would surely cook up nice, and would probably taste good, as well helping with our population problem.
Are you dumb? Hamburgers taste good, that's why.
Tried Carl Jr's beyond burger. Not bad. However $9.99 for a double burger is way too much. Come on people the veggie burger should cost less than a meat burger.
If they want it to catch on, yes, they need to get the pricing down to the same level as for beef burgers. But if you think the production costs should necessarily be less, you simply don't know what you're talking about. These aren't like the Original Gardenburger, for instance, which is a bunch of rice, soy, mushrooms, etc., just smashed together.
You can eat steak rare, but you should never eat ground beef rare: It's not at all safe, when you grind meat, exterior parts of meat covered in bacteria get pushed to the inside and cooking rare doesn't kill them off. If anyone sold bleeding hamburgers that were real meat- I would worry.
Please, feel free to eat your steaks rare as that's enough to kill off the bacteria on the surface... just don't eat burgers rare.
They mean bleeding while it cooks, duh, although plenty of people eat undercooked burgers all the time, however inadvisable that is. The game changer with the new version Impossible Burger, at least versus competing beef substitutes, is the flavor and the browning - they taste pretty much like beef and you can get a proper texture and "crust" on the outside, neither of which are there with most soy-based pretenders.
In other news Wendy's is relaunching it's "Where's the beef?" campaign.
They should just go back to the days when getting a meal at Wendy's didn't set you back close to ten bucks. Their food isn't horrible, but sorry, I can't stomach their prices anymore.
Eat more cows!!! If we stop eating them, think of all the cows that will never be born and will never know any life at all, however shitty. I'm Pro Cow (short)Life!
Putting aside the fact that the "fat is BAD, mkay?" movement died a richly deserved death some time ago, Impossible's most recent recipe has 240 calories, 3 grams of fiber, and a lot less sodium than the original. It'll be interesting to see if they really were able to hold the line on flavor/texture/etc.
I haven't tried the new version yet, but the reports I've read claim that it is much closer to real beef in taste, appearance, and texture. The reviews I've seen pretty much indicate that it is ready for mass market roll out, and can stand up to just about any fastfood burger. That sounds like a big jump to me, and at least a couple of reviewers acknowledged that previous iterations were lacking, so I'm very curious to try the new stuff. It actually does look like meat as it cooks, with the initial color, the "bleeding," and the browning. I'd like to try one plain and one loaded with toppings and judge for myself.
Somehow they've managed to improve the subjective quality of their product while slightly lowering the calories, fat, saturated fat, sodium, protein, and net carbs, all at once. If they did indeed get close on appearance and texture, the flavor and price will be the only questions. Get those right and there's no reason the masses won't eat tons of them. This is particularly interesting to me because I've been limiting my carb intake (with great success), and most meat substitutes are pretty carbohydrate-laden. I'm not really interested in going vegan, but it would be nice to be able to eat a ketogenic diet with fewer animal products.
I'm still not sure if I would like the Impossible Burger as much as a real hamburger.
The only way to determine this is to try it, obviously. I'm a fan of meat, and beef and burgers in particular, but I've noticed that reviews of the new generation of Impossible Burger have been pretty fantastic. People seem pretty amazed that they have finally been able to replicate the texture, look, and browning of ground beef fairly well now, in addition to the taste. You might not mistake it for real beef yet but they're getting close.
I've tried plenty of veggie burgers and various meat substitutes, and while some of them are legitimately pretty tasty, none of them are perfect beef substitutes. That has begun to change, and I can see fake meat getting even better in the near future and beginning to replace real meat even for people who aren't willing to give up tasty cows over ethical or environmental concerns. This could actually go over very well with burgers that are aggressively topped or dressed, like a BK Whopper. Add cheese, mayo, ketchup, pickles, onion, etc., whatever you like, and the more you add on the less important the "meat" becomes. Hell, McDonalds manages to sell billions of terrible burgers made of actual beef, so the sky's the limit for good beef substitutes.
Jraffics, LOL. This is why it's a hard G - because it's about Graphics.
The G in GIF stands for GRAPHICS, which doesn't start with a J sound. Therefore I, and many others, have pronounced GIF with a "hard" G since its inception as a file format, and we are not wrong to do so. I will argue this until I die, I am not kidding.
Perhaps players who invest more in hardware (higher FPS players) are more dedicated than average (lower FPS) players, and their better stats are explained by their time spent, experience, and skill. This is obvious, and I bet NVIDIA didn't control for it in any statistically scientific way.
Is anyone actually surprised that a gaming hardware manufacturer says that better/newer/more expensive gaming hardware makes gamers better at games? You know they cherry-picked stats in an obvious way, right? This is marketing, not news.
I wonder how many citizens consider their country being a "state" in the EU. I know it is the politician's wet dream, and something they lied about would not happen, to have the United States of Europe.
The term state has been used to refer to countries in a generic sense for generations. Deal with it, and don't apply a USA-centric model to this when you know that meaning was not intended. You're reading something into the terminology, incorrectly.
What's the difference between permanent DST and just permanent non-DST with everyone getting up an hour earlier? Plus, with non-DST at least noon happens when the sun is directly overhead, which has some real meaning.
Do you really think employers are just all going to agree to change people's working hours to better align with non-DST? Good luck with that - I guarantee we won't start and end our work days earlier if we get rid of DST, resulting in us losing an hour of daylight from Spring through Fall, when we all have things to do outside.
So everyone should be punished because some of you choose to live at ridiculously high latitudes? DST isn't your problem, living unnaturally far North is.
Roads are fine here, and not 500 years old. I want permanent DST. Removing an hour of evening light in the summer is a bad idea imho as it will lead to even less productive social and family time outdoors and unnecessary loss of life.
If you go to bed before 9 or 10 PM in July (depending upon how far East or West you are in your timezone), that's your problem. Rather than getting rid of Daylight Saving Time, I want it instituted year round as our regular time. Those late evenings in the summer are the best, and are a productive time for many, many of us. I don't care if it's dark when I get up in the Winter - plenty of people get up early enough that it's dark anyway, even on Standard Time. Most people aren't agricultural workers anymore who benefit from light at 5 AM.
SpaceX is essentially irrelevant if you are talking about monopolies, since they don't own access to space. You can pay someone else to launch your competing satellites, or do it yourself without them stopping you.
They partner closely with the SPACE FORCE!!!
There's a very minimal decrease in probability of being stolen
Absolutely false. There has been a huge drop in smartphone thefts worldwide thanks to this technology. Stop spreading FUD.
Sources, or you're just trying to convince yourself that you're safe. RTFA, stolen or found iPhones can be unlocked, and are valuable otherwise.