Journaling on estrip is easy and free. sign up here

Tinypliny's Journal

tinypliny
My Podcast Link

11/25/2009 02:30 #50375

Squash Soup in Six Steps.
Category: eating in
(e:imk2)'s mum hooked me on to the pear and butternut squash soup from the Wegmans recipe collection. I didn't have stock and I am not really okay with throwing away any vegetables after boiling them in water for making the stock - so I improvised on the recipe.

0. Chop. Chop. Set the rice cooker to cook some orange lentils.

Cumulative time to step 1: 4-5 minutes. (3-4 minutes if you are good at that game where you jab the knife between your fingers on the table really fast and try not to stab your hand. I figure if you are good at this, you will be good at chopping vegetables really really fast.)

1. Saute garlic, onions (preferably red), the hottest jalapenos you can find and ginger on low-medium heat in peanut/olive oil till the onions soften and become translucent. I guess you could caramelize the onions and increase their flavour but I don't have the patience to do this. The recipe is supposed to be ultra-quick and dirty.

Cumulative Time to step 2: 9 minutes

2. Add butternut squash or pumpkin or one of those typical fall squash vegetables, finely chopped celery - a whole bunch, carrots and tomatoes. Make sure you clean the celery well - no need for peeling. Add salt and a tablespoon of fresh or dried thyme. Fresh is better but dry works as well. Saute for a good 4-5 minutes - at the end of this step the squash should be almost tender but not quite.

Cumulative Time to step 3: 13-16 minutes

3. Take the cooked orange lentils out of the rice cooker and smash them. Add them to the mix. Add chopped pears and water to cover it all - bring to a rolling boil. Turn the heat up higher to make this step go faster.

Cumulative Time to step 4: 19 minutes

4. Pour everything into a blender and puree the hell out of it.

Cumulative Time to step 5: 24 minutes or forever (if your blender breaks down).

5. Pour into a bowl, dilute with water, add salt and pepper (rewarm if necessary), finely chop cilantro leaves/stems/roots and and mix it in. Mix in chopped red onions and chopped jalapenos if you want an extra kick.

Cumulative Time to step 6: 27 minutes or never (if you are just reading this. GET CHOPPING!)

image

6. Enjoy! Reach for seconds... :)


PS: This soup freezes really well. I portioned it out in those smaller hummus boxes so that I could just pop the contents of one box into a bowl, add water, microwave it for a couple minutes on high and vary the extra seasoning and garnish. They also make fabulous lunches - because (depending on your portion size) they contain at least 2 servings of vegetables, 1 serving of fruit, plenty of fibre, complex carbohydrates from the squashes, proteins from the lentils and are very balanced.
dcoffee - 11/27/09 13:38
yay for seasonal recipes!
jenks - 11/25/09 13:35
or, think.
jenks - 11/25/09 13:34
wow,that sounds delish. I would never thing to add pears!

11/19/2009 19:09 #50346

Drycleaning around Downtown Buffalo
Category: buffalo
Does anyone have any experience with the Drycleaners at:

a) The corner of Linwood and North? You know, that shop next to the art gallery that sells clothes with the grammatically wrong tagline "Never to big... to be beautiful". Hmm... does that imply that the shop *actually* thinks that if you are too big, you could potentially be ugly?

b) That Drycleaning store near Delaware and Amherst - whose adverts scream that they dryclean EVERYthing at $2.95.

Who are your favourite Drycleaners around the downtown area? I have a particularly grimy but really expensive woollen blazer I want to have drycleaned and could really use some recommendations.

Thanks!
tinypliny - 11/20/09 23:36
$17 to clean ONE coat? Do you live in a crazy condo with a swimming pool and sauna?!
jenks - 11/20/09 15:36
those prices sound pretty reasonable to me. Then again, I'm always astounded at how much dry cleaning costs. My building here has a dry cleaning service that picks up and delivers... super convenient... and we get a 10% discount. Fortunately i don't dry clean much- so it's been 5 months before I needed them- and they want $17 to clean one coat?!
tinypliny - 11/20/09 10:43
I stopped by the "Never to big..." shop and the lady told me the rates:

$12 for cutting off and hemming jeans.
$10 for hemming trousers
$5.50 for drycleaning one blazer

Is that reasonable?
heidi - 11/20/09 07:16
No, don't tip the drycleaner. I was planning to try the one at North & Linwood next partly because they also do tailoring and I need some stuff modified.
tinypliny - 11/19/09 23:45
What is a reasonable price do you think? Also, are you supposed to tip them like haircutters?
heidi - 11/19/09 21:11
I used the Eco-Friendly cleaners on Elmwood between Allen & North. Also felt quite expensive, but has that feel-good eco-friendly thing ;-). Dry cleaning is pretty cheap at home, and in the DC area it was $1.75/item about 8 years ago - I don't have good comparison points.
jenks - 11/19/09 20:19
I used to go to that "urban valet" on elmwood and.... i forget the cross street. South of Spot coffee I think. Kind of pricy, but I think they did a good job.

11/15/2009 23:01 #50315

"Visiting with family" =/= "Vacation"
Category: opinion
"Visiting with family" is definitely not equivalent to a "Vacation".

I was over the moon thinking about the vacation, was stressed out completely during the "vacation", but nevertheless didn't want to come back and felt devastated and depressed when I returned. Weird and totally expected at the same time. I miss my folks so much it actually aches. I think I now know why I avoided going back home for so long. :(

I think that's all I want to say about my "vacation".
tinypliny - 11/18/09 10:19
LOL :) I am not sure it was so much fun that I was depressed about coming back - it was more, what the hell am I doing here if I am not really there for people who matter the most to me.
metalpeter - 11/17/09 17:25
I have never gone to someplace I left, so I can only go by what I have heard and from what my brain can figure out. But when you go see family and or friends you want to try to see people but can't see them all or they are busy, or like most familes they also drive you crazy. I will admit that once years ago I had a great Vacation in Toronto and cried (well at least on the inside, maybe a little bit on the outside) when it was time to go home. Let me "Man This Up". I went to see Wrestlemania (Biggest Wrestling Event of the Year) They had Fan Axxes stuff. I broke a camera and bought a new one (before I had a digital one), went to eat some place and saw wrestlers there. Not to mention I went to Toronto Rock game I think they played the Bandits not sure can't remember and one day I had nothing to do so I went down to the ACC and saw that there was a leafs game and wound up waiting in a line and got tickets. The Point is that the time was so fun I didn't want to go back home. So with out knowing what went on I get the depression part of coming back.
tinypliny - 11/16/09 23:45
Thank you all so much. You are like my virtual family here. :-)

(e:deeglam): Yes, exactly. Worst feeling ever. That really sums it up! I just got done visiting my only family - so I guess no more family till next year.

(e:jenks) - I would have had I taken any worthwhile shots. I lost the motivation to take any photos after a while because it was not a "touristy" trip at all.
I do have some airline food posts to make - but for now my camera is lying buried somewhere deep inside my unpacked suitcase. :)
jenks - 11/16/09 15:58
How about some pictures? That will make *us* feel better, at least. ;)
matthew - 11/16/09 12:50
Welcome home (e:tinypliny)! Your comments have been missed.
james - 11/16/09 12:32
Welcome back.
deeglam - 11/16/09 10:22
awwww! I totally know the feeling... when I lived in Las Vegas and came home to buffalo it definitely wasn't relaxing as a vacation should be, but I was home and it was awesome...and leaving was the worst feeling ever. :(

Hang in there!

Are you visiting family for the holidays at all??
jim - 11/16/09 09:44
Welcome back.

11/15/2009 22:03 #50314

Sizes and why I hate clothes-shopping.
Category: whine
Over the past few weeks or so, I have been finding out what size I am or rather the numerous sizes my clothes need to be to remotely "fit" me in some way.

In Delhi, I am an XL for some shirts or an 80-85 or some weird European size in some arbitrary scale that the dressmaker invented while getting sloshed. Here in Buffalo, I am apparently Petite. Okay, that sounds reasonable. But I am also:

-- 3/5 short for trousers in the juniors (teens) section
-- 3/5 short for jeans in the juniors section (I like jeans with a looser fit, -- 3-short somewhat fits me but would be uncomfortable over a day of wearing)
-- 2 for tops in the women's section (this is baggy and they don't go any smaller).
-- Petite-Small-Extra-Small (not Average or large) for tops in the petite-women section
-- 2/4 for shorts/trousers in the women's section
-- 2/4 for jeans in the women's section

And none of the busts or lengths on any of these tops or trousers ever fit me. If they do, they are in the "girls" section - but then my hips don't fit. To make things even more fun, sizing varies among brands and in-store lines. I don't fit petite trousers at all - they are 7-10 inches too tall for me. Worse fits are regular women's trousers/jeans -- they are sometimes a full feet (and maybe a half) longer than I am.

Does it mean that the average woman here is well over 5'7-5'10 and has a bust of around 55 inches? I don't see many such individuals on the street. Who are these people tailoring clothes for? I see tons of women who are around 5' to 5'4". Where do these women shop? Do they all have enough money for tailoring/alterations or own sewing machines - because I never see them rolling up their cuffs or trousers like I am forced to.

I am completely baffled by sizing and fatigued with shopping. I could easily wear the clothes I currently own for the rest of my life, had it not been for the fact that work requires me to dress-up from the rather hobo-like frayed faded ill-fitting clothes I have been wearing over the past four years. I could also easily have brought my wardrobe back to Buffalo but I am not sure the wild colours, embroidery and mirrors I used to wear would be street-safe here.

I think I unconsciously stare in horror and fascination at people who say they love clothes-shopping. How could anyone possibly enjoy shopping if they are not 6' tall and have a 55" bust or have an incredibly small hip size? Or maybe I am just an alien mutant.

EDIT: I scrutinized a lot more sizing charts and I think I am a 2 Petite and unusually short. Good to know I am a pygmy even among petite people. Dockers metro trousers in a 2-Petite-Short with an "ideal fit" or a "curvy fit" almost fit me - except that the waist is a bit larger. As for tops, I am almost a 4 petite extra-small to small. Even by this measure my bust and waist are a whole inch or two smaller but my hips are almost fine but not really. :/
tinypliny - 11/19/09 19:12
Wow - I wasn't even thinking of all the other complications you just dredged up. I'd rather give up to the misery of wearing ill-fitting clothes here.

"have an active wardrobe from 1987"

LOL.
theecarey - 11/18/09 14:11
nope, I'm definitely NOT a tailor. I can darn a sock and the occasional button, but that is the extent of my sewing prowess.

More accurate sizing through standardization with clothing would be helpful, but precise measurements would be chaotic. (leg and arm length, yes please!)
Since there is so much variation among womens bodies, from head to toe and all around, AND combine that with an endless variety of styles, a precise measurement could possibly do more of a disservice. The answer has been to offer a (non specific/uncertain) size that should be able to accommodate a minute range around that number (I believe the standard deviation is 1.0-1.5 inches, but I have seen it as more, hence the need for a standardization). Unfortunately there are wide differences from style, manufacturer, cut, department (jrs, misses, womens, plus, etc) era (those into 'vintage' or just have an active wardrobe from 1987) and comfort/cut preference.
Mens clothing appears to be more simple in comparison, however it can get complex even with their 'precise measurement labels' on their generally more "straight up and down" (with variation in gut girth) bodies. For a button down shirt, the sizes are regular/traditional cut or tailored/slim cut along with chest, neck and arm length measurements. One or the other is chosen based on comfort level and style preference. The more stylish and tailored one wishes to appear, the more complicated the shopping experience. (apologies for over simplifying that explanation/example.)

If we really wanted to streamline and simplify the clothing fit issue, as a society we could do away with style altogether and live in sweatpants and baggy t-shirts.

hmm, some people are onto something.

but for the rest of us, figure out what your staples are and if you can tailor (or hire a tailor) or find a few really good companies that state what their sizes accommodate (check online retailers, make phone calls, check catalogs) then you will more likely find clothes that really look and feel good.
heidi - 11/18/09 11:42
I would love inch measurement, too, even though I only remember my height (65.5"). If I used the horizontal measurements more often, I'm sure I'd remember them.

tinypliny - 11/18/09 10:11
YES! Why don't they do inches for women? WHY WHY WHY?? Do dressmakers think we are so shallow that we prefer not knowing how many inches our busts and bottoms and heights are?

As far as I know, every woman knows these measurements and always remembers them - why not just label the damn clothes uniformly with their precise measurements??! It's not some vanity dance - its a WASTE of people's time.
metalpeter - 11/17/09 17:37
Some Women love to shop because I think they get to try all the stuff on and look in the mirror and see how they look and then put it back, HA, well buy it if it fits right. Hey what you say about the sizes is very true, Hey at one time I was young and I needed the money that is why I know about dress sizes, HA. I don't really know anything other then what you said about the sizes being different by brand. The way I know is that my Sis is about your size and went shopping with her once, Yes I wanted to slit my writs in the Galleria mall as I waited outside to store, what could be taking so long. It turns out the size stuff you mentioned is an issue. I think you are at just that odd size where it makes things tough. Guys have it easy they don't do that stupid size 3 means this, with guys they do inches and so it is pretty stright up. I'm guessing if you where taller you would have more fun shopping.
tinypliny - 11/16/09 23:14
(e:mike) I KNEW IT! I always knew you were the doppelgänger of this woman!!! :::link:::


(e:theecarey), you sell clothes? Really? Do you tailor clothes as well??! Hehe @ the Indian-clothing love - its only beautiful from a distance, the clothes get an awful lot of "you-must-be-an-exotic-dancer?" stares here. :)




mike - 11/16/09 22:48
I love clothes shopping! But then again my bust is 55" so i guess that explains it!
theecarey - 11/16/09 00:35
welcome back!!!!!!!!!:)

as for shopping.. I'm NOT a fan. Toss me in a book store or electronics store and I can have fun, but force me into a clothes store, and my head is aching in minutes. I'm 5'10 and everything tends to run short for me (arms, legs and torso- I have a lot of length to my torso) across several brands, quality, price point and style. Tailoring is the only way to make it work, but I'm not that motivated. If I find a few well fitting staples, then I wear them until they fray.

There isn't a size standard. When I sell clothing, I provide detailed measurements, not just what the size on the tag says. And I must say it is mind blowing how much difference there can be between one style being a size "small" and another being tagged as a "small".

Btw, I love the colorful and ornate look of Indian fashion. I'm really quite enchanted, actually.
tinypliny - 11/15/09 22:06
I am back. :)
james - 11/15/09 22:04
The gears of industry grind up another individual.

When are you coming back?

11/20/2009 03:22 #50350

The future of Personal Computing?
Category: i-tech
Chrome OS went opensource on Wednesday. I am excited but I also wonder if comfort in the knowledge of having most important things on your harddrive (if the internet were to crash and burn one day) would ever go away. I have a 1TB harddrive that I back-up things on - and I may potentially get another one. Why, then, is this concept of netbooking exciting?

I think people like me lead dual lives - a mobile, assimilate-and-let-go "info-now" life and a more static laid-back static "make-do-with-what-you-have" life. In the ancient past, I might have had a laptop for one life and a desktop for the other but now I have 2 laptops. My bigger older bulkier laptop serves as an emergency back-up for major disasters (which means it never gets used but its there all the same). The other smaller laptop is the one that I port around - almost inevitably to journal clubs and other venues that require me to review some written document.

I gave up printing more than a year back. All my docs are now online and backed up on my 1TB harddrive. I surf the web extensively and all my information gathering happens on this smaller laptop. Since I don't take my harddrive with me, whatever little data I have while on the go is on the tiny laptop. I depend on the net for the rest. So this could well be a netbook. I could get rid of the other laptop, retain my harddrive as a vestige of the ancient desktop and move ahead.

Some day, when I have a blazingly fast broadband satellite access to the net, I could ditch the harddrive as well. I just wonder if this day will coincide with the official release of Chrome OS. :)



I would love to see the owner of the voice in the video in action. I saw the video 3 times just because the presentation was so snappy, and so Google!

And if you are instinctively thinking of Windows when it comes to long boot up times, you would be wrong. The latest Ubuntu takes a WHOLE godawful minute to boot and you can't even mod it easily as you can mod Win XP. I am sick of the holier-than-thou attitude of linuxers when you ask if you could just cut out all the crap add-on software that Ubuntu ships with* - the answer is that its free so you shouldn't expect too much. I say, to hell with you and your snobbish attitude.

If you can't give civilized useful answers to genuine questions from new users, you are no better than the micro$*** folks who just keep making their operating system even more bloated with every revision. At least WinXP can be stripped down to a lean performance beast. Requests for user-friendly ways of slipstreaming and coring Ubuntu make it to the "innovative future ideas" board instead of being listed as priorities and answered - just goes to show how completely behind the times and user-unfriendly Ubuntu (and generally the linux community) really is.



  • PS: YES. I have tried Puppy Linux and its no more user-friendly than an esoteric command line system with all the commands in a useless pretty GUI drawn on a puppy's back. :/
jim - 11/20/09 23:55
typo aargh
jim - 11/20/09 23:53
SSD

All I'm sayin.
uncutsaniflush - 11/20/09 23:51
Wow! I'm old enough to think that booting up in a minute is fast. When I first got to work with an IBM pc at work in the early '80s, I think I could go down the street for an ice cream and get back befpre the system was booted. Anyone remember the 2 floppy drives PCs?

The box (e:leetee) uses runs a selectively updated (by me) pclinuxos 2007 :::link::: for stability. We have an asus eee 901 that's running moblin 2.1 :::link::: . I couldn't stand the Xandros gui that the eee came with. I have a couple of boxes that play with. I like e17 (more accurately Enligthenment DR17) :::link::: so I really like elive :::link::: which debian with e17. I tend to play with the latest development versions and push them until they break.

I also run Arch with e17. I'm a distro whore so I've always got a few random distros floating around on stray partitions. I think that I stopped counting how many distros I played when I reached a 100 about 4 years ago.

tinypliny - 11/20/09 22:09
Wow - thanks so much for the detailed responses (e:uncutsaniflush). Had fun reading them. :)

I did a full install of the latest Ubuntu version on the latest Toshiba laptop (my parent's)- and it took a full minute and some odd seconds to boot up. My mum asked me if it was "up yet" - and she is probably the MOST patient person around!

Keeping a laptop turned on for over a few hours is not really an option for my parents - so boot-up time is a big deal.

Thanks for the Arch recommendation - I will be sure to try it out. I am now really curious to know which distro you and (e:leetee) run. :)
uncutsaniflush - 11/20/09 11:42
Oh yeah, if you have the time and want to build a customized Linux that only has the apps that you want, I would recommend Arch :::link::: It takes a wee bit of time but eventually you would get a (e:tinypliny) Linux that boots very fast.
uncutsaniflush - 11/20/09 11:33
Zealots of any Operating System sort be they Linux, osX, or, dare I say it, Windows, are often annoying.

I suspect you encountered some of the RTFM (READ THE FUCKING MANUAL) bunch. Not all Linux users are like that.

That being said, I'm one of the crazies (along with the lovely Lettuce ((e:leetee))) who uses Linux on the desktop every day and we done so since 2001. From what I hear, that makes us weird and crazy. For most people, I would recommend osX as an alternative to Windows before I would recommend Linux because of better software/hardware integration. Unless cost is an issue.

Not all Linuxes run equally well on all hardware. Because of this I would recommend buying a box or 'top with Linux pre-installed to avoid hardware/software compatiblity issues for most people if they want to use Linux as alternative to Windows.

I'm a not a big fan of Ubuntu. I've played with several releases and found it unsatisfactory. But I know lots of people who love it.

As to the Ubuntu boot time, are you talking about a live cd or an installed version? Most distros boot faster from an install than a live cd. One generic way to speed up boot time in Linux is to only start up the services you actually use at boot time. Lots of distros including Ubuntu start up all sorts of unnecessary services to make it more "convenient" for the user.

On Linux boxes, most users measure uptime in weeks and months so a long boot time isn't seen as much of a problem if you boot up a couple times a year. Of course, on a 'top, boot time matters. There are versions of Ubuntu and other distros that specifically configured for net-tops and do a much better job than vanilla Ubuntu.
tinypliny - 11/20/09 11:20
The GDLF - looks like the French Revolution of data. :)

(e:zobar) - I think Ubuntu out of the box is fine for people who don't care about boot-up times, slow performance, dragging programs etc. The average windows users put up with these things on a regular basis. In fact, I think less viruses are written for linux so it might have a slight advantage if pushed to this kind of user.

But the idea of not having control over the zillion processes running in the background annoys me. Having to wait a minute for the boot sequences drives me crazy. I am happy that I can hack and strip my operating system till its running just the bare minimum I need and nothing extra AND boots in less than 14 seconds.

Naturally, it feels crippling that I can't do this with Ubuntu. The minute you strip out some extra bundled email program or IM chat program in it, a ton of other functionalities are affected without warning. It is as if the garbage is built into the OS. Of course, the minute you point this out at a linux forum, they get all defensive, snobbish and sometimes insulting at your "windows" background. A typical response is "Oh, linux is perfect as it is - keep the whole dirty idea of "modding" to your windows forums. Classic example of non-receptive behaviour.
jim - 11/20/09 09:30
Google Data Liberation Front: :::link:::
zobar - 11/20/09 08:36
Generally speaking I trust cloud computing because at their data centers even their redundancy has redundancy, redundantly. But the recent large-scale data loss at Danger/Microsoft/Sidekick and the occasional outages at GMail take the cloud analogy a little too far: the computing cloud, unlike real clouds, should not be ephemeral.

I used to use Linux. It was pretty ideal for what I did, but I thought the Linux Desktop people were crazy. Only geeks claimed Linux was ready for non-geeks to use. But that was ten years ago and I'd kind of hoped they'd made a little progress since then.

- Z