Dennis Hackethal
Member since June 2024
Badges
Activity
#1506 · Dennis HackethalOP, about 11 hours agoIngredients
- Store-bought dough (1 pound)
- Crushed tomatoes (120g)
- Mozzarella (part skim, 77g)
Then, for garnish:
- Oregano
- Fresh basil leaves
- A dash of salt
Steps
- Preheat pizza steel for 45 min on middle rack with broiler on (was somewhere between 450 and 500°F).
- Rest dough at room temperature for 20 min (per instructions on the label).
- Stretch the dough.
- Dust the pizza peel with flour and place pizza on peel.
- Add tomato sauce.
- Add cheese.
- Put pizza in oven (on pizza steel).
- Bake for about 10 minutes.
The main challenge with baking pizza at home is that home ovens don’t get hot enough for the dough to bake properly. The pizza steel is supposed to help with that.
Results:
The center dough was paper thin while the crust was a too thick.
#1506 · Dennis HackethalOP, about 11 hours agoIngredients
- Store-bought dough (1 pound)
- Crushed tomatoes (120g)
- Mozzarella (part skim, 77g)
Then, for garnish:
- Oregano
- Fresh basil leaves
- A dash of salt
Steps
- Preheat pizza steel for 45 min on middle rack with broiler on (was somewhere between 450 and 500°F).
- Rest dough at room temperature for 20 min (per instructions on the label).
- Stretch the dough.
- Dust the pizza peel with flour and place pizza on peel.
- Add tomato sauce.
- Add cheese.
- Put pizza in oven (on pizza steel).
- Bake for about 10 minutes.
The main challenge with baking pizza at home is that home ovens don’t get hot enough for the dough to bake properly. The pizza steel is supposed to help with that.
Results:
I need to stretch the dough better so it’s more circular.
#1511 · Dennis HackethalOP, about 11 hours agoThe toppings were done cooking much faster than the dough and started burning a bit toward the end.
Next time, I could turn the broiler off. And if I have the steel on the top rack, I could maybe move it to the middle, but that could take time and let too much hot air out of the oven.
#1506 · Dennis HackethalOP, about 11 hours agoIngredients
- Store-bought dough (1 pound)
- Crushed tomatoes (120g)
- Mozzarella (part skim, 77g)
Then, for garnish:
- Oregano
- Fresh basil leaves
- A dash of salt
Steps
- Preheat pizza steel for 45 min on middle rack with broiler on (was somewhere between 450 and 500°F).
- Rest dough at room temperature for 20 min (per instructions on the label).
- Stretch the dough.
- Dust the pizza peel with flour and place pizza on peel.
- Add tomato sauce.
- Add cheese.
- Put pizza in oven (on pizza steel).
- Bake for about 10 minutes.
The main challenge with baking pizza at home is that home ovens don’t get hot enough for the dough to bake properly. The pizza steel is supposed to help with that.
Results:
The toppings were done cooking much faster than the dough and started burning a bit toward the end.
#1506 · Dennis HackethalOP, about 11 hours agoIngredients
- Store-bought dough (1 pound)
- Crushed tomatoes (120g)
- Mozzarella (part skim, 77g)
Then, for garnish:
- Oregano
- Fresh basil leaves
- A dash of salt
Steps
- Preheat pizza steel for 45 min on middle rack with broiler on (was somewhere between 450 and 500°F).
- Rest dough at room temperature for 20 min (per instructions on the label).
- Stretch the dough.
- Dust the pizza peel with flour and place pizza on peel.
- Add tomato sauce.
- Add cheese.
- Put pizza in oven (on pizza steel).
- Bake for about 10 minutes.
The main challenge with baking pizza at home is that home ovens don’t get hot enough for the dough to bake properly. The pizza steel is supposed to help with that.
Results:
Need to use more cheese and spread it better.
Presumably, I need to get the oven hotter. I could try moving the steel right underneath the broiler while preheating.
#1506 · Dennis HackethalOP, about 11 hours agoIngredients
- Store-bought dough (1 pound)
- Crushed tomatoes (120g)
- Mozzarella (part skim, 77g)
Then, for garnish:
- Oregano
- Fresh basil leaves
- A dash of salt
Steps
- Preheat pizza steel for 45 min on middle rack with broiler on (was somewhere between 450 and 500°F).
- Rest dough at room temperature for 20 min (per instructions on the label).
- Stretch the dough.
- Dust the pizza peel with flour and place pizza on peel.
- Add tomato sauce.
- Add cheese.
- Put pizza in oven (on pizza steel).
- Bake for about 10 minutes.
The main challenge with baking pizza at home is that home ovens don’t get hot enough for the dough to bake properly. The pizza steel is supposed to help with that.
Results:
The dough was bland and not very crispy.
Add pics of the results
23 unchanged lines collapsedThe main challenge with baking pizza at home is that home ovens don’t get hot enough for the dough to bake properly. The pizza steel is supposed to help withthat.that.↵ ↵ Results:↵ ↵ - https://drive.proton.me/urls/SWE626NJKW#IQaJLZim5HZD↵ - https://drive.proton.me/urls/XGNSHXQDM8#ePyj0dPmg2xg
Iteratively improving on pizza at home. Inspired by itsdoughguy on Instagram but mistakes are my own.
Ingredients
- Store-bought dough (1 pound)
- Crushed tomatoes (120g)
- Mozzarella (part skim, 77g)
Then, for garnish:
- Oregano
- Fresh basil leaves
- A dash of salt
Steps
- Preheat pizza steel for 45 min on middle rack with broiler on (was somewhere between 450 and 500°F).
- Rest dough at room temperature for 20 min (per instructions on the label).
- Stretch the dough.
- Dust the pizza peel with flour and place pizza on peel.
- Add tomato sauce.
- Add cheese.
- Put pizza in oven (on pizza steel).
- Bake for about 10 minutes.
The main challenge with baking pizza at home is that home ovens don’t get hot enough for the dough to bake properly. The pizza steel is supposed to help with that.
Add followup question
> An example I have previously given is the flickering flags computation in the tv show (books) *The Three-Body Problem*. This computation depends on a mind defining states and logical relations. I am not familiar with this example, but that sounds like an inversion of the real relationship between reality and consciousness. See Ayn Rand’s ‘The Metaphysical Versus the Man-Made’. Certain types of computation give rise to the mind in the first place, so I don’t see how the mind could come beforecomputation.computation.↵ ↵ Or are you saying there are *certain kinds* of computation that require a mind?
#1498 · Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days agoI think you run into circular dependence if you exhaustively try to account for brain function by information processing. Even Claude Shannon’s definition of information depends on a «mind/perspective» defining a range of possible states. The world devoid of any perspective would have infinite states and systems depending on how you «view the world». An example I have previously given is the flickering flags computation in the tv show (books) The Three-Body Problem. This computation depends on a mind defining states and logical relations.
An example I have previously given is the flickering flags computation in the tv show (books) The Three-Body Problem. This computation depends on a mind defining states and logical relations.
I am not familiar with this example, but that sounds like an inversion of the real relationship between reality and consciousness. See Ayn Rand’s ‘The Metaphysical Versus the Man-Made’. Certain types of computation give rise to the mind in the first place, so I don’t see how the mind could come before computation.
#1498 · Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days agoI think you run into circular dependence if you exhaustively try to account for brain function by information processing. Even Claude Shannon’s definition of information depends on a «mind/perspective» defining a range of possible states. The world devoid of any perspective would have infinite states and systems depending on how you «view the world». An example I have previously given is the flickering flags computation in the tv show (books) The Three-Body Problem. This computation depends on a mind defining states and logical relations.
An example I have previously given is the flickering flags computation in the tv show (books) The Three-Body Problem.
Where?
#1498 · Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days agoI think you run into circular dependence if you exhaustively try to account for brain function by information processing. Even Claude Shannon’s definition of information depends on a «mind/perspective» defining a range of possible states. The world devoid of any perspective would have infinite states and systems depending on how you «view the world». An example I have previously given is the flickering flags computation in the tv show (books) The Three-Body Problem. This computation depends on a mind defining states and logical relations.
I think you run into circular dependence if you exhaustively try to account for brain function by information processing.
It’s not meant to be exhaustive. I’m not saying the brain is a computer and only a computer. It does other stuff too but that alone doesn’t mean it’s not a computer.
Improve copy
I think you run into circular dependence if you exhaustively try to account for brain function by information processing. EvenClaudClaude Shannon’s definition of informationis dependent upondepends on a «mind/perspective» defining a range of possible states. The world devoid of any perspective would have infinite states and systems depending on how you «view the world». An example I have previously given is the flickering flags computation in the tv show (books)Three body problem.*The Three-Body Problem*. This computationis dependentdepends on a mind defining states and logical relations.
## How to Structure Discussions Overall, I think the starting point of a discussion isn’t all that important as long as you’re willing to keep correcting errors.That’s a standard Popperian insight.↵ ↵ But(Popper)↵ ↵ But for those looking for a starting point, you can take inspiration from what I wrote in #502. You can either structure a discussion around a single problem:16 unchanged lines collapsed
Credit Popper
## How to Structure Discussions Overall, I think the starting point of a discussion isn’t all that important as long as you’re willing to keep correctingerrors.↵ ↵ Buterrors. That’s a standard Popperian insight.↵ ↵ But for those looking for a starting point, you can take inspiration from what I wrote in #502. You can either structure a discussion around a single problem:16 unchanged lines collapsed
Explain that Veritula cannot help with inexplicit ideas
12 unchanged lines collapsedVeritula works best for conscientious people with an open mind – people who aren’t interested in defending their ideas but in correcting errors. That’s one of the reasons discussions shouldn’t get personal. Veritula *can* work to resolve conflicts between adversaries, but I think that’s much harder. Any situation where people argue to be right rather than to find truth is challenging. In those cases, it’s best if an independent third party uses Veritula on their behalf to adjudicate the conflictobjectively.objectively.↵ ↵ Veritula only works for *explicit* ideas. For example, you may have an inexplicit criticism of an idea, but Veritula can’t help with that until you’re able to write the criticism down, at which point it’s explicit. (The distinction between explicit vs inexplicit ideas goes back to David Deutsch. ‘Inexplicit’ means ‘not expressed in words or symbols’.)
#1288 · Knut Sondre Sæbø, 3 months agoIf we use Claud Shannon’s framework of understanding information as reducing uncertainty, a light switch doesn’t contain information. But the problem with all kinds of information is that it is dependent on how you subjectively define states and uncertainty. Information is always relative to a certain «perspective».
Superseded by #1289. Knut, when you unmark an idea as a criticism, remember to ‘neutralize’ the old version.
Improve copy
If we useClaudClaude Shannon’s framework ofunderstandinginformation as reducing uncertainty, a light switch doesn’t contain information. But the problem with all kinds of information is that itis dependentdepends onhow yousubjectivelydefinedefinitions of states and uncertainty. Information is always relative to a certain «perspective».
Alan Forrester[^1] [says‘no’](https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/228643/197081):↵ ↵ >‘no’](https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/228643/197081), the brain is not a *quantum* computer but a classical one:↵ ↵ > Quantum mechanics has almost no bearing on the operation of the brain, except insofar as it explains the existence of matter. You say that signals are carried by electrons, but this is very imprecise. Rather, they are carried by various kinds of chemical signals, including ions. Those signals are released into a warm environment that they interact with over a very short timescale.4 unchanged lines collapsed
Fix misquote
4 unchanged lines collapsed> Quantum mechanical processes like interference and entanglement only continue to show effects that differ from classical physics when the relevant information does not leak into the environment. This issue has been explained [in] the context of the brain by Max Tegmark in [The importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes](http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9907009). In the brain, the leaking of information should take place over a time of the order 10^−13 − 10^−20 s. The timescale over which neurons fire etc.is 0.001−0.1s.is 0.001 − 0.1s. So your thoughts are not quantum computations or anything like that. The brain is a classical computer. [^1]: Forrester is a former henchman of the very toxic [Elliot Temple](https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/what-you-should-know-about-elliot-temple). Approach with extreme caution.
Quantum mechanics has almost no bearing on the operation of the brain, except insofar as it explains the existence of matter. You say that signals are carried by electrons, but this is very imprecise. Rather, they are carried by various kinds of chemical signals, including ions. Those signals are released into a warm environment that they interact with over a very short timescale.
Quantum mechanical processes like interference and entanglement only continue to show effects that differ from classical physics when the relevant information does not leak into the environment. This issue has been explained [in] the context of the brain by Max Tegmark in The importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes. In the brain, the leaking of information should take place over a time of the order 10−13 − 10−20 s. The timescale over which neurons fire etc. is 0.001−0.1s. So your thoughts are not quantum computations or anything like that. The brain is a classical computer.
-
Forrester is a former henchman of the very toxic Elliot Temple. Approach with extreme caution. ↩
#1454 · Amaro Koberle, about 1 month agoJust intuitively, I feel like there's a difference between forcing others not to force you, and forcing others not to copy you. I feel like defending against others using your scarce means towards their ends is just, while defending against others using non-scarce means towards their end is wicked. Since I impose no opportunity cost on someone by copying information, they have no claim on my scarce means as recompense. The copy-ability of information gives us this nice non-zero-sum situation where we can have our cake and eat it too because we don't have to economize on non-scarce things.
Correction: In some sense copying information does impose a cost, but I think of that cost more akin to the cost imposed on an incumbent producer by his competing alternatives in a free market.
When I distribute Harry Potter for free, I am simply offering better terms for access to the information than JK Rowling, so in a free market I should be the one that ends up distributing because I solve the same problem at a lower price.
‘When I distribute other people’s bicycles for free, I am simply offering better terms for access to bicycles than the stores that sell them, so in a free market I should be the one that ends up distributing because I solve the same problem at a lower price.’ 🤡