« first day (987 days earlier)   
00:00 - 03:0003:00 - 05:00

3:00 AM
And I roast a good turkey breast.
Turkey is an unbelievably good value most of the time.
 
By the way, I read that turkey used to be the standard thing to eat on Christmas Eve in England, but then it became too popular, and now the avant-garde have goose instead!
Turkey is often cheaper than chicken, isn't it?
 
I think goose is actually the throwback.
Here, yes.
 
In what sense?
 
I can often get turkey breasts (that is, the whole breast, on the bone) for about $1/lb
 
Hmm.
 
3:02 AM
Goose was traditional in England long before turkey was even an idea.
 
Let me see what Albert Heijn (Ahold) charges...
 
Its frozen, and maybe injected with brine, :-( but when I am in my poor times... plus I love turkey. With mashed potatoes. Or evidently, in ramen.
 
Hmm they only sell turkey filet, and it's € 11,58/kg!
 
What the bleep is a turkey filet?
 
That's five times as expensive as yours, but without bones.
 
3:04 AM
And what part of a turkey is worth $7/lb more or less I guess?
 
Breast, I think?
Or what do you call it?
 
We would never refer to a cut of turkey as a filet.
But I understand the brits don't cut them the same way we usually do.
 
I get nothing from that link.
 
It's a plastic thingy with some turkey cut in it.
 
3:06 AM
Ah, it downloaded instead of showing in the browser.
That looks like a pounded section of turkey breast. We would call it a cutlet.
 
Ah.
 
That is about the most expensive turkey thing you could buy.
But still, $7/lb! OUCH.
 
Ah. What would it cost for you?
 
Right now on my delivery service--backed by Giant owned by ahold--I can buy a WHOLE kosher turkey, for about 3.29 /lb. That is an expensive turkey.
The cheapest whole turkey is $1.49 / lb.
 
Hmm that sounds very cheap.
How much does a whole turkey weigh?
 
3:09 AM
Cutlets are $6/ lb. I would never buy them though.
 
Ah OK.
So not much cheaper.
 
If I went to my dutch market (not like you dutch, PA dutch), I could get higher quality poultry at lower prices.
AT least lower than the high end prices.
But they don't deliver.
 
Yeah, markets are cheap.
A whole turkey costs € 11/kg from a real butcher.
For a turkey of 3 kg, that's the price I found.
 
You can see why I tend to by whole turkeys.
I also know how to cut them up myself, so I save money that way.
Not that that is my usual priority.
3 kg turkey?
Turkeys should weigh about 5 kg, at least.
What about pork tenderloin?
Running about $6/lb here right now.
 
Ehh I never buy pork except bacon. I don't really know what the names of all the cuts mean, not even in Dutch.
 
3:13 AM
But remember--my online delivery source is one of the most expensive ways to shop. I do it because I don't drive much, and love convenience.
Ah.
 
Understandable.
Oh, I also like pork sausages.
And (smoked) ham!
 
Pigs are generally deliicous. Sausage is wonderful.
The Dutch market makes amazingly good sausage.
 
But not an actual cut piece of pork, it's just not my thing.
 
There is so much variance in what ham is that it would be hard to compare.
 
Yay!
 
3:14 AM
Every holiday season, we get a spate of articles describing the different types of ham available here.
 
You think kotelet = cutlet?
 
So what do three-headed dogs eat?
 
I think kotelet is a common cut of pork.
 
I think it is likely a cognate, yes.
But we are often mislead by false cognates.
 
Yeah.
 
3:15 AM
It probably means "prissy thin thing" in latin or something.
 
Or true cognates that have acquired different meanings.
Heh.
 
That too.
Or in english, we adopt two different cognates at different times and give them different meanings.
 
Well, kotelet means nothing in Dutch, while cutlet makes sense in English?
 
cutlet makes perfect sense.
It is a cut of meat, typically pounded thin, suitable for very rapid cooking by sauteeing.
 
Right.
 
3:16 AM
Usually refers to veal or pork, but makes sense for other meats.
Very rarely used to refer to beef.
 
Do you have something like carbonade? That is a kind of pork cut here.
 
The basis, for example, of the famous German dish wienershcnitzel (sp?) which basically is breaded fried cutlets.
I have no idea what carbonade means in terms of pork, sorry.
 
Schnitzel, I think.
 
You know the Germans love their compounds.
 
I think you're more of a sarcophile than I am.
 
3:18 AM
I am pretty sure weinersnhnitzel means pork cutlet :-)
sacrophile?
 
Sarco, not sacro!
Sarco-phagus = flesh-eating.
 
But sacrofile is a real word! I just googled it!
And it fits :-)
 
Perhaps I should call you a sarcophage.
 
I like low temperatures, and hate hot weather.
I refer to my self as a carnitarian.
By analogy to vegetarian :-)
 
@SAJ14SAJ Hah, not in my dictionary.
 
3:20 AM
From some university website: There are also sacrophile, thermophiles, acidophiles, alkaliphiles, and many more. A mesophile is ... A sacrophile fluorishes in low temperature environments.
 
You know I cannot use hybrid words unless they have become so normal as to have become unavoidable...
 
Hybrid words?
 
@SAJ14SAJ My dictionary doesn't know it...
 
I am sure it is a technical word in a fairly narrow field.
 
@SAJ14SAJ A word created out of parts that are not "supposed" to be attached like that.
 
3:21 AM
I like to do that. Did you see the answer where I slipped in the word "breadophilic" :-)
 
By Hades!
 
Styx!!
 
I wonder what they based this sacro- on.
 
Je ne sais.
 
And by the Styx too, yes.
 
3:23 AM
Who is watching the crossing while you are chatting? I imagine the souls are prancing right out.
 
Ehh I'm on my smartphone?
 
You chat on a smartphone? I would not try that, without a real keyboard.
 
With Swype, it's actually possible, though of course still far inferior.
 
And I am just not believing there is cell coverage in Hades. Lets be serious.
I don't know what Swype is.
 
Why not?
 
3:24 AM
I am kind of a cell phone luddite.
 
Cell towers don't just broadcast sideways, you know.
 
The dead have no need for cell service. How would the companies recoup their investment?
ACtually, they kind of do.
They are optimized for directionality.
 
Swype is a kind of software keyboard (an on-screen keyboard, if you will), where you type a word by drawing a line over the letters that you want, then lifting your finger.
 
But even if you assume they are ideal antenae, the cell frequencies don't penetrate through earth very far.
 
Have you never seen those small iron thingies in the road?
 
3:26 AM
Think about when you go through a tunnel.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
 
Those are our amplifiers.
A kind of antennae.
 
You cannot amplify a cell signal.
They are digital.
 
@SAJ14SAJ Maybe because they are invisible.
 
You might be able to repeat it.
 
Repeat, yes, that's what I meant.
 
3:27 AM
Well, you could amplify it, but it would just amplify the noise too.
 
Wouldn't that work?
 
No engineer would put a cell repeater in the road at surface level. That is just crazy talk.
 
Why not?
 
Really?
 
Our engineers are divine. Or infernal.
It's simple. You just drill a hole upwards until you meet air, then stick an antenna in it.
 
3:29 AM
They are dead, they are not up on their engineering skills.
 
Not the dead.
They can't touch things.
But our bestiarium.
 
The only evidence of creatures from hades we have is Larry, Moe and Curley.
But I suspect you are actually an asylum inmate with internet privilege:-)
 
How dare you!
growls
 
Hiss?
I am wathcing Amazing Grace reruns. There have been two GORGEOUS kitties in that episode.
 
But hey, it's soul-catching time. Wouldn't want to let ghosts escape to surface houses.
Is that a television series?
 
3:32 AM
They left. They know you like to chat in the US evening time.
 
Yo no lo so.
 
It was, it was incredibly good. So it was cancelled after three seasons :-(
 
Aww.
Time for a Kickstarter campaign.
 
I am not a fan of kickstarter.
 
No?
 
3:33 AM
Well, the idea is fine. But the gaming blogs have been taken over with "news" that are articles about ks announcements. I have no interest in games that I cannot play. I don't want to read about them until I can actually but and download them.
I would be happer if they just reviewed the games when they actually come out.
 
What if you could play them sooner by pre-ordering on Kickstarter?
@SAJ14SAJ They will.
 
Half the articles you read now, they are not even real games yet.
Pah.
There are so many obstacles, I don't believe ina game until it is actually available for release. And even then only after I read reviews.
 
I don't think I read that many articles about games, and I never buy games so soon after launch anyway. I usually wait a year or two, until they become cheaper.
 
I do that for some games. Skyrim is down to 50% of the original cost on steam.
Almost time to buy it.
 
Still far too expensive.
Did you like Oblivion?
 
3:35 AM
When it hits 1/3 the original price, I will probably buy it.
 
My goal is absolute, not relative.
 
I didn't like Oblivian very much--I loathed the level scaling. It took away the feeling of increasing power, which is one of the things I like about rpgs.
 
It should be € 15 or less for a game I really want to play.
 
Most of the games I but now are < $10. They are indies, it seems.
 
Yeah, well, I installed mods to counter that from the beginning. But I still didn't like the combat. I just don't enjoy aim-and-click.
 
3:37 AM
I haven't liked any RPG combat system after the turn based era ended.
 
Ended?
 
To me real time combat and RPG don't go well together.
 
It hasn't ended.
 
It has, in triple A games. Only indies seem to be turn based much any more.
Name a single main stream turn based RPG in the last three years or so...
 
Well, I think mêlée combat can be fun, if it is all about careful timing and button combinations. But few games have that. However, I always play as a mage, and magic is always point-and-click when it's real-time.
@SAJ14SAJ How about Final Fantasy games? Not that I have ever played any.
 
3:40 AM
I like mages too. But I am terrible at real time. I am the cannon fodder in PVP, so I don't do it. I am terrible at twitch games. I hated that Mass Effect when more twitch based. Not to mention they ruined the story, but I didn't but the 3rd one because it was basically an action game.
 
I really like Bioware's combat system: party based, real-time, but you give instructions while pausing the game. So it is more or less turn-based, you could say.
 
FF are strange.
@Cerberus Ah the golden age ones.
Like Baldur's gate.
 
Golden age?
Yes, like BG.
 
Golden age of computer RPGs.
Or Icewind dale.
 
Dragon Age 3 will come out this year.
 
3:40 AM
I loved those.
I won't buy DA3.
 
Have you played the DA series, that is, 1 and 2?
Why not?
 
DA1 was so horrible in its combat unfairness, and DA2 (from reviews) was worse.
 
How do you mean unfairness?
I like the combat in DA1. I am playing it now—that is, I have finished all but the last DLC.
 
The enemies were not there all along. Instead, you had to enter an area and then they spawned SURROUNDING you so you could never play cautiously and tactically, but were constantly being ambushed in situations no half way intelligent player would tolerate.
 
That happens occasionally, yes. But most of the time, you can see them from afar.
 
3:42 AM
I loathed that.
ARe you playing the same game I did?
 
It makes combat harder, but...why is it such a huge problem?
 
It was near constant, especially after the beginner stuff.
Because it reduces the value of smart play.
 
That is not my impression.
 
Well, I guess you are less sensitive to that aspect of it.
 
I think the most important boss battles are (nearly) all like that, yes, probably also because they start with a dialogue.
 
3:44 AM
I got to the point where I was roadblocked at every battle, and no amount of tactics could overcome overwhelming ambushes. So I just quit.
 
But most standard battles you can prepare for.
At what difficulty level?
 
There were a LOT of them that you would enter a room or area, and nothing would be there. Then you would walk in further--poof! Surrounded!
Its been years, bleep if I remember what difficulty level.
I typically play RPGs at their "normal" or "standard" level.
 
I was roadblocked once or twice, but I saw it as a challenge. I just had to consider my tactics really well, and pick some new spells. Then I would be able to win, after a couple of tries.
Hmm I play at nightmare, and I like combat to be hard.
 
I didn't give up easily. I think it was this battle where you crossed some stone bridges, and then a huge number of INVISIBLE mages that you could not pre-buff against would root your characters and then blast them to death that made me quit the game.
 
Perhaps that's the difference: if you don't like that, but rather like to advance the story instead of dying a couple of times, then that would be more annoying.
 
3:46 AM
I think you are more a masochist than I am.
 
Invisible mages?
I have never seen invisible mages. Oh, wait...
 
AS I recall. Its been years. I am an unreliable narrator.
 
Do you have any idea where that was?
 
There was a dragon somewhere nearby I think.
 
Was it on a mountain top?
 
3:47 AM
No, I have no idea. Years, I tell you, years. When did that game come out.
Probably.
 
OK.
There are ways to survive strong mages.
One or two might have been around some corner or something?
 
Remember, I played the golden age games. They were difficult, but you were never ambushed like that except in a couple of boss battles due to the dialog effect. and even then you could buff up.
I recall a big open area with no where to hide.
 
Hmm was it maybe the final battle, against the so-called arch-demon?
On the top of a tower in the city?
Probably not.
 
I don't think so, because I hadn't doe all four branches of the quests or whatever you were supposed to do.
 
OK.
 
3:50 AM
I rmember one battle was in an inn. You couldn't prepare, but it would start when you talked to some NPC. And again, surrounded. I HATE that.
 
Well, anyway, I agree that sometimes battles were frustrating, when you felt like there was nothing you could do. But there always was, eventually.
 
And you couldn't NOT talk to that PC because it was on the critical path.
 
Yeah, that is kind of annoying, in a small space.
But there are spells you can cast.
 
Well, I don't have the patience to find what the one optimal way is... especially if you didn't min-max your chars, and have perfect equipment. Which I never did.
YEah, yeah, yeah. you have a bigger RPG epeen than I do :-)
 
There is a spell that makes the blood boil of all enemies in an area, a kind of paralysis.
 
3:52 AM
I would never take blood magic, I am a good role player.
 
But blood magic is not evil! You have been indoctrinated by the templars!
 
I never do the evil campaigns.
 
Neither do I.
 
I think I ended up killing blood mage dude.
 
Aww.
 
3:53 AM
As I recall, he kind of forced you into it.
 
You...puritan!
 
I am not a complete relativist like you :-)
 
I didn't kill him. I used his ritual to save this kid from a desire demon.
Haha.
 
I am pretty sure there were other ways to save the kid.
 
I don't think so.
 
3:54 AM
Well... don't care.
Its been a long, long, long time since there was a major RPG that really pressed my buttons in a good way.
 
At any rate, I hate it when combat is so easy that you never have to rethink your tactics and reload.
 
You should play Gratuitous Space Battles. Ithink you would like it.
 
I think smaller turn-based RPGs appear on a regular basis?
Quoi?
 
Indies, sure. Abadon wasn't too bad.
Cthulhue saved the world, I am playing now. It s fun.
I never liked most of the Spiderweb ones--that underground world just didn't appeal to me.
My very favorite genre is the SRPG... but good ones are very, very rare.
The DS was a haven for turn based RPGs. Like Etrian Odessy.
 
That's a lot of spaceships.
I don't like dungeons either.
SRPG?
 
3:59 AM
Strategy RPG. The best known of the lot is probably Disgaea from the PS2.
 
Never heard of any of those.
And I'm not going to buy a second computer to play games on!
 
??
I use the same computer for games and work.
 
Especially not a crippled one that can only play games.
Playstation...
 
If you can play DA, you can play almost anything RPGish.
Oh, well... I take your point.
I won't be buying the next gen consoles. I think the best of gaming has come back to the PC.
 
I wonder why consoles still exist.
I hope Nvidia's "Shield" and Steam's "Steambox" will destroy consoles.
Where you can stream games from your PC to your television.
 
4:02 AM
Hard to say. But since you are a baby, you don't remember the beginning of the console era. They were THE way to play for some of us. I had an Intellivision as a child!
I have no doubt that those two will not make a dent.
 
Whatever that is!
 
Same era as an Atari 2600, but better :-)
 
They could be the beginning.
 
The iPhone and Android are the beginning.
 
People had SNESes when I was in primary school.
 
4:04 AM
You are a baby.
 
@SAJ14SAJ How so?
Shield can play Android games btw.
 
Casual non computer-based gaming is rapidly moving to them. People who don't want to fuss with the complexity of computer games have tablets and phones and Angry Birds to satisfy their itch. There is less of a low end for consoles to complete in.
Younger people--younger even than you--seem to use their phones and tablets as their primary or even only personal computing device.
So that is where they play their games.
They don't see any need for a console, where they are tied to the living room or whatever.
 
Perhaps.
On the one hand, people may want to play on a large, tv screen.
 
If I said the speed of light can not exceed 299,298 km/s, you would ask what the exceptions and limits are.
 
On the other, perhaps that is only a non-essential habit, the result of having only one screen in one's sitting room for so long.
@SAJ14SAJ ?
 
4:08 AM
That is a general trend, not an absolute behavior that charactarizes every gamer.
 
What is?
 
I play--and am typing right now--on a computer with a pair of 40" flatscreens.
The trends where mobile devices are more disruptive to consoles than something like the semi-mythical steam box.
I am far from normal, though.
 
I am a bit confused as to the line of our discussion. I do not disagree with what you say.
At any rate, a pair of 40" screens is not bad.
 
What kind of hours are you keeping there? Its just after midnight here.
 
Yeah, it's bed time.
I'm trying to shift back my sleep cycle.
As usual.
 
4:11 AM
You might be better off shifting FORWARD until you get back on cycle!
 
But that's hard.
I often have engagements in the evening.
And shifting forward is also annoying. And only temporary.
 
I know: command performance bruleeing!
 
Yay!
 
Not if you shift forward all the way around the clock!
 
I can't do that in one day.
It doesn't work.
 
4:13 AM
No, it would take about 12 weeks to go 24 hours around.
 
Oh, I can do it in less, maybe 10 days.
 
You can do 26 hour days pretty easily. Its my own natural rythem if I am unemployeed long enough.
 
Absolutely.
My natural rhythm is like that, or maybe 27.
 
Anyway, you should go pet your kitties and go to ... I see the problem. You need kitties. They aid sleeping.
 
Haha.
I would get kitties if they could get outside.
But anyway, good night!
 
4:15 AM
Bon soir.
 
Adieu!
poof
 
00:00 - 03:0003:00 - 05:00

« first day (987 days earlier)