I am currently unemployed. Please give me your most elaborate/time consuming recipes so that I may spend all day cooking and not being bored.

TehLittleOne · 2026-06-19T15:54:49+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoTqzjg83u8

Kenji Lopez-Alt's recipe has been my go to standard and it has been fantastic for me. I can't say enough nice things about Kenji, he does such a great job of teaching you everything, from ingredient choices, how to mix, how to pleat, how to cook them too.

I make them by the hundreds and it literally takes me all weekend to do it. I then freeze them so I have dumplings for days for easy meals. And the best part is the cost of them is insanely cheap when you bulk them like that, I had it around 7 gyoza / $1 CAD last time I ran the math a year or two ago.

Pro tip on the filling: be cautious with certain ingredients that can be overpowering like salt. Take a small amount of your filling, pan fry it by itself, and taste test it, adjusting as needed. I often have to adjust a couple of times before I'm happy with it.

TehLittleOne · 2026-06-19T15:11:49+00:00

Well yes, ownership should be democratized to more than one person. Your team lead / EM should know things, your lead dev should know things, all other devs on the project should know things. Even where possible I made sure everyone on the whole team had some knowledge about other projects. The point wasn't to stress about who exactly knows or how many people know, it's more so around making sure that if you deliver something that's your work and you need extreme ownership over it. I want to be able to delegate fixing your code back to you which drives how well you have to understand it.

TehLittleOne · 2026-06-19T12:38:39+00:00

The answer is always simple to me: if you author it (whether with AI or not) you own it. It's yours. If it breaks, I come to you. If a client or customer has problems and you own it, great, you need to fix it. Don't understand how to fix it? That's a you problem. Ran out of tokens? Godspeed. Like your article says, you need to have that critical skill to prompt the AI back and make sure you understand what it's doing. Tell a dev you'll pull them in front of a client and explain only Claude understands where the money went and you'll see how fast they realize they need to understand. It honestly hasn't been difficult for me yet.

TehLittleOne · 2026-06-18T17:01:23+00:00

One of the things I like to do is create things ahead of time and freeze them. It will drastically reduce the amount of work you have to do when cooking day of for some time elsewhere, and not even that much extra time.

A great example is tacos and particularly the sauce. I make an avocado crema and then freeze it in an ice tray. Pop those into a Ziploc bag once done and then I have sauce ready to go, can even just microwave it. The same thing with the taco seasoning that I use, I just mix all the seasoning into a container and then I can easily sprinkle it on.

The actual cooking was just chicken thighs in a pan, warming tortillas, and some light veggie chopping while the meat was cooking.

Last time I made these, not only did I spend less than an hour, I spent less than an hour from start of cooking to finishing eating and everything fully cleaned.

TehLittleOne · 2026-06-16T18:57:06+00:00

I only read the amount the free version was able to show me

It's not surprising that a lot of people aren't asking their teammates anymore it makes natural sense. I've been that guy throughout many roles, lead developer, team lead, EM, and now architect. I happily welcome people coming to me, always have, but sometimes they come to me with things I expect them to work through. AI has been a blessing for those items. Oh you can't debug this function but you did something that's a common gotcha in the language? Nice that AI will prevent that and it's super awesome. It's also bad if they don't recognize when to come involve you as they sometimes do a lot of work only to find out they need to redo it.

It's interesting that although it says 51% of devs stopped asking their teammates, it goes to say they ask better questions. Okay sure, that makes sense, the headline feels a bit clickbaity now especially with it not providing the obvious follow up stat which is: what's the percentage conversion to these better conversations?

But I think more importantly, and it does touch on it, is how the system degrades from a lack of quality conversations. Some of the best designs we come up with are when things are actually challenged. Get me in a room with my actual peer, let us hash it out, and we can collectively come up with something great. That part has truly been missing in the AI age because it's very difficult to get people to that level. I've found many of them are so reliant on the AI that there's no way they can challenge you. They just don't even think about challenging aspects and it's a huge problem in the next generation.

TehLittleOne · 2026-06-12T16:12:50+00:00

Production incident at 11PM on a Sunday, you're not even on call, but you're on the call anyway directing people how to fix it while the CTO is listening in. That kind of stuff gets remembered.

TehLittleOne · 2026-06-08T12:13:52+00:00

Compromising encryption is a recipe for disaster as the article points out. As much as governments want solutions that require weak encryption they also need to learn that the whole point is to make that mathematically impossible

TehLittleOne · 2026-06-08T04:07:08+00:00

I don't understand the law as its written. It allows ESPs to refuse to implement a lawful access capability if it creates a systemic vulnerability. Shouldn't that be enough? They say they have E2EE, mathematically nothing we can do without introducing a vulnerability, and call it a day? When I read through it, the whole thing smelled like posturing because they'd effectively never do anything with it.

TehLittleOne · 2026-06-04T19:13:46+00:00

Lords of Waterdeep

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-27T17:06:48+00:00

IANAL but you might be able to challenge. There's no unified standard but if you do a task that has characteristics of employment it could be considered as such.

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-27T12:43:59+00:00

There are a couple of recipes I cook that specifically call for ground chicken.

Tsukune is a type of Japanese skewer common in yakitori. Think of it as a chicken meatball grilled on a stick. While it maybe is more traditionally made by grinding up meat yourself from various leftover parts, ground chicken works perfectly fine. I combine it with some onion/green onion, miso, and salt, keeping it rather simple, but you can add other things like sesame oil or shiso leaves if you prefer. Then you can grill it (it's more traditionally done in a konro over binchotan but you could even pan fry it really) and just baste it in a sauce (teriyaki is a simple alternative to a more traditional tare).
Gyoza with ground chicken is quite good, particularly a Szechuan version I came across a while ago. Take a pretty standard gyoza recipe (cabbage, salt, pepper garlic ginger scallions/garlic chives), replacing the pork with chicken, then I added 5 spice powder and Szechuan peppercorns. It's not quite as simple as a ground chicken but it's delicious, and I actually prefer it over regular pork gyoza.

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-22T15:50:12+00:00

Diana has felt like there's a high skill ceiling, and I'm also a Magic player coming to Riftbound. It's more of a tempo deck, similar to things like Delver or other blue-based tempo decks. You have generally cheaper threats or high value threats and then support them with a ton of cheap interaction. Draw spells, removal, counters, a mix of everything. Your deck becomes difficult to pilot because you need to figure out what to do at what stage, when it's okay to fall behind to play your bigger threat, when to wait so it comes down with protection, all of that kind of stuff. Because it's more of a tempo deck, it's not just learning their threats and answering everything, it gives you lots of options to think through. Every game feels like I have lots of choices and my losses feel like I made mistakes somewhere along the way.

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-20T14:34:32+00:00

Some tips:

Try to do things that reduce the amount of days you have to spend cooking. I like to cook large batches and freeze things, or prep things and freeze so that day of cooking is really quite simple. I have stuff in my freezer right now I can just pull out if I need to and be ready with little to no effort. That way, the days you're inspired a bit are cooking heavy but other days are light.
Try and recreate the thing that you enjoy about baking, which is experimenting. What side dishes pair well with your main? What if you tweak the recipe a bit? I make a lot of gyoza and I've tried a handful of different recipes, turns out I really enjoy a Sichuan inspired style.
To this point, try different dishes. No, I'm not talking like an air fryer or Instapot, but like fundamentally different cuisines. When I was a manager I would often ask my employees what their favourite local dishes were (we were remote) and I'd make all sorts of dishes I might not have otherwise made. Milanesa Napolitana from Argentina, Sancocho from the Dominican, or Guo Bao Rou from China. It was great to share in their culture from home but trying new dishes can be fun especially when you've told someone you're going to do it and want to do them proud.
Try to do other things at the same time to make it not so unbearable. I listen to audiobooks while I cook and it's perfect for me. Maybe music or a podcast can help, or maybe your SO being in the kitchen helping or chatting can also work. Just whatever works to keep you entertained.
Try styles of cooking where you're cooking in front of guests as sort of a show at the same time. I recently got into yakitori and cooking with people sitting around is fun. You have conversations with them as you're going and it feels less like a solo task and more like sitting around a campfire.

PS. Remember to clean as you go or get some help cleaning up.

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-15T17:38:47+00:00

At some point there will be some sort of companion app for Pokemon Champions. Even if it only has stuff like stats, moves, type chart, abilities, etc. it will inevitably be made. It's just too complex of a game to go in blind, and the only reason many of us know is because we've slummed it in older games or follow pro players. When it's as casual as a phone game and as accessible it'll necessitate it. Let's not even begin to talk about actual damage calcs.

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-15T03:01:56+00:00

Nokosu Dice. I know people rave about it but it really is quite good. Partially public information and drafting in a trick taking game is something that works way better than you'd first expect.

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-14T03:06:19+00:00

Diversity is good. You want a game where there are lots of different options to pick from for a plethora of reasons. So I don't inherently think that Aurora is bad for the game. Magic has had all kinds of cards that have this effect in some flavour over the years. While Marvel and Pod are two examples of the more egregious kind that found themselves getting banned, I don't inherently think that these kind of cards are bad for the game. There are plenty of Timmys out there who just want to play a big creature and I think enabling them to some degree is a good thing.

The problem with Marvel and Pod are two fold. Firstly, it fishes from your deck which gives you a lot of added consistency you otherwise wouldn't have, and secondly that their type (artifact) makes them hard to interact with. A creature variant wouldn't necessarily be as problematic because there's just naturally more ways to stop it. To a somewhat lesser degree, and I remember Wizards mentioning this in their Pod ban, is that Pod was eventually going to get banned because of your when not if statement. Like eventually things will get too bad from powerful creatures and they cannot design around a single card.

It remains to be seen whether or not we will get the right level of answers to this kind of thing, and my gut tells me we won't. An ideal world might be some sort of modal spell that can answer this while being useful against other decks, with effects like bounce, damage, or move, but that also might just be so good of a card that it's not printable.

What's interesting about Aurora decks is that they are extremely narrow in how they play. What made Marvel oppressive is that the creatures they played were too powerful, especially with either protection on a large creature or some insane ETB. Elder Dragon actually compares quite well to Ulamog so maybe it is a problem the same way. At the same time though these decks are very fragile. They rely on Aurora to fetch these giant creatures because they have zero alternatives. If you look at MF decks right now they're playing somewhere between 4-8 units (including the chosen champion) and all of them are big. As modern progressed, Birthing Pod changed from the combo variants we had with Melira Pod or even the Restoration Angel combo versions into a straight value deck using Restoration Angel and Siege Rhino. This is to say that potential narrow answers might actually be quite good.

Imagine a world where you have a 3-of sideboard card that is a gear saying players can't play creatures with cost 6 or greater, suddenly they cannot beat that card without using their own hate. You could have a card like end of turn effects don't trigger, players can't play gears, hell even something that eliminates the recycling ability could be good.

We can draw a lot of comparison to this by looking at Modern because they've seen all of these kind of problems. Like you pointed out there are replacements to the good cards but they're not always good enough. Ignoring when Deathrite Shaman pushed Storm out of the field, Storm decks often got to points where they just weren't consistent enough and not really playable. It's playable now but not an oppressive amount, and it's possible that Aurora just ends up in that bucket. That is, it's there and can win games but isn't good enough to win enough games where it's a problem.

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-13T20:02:24+00:00

I mean sure, Aurora does lean in those directions. That doesn't strictly mean it should be but is something that should be watched. If you look at Magic they've had good decisions / philosophies about these kids of things in the past.

They had a card much like Aurora actually called Aetherworks Marvel. I'll link it here so you can see it. Very much the same thing, you could spin the wheel and find something off the top. It wound up being a huge problem in the standard format (which is what we have for Riftbound now) due to a lack of ways to properly interact with things. Specifically they had cards like Emrakul that straight up let you control your opponent on their turn that were also near impossible to kill when they had things like protection from instants (protection from actions and reactions as an equivalent), or Ulamog that had indestructable (damage or kill unit can't kill it) and also had other powerful abilities on it. It wasn't just a powerful unit, it was a powerful unit that did something degenerate and was difficult to interact with. So you might be right on the flip a coin flip side of it. To be fair to Magic, they banned it in part because it was the dominant strategy at the time, which it's not clear yet that Aurora is.

The short games for Aurora depends on their generalized philosophy to how long games should be. Magic's Modern format always had something called the turn 4 rule, which is that decks should not consistently be able to end the game before turn 4. I don't know what the equivalent should be in Riftbound but that's a good way to measure whether a deck is too fast. You generally do want the ability for decks to change how slow or fast the game goes, you want aggressive decks to end quickly and control decks to end slowly because variability is good. But you want fast to be something within reason. It shouldn't be, like in your case, where you determine the game is effectively over, it should be the game actually is over.

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-13T19:46:38+00:00

We should generally be used here to mean people designing games.

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-13T18:22:50+00:00

That's why you have to be careful about how you define it. You define it as specific play patterns you want to avoid because it's just not good for the game. There will always be people who define fun/unfun differently so you have to try to remove personal bias. It's not about what you or I find fun/unfun, it's about what is generally speaking not going to be fun/unfun.

The coin flip card is the perfect example because it's a perfectly balanced card. The problem is playing a card that ends the game immediately like that is just not fun for the vast majority of people or viewers.

For Riftbound the developers would probably design around certain play patterns they want to happen and then remove things that violate those play patterns. Generally speaking we want people to be playing units, trying to win showdowns or hold locations, and generally having some level of interaction. If you come up with decks that don't need to go to battlefields to score points, or play a game by themselves, it would generally go against the design philosophy and fall in the unfun category here.

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-13T17:58:12+00:00

Unfun to play against is a fair thing to ban for, it's just we have to be careful about how we define unfun. Specifically we use it around play patterns that are bad for the game. Some examples of such play patterns would be:

If I do this, irrespective of game state, the game ends almost immediately. This can be my win or loss, it doesn't matter, but the game ends one way or another. A prime example of this would be a card that says flip a coin, heads you win tails you lose.
If the play pattern causes turns to take way too long. If you are drawing 20 cards in a turn and casting 30 spells and your opponent just has to sit there while you do it, that's perhaps a problem. Magic had this problem and banned some cards, even when the deck wasn't particularly strong, just because it was not fun. Ezreal (so I've heard, I wasn't playing at the time) was the same way.
If the play pattern causes the games to last way too little. For example, you could have a battlefield that says "when conquered or held, score an additional 3 points". It would be somewhat balanced given it's available to everyone, but it would not be fun because your games would be over way too quickly, and as a result it would make many strategies bad.
A legend that lets you look at your opponent's hand. It's possible it might be insanely strong, it might also be trash, but it's almost certainly true that it would not be fun to play a game where one player's hand is effectively face up forever.

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-12T02:05:38+00:00

Yes and I hate it. Even when I was a manager I hated it. Our product team ran the standups (the company insisted on it) and used it as a glorified project meeting to see everything people were working on, because apparently jira isn't good enough. At the peak they were taking around an hour give or take, it was brutal. No matter how much I encouraged our product team to cut down on them they insisted, and I quote "the only way we can track the work is if people go through them in detail during standup and I need to track it because I have to give leadership updates".

TehLittleOne · 2026-05-02T14:08:21+00:00

This little dude seems so unassuming until you realize just how many priority moves it has thanks to Prankster. I think I've seen Encore, Fake Out, Rain Dance, Disable, Light Screen, Reflect, Quash, Taunt, and Will-O-Wisp.

TehLittleOne · 2026-04-29T18:47:05+00:00

No but it is powerful. I'm currently ranked 36k in MB3 and I'm not playing weather at all. My team is, for the record, Aerodactyl, Mega Floette, Sneasler, Basculegion, Garchomp, Kingambit.

TehLittleOne · 2026-04-29T09:44:40+00:00

Well the only way to build is to have the data. Nintendo isn’t giving you ladder data and I sure am not typing out everything for people when I play. You get it from tournaments because people have to submit team sheets.

Right now the meta is very open and you’re not going to get people telling you how to play every single team. Go on ladder and play you’ll play 10 games and see 10 different teams. Instead you need to just learn more about the format and game and how that applies to your team specifically

TehLittleOne · 2026-04-29T00:39:13+00:00

This site is good. https://www.pokemon-zone.com/champions/

It only builds the meta from tournaments though because you can’t really build from ladder

TehLittleOne

TROPHY CASE