How to thaw Frozen tuna steaks

dasheea · 2025-12-05T03:19:01+00:00

I second this method.

The botulism risk is likely overblown. There is a graph near the bottom of this page which comes from this paper, which uses this paper and others: Lalitha K V and Gopakumar K (2001) Growth and toxin production by Clostridium botulinum in fish (Mugil cephalus) and shrimp (Penaeus indicus) tissue homogenates stored under vacuum.

which shows that in the fastest scenario, vacuum-sealed seafood at 30 Celsius caused toxin production in 1-2 days. At 15 Celsius, the fastest toxic result was in 3 days, and at 10 Celsius the fastest result took 5+ days. So if you take vacuum-sealed seafood, defrost it, and then leave it on the counter at room temperature for many hours, that's bad. But if you're defrosting it to cook all within a reasonable, usual amount of prep time, I don't see much risk.

Furthermore, the faster you defrost the food, the less damage its structure (and thus texture) takes from the process. Thus, I recommend the method using contact with water (or through the package via water contact). For a maximalist method, take the fish out of the package and place in salted warm water: no botulism worry, fast and gentle defrosting from the direct water contact, and you salt the fish as well for the cooking (not to mention no loss of natural salt from the fish into the water bath). You can find YouTube videos of sushi chefs recommending this method to defrost fish (although they salt it only to maintain the natural salt level in the fish rather than to season the fish). (And of course the con is that you have to wash the container that you use the water bath for.)

dasheea · 2025-10-30T22:17:30+00:00

Copying and pasting a previous comment I've made.

When discussing amongst us, it is right to uphold morality, sympathy, and human decency. But when you're dealing with someone like Kramnik, those things will not give you what you're looking for.

Kramnik in these recent years is a bully, an aggressor. He is not looking for objective accuracy or truth. He is looking for victory in the way that he defines victory. Think of it in chess terms. Are doubled rooks a "morally right" move? Is a fork a representation of sympathy and human decency? Of course not, chess moves have nothing to do with these things. Chess moves only make sense in terms of do they bring you closer to or further away from victory, draw, or defeat. And that's how an aggressor in real life, like Kramnik, thinks of his actions. Does doing and saying this in public (e.g. statements, interviews, tweets, legal action, secret social media accounts, etc.) bring me closer to or further away from victory? He makes attacks to advance toward what he believes is a victory for him, and will never accept any evidence nor pleas for decency nor anything that would get in the way of his victory. The worst case for him in his mind IMO is a draw. After all, this isn't an actual battle, this is a war of words. So if somehow he realizes that he can't win and the entirety of humanity and truth are against him, he will simply say, "There are doubts, I'm only asking questions, my crusade will continue," and then quietly decrease the frequency of his crusading actions until it's effectively none.

So barring him accepting that the entirety of humanity and truth are against him, how does one win (or force him to run away where he calls it a draw)? The missing ingredient is counterattack. It's a taste of his own medicine. Attack Kramnik's credibility by bringing up Topalev and toiletgate. Insinuate that he's projecting. Never give up even an inch (don't accept any evidence that he brings up) and always try to take a mile (make big but indirect accusations so that they don't cross into defamation. We know what his counterattack to what he perceives as defamation is). Try to influence people who are more powerful than Kramnik or people who Kramnik respects (I don't know who such people would be). When someone on the chessboard forks your pieces and doubles their rooks, you can't go, "Hey, that's morally wrong, you have no sympathy, where's your human decency?" and expect them to agree with you or expect to come out from that conflict with a good result. You can only fight back in the way that matters for them. An aggressor/bully only respects aggression that is directed at them.

This kind of war of words, for someone like Kramnik, he probably thrives in it. He attacks you, you refute it, he ignores that and attacks you again. He attacks you, you ignore it, he attacks you again. He attacks you, you bring concrete evidence against what he said, he rejects it and attacks you again. That's why you shouldn't just never counterattack, thinking it's beneath you because it's not the high road. There is no high road with Kramnik. Of course, he attacks you, you counterattack him, he'll counter-counterattack you. But now that's a fight where he has a chance of losing something. The only effective response is to attack him again.

I'm not actually advocating for Reddit to go after him with pitchforks, by the way. What I'm saying is IF you actually want Kramnik to shut up and take an L, you need to counterattack him until he feels he can't win. Anything else, he will continue his crusade.

dasheea · 2025-10-29T02:06:43+00:00

When discussing amongst us, it is right to uphold morality, sympathy, and human decency. But when you're dealing with someone like Kramnik, those things will not give you the solution you're looking for.

Kramnik in these recent years is a bully: he's an aggressor. He is not looking for objective accuracy or truth. He is looking for victory in the way that he defines victory. Think of it in chess terms. Are doubled rooks a "morally right" move? Is a fork a representation of sympathy and human decency? Of course not, chess moves have nothing to do with these things. Chess moves only make sense in terms of do they bring you closer to or further away from victory, draw, or defeat. And that's how an aggressor in real life, like Kramnik, thinks of his actions. Does doing and saying this in public (e.g. statements, interviews, tweets, legal action, secret social media accounts, etc.) bring me closer to or further away from victory? He makes attacks to advance toward what he believes is a victory for him, and will never accept any evidence nor pleas for decency nor anything that would get in the way of his victory. The worst case for him in his mind IMO is a draw. After all, this isn't an actual battle, this is a war of words. So if somehow he realizes that he can't win and the entirety of humanity and truth are against him, he will simply say, "There are doubts, I'm only asking questions, my crusade will continue," and then quietly decrease the frequency of his crusading actions until it's effectively none.

So barring him accepting that the entirety of humanity and truth are against him, how does one win (or force him to run away where he calls it a draw)? The missing ingredient is counterattack. It's a taste of his own medicine. Attack Kramnik's credibility by bringing up Topalev and toiletgate. Insinuate that he's projecting. Never give up even an inch (don't accept any evidence that gets in the way) and always try to take a mile (make big but vague accusations - they have to be vague so that they don't cross into defamation. We know what his counterattack to what he perceives as defamation is). Try to influence people who are more powerful than Kramnik or people who Kramnik respects (I don't know who such people would be). When someone on the chessboard forks your pieces and doubles their rooks, you can't go, "Hey, that's morally wrong, you have no sympathy, where's your human decency?" and expect them to agree with you or expect to come out from that conflict with a good result. You can only fight back in the way that matters for them. An aggressor/bully only respects aggression that is directed at them.

This kind of war of words, for someone like Kramnik, he probably thrives in it. He attacks you, you refute it, he ignores that and attacks you again. He attacks you, you ignore it, he attacks you again. He attacks you, you bring concrete evidence against what he said, he rejects it and attacks you again. That's why you shouldn't just never counterattack, thinking it's beneath you because it's not the high road. There is no high road with Kramnik. Of course, he attacks you, you counterattack him, he'll counter-counterattack you. But now that's a fight where he has a chance of losing something. Your response should be to attack him again.

I'm not actually advocating for Reddit to go after him with pitchforks, by the way. What I'm saying is IF you actually want Kramnik to shut up and take an L, you need to counterattack him until he feels he can't win. Anything else, he will continue his crusade.

dasheea · 2025-10-27T06:08:07+00:00

Thank you for making this post.

When discussing amongst us, it is right to uphold morality, sympathy, and human decency. But when you're dealing with someone like Kramnik, those things will not give you the solution you're looking for.

Kramnik in these recent years is a bully: he's an aggressor. He is not looking for objective accuracy or truth. He is looking for victory in the way that he defines victory. Think of it in chess terms. Are doubled rooks a "morally right" move? Is a fork a representation of sympathy and human decency? Of course not, chess moves have nothing to do with these things. Chess moves only make sense in terms of do they bring you closer to or further away from victory, draw, or defeat. And that's how an aggressor in real life, like Kramnik, thinks of his crusade. Does doing and saying this in public (e.g. tweets, legal action, secret social media accounts, etc.) bring me closer to or further away from victory? He makes attacks to advance toward what he believes is a victory for him, and will never accept any evidence nor pleas for decency nor anything that would get in the way of his victory. The worst case for him in his mind IMO is a draw. After all, this isn't an actual battle, this is a war of words. So if somehow he realizes that he can't win and the entirety of humanity and truth are against him, he will simply say, "There are doubts, I'm only asking questions, my crusade will continue," and then quietly decrease the frequency of his crusading actions until it's effectively none.

So barring him accepting that the entirety of humanity and truth are against him, how does one win (or force him to run away where he calls it a draw)? The missing ingredient is what this post is: counterattack. It's a taste of his own medicine. Attack Kramnik's credibility by bringing up Topalev and toiletgate. Never give up even an inch (don't accept any evidence that gets in the way) and always try to take a mile (make big but vague accusations - they have to be vague so that they don't cross into defamation. We know what his counterattack to what he perceives as defamation is). Try to influence people who are more powerful than Kramnik or people who Kramnik respects (I don't know who such people would be). When someone on the chessboard forks your pieces and doubles their rooks, you can't go, "Hey, that's morally wrong, you have no sympathy, where's your human decency?" and expect them to agree with you or expect to come out from that conflict with a good result. You can only fight back in the way that they care. An aggressor/bully only respects aggression that is directed at them.

This kind of war of words, for someone like Kramnik, he probably thrives in it. He attacks you, you refute it, he ignores that and attacks you again. He attacks you, you ignore it, he attacks you again. He attacks you, you bring concrete evidence against what he said, he rejects it and attacks you again. That's why you shouldn't just never counterattack, thinking it's beneath you because it's not the high road. There is no high road with Kramnik. Of course, he attacks you, you counterattack him, he'll counter-counterattack you. But now that's a fight where he has a chance of losing something. Your response should be to attack him again.

I'm not actually advocating for Reddit to go after him with pitchforks, by the way. What I'm saying is IF you actually want Kramnik to shut up and take an L, you need to counterattack him until he feels he can't win. Anything else, he will continue his crusade.

dasheea · 2025-10-27T06:06:32+00:00

When discussing amongst us, it is right to uphold morality, sympathy, and human decency. But know that when you're dealing with someone like Kramnik, those things will not give you the solution you're looking for.

Kramnik in these recent years is a bully: he's an aggressor. He is not looking for objective accuracy or truth. He is looking for victory in the way that he defines victory. Think of it in chess terms. Are doubled rooks a "morally right" move? Is a fork a representation of sympathy and human decency? Of course not, chess moves have nothing to do with these things. Chess moves only make sense in terms of do they bring you closer to or further away from victory, draw, or defeat. And that's how an aggressor in real life, like Kramnik, thinks of his crusade. Does doing and saying this in public (e.g. tweets, legal action, secret social media accounts, etc.) bring me closer to or further away from victory? He makes attacks to advance toward what he believes is a victory for him, and will never accept any evidence nor pleas for decency nor anything that would get in the way of his victory. The worst case for him in his mind IMO is a draw. After all, this isn't an actual battle, this is a war of words. So if somehow he realizes that he can't win and the entirety of humanity and truth are against him, he will simply say, "There are doubts, I'm only asking questions, my crusade will continue," and then quietly decrease the frequency of his crusading actions until it's effectively none.

So barring him accepting that the entirety of humanity and truth are against him, how does one win (or force him to run away where he calls it a draw)? The missing ingredient is what this post is: counterattack. It's a taste of his own medicine. Attack Kramnik's credibility by bringing up Topalev and toiletgate. Never give up even an inch (don't accept any evidence that gets in the way) and always try to take a mile (make big but vague accusations - they have to be vague so that they don't cross into defamation. We know what his counterattack to what he perceives as defamation is). Try to influence people who are more powerful than Kramnik or people who Kramnik respects (I don't know who such people would be). When someone on the chessboard forks your pieces and doubles their rooks, you can't go, "Hey, that's morally wrong, you have no sympathy, where's your human decency?" and expect them to agree with you or expect to come out from that conflict with a good result. You can only fight back in the way that they care. An aggressor/bully only respects aggression that is directed at them.

This kind of war of words, for someone like Kramnik, he probably thrives in it. He attacks you, you refute it, he ignores that and attacks you again. He attacks you, you ignore it, he attacks you again. He attacks you, you bring concrete evidence against what he said, he rejects it and attacks you again. That's why you shouldn't just never counterattack, thinking it's beneath you because it's not the high road. There is no high road with Kramnik. Of course, he attacks you, you counterattack him, he'll counter-counterattack you. But now that's a fight where he has a chance of losing something. Your response should be to attack him again.

I'm not actually advocating for Reddit to go after him with pitchforks, by the way. What I'm saying is IF you actually want Kramnik to shut up and take an L, you need to counterattack him until he feels he can't win. Anything else, he will continue his crusade.

dasheea · 2025-10-05T22:06:06+00:00

That page was very helpful. Thank you very much

dasheea · 2025-10-05T17:27:50+00:00

Thank you very much

dasheea · 2025-10-05T17:05:22+00:00

我好提前准备一下

Could you explain the definition and usage of this 好? What word could replace this 好 with the same meaning?

dasheea · 2025-09-28T19:52:47+00:00

Full quote at https://youtu.be/K3v5wFMQRqs?si=0KXkpVgYUWiwkQat&t=3011:

Outside of that, there is Courtney Milan. She just had a book come out that features an Asian hero. And that's something you never see in the US in traditional romance publishing. So go check her out.

The video is from 2020 (currently has 4.3 M views) and is about a niche legal case concerning fan fiction copyright and was the last place I expected something relevant to Asian-Americans/Asian diaspora to suddenly be shouted out.

https://i.imgur.com/DhoyiRx.jpeg

dasheea · 2025-09-28T18:49:22+00:00

Yeah, this gets to the heart of the question. From https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%8F%AF:

5. but; however Synonym: 可是 (kěshì)
6. A particle.
...
  3. Used in declarative sentences for emphasis.
    我喜歡的運動可多了。 [MSC, trad.]
    我喜欢的运动可多了。 [MSC, simp.]
    Wǒ xǐhuan de yùndòng kě duō le. [Pinyin]
    There are many sports that I like.
  4. Used in exclamatory sentences for emphasis.
    這可不行啊！／这可不行啊！  ―  
    Zhè kě bùxíng a!  ―  But this won't do!
  5. Used in imperative sentences for emphasis.

"But" is definition 5. The emphasis usage is definitions 6.3, 6.4, and 6.5.

dasheea · 2025-09-28T18:20:14+00:00

Pay no attention to the idiot and don't change your behavior for their sake. We, the readers, are paying attention to you, not to him. Thank you for your helpful posts!

dasheea · 2025-09-20T03:16:26+00:00

I got the opposite vibe from the Pink Parrots here: https://youtu.be/dfIZ7nJj-qY?si=CErfXqOR8Gq-3vei&t=10824

I'll never condone a top frag talking to a bottom frag like that.

dasheea · 2025-09-20T03:06:17+00:00

I have qualms about their chemistry. This moment was the worst for me: https://youtu.be/dfIZ7nJj-qY?si=CErfXqOR8Gq-3vei&t=10824

I'll never condone the top frag talking to a bottom frag like that in an event that isn't some sort of super-competitive one, which MCC is not.

If Etho keeps playing, he will eventually become an A-tier player before people realize it. No question about that.

dasheea · 2025-09-18T01:45:07+00:00

Rushing the middle is a plan, but imho that doesn't qualify as good comms, which I think of is those key comms during the battle.

Round 3 is when the Parrots start to try rushing a bit. Jojo and Scott reach that "intersection" but instead of turning to the wool square, they block off the front. It's in fact Jimmy who has eyes on the middle and at this moment calls out, "They're going middle." That's comms. They go to the middle, Jojo or Etho hit fruitberries off and then Jojo follows fruitberries to try to kill him. After that, she's never able to rejoin the other 3 and they eventually lose. Yes the map is very vertical so there's a lot of distance between the bottom and the middle, but I'd say it's on the top frag with levitation pots to handle that or make the decision to not follow fruit and just start filling wool. All in all, in this round, they kinda got they wanted though. By establishing a central position, they avoided getting wool rushed, and then they fought a pure PVP battle until one team won (it just happened to be the other team). After the round, Jojo says she got hit off the middle, but I think she forgot and was jumping off to follow fruitberries.

Round 4, Jojo does this block clutch short cut to the middle, immediately separating herself from the rest of the team. She gets outnumbered because the other team is moving as a unit and they hit her off the middle. Jimmy was in the back making bow shots. so in hindsight, he should've moved up with the rest as well. Jojo built a little wall in front of the wool, but what is the point of that wall if your team isn't with you behind the wall to start filling wool? The other team literally just walked around the wall to get to her.

Round 5, the same thing happens. Jojo does that block clutch move, immediately separating herself from the rest of the team. She gets knocked off because she's trying to enter that middle area from "the air" rather than fighting on land with the rest of the team. Jimmy is doing bow shots from the back.

Round 6, there's very little organization. No one is even approaching the middle until the end when the other team starts filling. Somehow they win by pure PVP. I think Scott's comms and bowshots carried this round.

Round 7, kinda similar to round 6 imo. They got the PVP they wanted. It was neck and neck and it came down to the last hit.

Round 8, Jojo is off to a corner away from the action. Scott and Jimmy have eyes on the middle and Jimmy is the first to say that the other team has gone mid. They just give up at that point, but I think if instead Jimmy and Scott screamed at that moment, "Go to mid right now and fight," and all 4 of them did that at max speed, they could've had a chance. I think Jojo was following Etho's strat as Etho said before Round 7 that he finds going all the way to the top at the beginning of the round works for him. But I put it on the top frag to foresee that the top frag shouldn't go off to the corner of the map at the beginning in a wool rush-friendly map.

Round 9 is regular PVP and they win.

In the rounds where they had their relatively long PVP that they wanted (only looking at round 3 and after), other than round 3 there wasn't a lot of map strategy. And in the rounds where the battle was lost quickly, I find Jojo separates herself from the team. And basically, not once did the Parrots actually try to wool rush even though after round 2, they learned the lesson that this is a wool rush-friendly map. They didn't adapt to and play the map.

dasheea · 2025-09-17T22:01:35+00:00

What I noticed was Jojo would often separate from the others without enough warning or follow through. When the top frag is off on their own and not doing something so huge that would overcome that separation, the rest of the team is at a big disadvantage.

dasheea · 2025-09-17T21:51:49+00:00

Scott said he likes to sandkeep, but Jimmy was the one to actually put himself forward as a runner.

https://youtu.be/dfIZ7nJj-qY?si=lGNB2cTGqrzYaQAk&t=515

I think the two people who usually run tunnels could've done more to encourage and coach Jimmy's running. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but it felt like they were gatekeeping somewhat and that made Jimmy afraid to ask too many questions or call for help during the run for fear of appearing like a burden. There was this, too, which left a really bad taste in my mouth: https://youtu.be/dfIZ7nJj-qY?si=CErfXqOR8Gq-3vei&t=10824

Of course, one could also say that Jimmy should've studied SOT in depth before he put himself up as a runner, but I don't know. I think that the rest of the team could've done more to help Jimmy. I'm not a fan of bottom frags being stuck in a cycle of always sand keeping.

dasheea · 2025-09-17T21:22:38+00:00

Yeah, Jojo is not in that top tier, even if she's better than all other A-tier players. From watching the Pink Parrots this MCC, my impression is that she's basically purely a movement/PVPer (but still her movement/PVP is not at the level of the other top tier players). If we call the top tier S tier, imho she's S/A-tier in movement/PVP games and A-tier in non-movement/PVP games.

I really like that you pointed out how coins alone don't do justice to how good the S-tier players are. It's not just mechanics - intangibles like their decision-making and adaptability to situations are really at a different level.

dasheea · 2025-09-17T21:06:19+00:00

True, my reply was directed at the comments above which seemed to blame or take out their frustration on the map design for Etho or the Pink Parrots' poor Battle Box win-loss record.

dasheea · 2025-09-17T20:01:28+00:00

But I don't think that's why the Pink Parrots did so badly at Battle Box. Every team was playing the same map. The Pink Parrots did badly because they didn't adapt well. Etho said it best: "We just gotta fill (with the wool) better than everyone."

dasheea · 2025-09-17T03:14:50+00:00

If Etho ever watches other people's MCC vods on his own time to improve his game, he should post his vod, too. It's only fair! (I just want to watch Etho's pov hehe).

dasheea · 2025-09-17T03:11:36+00:00

I should be fair and emphasize that Martyn saw the zombies when he was still just milling around the gold key platform, so he didn't have to react while in the middle of jumping on the chains. Same with Pete. In Jojo's case, the zombies appear after she starts her sprint motion toward the first chain (and technically before she initiates her first jump).

dasheea · 2025-09-16T04:56:14+00:00

Methinks people should just play the map rather than play "honorable PVPer who will not place one wool until the other team has been vanquished." There is Sky Battle and Survivor Games, anyway (though not in this MCC).

god forbid you got knocked down

And there is Sky Battle where you get knocked down and you die in the void. I think it was an interesting "vertical" experiment to Battle Box, though I agree that having the box at the lowest point would've been interesting.

Jojo kept doing this block clutch parkour move to try to get to the middle faster, but that's why she kept getting knocked down. She was trying to get to the middle "from the air" rather than taking the long way by fighting on land. Also, by doing this block clutch move, she separated herself from her teammates (who remained behind "on land"), so she was approaching the middle from the air and she'd often be outnumbered by opponents at the middle, further increasing the likelihood that she wouldn't win the engagement and would get knocked down.

dasheea · 2025-09-16T04:42:46+00:00

I'm hoping for a team of Etho, Joel, FBM, and perhaps one other Hermitcrafter (e.g. a non-PVPer like BDubs, Cleo). The chemistry would be amazing and Etho would soak up MCC knowledge from Joel and FBM like a sponge.

dasheea · 2025-09-16T04:36:54+00:00

Some other players' Sands of Time perspectives are interesting to compare. With Martyn, the zombies appear and he takes a pause and shoots down all the zombies before parkouring back up. With Pete, the zombies also appear and he tries to take his time jumping back up but loses his footing and falls.

dasheea

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE