James Hoffman did some interesting videos on that -- espresso is a more efficient extraction method than Aeropress, but less complete than a very high water to coffee ratio pour over for the same weight of ground coffee. Extraction of caffeine is very directly tied to contact time and temperature, so two double shots of espresso (40g coffee) can actually be less caffeine extracted than a single large pour over (25g coffee) when the pour over is upwards of 22% extraction (typical of 20:1 water to coffee ratios and modern zero-bypass brewers). Similarly, there are large differences in beans, so 22% extraction on weak caffeine beans might be way less than 18% extraction on much higher caffeine beans. This is most obvious in the fact that Robusta has much higher caffeine on average than Arabica. Also, 22% extraction has a lot more unpleasant bitter compounds, not just more caffeine, so it's not my preference for taste in general.
Yes, but it might also be that you're drinking "coffee" (I assume you mean drip / pour-over) in the morning when you are just out of bed and have almost nothing in your stomach. Whereas the espresso you're drinking at a shop later in the day, probably already with breakfast in your stomach and maybe you're ordering a snack with it.
> A high carbohydrate meal consumed prior to caffeine ingestion significantly reduced serum caffeine concentrations and delayed time to peak concentration
Caffeine is a stimulant, acting on the sympatheitc nervous system. If you're also activating the parasympathetic nervous system, like by eating a meal, the effect won't be as strong.
Another effect of caffeine is as an adenosine re-uptake antagonist. Adenosine levels are usually low in the morning, so the effect is small. Later in the day, it can have a bigger effect on how alert you feel.
As an espresso drinker with a good machine and grinder, and lots of variety with mostly Italian beans, it depends, as the OP already indicated. I only buy low or at most middle caffein content beans to begin with, but you can get high caffeine beans for espresso easily. Easiest method: Increase the amount of Robusta.
Good vendors should have things like caffein content in their product description. I mostly buy from an online vendor that lists the exact roast date and also shows caffein content for each product (https://www.espresso-international.com/ - their only disadvantage is the use of some pretty light GRAY for most text, another topic, too many websites do this for reasons I cannot understand).
Many years ago, when I still lived in the Bay Area, the Cappuccino I got at a certain Berkeley coffee shop always made my heart go BOOM BOOM BOOM. Whatever concoction they brewed certainly had very high caffein (and I hated it, but the place was great). The ones I make myself now I can drink at 10 pm and be completely fine (I only drink 2-4 max espresso per day, and can easily drink zero if I'm away and have no access to good espresso, so I'm not addicted and just "used to it").
Sometimes I compromise and buy medium caffein beans when it's something good, but those I can feel just a little.
All of that just means you have to exert some control over which beans you consume, if you want to keep caffein low. On the plus side, if you stick to 80%-100% Arabica (the rest Robusta) it's not hard at all. If you like mixes with high Robusta ratio it gets much harder. Caffein free roasts exist though (examples: https://www.espresso-international.com/decaffeinated-coffee), but that choice severely limits your options.
No the cappuccino tasted fine, good even. I hated the effect on my heart that came later.
Also, the food was very very good, I still dream of it occasionally. Just some sandwiches, but perfection. Some cooked root whose name I forgot as the main ingredient, the overall composition was what distinguished it though, like a cook is able to get much more than the sum of the parts out of the ingredients by choosing compatible ones and doing appropriate processing.
Also, top location. College Ave. somewhere, not University Ave, maybe corner Ashby, and ca. twenty to twenty-five years ago.
The biggest thing is what kind of "coffee" you mean by coffee -- cold brew in particular tends to be a much higher extraction % since the bitter notes you get on higher extractions are less noticeable at colder temperatures. The rest is what the sibling responses mention -- time of day and speed of absorption in the digestive system can have big impacts.
Technologies: Embedded systems, automotive, machine learning, signal processing, data science, real time computing, safety processes (MISRA, ISO26262, etc), MATLAB, FPGA.
Background: Masters in control theory and signal processing, working in the auto industry for the last 7 years, first on low level powertrain software then the last year or so on LIDAR/computer vision for autonomous vehicles. I've done the most work in C, but I'm now contributing to safety development work with the Rust consortium and Ferrous Systems through my current employer. Recently had to read the Linux kernel source and use the BCC tool suite to find a subtle issue in the network stack causing high latency on sensor data for AV, also coincidentally fixed most of the network timing infrastructure.
Currently doing software defined vehicle software architecture with a focus on fail-safe and fail-operational, loosely coupled, distributed systems. This includes some standards contributions and work with high level suppliers like Nvidia and Renesas for next-generation software/hardware system co-development.
Primary skills include hard real time embedded systems, safety critical applications, firmware development, system integration and complex hardware/software interaction debugging, along with detailed data analysis problems.
Side interests include machining, 3D printing, embedded system development, coffee roasting and furniture making.
This is mostly a function of the markets for used EVs and used ICE vehicles being the same and the used EV purchaser is not a target market for EVs in general.
Not that many people can afford a new car now at all, and of those who can, they're getting luxury end cars, generally. Luxury vehicles depreciate faster than non-luxury vehicles, generally. People who want used cars are frequently people who can't afford new cars, thus they want something that works in their area in their situation with their stuff as it stands. Many of these people live in places with poor charging networks or rent and cannot install a charger. Used EVs don't come with a free charger like new ones often do. EVs were also being priced and purchased based on the tax credit for quite a while, which meant that price was a little... soft? On top of that, many EVs that fit into this data are selling for less for real reasons, like the uninsurability of Cybertrucks and the range loss on the Bolt EV. This all drives demand down or shifts the curves and lowers prices. It's just a small market for now.
I started out my automotive software career with Ford, and as part of the new college hire training program, I actually got to see the process of how "book rate" is determined. They take a brand new car, straight off the assembly line and give a master mechanic a process sheet (head gasket remove and replace, for instance). He has a tool cart with a computer next to it, about 6 feet away from the vehicle. For each step he starts a timer on the computer for that step, picks up the necessary ratchet and socket or whatever, loosens the next bolt, walks the ratchet and socket back to the tool box, puts it away and then finally stops the timer. He probably practices the procedure a few times before the timed run, but basically this prevents the company from setting the time to do a job super crazy low.
He's also not allowed to take any shortcuts from the book procedure, which there frequently are a few available (use a long wobble extension bar and a universal joint and you can get in without taking off all of the stuff above that bolt, whatever). On the other hand, this is the warranty rate (meaning new cars, largely less rust, etc). Independent/non-dealer mechanics will typically charge more time than the warranty time estimate from the manufacturer to account for things like rusty vehicles with harder to remove bolts and such, though this is usually in the rate book they subscribe to from whatever information source they pay for (warranty + 20% or so).
The issue is that the estimated time for a job is probably a high estimate for a brand new car and probably a low estimate for a several year old car, and the risk of that is on the dealership. The dealership then pays mechanics an hourly wage ($20+, fairly high for well certified master mechanics) and assumes that the hours listed on the job from the manufacturer are accurate, leaving the mechanic to take the risk if it goes over. Generally, the dealership loses on this proposition too, since they lose out on business/bay/electric/heat/etc for the lost time, so they don't like warranty work. They can upcharge/charge for more time/etc on a job for a customer, not for warranty repair due to contractual obligations to the OEM. This is particularly bad for Ford, since they currently lead the industry in recalls and warranty spend, meaning that their dealership networks are getting a lot more of that kind of work with limited profit and no ability to turn it down.
Wife's cousin is a GM mechanic, and similar to this, he explained how they game recalls/TSBs. When you have a recall/TSB, it's the same process where the manufacturer comes up with the amount that the dealer is paid to resolve. However, if the mechanics individually don't submit common problems, then it doesn't rise to the level of a recall/TSB and the dealership can bill T&M.
The specific example was a leak that was the shorting out of electric window motors due to rainwater leaking through the window. It was better for him to fix it by cutting up a plastic container and attaching it over the motor & getting hourly for it than it was for GM to tell the dealership "Here's the part, you get $8 to install it when the customer is subject to the TSB"
>This is particularly bad for Ford, since they currently lead the industry in recalls and warranty spend
Can confirm this. Just Traded in my Escape for a Toyota. I was tired of spending time and money on repairs on a mid range car with less than 65k miles.
I thought the same about Toyota being better quality, but I took delivery of a 2024 Sienna and it has had several visits to the dealership for warranty items. Not mechanical, but I still find them disconcerting since they could indicate a lack of QC. I'm sure you're aware of the major turbo QC problems Toyota has with the 3.4L twin turbo in the Tundra and Sequoia models. I think all automotive mfgrs are racing to the bottom when it comes to quality hoping that the world moves en masse to an AaaS model and stops holding on to them.
I'm still quite happy with my 2007 Sienna. Just clocked over 256k miles - 80k of which we have put on it. I replaced the alternator and starter, otherwise it's been a champ! Then again, I have zero context for the warranty items that were dealt with before we took ownership.
Maybe this is just survivorship bias of the used car market. When you see a vehicle with 180k miles that still runs great and looks to have been well taken care of, you're not seeing the dozens of others that were completely abused or neglected or let warranty items slip. There is a certain amount of filtering that has already gone on for a vehicle with that many miles on it that helps you avoid the real lemons or models with serious design flaws.
I sort of took the opposite route of most people. I got access to software developer money fairly early so was buying new (but practical) vehicles. I wasted so much money on new cars and still had to deal with warranty stuff and minor inconveniences and a shitty owner who doesn't take care of their vehicles. As I got older I've started buying the cheapest functional vehicle I could find that still had good maintenance history and zero accidents. I have had excellent results now that I'm doing the basics of care and maintenance. Part of me still wants the new toys. I'd love to have HUD speed limit and current speed projected for example. Vented and cooled seats would be amazing! I think the Ionic 5 N is the most tempted I've been by a new vehicle in a long time. But I haven't had a car note in over a decade and my insurance is dirt cheap on these very reliable but older vehicles.
A friend with 4 children and not much money would search out used vehicles with 300,000kms with the reasoning that if the vehicle made it that far and was in an reasonable condition then he wouldn’t have to invest much into it. Plus they were very cheap since no one wanted them. Pre-COVID of course.
Our 2008 Sienna finally died at just over 300k miles. Well, it still ran on a couple cylinders, so it got everyone home, but didn't have much power anymore.
> The dealership then pays mechanics an hourly wage ($20+, fairly high for well certified master mechanics) and assumes that the hours listed on the job from the manufacturer are accurate, leaving the mechanic to take the risk if it goes over.
What's the mechanic's risk? Are they only paid on the pre-estimated labor time?
It's not an hourly rate as in if you work 5 hours you are paid for 5 hours of labor. You are paid $20+ an hour based on the expected time to complete the job, with a price floor of minimum wage. If a job should take 3 hours and you take one, congrats, you made money. If the job should take 3 hours and it takes a full day, sucks to be you, you get paid for 3 hours. If the job should take 3 hours and you wait 2 hours for a part, you get paid 3 horus.
It's almost like a hairdresser as well, as they usually need to buy many of their own tools.
Well, if mechanic is present on the workplace all day, they must get paid at least a minimum wage per day, regardless of any estimates or even if there's any work at all.
It's employer's problem, employer never wants to pay workers less than minumum wage per hour, and loading them with work is manager's job.
But I doubt mechanics want minumum wage, especially since it's not keeping up with inflation.
Just make sure you understand that minimum wage is only for W2s. Shops likely dont only us employee labor and likely treat their mechanics and contractors often enough.
Then autoshops are exposed to the risk that mechanics report/sue them for "employee misclassification" and unpaid wages.
Employers are better always pay at least minimum wage, even for 1099s, otherwise more incentive for workers to report them.
Of course many are ok being exposed to that risk, depends on the jobs. Also there's tips that help employers avoiding the unpaid wages. However, worker must report the tips received, and if they received less tips to cover the minimum wage, then employer must pay employee the difference (so the total pay would be at least min wage).
I saw that restaurant owners pay at least min wage even to illegal workers who don't even have SSNs. I assumed that unpaid wages is more serious than hiring illegally.
Yes, but if you are one of Uber/Lyft drivers you're less likely to receive anything from reporting them than if you're one of only 5 mechanics in an auto shop. Auto shop owner does not have an army of lawyers to drag the case.
Mechanics don't have to work for the dealership. If the dealership isn't paying them well, they can go work for an independent shop, which is exactly what's happening.
Getting paid the book rate is an advantage to the mechanic because then they still get the full rate if they're more efficient at their job, which is an advantage to everybody. As long as the book rate is reasonable. And if it isn't then they don't take the job, which isn't a problem for the mechanics, it's a problem for Ford.
Yep I know a few mechanics and all of them who worked at dealerships have gone independent. Either started their own shop, or are working for a non-dealer shop.
A mechanic getting $20/hr is crazy. Shops charge the customer $100+ per hour for labor. Of course they have overhead, but many people don't realize that mechanics buy their own tools.
For years, it was difficult to hire licensed mechanics at Hyundai dealerships due to the massive recall of the 2.4L engine. Since Hyundai had to eat the losses of offering a lifetime warranty to owners of that engine, recalls and product improvements, mechanics bore some of that financial burden when Hyundai provided a low labor rate to them. They would spend days swapping an engine and watch a lube lane mechanic out earn them.
I despise the idea of leasing, but in a world where nothing is built to last any more, there may not be much of a choice for people just trying to get from point A to point B.
> The dealership then pays mechanics an hourly wage ($20+, fairly high for well certified master mechanics)
Maybe in Ohio.
I'm not sure that your comment is even directionally correct. TFA is clickbait for blue collar pseudo-car-guys. The example given in the article paints the mechanic as the hero, losing money on every job. In reality book time is insanely exaggerated in the median, and the problem is likely more that mechanics don't like earning a dime for every dollar the boss makes.
Many mechanics (seems that is what the article example is) get paid on book time, not hourly. That is what the guy in the article is complaining about. That their book rate is both too aggressive, and far less than the "customer book time" / rate. The reason mechanics are often paid this way is so that they stay efficient. Warranty jobs are especially aggressive on the mechanic book rate, because cars under warranty are newer with few unexpected problems like rusty parts, stripped bolts, age related issues, etc.
Thus the starting out part. Certifications, years of experience, skills in terms of welding exhaust or the like all raise that, but mechanics get screwed on their rate regularly, which is why they're dropping out. See one of the other top level comments about "shortage -> low wages."
>breaking his back and knuckles, and exposed to carcinogens (used motor oil, grease, etc).
They work indoors and don't exactly work in an environment where things get burnt or aerosolized. It's no office job but it's not exactly ditch digging.
The Ford dealership I worked as a technician at had a covered roof, but just past the lift it was uncovered. It was basically outdoors - no AC and the wind would blow rain on you.
You're playing that stupid game by yourself. I was explaining the justification behind a decent mechanic who works 40hr on the clock is getting paid more than 40hr on the book.
This seems like a pretty fair system, they do get to do it on unrealistic practically new vehicles, but they also can’t take any practical shortcuts whatsoever.
Is there any proposal for some alternate way determining it?
The impression I got from seeing the demonstration was that this was the result of years of negotiating and arguing to get to something fair. Ford doesn't love it, dealers don't love it, but no one can really come up with a major improvement.
I say something like this to my kids when I'm tired of mediating and I want them to solve their own disagreements. "My definition of success is that you are both crying after I've made my decision."
(for the record, I did not have this policy when they were toddlers, only as tweens; I'm not a monster)
If the article is to be believed Ford has changed how book time is calculated considering they're paying 36 minutes for a job that requires removing the cab.
HYou think it might be the CEO? No, couldn't be, surely someone paid 100s of times their employees would be honest about something he has no real experience doing.
I think it is either the journalist, or the guy she interviewed.
I know how Ford sets book time. Their methodology, while perhaps biased towards optimistic estimates, is not ever going to put cab R&R at under an hour.
Charitably, someone is mistaken. But given that these numbers are core to the argument being made, I find it odd that the claims were not vetted at all. It takes almost no effort to find example R&R times for various Ford pickups, and they're all measured in hours. It's not hard, typically 6-10 bolts depending on the model. But even with bulk electrical connectors, no rust, the right tools, and experience, the process takes more than an hour.
A fair system? This is nothing more than theater, necessary to get cheap labor. What about giving mechanics an hourly rate, just like the rest of the world?
The book time provides consistency within and across dealerships. Would you accept paying twice as much for a repair if they assigned a new mechanic to your job?
The one thing I've heard consistently from people in that business is "You won't last long if you can't beat the book," something experienced mechanics do on a regular basis.
Technologies: Embedded systems, automotive, machine learning, signal processing, data science, real time computing, safety processes (MISRA, ISO26262, etc), MATLAB, FPGA.
Background: Masters in control theory and signal processing, working in the auto industry for the last 7 years, first on low level powertrain software then the last year or so on LIDAR/computer vision for autonomous vehicles. I've done the most work in C, but I'm now contributing to safety development work with the Rust consortium and Ferrous Systems through my current employer. Recently had to read the Linux kernel source and use the BCC tool suite to find a subtle issue in the network stack causing high latency on sensor data for AV, also coincidentally fixed most of the network timing infrastructure.
Currently doing software defined vehicle software architecture with a focus on fail-safe and fail-operational, loosely coupled, distributed systems. This includes some standards contributions and work with high level suppliers like Nvidia and Renesas for next-generation software/hardware system co-development.
Primary skills include hard real time embedded systems, safety critical applications, firmware development, system integration and complex hardware/software interaction debugging, along with detailed data analysis problems.
Side interests include machining, 3D printing, embedded system development, coffee roasting and furniture making.
There has been a move to get the FTC to start labeling these net carbon numbers as misleading advertising because it always includes a bunch of purchased offsets unrelated to the company. Further, there have been some real and complicated situations where carbon credits were sold more than the actual amount of offset carbon -- meaning for example BigCorpA and BigCorpB buy the same "green energy infra" credits from projects that are in construction and then never actually meet their listed goals, but both companies claim to be carbon neutral because of the claims for several years before that comes out. Matt Levine had a very interesting column on forestry in the US Southeast talking about places getting paid to not cut down trees far in excess of the number of trees that could realistically be harvested. Google might be frontrunning some of those arguments. Or might have done the real audit of the claims and realized that they had been less carbon offset than they thought, so safer to just pull the whole pledge at least in the short term.
>There has been a move to get the FTC to start labeling these net carbon numbers as misleading advertising because it always includes a bunch of purchased offsets unrelated to the company
Cap and trade is a perfectly sound strategy for reducing carbon emissions, and carbon offsets are valid part of the 'trade.' There's the potential for fraud, but fraud can happen anywhere and there's nothing special about carbon offsets that makes them entirely fraudulent. The market and regulators have already been accounting for this through third party verification.
Now, if you are a fossil fuel megacorp and want to burn the entire cap and trade system to the ground, creating a 'carbon offsets are a scam' meme and destroying the 'trade' side is a great way to manufacture consent to get rid of that pesky 'cap.'
> there's nothing special about carbon offsets that makes them entirely fraudulent
The problem is that what gets exchanged in the marked is a certificate but the purpose of the market is to create a positive externality. This means the buyers and sellers don't have an inventive to be honest.
The buyer of the carbon credits doesn't actually need the carbon to be captured. They just want a certificate for X credits, so they can emit elsewhere or get some other benefit.
The seller doesn't actually need to capture the carbon. As long as they can make a convincing enough case to the buyer that they did capture the carbon, the buyer is happy to buy.
This is unlike a typical market where the seller does have an incentive to fool the buyers into a buying a subpar product, but the buyer has a lot of economic incentive to actually not be fooled.
There are 3rd-party enforcement mechanisms. It's not as simple as the seller saying "We don't pollute, trust us"; there are actual government inspectors and NGO delegates that go out, visit factories, and fine them if their actual emissions don't match the declared permits:
The bigger issue, as mentioned above, is that there's often a time lag between when the seller receives the money and when the seller can actually put it to use to reduce carbon emissions. One of the biggest sellers of carbon credits, for instance, is CA high-speed rail, which is decades away from completion. If it doesn't actually complete, it's not going to take any cars off the road or planes out of the sky, and so all the carbon credits it sold would just allow fossil fuel emitters to maintain status-quo emissions.
But as a way of diverting private resources from CO2 emitters to greener alternatives, cap & trade has been pretty effective. Over half the cars in my Bay Area city are now EVs; Tesla was kept afloat for many years by selling carbon credits.
Its a scam as long as emitting CO2 and then buying credits doesnt result in capturing the emitted amount from the athmosphere, yet allows one to claim net neitrality in a market where customers are somewhat critical
Technologies: Embedded systems, automotive, machine learning, signal processing, data science, real time computing, safety processes (MISRA, ISO26262, etc), MATLAB, FPGA.
Background: Masters in control theory and signal processing, working in the auto industry for the last 7 years, first on low level powertrain software then the last year or so on LIDAR/computer vision for autonomous vehicles. I've done the most work in C, but I'm now contributing to safety development work with the Rust consortium and Ferrous Systems through my current employer. Recently had to read the Linux kernel source and use the BCC tool suite to find a subtle issue in the network stack causing high latency on sensor data for AV, also coincidentally fixed most of the network timing infrastructure.
Currently doing software defined vehicle software architecture with a focus on fail-safe and fail-operational, loosely coupled, distributed systems. This includes some standards contributions and work with high level suppliers like Nvidia and Renesas for next-generation software/hardware system co-development.
Primary skills include hard real time embedded systems, safety critical applications, firmware development, system integration and complex hardware/software interaction debugging, along with detailed data analysis problems.
Side interests include machining, 3D printing, embedded system development, coffee roasting and furniture making.
Student housing near the engineering campus at University of Michigan is about 1/2 mile away from the reasonably close Kroger grocery store. When I started there in 2009, the carts didn't have the locking wheels and many people would take the cart all the way back to their apartment complex -- this meant that the Kroger store manager had to rent a moving van every so often and go collect them all as the carts cost $500~1000 new, so replacing them when they're 1/2 mile to a mile away wasn't good economics. Eventually this got so bad (never a cart at the store when you wanted one, had to go get them all the time) that they switched to the geolocking wheels, which was a pain because the geolock frequently false detected if you were at the back of the annoyingly small parking lot, so there were always carts stuck in the back ~20 spots.
Later, my girlfriend told me that the specialty foreign foods store near the Big Lots she worked at in a different Detroit suburb would intentionally come steal the Big Lots carts, rather than pay for their own (see above, expensive), so the Big Lots clerks would occasionally get sent on a mission with a moving van to get a bunch of their carts from the next shopping center over's parking lot. I think they might not have ever paid for the geolocking wheels, since Big Lots is low margin and those options are pretty expensive, but you can see the incentive to do so.
I've seen carts with stacks of disks for wheels (with gaps between them). The parking lot edges have grates that are the width of the disks, so if you push a cart over this, it'll fall in and stop moving. You have to pick it up and carry it out, which might be enough of a roadblock to deter some casual theft.
Was prosecuting the thieves ever considered? It wouldn't even have to involve law enforcement in this case but could be handled through the university. Sometimes even a little bit of deterrence is much more effective than a mountain of technical solutions.
Also they've been bought out by private equity an prices have shot through the roof -- Vegas is seeing massive downturns in tourism and from my cursory following of the problem, it's all price increases on food, booze, travel, hotels on the Strip making people uninterested in going.
