Bought some daikon that’s quite bitter when eating raw. So I tried these remedies after a web search:

1. slice it up, salt it heavily, let it sit in a collander for >30 min to drip out bitter liquids, rinse, add to stir-fry
2. simply steam it

The first approach worked, but the saltiness remains even though the salt was rinsed off. It was still decent as a salty taste happened to be compatible with the stir-fry.

The 2nd approach was a disaster (even though I peeled it as well as the bitter tastes can be concentrated in the skin). I was skeptical when I read an article claiming that simply steaming the daikon removes the bitterness. I tested the claim by steaming for like 30—40 min. It was not instantly bitter but as I chewed it it became increasingly excessively bitter. I’m sure it would have ruined the miso soup I was originally planning to put it in.

I got a 2nd opinion. Someone else tasted the same steamed daikon as I did and said it did not taste very bitter. Of course there is a dilemma here: either the other person does not perceive the strong level of bitter taste (due to human genetic differences), or they are simply not bothered by it. We could not work out how to test which case it was.

2 theories for why people /think/ steaming works

Daikon can be bitter for a number of reasons: genetics of the veg, harvesting of it (particularly the timing), and storage (to a lesser extent).

① I wonder if people who claim cooking alone is sufficient are perhaps buying daikon that is not notably bitter to begin with.

② The human genetic factor: some people do not taste some bitter compounds.

In any case, I would like to know if anyone has other techniques to preparing bitter varieties daikon.

Just wondering how a democrat can buy a gun without supporting the NRA. Obviously all American guns are from NRA-supporting gun makers. And if you buy a foreign gun, the importers are (all?) supporting the NRA. What’s left?

From the linked FAQ:

How can I make a test 9-1-1 call? To make a test 9-1-1 call, you need to first contact the 9-1-1 center that serves your area. The non-emergency numbers for Colorado's 9-1-1 centers are available here(opens in new window). If you're unsure which 9-1-1 center serves your area, call the 911 Program at 303-894-2871, and we'll help you identify the 9-1-1 center for the location you want to test from.

When you call the 9-1-1 center, ask them if it would be okay to make a test 9-1-1 call. If they are particularly busy or are handling a major incident, they may ask you to call back at a later time.

When your phone cannot make normal calls for whatever reason¹, you obviously want to know if 911 calls will at least work. And the idiots design a test procedure that requires normal phone calls to work.

① Typical reasons why you may be unable to make normal calls:

• You have a GSM phone with no GSM chip, or unsubscribed chip.
• You are on a prepaid plan and have no credit.

So indeed the telecom industry has a glaring competency problem.

From the linked FAQ:

How can I make a test 9-1-1 call? To make a test 9-1-1 call, you need to first contact the 9-1-1 center that serves your area. The non-emergency numbers for Colorado's 9-1-1 centers are available here(opens in new window). If you're unsure which 9-1-1 center serves your area, call the 911 Program at 303-894-2871, and we'll help you identify the 9-1-1 center for the location you want to test from.

When you call the 9-1-1 center, ask them if it would be okay to make a test 9-1-1 call. If they are particularly busy or are handling a major incident, they may ask you to call back at a later time.

When your phone cannot make normal calls for whatever reason¹, you obviously want to know if 911 calls will at least work. And the idiots design a test procedure that requires normal phone calls to work.

① Typical reasons why you may be unable to make normal calls:

• You have a GSM phone with no GSM chip, or unsubscribed chip.
• You are on a prepaid plan and have no credit.

So indeed the telecom industry has a glaring competency problem.

If you have a properly defensive browser when visiting an NY Times page, you will get: “Please enable JS and disable any ad blocker”

It used to be possible to replace the NY Times host portion of the URL with this:

https://www.nytimesn7cgmftshazwhfgzm37qxb44r64ytbb2dj3x62d2lljsciiyd.onion/

That would give a deshitified UX, and strangely I think NY Times hosted that onion. Perhaps they figured the small number of Tor users did not warrant using extra force to push ads. But now the site is dead.

Normally archive.org is a refuge. But NY Times is also hostile toward IAWM:

“This page is unavailable for archiving, because: access is forbidden.”

From the linked PDF:

Anyone with a smartphone or other wireless device that supports RTT can make a TTY Relay call. As a result, it is easier for individuals with no communication- related disability to misuse TTY Relay in an attempt to hide their identities or otherwise deceive a called party by communicating through a CA.

36. To ensure that TTY Relay is used appropriately and efficiently, and to safeguard the TRS Fund from waste, fraud, and abuse, we seek comment below on applying user eligibility, registration, verification, and call detail records requirements to all forms of TRS95—measures that have proven effective in safeguarding other TRS programs. 96 We seek comment on the specific processes for TTY Relay user registration and verification, including the type of documentation or assessment required to confirm eligibility and how to balance ease of access for legitimate users with robust protections against misuse. Are providers able to verify the identity of TTY Relay users at the beginning of calls? Would user registration requirements unduly burden state TRS programs in their support and oversight of intrastate TRS?

54·. User Eligibility, Registration, and Verification Requirements. To ensure that IP STS are used appropriately and efficiently, and to safeguard the TRS Fund from waste, fraud, and abuse, we propose to apply user eligibility, registration, and verification requirements similar to those already in place for IP Relay, VRS, and IP CTS. 137 This would include requiring users to register with a certified provider and undergo a verification process to confirm their identify and location, as well as to certify eligibility as individuals with speech disabilities who require the service for functionally equivalent communication. 138 We seek comment on the specific processes for IP STS user registration and verification, including the type of documentation or assessment required to confirm eligibility and how to balance ease of access for legitimate users with robust protections against misuse.

Yikes. Having my voice recorded by large corporations (e.g. banks), then having to trust the untrustworthy to protect the recording so that it is not used to do AI-driven impersonation -- no thanks. So obviously TTY/RTT services are interesting for non-impaired (hearing) people who want to avoid that exploitation. As we can see from the quote, the FCC intends treat street-wise people as “abusers” for doing common-sense self-defense.

Some people need a Call Assistant (CA) and some do not. Obviously a hearing person does not need a human CA. We can simply do a straight text chat in both directions. Having a needless MitM is where the waste is. I’ve read that IP relays need a CA, but it’s not clear why that would necessarily be the case for everyone.

Interesting to note that the FCC cares to protect the privacy of the hearing/speech-impaired /to some extent/:

53. Provision of a Muting Option. The Commission currently requires STS providers to offer the user the option of having their voice muted so that the other party to the call would only hear the STS CA re-voicing the call, and not also the voice of the STS user. This feature serves to minimize disruption to the conversational flow and potentially enhance the privacy and comfort of the STS user.

Nice, but in the end the FCC (who blocks Tor) is privacy-hostile motherfuckers:

3. Extending User Registration and Verification Requirements

4. While Internet-based TRS users are subject to various registration and verification requirements, analog TRS, such as TTY Relay, CTS, and STS, currently lack comparable mandated user registration and centralized verification processes. To further strengthen the integrity and oversight of the entire TRS program and build upon the recognized benefits of a user registration database, we propose to extend comprehensive user registration and verification requirements to all forms of TRS, including these analog services and any future Internet-based forms of TRS. This expansion is crucial to ensuring that all services supported by the TRS Fund operate with enhanced accountability and to combat waste, fraud, and abuse program-wide. Such a measure would allow the Commission to gather complete and accurate data on service demand and utilization across the entire TRS landscape. We seek comprehensive comment on the feasibility, costs, and benefits of extending user registration and verification requirements to all forms of TRS. Commenters should detail any unique technical or operational challenges for specific services (e.g., TTY Relay, STS, CTS, or IP Relay, or proposed IP STS and RTT- based relay service), and identify the specific types of data that would be most relevant and least burdensome for the providers to collect and submit. We also solicit input on how current user registration data elements might apply or need modification for these services, and the timeframe for implementation.

5. TRS providers seeking compensation from the TRS Fund must submit Call Detail Records (CDRs) to the TRS Fund administrator for each call for which compensation is sought.

cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/27156738

I have been relying on quite poor VOIP service to place calls to large orgs that have call centers. The voice quality was lousy and recently my VOIP provider screwed something up and the service became broken.

I am not hearing-impaired but I think TTY might solve my problem. If I need to call a large org/agency that is likely TTY-capable, is this possible without some kind of service? In principle, shouldn’t I be able to connect to a bank or something without using any kind of subscription service? Linux, gnu screen, ssh, a terminal, Internet should be all I need, no?

My searches for TTY either yields results about how deaf people can use dedicated hardware or a Telecommunications Relay Service (“TRS”) -- or the search results are about /dev/tty* which is just a UI for sending commands to a command interpreter (apparently not a human). There are claims that all iPhones and /some/ Androids can do TTY. But doesn’t that still rely on phone service? I prefer NOT to use a phone or phone service.

This question has no answers, but it’s along the lines of what I need. There is this Zapata thing but that project has had no status since 2004.

Update

After more looking, it seems an “IP-TTY” relay service is needed for this situation. Searches so far lead to services that want to force a proprietary app on you, which only works on proprietary platforms.

I have been relying on quite poor VOIP service to place calls to large orgs that have call centers. The voice quality was lousy and recently my VOIP provider screwed something up and the service became broken.

I am not deaf but I think TTY might solve my problem. If I need to call a large org/agency that is likely TTY-capable, is this possible without some kind of service? In principle, shouldn’t I be able to connect to a bank or something without using any kind of subscription service? Linux, gnu screen, ssh, a terminal, Internet should be all I need, no?

My searches for TTY either yields results about how deaf people can use dedicated hardware or a Telecommunications Relay Service (“TRS”) -- or the search results are about /dev/tty* which is just a UI for sending commands to a command interpreter (apparently not a human). There are claims that all iPhones and /some/ Androids can do TTY. But doesn’t that still rely on phone service? I prefer NOT to use a phone or phone service.

This question has no answers, but it’s along the lines of what I need. There is this Zapata thing but that project has had no status since 2004.

Update

After more looking, it seems an “IP-TTY” relay service is needed for this situation. Searches so far lead to services that want to force a proprietary app on you.

The sad reality is that POTS is dying. The upside of this is that in principle we don’t need a VOIP provider, right? We should be able to run our own SIP server and place a call to another SIP user without using a POTS line -- thus w/out a subscription to a service. SIP addresses look like email addresses.

The problem is, IIUC, I have no way of knowing the SIP address for my bank. I only have their phone number. Is there a way around this? Is there a way to obtain the underlying VOIP address for a phone number?

I’ve been on a maddening search for a VOIP provider. Everything I find either blocks tor or blocks VPNs. Are we stuffed?

Recall my previous post when the threat was emerging a couple years ago. Now that shit has played out. Now Discovercard customers are served by a much bigger scumbag.

It’s also a practical problem. The hand-off was apparently incompetently executed so now I have suppliers harassing me because the Discovercard they have on file quit working. And it looks like Cap One wants to stuff their app and shit down our throats. Fuck me if that’s true.

Around a decade prior the Japanese network (JCB) pulled out of the US. So no quasi-ethical refuge.