That's a Washington Post article — gift link — that Meade sent me just now.
I was all: I saw that yesterday and already had a long discussion with Grok about it. Here are my 6 prompts:
1. why is dark chocolate better than milk chocolate?
2. so everything that's in dark chocolate is also in milk chocolate, it's just that there's ALSO something else in milk chocolate: milk. So what's the problem? If I had a tiny shot of milk along with my dark chocolate, they'd be the same, right?
3. 5–6 times the sugar — but the sugar in dark chocolate is severely low. assume I don't want to live like that
4. so big deal -- twice as much as a very small amount. why lose the joy over that?
5. I have near total anosmia, and the sweetness and *creaminess* of milk chocolate really come through for me. The *bitterness* and brittleness of dark chocolate are severe *to me*
6. dark chocolate people strive to characterize their food as a health food. I'm a bit intolerant of the bullshit and care about the last vestiges of pleasure
Posts
1 comment:
True wisdom, Ann. When experts sliver-slice micro benefit differentials, based on their own criteria, we must evaluate our own preference, unless the issue is leaving a burning house. Don't experts have a real life outside smarty-pants land?
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.