Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Cube Rule (2017)

cuberule.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 144 posts

Re: The Cube Rule (2017)

#31

Post by tshaddox »

schwartzworld wrote: post #15
lalaithion wrote: post #4

The idea that we should classify food by shape is clearly erroneous. Our food classifications should be based on method of eating , not by shape! A sandwich is any food that uses a carbohydrate to protect your hands from a messier food, so that you can eat it at a card table without getting your hands dirty (a la the origin myth). Let's go through the things here: Pizza: Yes Sushi: Mostly no (the carbs don't protect…

If you rule out anything eaten with a fork, you immediately rule out open-faced sandwiches, which as far as I know, are universally referred to as open-faced sandwiches. You can pry my open-faced tuna melt on rye out of my cold dead hands. If you commit yourself to the carbohydrate as a protector from mess, is a messy sandwich still a sandwich? What about cucumber sandwiches (not messy on the inside)? You say a pie i…

> you immediately rule out open-faced sandwiches, which as far as I know, are universally referred to as open-faced sandwiches.

I mean, the whole reason they're called "open-faced sandwiches" is to distinguish them from, you know, sandwiches, because sandwiches aren't open-faced.

Re: The Cube Rule (2017)

#32

Post by andybak »

lalaithion wrote: post #26
andybak wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strong start then you lost me by ruling out "toast sandwich". I eat it and every atom in my body screams "this is a sandwich". I can't get past that.

To be honest, I was on the edge with this one. Maybe it is a sandwich after all; but surely three pieces of bread isn't a sandwich.

There's a get-out clause. You've overlooked the fact that toast buttered on both sides is messy...

Re: The Cube Rule (2017)

#33

Post by lisper »

omnicognate wrote: post #25

Hotdog being a taco is definitely appealing, but I can't take this seriously when nigiri sushi is classed as 1/toast rather than 4/sushi.

It gets better. On the cube-rule taxonomy, steak is a kind of salad, and salad is a kind of nacho.

Re: The Cube Rule (2017)

#34

Post by bryanrasmussen »

lalaithion wrote: post #21
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>A sandwich is any food that uses a carbohydrate to protect your hands from a messier food, so that you can eat it at a card table without getting your hands dirty (a la the origin myth). I mean legally speaking it requires bread not just a carbohydrate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandwich#Language >In the US, a court in Boston, Massachusetts, ruled in 2006 that a sandwich includes at least two slices of bread[1] a…

I don't care a whit what the US court system considers a sandwich.

Is there a particular court system you prefer?

Perhaps Ireland, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/01/irish-court-ru... , if Subway bread too sugary to be bread maybe then a Subway sandwich is a form of cake. I wonder if 'Is it Cake?' will address this important question.

Re: The Cube Rule (2017)

#35

Post by andybak »

schwartzworld wrote: post #15
lalaithion wrote: post #4

The idea that we should classify food by shape is clearly erroneous. Our food classifications should be based on method of eating , not by shape! A sandwich is any food that uses a carbohydrate to protect your hands from a messier food, so that you can eat it at a card table without getting your hands dirty (a la the origin myth). Let's go through the things here: Pizza: Yes Sushi: Mostly no (the carbs don't protect…

If you rule out anything eaten with a fork, you immediately rule out open-faced sandwiches, which as far as I know, are universally referred to as open-faced sandwiches. You can pry my open-faced tuna melt on rye out of my cold dead hands. If you commit yourself to the carbohydrate as a protector from mess, is a messy sandwich still a sandwich? What about cucumber sandwiches (not messy on the inside)? You say a pie i…

> which as far as I know, are universally referred to as open-faced sandwiches

You might have overreached with "universally".

I call them "(x) on bread" - which is the logical extension of "(x) on toast" as seen in the ever popular "cheese on toast".

Re: The Cube Rule (2017)

#36

Post by throwawaycities »

lalaithion wrote: post #4

The idea that we should classify food by shape is clearly erroneous. Our food classifications should be based on method of eating , not by shape! A sandwich is any food that uses a carbohydrate to protect your hands from a messier food, so that you can eat it at a card table without getting your hands dirty (a la the origin myth). Let's go through the things here: Pizza: Yes Sushi: Mostly no (the carbs don't protect…

> Our food classifications should be based on method of eating, not by shape!

I agree Euclidean geometry isn’t the key to proper classification of sandwich systems.

Rather we need to look towards physics and emergence. Sandwich emergence is the law or phenomenon that which occurs at sandwich scales (in space or time) but not at ingredients scales, despite the fact that a sandwich system can be viewed as a very large ensemble of ingredient systems.

Re: The Cube Rule (2017)

#37

Post by andybak »

Isn't the choice of cartesian axes creating a false distinction here? Where does a tetrahedral snack with a missing face fit?

I think a pure topological approach would be more robust. Count the holes and edges.

Re: The Cube Rule (2017)

#38

Post by andybak »

andybak wrote: post #35
schwartzworld wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you rule out anything eaten with a fork, you immediately rule out open-faced sandwiches, which as far as I know, are universally referred to as open-faced sandwiches. You can pry my open-faced tuna melt on rye out of my cold dead hands. If you commit yourself to the carbohydrate as a protector from mess, is a messy sandwich still a sandwich? What about cucumber sandwiches (not messy on the inside)? You say a pie i…

> which as far as I know, are universally referred to as open-faced sandwiches You might have overreached with "universally". I call them "(x) on bread" - which is the logical extension of "(x) on toast" as seen in the ever popular "cheese on toast".

> cheese on toast

And if anyone claims it's an "open-faced toasted cheese sandwich" then I will not be happy.

Re: The Cube Rule (2017)

#39

Post by bryanrasmussen »

tshaddox wrote: post #30
lalaithion wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care a whit what the US court system considers a sandwich.

I don't think the suggestion was that the US court system's definition is supreme. I think the requirement of bread or at something starchy matches most people's intuitions for the definition of "sandwich." Is an apple (eaten whole, with your hands) a sandwich, given that apple peel contains carbohydrates?

by their definition not because the inside of the apple is not 'messy'

Re: The Cube Rule (2017)

#40

Post by tshaddox »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #39
tshaddox wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the suggestion was that the US court system's definition is supreme. I think the requirement of bread or at something starchy matches most people's intuitions for the definition of "sandwich." Is an apple (eaten whole, with your hands) a sandwich, given that apple peel contains carbohydrates?

by their definition not because the inside of the apple is not 'messy'

The stated requirement is that the inside is messier than the outside. I think that's uncontroversially true of an apple.
Post reply on HN