#kitchensurfing

[magdat]

Where do I get a recipe expert?

Here are a few places to find a recipe expert depending on what you need:

1. Freelancer Platforms

Upwork or Fiverr: Look for food stylists, chefs, or culinary experts. Many specialize in recipe development for blogs, cookbooks, or product promotions.

Toptal: If you need a high-end, curated experience.

2. Culinary Consultants or Bloggers

Instagram or Pinterest: Many food bloggers and influencers create custom recipes. Look for creators with content that matches your style.

Substack or Medium: Writers often offer paid services beyond their regular content.

3. Specialized Websites & Agencies

Culinary Agents: Connects you with culinary professionals.

Cozymeal: Not just cooking classes — chefs on this platform often offer recipe consulting.

KitchenSurfing: Offers services like private chefs and recipe creation.

4. Local Options

Cooking Schools or Culinary Institutes: Reach out to students or instructors for part-time work.

Farmers Markets or Specialty Shops: Many small food entrepreneurs also work as consultants.

5. AI Tools (if applicable)

You can also leverage platforms like ChatGPT with recipe-focused prompts to generate or fine-tune existing recipes. But for highly specific or traditional needs, a human touch is still best.

What kind of recipe expertise are you looking for — something specific like meal prep, dietary requirements, or just unique creative dishes?

[transparentgentlemenmarker]

artplut

Sound by @kitchensurfing

[encinitas93]

保健所対策‼️ 場所によってルールが違う😅 これで大丈夫かな… 7/6,7は辻堂海浜公園にて "surf festival"に出店しますので良かったら飲みに来て下さーい🍻 #キッチンカー #surffestival #kitchensurfer special thanks @foolenlarge @re.store_yosshi @liglab.co (encinitas - エンシニータス) https://www.instagram.com/p/By9SAhNlEH8/?igshid=1mbrraoxsltv2

[amandajaugustine]

Blogpost #6 (Amanda Joy Augustine)

In this week's reading, Ravenelle gives us greater insight to the definition of the sharing economy, which is a catchall term for "'peer-to-peer' firms that con-nect people for the purposes of distributing, sharing, and reusing goods and services.", and how it has developed over the years with the world’s progress in technology. Her research mainly revolved around three known sharing economy online platforms in the United States, Airbnb, Uber and Kitchensurfing. She shares that although the sharing economy is often hyped as a solution to many of society’s downfalls brought about by capitalism, her research and interviews of the experiences of workers part of this gig economy illustrates how everything is not what it seems and how this economy is not the ‘social leveller’ it is supposed to be. 

In theory, this shareconomy seems like a great idea to fix the detriments that we have in society - inflexible work policies, a lack of social connection, a growing trend of inequality, the faulty social safety net and even reducing waste.  However, there seems to be doing the opposite, with its impacts causing more disruption than ever before. I found this reading to be very intriguing, and especially applicable to the context of Singapore. Singapore boasts a diverse range of goods and services traded on these sharing platforms, and this is evident in the widespread of local businesses such as Grab, which is ride sharing and delivering platform and BlueSG, which is a car sharing platform.This new shareconomy is disrupting established business models and the rise of social and mobile technology have ultimately lowered the entry barriers to this new business model, and providing a constant connection that allows consumers and businesses to interact in the sharing online platforms along with the internet providing mobile connectivity, the user experience for consumers are mostly digital and seamless, allowing them to get what they want in a literal click of a button. Singapore is a very technologically advanced nation, with the majority of the country using smartphones with 4G and 5G services, the constant access to sharing applications and more cheaper and efficient options at their fingertips, it is unsurprising how Singaporeans have so easily come accustomed to this new shareconomy. 

However, despite the benefits that come about through this new business model, it is apparent how many other issues are arising. Although it gives a chance for more people to be able to earn some money, this lower barriers to entry for certain jobs leads to the devaluation of skills, especially without needing any certification or paper work done, job stability is at stake. An example would be for full time taxi drivers, with the rise of grab ride sharing, many full time taxi drivers, who often fall within the lower income brackets, find it hard to get as many jobs as before as there is now rides going for more competitive prices, especially with the influx of drivers that are allowed to sell their service on the app without the need of much certification as before. The shareconomy also brings about another issue, the worsening of the income gap. The concept of the sharing economy allows anyone to be able to share their goods and services, thus pushing forth the fact that those who are in a place of privilege and are more well to do will have the access to more resources that they can ‘share’ on these platforms. For example, those Airbnb hosts who are richer will be able to own multiple properties that they can rent out to a multitude of people. This not only, allows them to profit even more off this business model but the ownership of more properties ultimately drives up the prices of houses, making it more difficult for those in the lower income groups to have access to these resources and properly profit off it, thus further proliferating the income gap.

[xuanllx]

Blogpost 6: Precarity and Labour (Lim Li Xuan)

In this week’s reading, Ravenelle (2019) analysed the mechanics of the sharing economy and started off by explaining its different definitions, of which may vary and seem arbitrary. She then provides her definition of the sharing economy, which is “a collection of app-based technologies that focus on lending/renting of assets or services either for profit or for a higher good” (pg. 31). Ravenelle’s research draws on three main themes: the trust divide between Gemeinschaft/GesellSchaft, the increasing casualization of labour with a related shift in risk, and the resulting increase in social inequalities. She then asserts that there is a lack of interest in the sharing economy, and that the hype of it has led to the shift in risk from employers to the workers, as owners of app-based technologies seek to avoid social responsibilities. Furthermore, Ravenelle argued that the sharing economy has increased inequality between people as the rich get richer – those who own multiple Airbnb homes for example, and the less privileged lose out. Her research zoomed in on four services – Airbnb, TaskRabbit, Uber and Kitchensurfer, and the background of the workers in each service.

I particularly agree with Ravenelle on her point on the increasing inequality of people in the sharing economy especially for the different services like Airbnb and Grab in the context of Singapore. The class positions of workers influence the types of services they can take on in the sharing economy which then further determines the amount they have to earn back for a living. For example, people who have enough economic capital tend to venture into Airbnb to earn a supplementary passive income than to work as a gig worker for Grab which is much more labour intensive and does not pay as much. Comparing this to most of the people who work for Grab, they largely rely on this platform as it has low barriers to entry – little to no capital to start earning, and it is an accessible way for them to earn an income. However, as compared to the profit margin of renting out an Airbnb, the payout for each ride/food delivery is much lesser, and workers would have to take on many gigs in a day to earn enough. Again, this system of gig work emphasizes the inequalities between those with enough economic capital who rely on the sharing economy for a side income, as compared to those who rely on it for a full-time job. Those who take on tasks on Grab as a side hustle do not experience ‘consequences’ as they do not feel obliged to take on that many tasks if they do not need to. Whereas for others who rely fully on grab for their income, they feel pressured to take on as many tasks as possible to earn enough/as much as possible for a living. There is also increased pressure on them to accept tasks even when it is inconvenient to avoid having bad reviews on the app which would affect their earnings. Thus, we can see that the class positions of the people who engage in the different services like Airbnb and Grab, further widens the class gap between these groups of people as the rich get richer, and the less privileged get discriminated and exploited as they are usually at the ‘mercy’ of these app-based technologies.

[continuations]

Meet Clarity

Today Algorand and Blockstack are announcing that they are collaborating on the Clarity smart contract language. Clarity is a decidable (i.e. non-Turing complete) language inspired by lisp. I am extremely excited about this development and have spent a few hours this week writing a smart contract in Clarity.

I have long argued that Turing complete smart contract languages are problematic because the only way to really understand the system as a whole is to run it and see what happens. Still this is the route most projects have chosen and even more odd to me has been the embrace of WASM as an execution environment which optimizes for speed over safety and analyzability. Given that the key point of decentralized systems is censorship resistance that has long struck me as the wrong order of priorities. After all, there is no-one you can call to just unwind a mistake (modulo the DAO hack reset, I suppose).

Clarity instead is all about safety. Avoiding costly mistakes long before they can cause millions of dollars in damage. Decidability is one key aspect of that. To give just one example of the power of decidability: with Clarity you can know the precise gas fee of a contract in advance. Another key aspect is making actions such as issuing non-fungible tokens, which are a critical component of many applications, completely straightforward. There are many more aspects of Clarity that are a delight, such as the simple and clear type system. And being inspired by Lisp, Clarity naturally lends itself to building up code out of short functions (if you have never seen Lisp before, the language may strike you as odd at first -- but I promise that learning it will make you a better programmer).

Now some people may think that you lose a lot by giving up Turing completeness, so I wanted to write a non-trivial example. One came to mind easily: an all-or-none funding mechanism. There are many possible use cases for such a contract, including a system such as Kickstarter, or my personal favorite, the second coming of Kitchensurfing (I hope). For readers who may not remember Kitchensurfing, it was a wonderful service where a chef would come to a home and cook there. The key missing feature though was the ability to get everyone to split the payment upfront, so that meant the host had to put up the entire bill and then collect from guests which is more than a bit awkward.

I won’t post the (nearly) complete contract here, you can find it on github. There is a bit more argument checking I need to add in one of the functions and I also have been remiss in writing a test harness (yes, I know I should have written that first, but I was too damn excited).

Here are some key things I would like to call out. How do you define a non-fungible token in Clarity?

(define-non-fungible-token event-pass uint)

That’s all there’s to it. Later, when you want to issue an event-pass to someone who has paid, all you need to do is

(unwrap! (nft-mint? event-pass event-pass-id tx-sender) (err "unable to issue event pass"))

Again, that’s it. Three lines of code and that includes the error handling!

Let’s look at a different part of the code to show another elegant feature of Clarity. With asserts! I can easily check if a condition is met and if it is not met issue an error. Doing so will abort execution and leave all blockchain state untouched

(asserts! (< (get expires-at event) block-height) (err "event still funding"))

There is a lot more to discover and I encourage everyone who is interested to check out Clarity. The tooling is still growing but there is already a Clarity LSP for VS Code (which helped me find a number of mistakes). A full blown REPL running against a chain instance is in the works and will be a great way to interact with Clarity contracts during design.

Over time Clarity will become an independent project. It would be wonderful to see other chains support Clarity as a development language (possibly even the only one). In the meantime there are many amazing opportunities to contribute, from just writing contracts in Clarity (and providing feedback) to working on the virtual machine or on development tooling.

[vino-tnj]

Friends Subscribe and Ring the Bell and support #indiandishes #cuisine #tastyfoods #foodporn #yummy #delicious @foodffs @foodnetwork @foodandwine @foodiegifs @foodisthenewrock @cuisinekid @cuisinesurmesure @cookingwithleftovers @cookiing-tiime @cookingthebooksshow @cookingcaveman @kitchensurfing @kitchenrevelry @kitchensinkblog @foodie-guiltfree @foodiebooty @healthyassfood @healty-life-tips #food #tamilfood #paniyaram #dishes @dish

[livioacerbo]

For Workers in the Gig Economy, Client Interactions Can Get … Weird

For Workers in the Gig Economy, Client Interactions Can Get … Weird

If you work in the gig economy, things can get weird. Like sexually suggestive, or worse. Just ask Roxanne, 27, a freelance chef who hired herself out as an in-home cook through the Kitchensurfing app. (TaskRabbit for chefs, basically.) One client, after his girlfriend was a no-show, asked Roxanne to join him for dinner on …

Continue reading “For Workers in the Gig Economy, Client Interactions…

[ambertay3205]

The Sharing Economy and Carousell

“What is the Sharing Economy?” by Alexandrea J. Ravenelle examines the ethics and politics of the sharing economy, and suggests that it is not as idealistic and generous as it claims to be. Defined as a “peer-to-peer” economical model that allows people to distribute, share and reuse goods and services between one another, the sharing economy illustrates a world where people can become entrepreneurs without the risk of failure. However, Ravanelle argues that sharing-economy companies, such as Uber, TaskRabbit, Airbnb, and Kitchensurfing, do not actually care about their workers because they are independent contractors. As a result, these companies are able to benefit from the labor of these workers without being responsible for any risk or liability that may occur.

Another example which supports Ravenlle’s argument is Carousell. Carousell is a company which allows users to sell their second-hand items to other people. As the company increased in popularity, sellers also began selling brand-new items on the platform, as well as providing rent services. Though Carousell and its customers benefit from the increased diversity in products, the same cannot be said for their sellers. The increased competition of products that are no longer limited to only “second-hand” further serves to perpetuate the social inequality in society. For instance, sellers of higher economic status are beginning to sell exclusive items that can only be found overseas at a mark-up price. Some sellers have also began creating their own products to sell through Carousell. In order to be able to create or export such items, one’s financial standing must be stable enough to partake such risks. Furthermore, sellers of low economic status are more likely to be selling second-hand items that they are not able to profit much from in the first place. Hence, as suggested by Ravanelle, “those with wealth to invest will get wealthier; those without probably won’t.” That is to say, independent contractors who do benefit from the sharing economy are often the wealthy, since they have the means to gain the resources necessary to survive in a competitive environment. Sellers are also responsible for all aspects of the selling process, from negotiating with customers to delivering the item to them. This has often led to sellers having to deal with the consequences when customers suddenly back out of deals or try to lowball. This can be seen as another example for Ravanelle’s argument on the sharing economy’s lack of responsibilities when it comes to the consequences of their actions. 

Nevertheless, Ravanelle’s approach to the explanation of sharing economy companies causes readers to have no choice but to agree with her argument. From the beginning, she dismisses any contributions sharing economy companies may have made to society. This can be best seen through a statement where Ravanelle claims, "instead of truly changing the world, the services are just taking standard services and putting them on an app. They’re not inventing hoverboards to replace taxis; they’re simply making it easier to get a for-hire vehicle.” (p.30). By doing so, Ravanelle undermines the changes the sharing economy has made to society, dismissing it as nothing more than an unnecessary contribution to society. However, through applications such as Carousell and Uber, our lives have become so much easier in so many ways. The way we carry on our day have also changed due to them. For instance, people who are in secluded areas no longer have to worry about being unable to catch a taxi due to being able to notify nearby taxis of their location.

Moreover, Ravanelle focuses so much on what sharing economy companies fail to do that she completely dismisses the fact that these companies were able to succeed in its aim of bringing workers short-term income opportunities.

[lohjoey3205]

#06 Precarity and labour (Loh Joey)

‘What is the sharing economy?’ by Ravenelle (2019) exposes the jarring disparity between the realities of the sharing economy and what is marketed to its potential consumers. Her research focuses on the Gemeinschaft/Gesellschaft trust divide, or technology leading to the revival of trust and community; the increasing casualization of labor with a related shift in risk; and the resulting increase in social inequalities through the examples of service providers on Airbnb, TaskRabbit, Kitchensurfing and Uber.

Ravenelle’s argument that the sharing economy is failing to connect people from different backgrounds and perpetuating the income divide by enabling the already-rich to further grow their wealth struck me. Despite the increase in sharing economy services such as Uber and Airbnb, trust in fellow humans has not seemed to increase. Instead, human connections have weakened with increased tendencies for background checks and identity verification before commencing the exchange of services.

For example, when I’m shopping online on Lazada mobile application, I’m more likely to click into product listings labelled with ‘LazMall’ rather than from unfamiliar vendors. LazMall is a virtual mall within the Lazada platform where leading brands and international products are carefully curated. It is also home to authorized distributors and top-rated online brands. Vendors under LazMall are usually established and successful household names. Most brands in the screenshot below are international companies and are instantly recognizable.

The ‘LazMall’ label reassures online shoppers like me that the authenticity and quality of the product I’m interested in is backed up by the guarantee of Lazada itself since these brands would have to fulfil stringent requirements to be part of LazMall. Besides seeing if the product is part of LazMall, I would also look at the product and seller ratings and reviews to decide which product to buy and from whom I would buy from. Just the other day, I wanted to replace my wired headphones and was searching for an affordable one on Lazada. Even though there were much cheaper options available, I went with one from JBL as it received high ratings and favorable reviews from past users and was sold under LazMall. I believe it is also its association with LazMall and being a prominent brand in the audio equipment industry that it is able to enjoy higher sales and ratings. Referring to the screenshot below, products with the LazMall label have significantly higher sales number as compared to those without. Despite being considerably cheaper than JBL’s and having similar stellar ratings, products with no LazMall label have much lower sales.

Furthermore, LazMall vendors are frequently displayed at the top of the search results before that of regular Lazada sellers, and consumers will thus be drawn to their offerings first. This supports Ravenelle’s argument that the sharing economy is able to raise the income of the already wealthy. These successful companies are able to continually generate profit based on their established brand and consumers’ trust in them. However, this greatly reduces the chances of consumers taking a leap of faith and patronizing local or small businesses. They are the ones who need the income from these ecommerce sites the most. This perpetuates the cycle whereby consumers will repeatedly patronize already wealthy companies with better reviews, ratings and sales, and consequently, leaving less recognized brands in lurch.

[encinitas93]

換気扇、床磨き、コンロ掃除😊 ピカピカ🇺🇸 #kitchensurfer #フードトラック #レンタル #chevyp10 (Chigasaki, Kanagawa) https://www.instagram.com/p/BwWO8zJHzji/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=1ncxs1sb435ls

[victoriakom98]

Post 6 – Precarity and labour: The gig economy (Victoria Kom)

A few major topics about the sharing economy was covered in Ravenelle’s (2019) paper. She started off by questioning the definitions of “sharing” and explained how companies appropriate terms like “trust” and “disruptive” for the purposes of marketing their business while misleading its consumers. Thereafter, Ravenelle (2019) identified downsides of the sharing economy, such as how it doesn’t actually promote a sense of community, how it further perpetuates discrimination and widen inequalities as well as the job precarity of workers involved. Her study then dives into the details of participants who were apart of 4 sharing economy platforms – Airbnb, Uber, TaskRabbit and Kitchensurfing.   While many of Ravenelle’s (2019) arguments are valid and agreeable, I do feel that she tends to portray platforms in the sharing economy as all-powerful entities that consumers and workers have no control over. Through the example of TaskRabbit, Ravenelle (2019) pointed out that platforms have the power to change fees and reduce the payment that workers receive for a repeated client, leaving “many TaskRabbits watch their incomes drop”. However, she did not cover the possibility that clients and workers can take their communication and transaction off the platform, thus posing a threat to platforms. For instance, I took an Uber while on holiday in Sydney and asked the driver if he knew the operating hours of taxi/ public transport services as I had an early flight to catch the next morning and didn’t want to risk not having any transportation to the airport. The driver then offered to pick me up the next morning and provided me his contact number. This way, we took our communication off Uber, and the driver gets paid the full amount as Uber won’t receive any commission fee. He even provided me his name card so that I could directly call him in the future if I were to visit Sydney again. While this was a one-time incident for me, I had a professor who also realized that her and her Grab driver work near each other with similar knock-off timings, thus they informally made long-term work transportation arrangements while eliminating Grab as the middleman and providing the driver a sense of job stability. As sharing economy platforms face the threat of consumers and workers leaving the platform or finding other alternatives (eg. Telegram channel SGHitch where people make informal transport arrangements at a lower price), platforms are “kept in check” to ensure that they price their offerings reasonably and avoid exploiting workers. 

Sources: Ravenelle, A. J. (2019). What is the sharing economy? Chapter 2 in Hustle and gig: Struggling and surviving in the sharing economy (1st ed.). Oakland, California: University of California Press.

[livioacerbo]

For Workers in the Gig Economy, Client Interactions Can Get … Weird

If you work in the gig economy, things can get weird. Like sexually suggestive, or worse. Just ask Roxanne, 27, a freelance chef who hired herself out as an in-home cook through the Kitchensurfing app. (TaskRabbit for chefs, basically.) One client, after his girlfriend was a no-show, asked Roxanne to join him for dinner on …

Continue reading "For Workers in the Gig Economy, Client Interactions Can Get … Weird"

from Blogger https://ift.tt/2Cn7pDG via IFTTT

[thehomelydiaries]

amla pickle | gooseberry pickle recipe

@intheknowfoodie @foodnetwork @foodffs @foodiegifs @foodandwine @kitchensurfing @kitchensinkblog @reciperadar @recipefoodies @recipe-cookbook

[lauramary-creations-blog]

Check out this item ! @vintageeveryday @vintage @housedecor @kitchendecortips101-blog @vintagekitchen-blog-blog @vintagekitchensofaustralia @kitchendecortemple-blog @kitchendecorxclusive @kitchensurfing @homeandinteriors @homedesigning @homedecorobsession