/ck/ - Food & Cooking

[Anonymous No.11308102]

ITT: A sign of quality

[Anonymous No.11308103]

>>11308102
>EVER trusting Chinese steel
Wew lad

[Anonymous No.11308104]

A sign of being a weeb ass faggot that probably can't even cook worth a damn.

[Anonymous No.11308108]

>>11308102
>CCK autist at it again

might have been worth it at $40, not worth it at wusthoff prices. fuck off.

[Anonymous No.11308111]

>>11308103
Phoneposting, can someone type this out so I can read it?

[Anonymous No.11308123]

>>11308111
The short version is that the Chinese constantly fuck over foreign buyers with literal garbage quality steel passed off as premium grade stainless, and there's basically no legal recourse so it's systematically enabled by the Chinese government

[Anonymous No.11308157]

>>11308103
>he can't even tell the difference between Hong Kong and Mainland China

Opinion discarded.

[Anonymous No.11308186]

>>11308103
Good read.

>>11308111
>type this out
No. It's like 15 2000-character posts.
tl;dr though: some anon saying don't learn Mandarin because it's only applicable in China, China has shit business practices. You can expect to pay $100000 but receive products barely $1000 worth, that kinda shit. Lists 5 examples afterwards of his experience as well as 3 anecdotes of the Chinese being generally shitty humans.

[Anonymous No.11308189]

>>11308157
>there is a difference
LOL

[Anonymous No.11308195]

>>11308102
>A sign of quality
That would be the ロリ画像. The only true definitive qualifier for true steel.

[Anonymous No.11308200]

>>11308157
>he thinks the same race of people living under one polity or another is fundamentally different just because one was living under British rule for a little while

[Anonymous No.11308222]

>>11308157
hello chang

[Anonymous No.11308598]

>>11308103
I've found that mainland Chinese do produce some high-quality products, but they cost about as you would expect for high-end stuff.

[Anonymous No.11309067]

>>11308103
One thing that bugs me about that post is he claims that there is only one 201 steel standard, and no "local" standard, but then the Russians end up accepting the Chinese 201 steel because the Russians also adhere to the same "local" 201 standard. So it seems like the Chinese weren't really lying about that, the author just didn't realize there was a local standard for 201 steel that wasn't the same as the actual standard.

[Anonymous No.11309091]

>>11308102
>chinese moon runes
>a sign of quality

[Anonymous No.11309093]

>>11309091
*he types this on a computer with 90% of its parts made in china and uses a phone with 95% of its parts also made in china*

[Anonymous No.11309097]

>>11309093
>parts made wherever using cheap labor
>assembled and tested for quality in america

My dishwasher and prep cooks are illegal Mexicans, but I'm the one putting the food in the window. What's even your point?

[Anonymous No.11309108]

>>11309097
>he thinks america has quality

theres a reason why GE and Ford almost went bust you know
also this isnt the 1990s anymore, many of the tech innovators are now in shenzhen china

[Anonymous No.11309115]

>>11309108
>this isnt the 1990s anymore

It also isn't the 1980's, and nobody thinks the car industry is relevant, or that American cars are anything special. I bought my first of 3 cars in '97 and have never bought American.

[Anonymous No.11309120]

what does it do better them my $10 knife form the hardware store

[Anonymous No.11309134]

>>11308200
Hong Kong has been under British rule longer than China has been communist.

[Anonymous No.11309174]

>>11309120
speed and doubles up as a scoop/crushing surface
it has weight so you arent pushing down and straining your wrist as much, but letting the blade fall

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip1sAKybSHs
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ohu2Hugqwyk

[Anonymous No.11309520]

>>11309134
Nigger are you retarded? Chinese civilization has been around for about 4000 years. British Hong Kong only lasted a little under 150 years. Do you really think a little over a century of British rule is going to leave that much of an imprint compared to 4000 years of shared imperial rule, race, and culture?

The Japanese occupied Hong Kong for a while too, do you think that left a lasting imprint? Or are the people of Hong Kong fundamentally Chinese?

[Anonymous No.11309535]

>>11309520
That argument only holds if the Mainland Chinese are awful because of their Chinese-ness, not their Communist-ness.

[Anonymous No.11309539]

>>11309520
Nigger are you retarded? Look at what under 100 years of communism did to China.

[Anonymous No.11309581]

>>11309535
>>11309539
>constantly ruled by foreign conquering dynasties for millennia
>lose nearly every war
>very poor international power projection
>very poor control over own provinces
>absolutely BTFO by the British in the Opium Wars
>lose treaty ports
>lose control of Korea to Japan, then lose it again to America (along with Taiwan)
Chinese political history is mostly a succession of failures. Reminder that it was also one of the poorest countries in the world up until Deng Xiaoping's reforms post-Mao.The crypto-NatSoc undercurrent within modern Maoism is the only saving grace behind an otherwise very unsuccessful race of people. The notion that modern China is "Communist" or "Marxist" in any substantiative way is absurd, and they were in such dire straits during the imperial era that they are by almost all measures better-off as a result.

[Anonymous No.11309595]

>>11309581
>one of the poorest countries in the world up until Deng Xiaoping's reforms

>In 1500, China was the largest economy in the world, followed closely by India, both with estimated GDP's of approximately $100 billion. France was a distant third at approximately 18 billion, followed closely by Italy and Germany. What is now the United Kingdom ranked 10th, at barely one quarter the output of France.

china was literally the centre of the world and it will be so again, l2history

[Anonymous No.11309606]

This thread is pure concentrated stupidity

In 1985 your dad was probably raving drunkenly about the scheming japs who took er jeerrrrrrb, and look where that got you. Now it's the chinks and you're still a loser

[Anonymous No.11309615]

>>11309595
>L2GDPpercapita, moron.
China cannot and will not surpass any of the big boys. The classic economic story is that shithole countries experience rapid GDP/capita growth as the 'Westernize", but then they begin to plateau at a certain multiplier below the foremost economic power, say at 90% of the superpower. This happens because one expends substantially less time and energy by simply copying what the innovator is doing. Is this starting to sound familiar? China does not come up with anything. Even their military equipment like stealth planes are all ripped off foreign developments. For now, they're comfy where they are as third-rate innovators but first-rate insect-person factory workers. They will likely take a tumble as automation begins to replace their role in the global economy.

[Anonymous No.11309622]

>>11309606
hey gramps, 1985 is well before i was born
it's 2018 already, remember?

[Anonymous No.11309627]

>>11309615
>They will likely take a tumble as automation begins to replace their role in the global economy.

You do understand that China is one of the leaders in automation right? They own several bleeding edge German robotics firms. If anyone will replace their bug people they're going to be one of the first.

[Anonymous No.11309653]

>>11309615
>China does not come up with anything.

china literally invented gunpowder, paper, the crossbow and its automatic variants, bank notes, printing, the compass, silk, alcohol production and porcelain...and thats just off the top of my head

l2history AGAIN, dude

[Anonymous No.11309668]

>>11309581
>claims China was poorer on capita basis compared to other countries pre-Enlightenment

Before the 17th century, all the major countries in Europe, and China and Japan all had approximate GDP per capita of $1,000/yr in current dollars with exception of Italy during the height of Renaissance which had about $1,500 before population growth outpaced economic growth and brought the per capita GDP back down to the $1,000 range by the time of Enlightenment.

[Anonymous No.11309670]

>>11308102
welcome to the senpai
deffo not quality
v possibly better cutting implement than anything else I own (this includes hap40 and honyaki pieces)
Did you get the no2?

[Anonymous No.11309682]

>>11309627
And then what? If we're not talking about some kind of AI singularity thing, and simply factory workers getting replaced, then China's one comparative advantage on world markets (their cheap labor) begins to disappear. Manufacturing will leave China and move back to either where the natural resources are, where the innovation is happening, or both.

In the context of domestic markets, who's going to be starting the fully automated factories? It's not going to be wagies, it's those with accumulated capital to be able to purchase the equipment. Recall that GDP is a measure of national income, while National Net Wealth is the analogue to net worth, or capital reserves. China may have had phenomenal GDP growth rates these past few decades, but their GDP/capita still lags behind the United States and will likely never pass it.

As for National Net Wealth, China's figures in that area are still way behind - that is to say they have a high income but a low net worth. This is like a doctor or lawyer, not a shrewd investor/businessman. I don't expect to see doctors and lawyers doing well through automation, and neither will China.

[Anonymous No.11309690]

>>11309670
Forgot your name, faggot.

[Anonymous No.11309698]

>>11309682
I don't even know why you're still talking to me, I'm just bringing up points to be argumentative.

[Anonymous No.11309704]

>>11308103
He's not wrong. I work in the greyhound racing industry in my country and we had an arrangement to build 3 racing tracks in China, everything signed and sealed but they suddenly decided they only wanted to pay half of what was agreed. Cost us hundreds of thousands. Not to mention millions in possible future profits.

[Anonymous No.11309713]

>>11309653
>china literally invented gunpowder, paper, the crossbow and its automatic variants, bank notes, printing, the compass, silk, alcohol production and porcelain...and thats just off the top of my head
Are you being intentionally obtuse? When did China invent gunpowder, paper, the crossbow and its automatic variants, bank notes, printing, the compass, silk, alcohol production and porcelain? Can you think of anything they've come up with in the last couple hundred years? It is indisputable that in recent centuries they have almost entirely relied upon the West (and Soviets/Russians) for technological innovation. See basically all their military equipment for an easy example.

>>11309668
Nice reading comprehension, moron. I didn't claim China was per-capita poorer. I merely drew your attention to GDP/capita in relation to your claim that China was "literally the centre of the world".
>Before the 17th century, all the major countries in Europe, and China and Japan all had approximate GDP per capita of $1,000/yr in current dollars with exception of Italy during the height of Renaissance which had about $1,500 before population growth outpaced economic growth and brought the per capita GDP back down to the $1,000 range by the time of Enlightenment.
As you can see from your own analysis, it was not substantially better off than any other region.

Either way, the Chinese had their Faustian spirit beaten out of them by their dear emperors and it's never coming back until China collapses into centuries of warring states like Europe.

[Anonymous No.11309717]

>>11309698
Huh?

[Anonymous No.11309726]

>>11308103
>The thing is, you can find good quality, it's just that the big mills (the reliable ones) only produce in certain order lots, and most of the times those order lots are out of reach for smaller traders

Did you even read your own image? Fuck, half the time I think /ck/ has less reading comprehension than the average Chinaman.

[Anonymous No.11309730]

>>11309726
Try reading the image again, sweetie

[Anonymous No.11309733]

>>11309717
Huh?

[Anonymous No.11309736]

>>11309730
>from the faggot jap who didn't even read it in the first place
Explain how a major cutlery company would be considered a small trader in any universe besides the one you live in.

[quiche !!T2UdrWkLSWB No.11311187]

>>11309690
<3

[Anonymous No.11311202]

>>11309115

>literally nothing is quality

okay then faggot your opinion is irrelevant