If only hip cafes that get custom built ones knew how to pull an actual espresso shot.
New rule should be La Marzocco judges every barista on their skills before being able to flip a paddle, which requires a bespoke NFC card linked to their certification.
Yes I’m salty about the amount of aesthetic cafes that have no idea what to do about their coffee program because all they care about is being a hip third space.
One coffee shop near me (since closed) had a Group 3 Slayer paired with a Super Jolly (but they also didn't know how to pull a decent shot).
For those unfamiliar, Slayer is (imo the best) one of the top $$$ machines and pairing it with a budget grinder is a classic sign the owner doesn't know a thing about coffee. Often the grinder is more influential than the espresso machine.
And how I mention "Group 3" that means it has three brewing heads. They were using a ~$20-30k espresso machine paired with a run of the mill budget grinder.
> For those unfamiliar, Slayer is (imo the best) one of the top $$$ machines and pairing it with a budget grinder is a classic sign the owner doesn't know a thing about coffee.
The exception to that rule is Espresso Vivace in Seattle, with (at Capitol Hill location) a couple 3-group La Marzoccos at the bar and a collection of modded Niche Zeros on grinding duty. Nobody can accuse David Schomer[0] of "not knowing a thing about coffee".
Boy different world different meaning of "expensive." I'm opening a cafe in Jakarta and I'm thinking if I should get a used Super Jolly or something _cheaper_.
The Super Jolly is fine, I have a used one at home that I’ve had for 15 years (which I use now with a Linea Mini that I just a couple of months ago) and get really good results.
The point is that investing in such a crazy expensive machine but not a much better grinder is really foolish, because the machine is going to be limited by the grinder so they may as well buy a machine that is 1/3 the price.
But really it sounds like 80% of the problem in the case tow OP is talking about still would have been the poor skills of the baristas, because they should still be able to pull very decent shots even with the mid-range grinder.
I was a bit confused, because I've only known of the old models. Apparently there's been a refresh and they're no longer a few hundred dollars. FWIW they were not using one of the new models, they were using an old model which would have been maybe a few hundred on the used market at the time.
It's kinda wild to look and see even the old models listing for double the price they used to.
> New rule should be La Marzocco judges every barista on their skills before being able to flip a paddle, which requires a bespoke NFC card linked to their certification.
The same La Marzocco that puts fake paddles on their cheaper machines when whats there is really just a button?
In my anecdotal experience of reacting to “wow this espresso is good” it’s often been a Slayer machine. It’s been a rough indicator of where to get good coffee for me.
I tend to look at the grinder and also the choice of the beans (roast level, consistency, chips). As another commenter pointed out you do occasionally get places that will buy a super fancy machine but have no idea what to do with it.
It's rarer to spend loads on a fancy grinder if you don't know what you're doing.
La Marzocco has such brand recognition that a lot of newbie coffee shops would buy one, but people who buy a more niche commercial machine like a Slayer or a Synesso probably know what they are doing. Still, there's nothing wrong with the machine itself and there are plenty of really great coffee shops with a La Marzocco.
Unless your plan is to eliminate La Marzocco machines from the secondary market by rapidly buying up the old machines, at a substantial premium, and leasing all future machines I'm pretty sure you'd run into difficulty implementing any sort of mandatory certification requirement.
As unfeasible as the original post is, I do empathize. There is a trend of expensive coffee places spending all this money on everything but training the actual employees.
Warp launched something similar a week or so ago, but the Zed implementation I find a lot more logical. Will give Zed another try, as I’m overdue for my monthly “maybe I should try this terminal/IDE” itch.
I like Warp but something about it is very opaque and confusing. Maybe it has a learning curve I haven't committed to, or it's just very alpha and evolving often.
Agreed, I exclusively use Warp for server maintenance and ssh'ing into servers, it does that better than Claude itself but the UI is always confusing, especially after their recent changes.
So you want me to convince myself that immigration is an issue?
You blame immigrants moving into the country causing what problem exactly? Too many NHS workers from foreign countries now, or too much competition for you when applying for roles?
This isn’t a serious contribution to the discussion. The overall level of NHS services would clearly be far lower (non-existent in some cases) without the contribution of immigrants.
Do you believe that foreigners should be allowed to practice as nurses with fake qualifications? Because the NHS does. As they were ACTIVELY working while the NHS knew about the forgery.
Do you have evidence that there is a widespread, institutional fake qualifications problem with native NHS nurses? Please provide evidence. This is what would show that foreign workers in the NHS do not drag down standards on average.
We’re not going to figure out a practical way to improve the NHS with this level of debate. We get that you don’t like foreign nurses, but I’m not going to respond to your rhetorical questions.
You put words in my mouth, that's a dishonest way of arguing :)
I never once said all foreign nurses or bad, nor did I say I dislike them. I pointed out widespread, institutional level fraud that puts patients at risk, exclusively by foreign NHS staff.
It's worrying you can't respond to the argument without strawmans. Is patient safety a concern for you or does politics trump it?
You know that the NHS crucially depends on immigrant doctors and nurses and that their contribution is overwhelmingly positive. Your original comment was a completely transparent attempt to derail the discussion with a single cherry picked example.
Foreign NHS workers can be 'overwhelmingly' competent AND still drag down standards on average due to widespread fraud. You seem to be avoiding any questioning of specific groups engaging in institutional fraud.
Is fraud a problem or not? Should we have standards at all? Does patient safety matter or should we let fake nurses put patients at risk KNOWINGLY?
There aren't anywhere near enough British nurses for the NHS to use only British nurses. Can you point to a credible long term plan to change that situation? That's what you'd do if you had a goal beyond just stirring up unjustified mistrust of foreigners.
MAGA cheerleader openly admires Trump's methods and personality and seeks their endorsement, and openly plans on making structures similar to abused in the US for human rights abuses already.
They're openly preparing to do exactly that.
And some of the tools (that wouldn't be necessary if not for Fartrage campaigning as well) fit very well in their plans.
What part exactly you consider clickbait and not foreboding?
New rule should be La Marzocco judges every barista on their skills before being able to flip a paddle, which requires a bespoke NFC card linked to their certification.
Yes I’m salty about the amount of aesthetic cafes that have no idea what to do about their coffee program because all they care about is being a hip third space.
reply