[HN Gopher] Show HN: OnlyRecipe.app - Remove clutter from recipe... ___________________________________________________________________ Show HN: OnlyRecipe.app - Remove clutter from recipe sites Author : AwkwardPanda Score : 443 points Date : 2022-01-04 15:03 UTC (7 hours ago) (HTM) web link (showcase.onlyrecipe.app) (TXT) w3m dump (showcase.onlyrecipe.app) | seabea wrote: | Looks poorly tested. QR code scanner doesn't work and the "how to | use?" tip doesn't display anything. Manually entering a url | requires the user to include the subdomain AND http/https | (instead of defaulting to "http://www". | black_13 wrote: | AwkwardPanda wrote: | Oh shoot. I did not expect this huge a response. Any more load | and my backend server is going to collapse. | temptemptemp111 wrote: | asow92 wrote: | reminds me of https://www.paprikaapp.com/ | ziggus wrote: | Agreed. Probably the best recipe app around, just for the | built-in browser that lets you grab any recipe from a site. I | think I've run into one instance of a site that it couldn't | scrape, out of hundreds. | asow92 wrote: | Their web import feature, while not always perfect, does a good | job of stripping these things out. And this service has | synching between native apps on various platforms. | haswell wrote: | As a regular user of Paprika, I have to mention that it's a | fantastic app, and any recipe I intend to make more than once | gets imported. | parkersweb wrote: | Yeah - there's some really lovely touches to Paprika - like: | | - easily scale the recipe to make different quantities | | - convert units used to one you're more familiar with. | | - wherever the recipe says 'do x for 10 minutes' you can tap on | the time and it'll allow you to set a timer for that one piece. | Pete-Codes wrote: | ha, I always have to navigate whimsical tales of Italian | grandfathers etc to get to the actual recipe so this is a good | idea | js2 wrote: | The comments on recipe sites are often useful. Things like: pre- | heat your mason jars before pouring in the caramelized sugar or | they'll crack. You can find clarifications, or things people have | substituted, or just how a recipe has failed for some folks. | | There's a handful of recipe sites I tend to stick to. Smitten | Kitchen, All Recipes, Serious Eats, NYT Cooking. I also have a | few favorite cooking books: On Food and Cooking, Joy of Cooking, | The Art of Simple Food. Then I have some speciality cooking books | for desserts, ice creams, and soups. | | My wife transcribes recipes we really like to 4" x 6" index | cards. The recipe box is up to probably about 200-300 recipes | we've collected over our 25 years together. | | FWIW, on current iPadOS, Only Recipe isn't showing up in the | Share menu for me. | ceejayoz wrote: | Recipes I like go into a Google Drive shared folder for me, | where I standardize format, add notes/tweaks, and share with | friends/family who want 'em. | hnrodey wrote: | Aggregating to handwritten version is very nice. A recipe box | is a terrific artifact to hand down through generations. | | Congrats. | vestrigi wrote: | Nice if you get the recipes right on the first time but | tedious if you like to update recipes and add comments. At | least for handwriting perfectionists. | groby_b wrote: | A handwritten recipe without annotations and butter stains | is simply a recipe you don't like very much ;) | | Which, to me, means digital is a bad format - because I'm | not going to annotate in my text editor while juggling | three burners and the cake in the oven. | jeffbee wrote: | I agree the comments are often important. I also agree with | your list of sources, and would add that the magazine Cook's | Illustrated is nice. | | I think the reason that people are all upset about the spammy | recipe sites is they are too cheap to pay anything for content, | so they are stuck with the spammers. The easy solution is to | just look at yourself and stop being such a cheapskate. Buy a | recipe book. Buy a magazine. Subscribe to a newspaper. | short12 wrote: | Recipe websites are a prime example of everything that is wrong | with the web today. The bulk collection websites are primarily | crap but for the same reasons as the personal branded websites. A | shit ton of junk around a sometimes worthwhile background story | or such and then the recipe all with shit tons of junk | interrupting and destroying any sense of continuity. Fuck their | stupid ads | hericium wrote: | Web written for Googlebot, not humans. | markstos wrote: | Better: Use AnyList. It has a feature to import recipes. The | result is that not only get to view a clean copy of a recipe, but | a clean copy is stored in AnyList for easy reference later. | njovin wrote: | I'll second this recommendation. I started using Anylist last | year and it's incredible. My weekly grocery flow goes like this | now: | | - Skim a few recipe sites for anything new I want to try | | - 1-click import them to Anylist (using the browser extension) | | - Add recipes to the weekly meal plan in Anylist | | - Click "Add all ingredients" for each recipe, which | automatically puts all ingredients for the recipe into my | shopping list. | | One of my favorite things is that it automatically categorizes | the list items by store section, making the shopping much | easier. | | It doesn't work with every recipe site, though (traeger.com for | example), but it works with most. | | There are two features I wish it had that would make it nearly | perfect: | | 1. Ability to create my own categorization rules. For example, | "whole peeled tomatoes with their juices" gets categorized as | beverage, and I can manually recategorize that specific item, | but it would be nice to create a rule for whole _peeled_ | tomato* that puts it in the "Canned Goods" category | | 2. The ability to exclude ingredients from being added to the | list. I always have salt, pepper, and olive oil on hand, but I | end up having to manually cross a dozen of those off my | shopping list when I add ingredients for the week when nearly | every recipe inevitably includes them. | leifg wrote: | I use a similar recipe manager on my phone (paprika 3 but also | playing around with Mela). They come with an integrated browser | to download the recipes. | | Not only do they did rid of the novel about the ingredients and | their origins, they also get around most paywalls. | | The thing that would make me instantly switch to any other | manager is an app that would parse recipes from the various | YouTube and TikTok videos. If you follow the right accounts these | videos are a gold mine. | mirthturtle wrote: | Someone tried this a while back and it didn't go so well: | https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2021/03/02/recipeasly-fo... | metabagel wrote: | This is an app, though, not a website. If I understand | correctly, it's just parsing the page for you. | | Edit: Oh, there is also a website. | gamerDude wrote: | Maybe keep ads so that the bloggers can keep their current | revenue stream. As someone who loves this idea, all I care | about is easy access to the recipe. Its ok with me to have not | too intrusive ads. | gamerDude wrote: | Or just move the recipe to the top and keep all the other | content/ads below. | artursapek wrote: | That guy had absolutely no conviction once he started getting | called out. He did a complete 180 in the weakest way. | [deleted] | toyg wrote: | The site is back up, although it now seems to contain | exclusively "free" recipes (i.e. coming from CC sites and old | books). | | IMHO there are ways to make recipe-scraping resistant to | copyright claims. | | 1. hide all scraping actions behind a login page; that makes | content private, hence uninfringing. | | 2. every time a user "publishes" or shares content, present | only an extract of the recipe, like the ingredients and first | few steps; expanding the extract sends you to the original site | (ideally to the specific anchor of the procedure). | kixiQu wrote: | > private, hence uninfringing | | let me know how this goes for private torrent tracker sites | Hard_Space wrote: | From the WP article: | | _But it's even more complex than that. The stories are | personal. They're cultural. They're often told from the | perspective of women, immigrants and people of color who have | created and invested in a platform to share their stories. The | recipe aggregator sites, bloggers note, basically tell the | creators that their stories have no value. It's the same | message America has told immigrants and women for centuries, | now just in electronic form._ | | I think that may be taking it too far, particularly since | Google effectively created this entire syndrome. | fknorangesite wrote: | Yeah. | | > It's the same message America has told immigrants and women | for centuries | | I certainly won't deny this point conceptually, but it | assumes that the stories are even true in the first place. | renewiltord wrote: | I've got to be honest: those stories hold no value to me. | That's the truth. I don't know why the WaPo wants those us | who are like me to pretend otherwise. | pessimizer wrote: | It's weird how you go from "to me" to "wants us." Surely | you can imagine that people might be interested in history | and stories around food. | | I personally don't give a shit about mathematicians and | scientists personal lives, but I don't have a problem | imagining those who do. I think the numbers say it all. | Others think that the examination of every detail of the | person who wrote the numbers first might give them some | insight into how to create more numbers. | erik_seaberg wrote: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_algorithm#Newton%E | 2%8... is interesting but I wouldn't want Google Sheets | to display it in a modal every time I hit the "/" key. A | recipe needs a very high signal:noise ratio when it's | going to be followed in real time while food is cooking. | lazyasciiart wrote: | That's why it's all in one place on the screen at the | bottom of the post, so that when you have decided you | should cook it, you can just leave it there to look at. | renewiltord wrote: | In my experience, traditional English usage there would | use context to replace "us" with "those of us like me". | But since clearly that is not the case, I have replaced | it so it is no longer 'weird' to you. | | I'm going to go out on a limb and say that if you polled | recipe searchers, the vast majority (>66%) would say that | they don't want the story. In fact, I'll back that. If | you're in San Francisco, I will bet $1000 against your | $1000 that this will be the case and we can equally bear | the price of running this. An associate will contact you | if you're up for it. | kixiQu wrote: | Bloggers who are putting care into their work typically | write more for the people who follow them than for the | randos who drop in from a Google search. What do people | who subscribe to foodie Patreons care about? The people | who have a list of bookmarked recipe blogs? What about | people coming from Instagram posts who are drawn in by a | beautiful photo, what are they hoping to see? Why are we | establishing a framing that the people who should be most | catered to are the people who care the least about the | cook and their work? | renewiltord wrote: | I don't think we are establishing a framing where the | randos (folks like me) are of prime importance - merely | establishing a framework where they exist. The WaPo piece | speaks against recipe aggregators who simply strip the | recipe down to ingredients and algorithm. i.e. I am | fairly comfortable with recipe websites writing long- | winded stories for _their_ audience while alternative | apps strip those down to ingredients and algorithm. It | appears that the WaPo writer opposes the existence of the | latter. | | The story writers don't have to write for randos, but I | (a rando) rather enjoy the stripping tool. So I think I'm | going to install OnlyRecipe.app and if OR's author is | pressured by WaPo-like folks to shut down, I'll probably | write my own since parsing that schema is trivial. | | And I have a day job in HFT so I can't be shut down. | After all, no one can boycott me or my products. | kixiQu wrote: | > while alternative apps strip those down to ingredients | and algorithm. | | So what you want is for recipe developers to have their | work scraped, stripped, and presented outside of its | intended creative context and _revenue generation | mechanism,_ and while other people may think this is | unethical, they can 't stop you so that makes it fine. | renewiltord wrote: | No. What makes it fine is that the user agent is my tool | to read content that servers send me so it is free to | display or not display sections of the content using | whatever formatting I desire. | criddell wrote: | If Google changed their algorithm to rank recipe sites by | efficiency (ie less narrative is rewarded), I bet the | recipe developers would change their sites overnight. I | suspect the main audience for the stories is the | GoogleBot. | butwhywhyoh wrote: | I agree with this. These app don't take anything from the | experience of people who want to read these asinine | stories -- it just helps the folks that are there for the | ingredients. | | If this gets shut down I would love if a general, open- | source solution could be developed to spread the | capability. A generic Python recipe parser that anyone | could hook up to a front-end. If the apps proliferate at | a high enough rate they can't all be shut down. | computershit wrote: | Same. If you're only telling the story to fill time then | write a blog post, keep it separate from the recipe. | fleddr wrote: | The complexity is imagined. It's not complex at all. People | using Google for a free recipe are looking for...the recipe. | If they were looking for stories from immigrants, they would | have googled that. | dendrite9 wrote: | I don't think it is taking it too far honestly. Even if it | can be a bit jarring to see it written out like that. Part of | trying food from other cultures/countries/families is getting | to see how their history is reflected in the food they | prepare. I read cookbooks to get a feel for a place, even if | I don't plan to cook everything in the book. Or more | correctly couldn't. | | For example I enjoy pad Thai, but I didn't know it was | created by the Thai government in the 1930s until I saw a | small comment and did some reading. https://www.theatlantic.c | om/international/archive/2014/04/no... | | Or the history of Lebanese immigration into Mexico that led | to Al Pastor. https://theeyehuatulco.com/2020/07/29/al- | pastor-and-the-leba... | m4rc3lv wrote: | Works on a lot of sites, nice job. I can't pull recipes from | McDougall. https://www.drmcdougall.com/recipes/white-beans- | mexicali/ | amelius wrote: | Isn't this what "Reader Mode" is for? | switzer wrote: | Since OnlyRecipe.app is already parsing the recipe site, it would | be a great feature to allow conversion to weights from volume | (e.g. show 120g of flour vs. 1c of flour). Also, allow someone to | double (or 1.5x...) the recipe as well, and have all measures | double in the recipe! | dagurp wrote: | A choice between metric and imperial would be nice too | joshstrange wrote: | You might be interested in Paprika, it can import recipes from | anywhere, let you edit/save them, and scale. It's got a ton | more features than just that but it's a great app and worth | every penny. | linsomniac wrote: | Agreed, happy user of Paprika here. It also has multi-device | syncing, so my wife and I have a common place for them. We | both cook quite a lot. Found Paprkia via HN comments 2-4 | years ago. It is paid, and there's a Mac laptop app that is | an extra charge. Around they holidays they usually have a | sale, but I think it was ~$10 for both my wife and I to get. | datavirtue wrote: | Please just parse recipes and do it well. I can convert it | myself and you cannot convert volume to weight reliably unless | you index specific ingredients (brand, flour type, seive) to | their volumetric weight. | | FTR: I hate volume measured recipes that include flour. "1 cup | of flour"...hmm, what does that mean? Guess I'm about to find | out. | | I generally assume it means to sift the flour into a cup but | that is not always the case. Some recipes do not specify, and | some do. It's a roll of the dice which is the recipe writers | default for "1 cup of flour." Some recipes count on you gouging | out a packed cup and some assume you should be sifting. | Professionals weigh their flour. | | The last thing this app should be doing is trying to figure all | this out. Impossible. | | I have seen it tried in other services and the feature just got | in the way or ruined the recipe. | switzer wrote: | But.. that's what I want! e.g. 1C flour = 120g, 1C sugar = | 200g. If you parse the recipe, it cannot be that hard to do a | conversion based on ingredient, and such a value add! | AwkwardPanda wrote: | Thanks for the feedback. I'll see if that conversion can be | done in a generic way. | hellweaver666 wrote: | As a metric user, imperial format recipes are the bane of my | existence. I swear to god some Americans don't realise the | rest of the world uses a whole other system. | Symbiote wrote: | I put "UK" in most English recipe searches where it might | matter. | | The recipe itself is likely to be a bit less sweet, and my | ingredients (purchased in Denmark) are also closer to those | sold in Britain than the American versions. Things like | types of cream, lack of sugar added to slightly-processed | ingredients etc. | adwww wrote: | I've acquired three types of table spoon in my kitchen | drawer. The largest is nearly double the smallest. It's | absurd that this is an actual unit of measure. | Symbiote wrote: | Assuming we're talking about measuring spoons (since | table cutlery can be any volume, according to the | design), I first wrote "a metric tablespoon measure is | 15mL exactly, by definition." The US one is almost the | same, and Australia is weird with 20mL. | | But now I see Germany changed the definition at some | point, and a 15mL spoon is an Alter Essloffel, with a | Moderner Essloffel being 7.5mL. Can a German confirm | this, or clarify which is used in practise? | | The other European countries I've checked use 15mL (if | they use the measure at all). | | https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essbesteck#Verwendung_als_M | a.C... | infini8 wrote: | Imperial system just seems so illogical and unscientific. | kixiQu wrote: | Yeah, and what's up with all this non-English content on | the internet? Don't they know that it's the most spoken | language? A lot of it isn't even in Chinese, either! Ruins | my day when I come across something written in German | geocar wrote: | I was taught to bake (and write recipes) using a mixture of | units; to prefer metric measurements when precision is | required, but to prefer "American" units when it isn't, | almost to highlight the absence of precision, and to clue the | reader that they may have to adjust for humidity or the | amount of gluten generated (or whatever). | | I know this stuff is obvious to an experienced cook, but I | can also imagine seeing 14,2g of anything causing some | unnecessary distress when trying to work with an unfamiliar | recipe. | | Maybe something like "1c of flour (approx. 120g)" is a good | way to be safe? | | If you're looking for an engine for actually _doing_ the | conversions, there 's GNU units[1] and Frink[2] which both | contain databases of these conversions you may be able to | mine. | | [1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/units/ | | [2]: https://frinklang.org/ | Symbiote wrote: | I have friends who sometimes help me cook a dinner for more | friends. I've seen some of them try to measure out 22.5mL1 | of olive oil for frying because I pressed a button on the | site to 1.5x the recipe... | | Recipe websites don't include that first 10 pages of a | "beginner" recipe book, which usually describes how to | measure ingredients and the various cooking techniques | used. | | 1 1.5 metric tablespoons, 1.5 x 15mL. | [deleted] | thepratt wrote: | Being able to tell if it's a US or non-US cup for conversions | is something that would be great too. I first look for | grams/oz/other as units, then fall back to primary intended | audience/publisher being American or not. | ryanmcbride wrote: | I've all but stopped getting recipes from websites. It always | feels like every recipe I find was either just copied from some | other site with one ingredient changed, or there's some brand | sponsored ingredient shoehorned in. A lot of modern recipe books | aren't much better, but there's maybe a little more useful info. | | The main thing I've done to find decent recipes these days is to | check youtube. Not stuff like 5 minute crafts or overproduced | tiktok recipe "hacks", but videos by people cooking in their own | kitchen, mostly in real time, talking about what they're doing | and why. You can see the whole process and see their technique | and be reasonably certain that they know what they're doing on | some level. | | Here's a few people I always come back to in case anyone is | interested: | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNrkDzpgSFY | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dSeHP14Osc | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uyop7-v3Es | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVolu2pxveo | thrower123 wrote: | Most recipe sites are less terrible if you click the "Print | Recipe" button, for example: | | https://goodcheapeats.com/simple-rice-pilaf/ | | versus: | | https://goodcheapeats.com/wprm_print/27621 | 2bitencryption wrote: | What is the reason that every single recipe site, without fail, | follows this same horrible pattern? | | I.e. the twenty paragraph "When I was a child growing up in | Atlanta..." followed by a crappy in-house video player followed | by, finally, the actual recipe? | | My assumption is SEO? For some reason, Google must really like | having tons of text on your page, and dislikes simple "here's the | recipe"? etc? | | Second question - anyone who has searched for recipes also knows | that Google will parse out any star rating from the recipe page | and show it alongside the results. Which is obviously meaningless | because comparing 4.5 stars from grandmas-cooking.net to 4.5 | stars from foodnetwork.com is apples-to-oranges. So what's to | stop me from simply faking my own star system, then presenting it | on my website so that google picks it up in its results? And what | triggers Google to look for a star rating? Could I update my tech | blog to have a star rating and Google will show it? Or is it | limited to keywords like "recipe"? | avaika wrote: | It's not just recipes. There are tones of questions I often | search which have a very specific and short answer. E.g. "how | many kangaroos are there in the world?". | | Ideally I would expect a page with my question and a number | with link to the source. However in the real world I get | various pages with somehow related title and tons of text | inside I don't need. Often times without the exact number I'm | looking for. | | I guess that most likely nobody wants to maintain such a | resource since it might be hard to make it profitable. Still it | might save a lot of time for collective humanity. | yhorawu8 wrote: | johnfn wrote: | Google weights time spent on site in rankings. If you bounce | instantly back to the search results, obviously you didn't find | what you were looking for. If you stay for a while, maybe you | did. | lkxijlewlf wrote: | Ratings for recipes never make sense anyway because if one | reads the reviews they're always of the sort, "I LOVE THIS | RECIPE! I used buttermilk instead of Milk, doubled the sugar, | used almond extract instead of vanilla. This recipe is | AMAZING!" | bluGill wrote: | Those reviews are more useful that the recipes. If I am | missing one ingredient I have more confidence in trying a | substitute if someone else has before me (I've messed a few | recipes up with a bad substitute). sometimes I'll look at the | substitution and think that sounds better even though I have | everything for the original (if I've made this before I'm | more likely to do this for variety). | lkxijlewlf wrote: | The problem is once you change the ingredients, you're not | making the same recipe. Sure the alternatives may turn out | better, but rate the original a 1 star and then list what | changes you made. | bluGill wrote: | Why would I rate the original 1 star? I didn't make it so | I have no knowledge about it, or I like it and I like | this modifications. | foofoo4u wrote: | Its annoying to me too. A lot of fluff. From what I remember, | back around 2012, Google was facing a serious issue of content | farms appearing in their results. These are sites that | aggregate data and auto-generate articles about a myriad of | topics. They were ruining search. So Google introduced a | significant change to the way that they rank websites. They | figured originality and authenticity was the key to identifying | genuine sites. And how was this determined? Well, an article is | written, it should contain a lot of text, more so and of better | quality than an algorithm could write. And the content had to | be original. If it was clear that the content was copy and | pasted from somewhere else, then it was probably not original. | So here we are, where a simple recipe has to tell the person's | life story in order differentiate it from the junk of content | farms. I am sure someone here remembers this Google change back | then. It had a specific name. Everyone on the web who was | concerned about SEO at the time was aware of it. | _ttg wrote: | It's Google SEO, as others have pointed out. A pretty | insightful look into the incentives in this article - | https://www.protocol.com/tech-vs-food-bloggers | ethbr0 wrote: | > _I.e. the twenty paragraph "When I was a child growing up in | Atlanta..." followed by a crappy in-house video player followed | by, finally, the actual recipe?_ | | As a child growing up outside of Atlanta, this is how we were | typically taught recipes. | | "One day, when you're sharing this recipe on a mass | communication network that doesn't exist today, make sure to | (1) mention that you're from Atlanta & (2) include a story | about your children / partner / family." | | I guess, maybe it's different elsewhere? | Rygian wrote: | The copyright around the recipe itself is a challenging issue | [1], so a simple way of guaranteeing that the site is not | scrapped and published elsewhere verbatim is to include also | non-recipe material that falls more clearly under copyright | law. | | [1] https://www.copyrightlaws.com/copyright-protection-recipes/ | walligatorrr wrote: | Interesting but this app doesn't seem to be having a hard | time scraping and publishing the recipe material without | copyright. | pfranz wrote: | I _always_ see this as a stated reason, but I 'm skeptical | unless it's cargo-culting like "no copyright intended" on | YouTube videos (but this is _a lot_ more work). I can 't see | Adam and Joanne [1] or Holly [2] suing for copyright because | when someone stole their Frito Pie recipe and left off the | story at top. Especially, when they both have Google-defined | tags to grab only the recipe and ingredients. As others have | mentioned, the bigger sites (Allrecipes, food network, | NYTimes, binging with babish etc.) tend not do the story | thing. | | Do you have any other info on copyright as a reason? | | [1] https://www.inspiredtaste.net/15938/easy-and-smooth- | hummus-r... | | [2] https://www.spendwithpennies.com/easy-homemade-lasagna/ | | [3] https://developers.google.com/search/docs/advanced/struct | ure... | littlecranky67 wrote: | Not sure about the US or the EU in general, but in Germany at | least _databases_ - even if they solely consist of trivial, | non-copyrightable data - are still copyrighted. This law was | put into place after a company in Germany just hired people | to type of physical copies of Phonebooks and the yellowpages, | and sold a "phonebook" on CD. A name+phonenumber pair isn't | copyrightable, but the collection as a whole is (at least | now). | anamax wrote: | In the US, the facts in a phone book (names, numbers, | addresses) are not copyrightable and neither is the | collection. However, see the bit at the end about | compilations. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications,_Inc.,_v._ | R.... | | I wonder whether "fake facts" (bogus names, numbers, | addresses) are copyrightable. If they are, they can be used | to give copyright protection to a collection even when the | bulk of the collection isn't copyrightable. | littlecranky67 wrote: | Those fake facts are a thing and have a name [0], they | are placed into phonebooks, dictionaries, encyclopedias | etc. to detect copyright violations (i.e. somebody else | stealing your compilation). | | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_entry | whiddershins wrote: | And maps. | nybble41 wrote: | > I wonder whether "fake facts" (bogus names, numbers, | addresses) are copyrightable. | | This has, unfortunately, been upheld on occasion. True | damages from copying such false entries would be | nonexistent, naturally, but statutory damages are blind | to such trivialities as justice or proportionality. | | Morally speaking, anything _presented_ as fact (including | entries in a phone book or notations on a map) should be | _treated_ as fact and thus not copyrightable. Something | along the lines of estoppel should prevent one from | claiming that they are providing a database of facts and | then suing the recipient for reproducing copyrightable | "creative elements" which don't belong there. Also, | selling someone a database of "facts" with deliberate | fictitious entries mixed in which are not specifically | labeled as such should be classified as fraud and open | the publisher up to liability should anyone suffer the | slightest harm due to the false entries. | tinus_hn wrote: | That's not copyright but a separate database right with | different rules. | bloak wrote: | I think there are two separate things here: | | * database rights, which are similar to but distinct from | copyright; in particular they last for only 15 years; | | * copyright in a particular collection of public-domain | things. | | Case C-304/07 Directmedia Publishing GmbH v Albert-Ludwigs- | Universitat Freiburg, which was about an anthology of | poems, seems to have involved both things. See if you can | make sense of it because I'm not sure I can! | servercobra wrote: | People scroll more, so higher engagement and lower bounce rate | metrics with the site (which I think helps with search ranking) | seanhunter wrote: | My understanding is there are 3 reasons. 1)The authors want to | build a brand for themselves rather than just provide you with | recipes. This helps to get further opportunities for them and | differentiates their cookbook/site from others in a very | crowded market 2)A lot of people read cookbooks as books rather | than just when they are cooking and this philosophy seems to | have been copied over to recipe sites 3)Copyright. Istr reading | somewhere you can't copyright a recipe whereas you can pursue a | claim against someone who plagiarises the non-obvious text | parts. It's something like that. | technothrasher wrote: | The "listing of ingredients" and "simple set of directions" | are not copyrightable in the US (I have no idea about other | countries). Photographs, drawings, and background info such | as explanations of how or why the recipe works may all be | copyrightable though. | | https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf | elwell wrote: | > Google will parse out any star rating from the recipe page | and show it alongside the results | | Recipe Schema: | https://developers.google.com/search/docs/advanced/structure... | | Yes, you can totally fake the # of stars & rating. | giaour wrote: | > I.e. the twenty paragraph "When I was a child growing up in | Atlanta..." followed by a crappy in-house video player followed | by, finally, the actual recipe? | | > My assumption is SEO? For some reason, Google must really | like having tons of text on your page, and dislikes simple | "here's the recipe"? etc? | | Cookbooks that sell well usually have some introductory text | for every recipe. The best cookbooks use this intro to describe | unusual techniques or flavor combinations in the recipe, so the | intro text in such books can be really helpful and is sometimes | critical to getting the recipe right the first time you try to | make it. The only cookbook I own that _doesn 't_ have intro | text for each recipe is a culinary school textbook, so the | authors felt safe assuming a certain level of familiarity with | the terms and techniques used. | | OG food blogs like Smitten Kitchen and David Lebovitz emulated | the classic cookbook style, and, not surprisingly, those | authors have gone on to make a lot of money writing traditional | cookbooks. Contemporary food blogs tend to try to emulate | older, successful blogs (maybe because Google somehow boosted | recipes with intro text back when such text was usually | helpful?) but mostly come off as AI-generated garbage text, | made just long enough to create a couple scroll events and | artificially lower a site's bounce rate. | rjzzleep wrote: | 1. SEO. I've been recommended to have a ghostwriter write | technical articles for me to increase my client base. Build | enough of a cult following and you can be sure that your | youtube channel, or next book has enough of an audience. | | 2. I think it also appeals to a certain audience. It makes them | feel open minded to other cultures. There's an emotional bond | forming with the story or the people in the story. | | Don't forget that the average american speaks only one | language, yet considers themselves as part of the country that | is creating/keeping world peace and that at the same time the | average american consumer spends more on average on consumer | goods per capita than any other nation in the world. Add to | that, that ad revenue is the US is also disproportionately | higher than anywhere else. | hiptobecubic wrote: | I have literally never met anyone express (2). Any time | anyone needs a recipe site they immediately start complaining | about it, unprompted. | vshade wrote: | I sometimes like to read the paragraphs to know why some | things are done and possible substitutions, specially if | I'm not going to make the recipe immediately. But when I | want to make it, I really would love to have it separated | from the text. | mattkrause wrote: | Smitten Kitchen often has a few paragraphs before the | recipe. I don't _always_ read it, but I also don 't hate | it. | | It helps she writes well and it seems to genuinely reflect | the author's life--I think it started out as a personal | blog with occasional recipes before becoming a recipe site | with bloggy bits bolted on. The text is also fairly | helpful, in that it sometimes describes less successful | attempts cooking the same thing, or compares it with other | dishes ("If you hate X, try [this] instead"). | | This may be a rare exception though--I agree that a lot of | other recipe sites have tons of vacuous filler. | giaour wrote: | Smitten Kitchen was one of the OG food blogs that | established the pattern that recipe spam websites are | trying to emulate. Back in the aughts, searching for a | recipe on Google _was_ useful because they would | prioritize "enriched" sites like Smitten Kitchen, David | Lebovitz's blog, Orangette, The Wednesday Chef, etc., | where the narrative portion of the recipe primarily | established who the recipe would appeal to, tips on | unusual techniques employed in the recipe, and sometimes | a humanizing anecdote or two. | | The format of Smitten Kitchen and David Lebovitz's blog | have remained unchanged for about 15 years, probably | because those authors used the success of their blogs to | establish related revenue streams (mostly via bestselling | cookbooks). I would be surprised if the blogs themselves | still make much money, given how few display ads are | included on each page. | MartinCron wrote: | My wife and I collect cookbooks and cocktail recipe books. | There are a handful of writers who have a compelling voice | where I read more than just the ingredient list and | instructions. | | But for some random blog that I find while googling? Never. | floatrock wrote: | Because "Recipes" are one of about a dozen categories for which | google defines special Structure Data formats, which allows | presumably-high-clickthrough results page features like the | rich media carousel previews, etc. | https://developers.google.com/search/docs/advanced/structure... | | If you want to know what categories of things will have | especially horrendous (ie clickbait-optimized-to-hell) results, | look at the other things that google encourages developers to | semantically tag and compete for use of the shiny results page | features. A couple interesting ones: Ecommerce | (monetizable sales): - Books - Review snippet | - Software app - Events Google Maps data | ingestion: - Local Business Youtube | previews: - Video - Movie Job search: | - Employer Aggregate Rating - Estimated salary - | Job Posting Knowledge graph: - COVID-19 | announcements (ooo, topical!) - Dataset - FAQ | - Fact Check | | Recipes are something that people who search for recipes do | several times a week, so the algorithms identified this as a | Thing with High DAU's. Semantic tags then makes it easier to | identify "this is a recipe page", but that means for such a | crowded category it's a race to the bottom with optimization | and ad-stuffing (more life story == more inline ad blocks). | | Unfortunately, it's against google's interest to promote to- | the-point recipe pages that have fewer embedded AdWords blocks. | | Projects like OP probably just parse out the semantic tags and | throw away the rest of the content. This could easily be a | browser extension. | tiborsaas wrote: | I don't usually search for recipes, but I got these just to | test: | | "pizza pocket recipe" 2nd result is decent: | https://foodnetwork.co.uk/recipes/pizza-pockets/ | | "lasagne recipe easy" 1st result is good: | https://www.spendwithpennies.com/easy-homemade-lasagna/ | | "sushi recipe chicken" 1st result is to the point | https://www.tegel.co.nz/recipes/teriyaki-chicken-sushi/ | | Note that I have adblocker so I don't know how many ads you | see and I can't judge the quality as well, buy at least the | sites are quite usable. I'd be more pissed off by a missing | ingredient than having to scroll a screen or two. | asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: | The lasagne recipe page would be one I count as bad. | There's a lot of useless text before the recipe. The other | two result pages are good. | | Interesting enough, the big name recipe sites: Allrecipes, | food network, NYTimes, binging with babish etc. all are | short and to the point. But for some reason the crappy | recipe sites outperform them on Google. | creato wrote: | NYT recipes are almost always in the top 3 results for | me, I don't think they are being outperformed that much | if at all. | tiborsaas wrote: | I don't know how to make it, a list of ingredients | wouldn't help me much. That article is a bit too | superficial for me. | | Actually, video recipes are the best imho: | https://www.youtube.com/c/yousuckatcooking :) | schnevets wrote: | The Lasagna recipe is an independent cooking blogger | (note the "Hi there, I'm Holly!" in the top-right | corner). Food Network, Allrecipes, Tegel, and other sites | mentioned are not promoting a specific person, but an | entire brand. Babish is the exception to this rule, but | he "changed the game" by going for YouTube instead of | blogs. | | Although the optimization is infuriating, in my search to | become a decent cook, I have found more success following | specific writers instead of a top result/highest rated | meal. Many of these writers self-promote (and cross- | promote) on sites with the same template as | spendwithpennies.com | | I wouldn't be surprised if that annoying SEO template was | designed in collaboration with Cookbook publishers. The | "anecdote before recipe" style was made famous in Irma S. | Rombauer's Joy of Cooking, and took on a variety of forms | throughout the 20th century. | WaxProlix wrote: | > Babish is the exception to this rule, but he "changed | the game" by going for YouTube instead of blogs. | | I think this (or a hybrid approach) was already a thing. | See Food Wishes (Chef John), which has been using a | similar model for a while. | srcreigh wrote: | The "Jump To Recipe" button on the Lasagna page took to | straight to the ingredients | dwighttk wrote: | > Note that I have adblocker so I don't know how many ads | you see | | Be careful. I also have an ad blocker and sent a fun link | to my mom a friend had sent me and she saw Alllllllllll the | ads. It was not a fun link for her. Didn't even think of it | before sending. | wilde wrote: | I wonder if it has to do with the type of food. "Hummus | recipe" gets you the entire history of chickpeas: | https://www.inspiredtaste.net/15938/easy-and-smooth- | hummus-r... | allochthon wrote: | This is the kind of recipe I see most often when | searching for recipes. I wonder whether GP was a little | lucky with his/her three links. (The lasagna recipe was | an example of an SEO'd recipe.) | cguess wrote: | There's a new one coming for a Media Fact Check as well. | https://schema.org/MediaReview | msielski wrote: | There are browser extensions which do this: - | https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/recipe- | filter... - https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/recipe- | filter/ahlc... | cvg wrote: | This is interesting. Looks like the app might be just parsing | this schema from the webpage and adding a nice ui. | danielvaughn wrote: | Exactly. I've never been as frustrated with the modern web as I | am when I try to find a recipe. It's the most infuriating | experience. I'd pay money if I knew I could access a very large | database of recipes, where I know I just get the recipe itself. | guynamedloren wrote: | It's an infuriating experience indeed. I reached my breaking | point a few months ago, and decided I was just done with | googling recipes. After trying a few different highly | regarded paid apps (recipe managers, NYT Cooking) and not | finding quite what I was looking for, I caved and started | compiling my own recipe database in Notion. My goal is to use | this database exclusively for weekly meal planning, as well | as for cooking up something on a whim. It's a habit change | for sure, and required a bit of upfront work to seed the | database, but so far, has proved to be successful. Overall, | both meal planning and cooking itself have become more | enjoyable! | nerdjon wrote: | My best possible guesses (note, not really based on any | research into it but just theories). | | - The ones that I have noticed do this, also tend to have a lot | of ads. So maybe to both be able to show more ads (there is a | limit of how many ads you can show if you just have a simple | recipe, but add a book above it and you can show many more). | Maybe also the ability to add referral links to talked about | products? | | - It seems like some of them are trying to build a community. | They do the whole "tell me about your experience" thing that | only generates more page views and "interaction". So maybe | there are people that actually follow these blogs and feel like | all of that story is personal? | | - I am sure there is some SEO stuff going on here like others | have said. | shoulderfake wrote: | Man I was wondering this same thing. Every single stupid recipe | site is just terrible ux. Just show the recipe we don't care | about the story. | password1 wrote: | It's SEO. Once a SEO expert was showing me user heatmaps on his | popular website's articles. The users completely ignored 90% of | the content and of the text of a page. I asked him why so many | parts of the text were ignored by the users and his answer was | "oh, that text is not for the users, it's for google". The | literally paid writers to write articles way longer than needed | solely to satisfy Google algorithms. The worst part is that it | worked and they earned a lot of money from it. | AlexandrB wrote: | Yet another reason the search monopoly we find ourselves in | is so harmful. If there were even 2 or 3 search engines with | substantial (20%+) market share SEO would have to try to | triangulate for multiple competing measures of page quality - | hopefully landing on something that resembles a passable user | experience. Instead everyone in SEO is laser-focused on the | singular quirks of Google's Page Rank. | charlietango wrote: | I do front-end dev for a high-volume recipe site and our | multivariate tests mostly confirm the opposite. Simpler pages | rank higher (and users report higher satisfaction with the | product). Core Web Vitals changed the way a lot of things | work, how long ago were you given this advice? | password1 wrote: | A while back (two years?). The thing is, user were | extremely satisfied by the product. The users came to the | website for a comparison table (which was at the top), used | the information, clicked a link on the table and then | exited the website. The rest of the page was useless, most | won't even scroll. But still they needed it for a ton of | SEO reasons (keyword density, semantic structure and | complexity, internal and external linking). The company was | working on an extremely competitive niche and it was | crushing it (multi-million dollar ad revenue), so I think | they knew what were doing. | bee_rider wrote: | I wonder how Google would respond to a site that had a big | arrow pointing to that text with a "This is just to quiet | google. Click here to jump the the recipe." | password1 wrote: | I think it would get reported by your competitors and then | blacklisted/penalized after manual review. | gamerDude wrote: | If this is true. Is there any harm in putting the recipe at | the top and the story below? | hysan wrote: | Placing recipes on the bottom and behind "click to show" | type features forces users to remain on your site for a | longer period of time. This makes it appear to Google that | users are more "engaged" on your website because it takes | longer for them to bounce in the cases where the recipe | isn't what they are looking for. | csa wrote: | > If this is true. Is there any harm in putting the recipe | at the top and the story below? | | From an SEO perspective, yes. | | Time spent on page will be less if the recipe is on the | top. | shoulderfake wrote: | Such bs. I rarely spend more than 20s on a recipe page | anyways. I scroll quickly to find ingredients box and | thats it. Done... | micromacrofoot wrote: | At this level of optimization even the 0.25s spent | scrolling past a story is enough to make a difference... | this is like "competitive swimmers shaving off their body | hair" level SEO. | rovr138 wrote: | ...How do you follow the recipe? Or are we talking simple | recipes where the steps are simple? | technothrasher wrote: | For me, at least, I typically don't follow the recipe. | Very rarely am I looking for cooking instruction. I'm | familiar enough with most typical cooking techniques that | ingredient list and proportions, plus sometimes a quick | glance at the steps, is all I need to get the job done. | I'm usually modifying the ingredients on the fly as I | cook the dish anyway. | | When I _am_ looking for cooking instruction, I find my | existing library of trusted cookbooks to have a much | better signal to noise ratio than Googled recipes sites | on the web. | sseagull wrote: | I wish there were some "intermediate" websites for | cooking. There seems to be a missing middle, where I | don't know exactly to do, but know enough basics to only | meed a little bit of direction. | | Ie, not step by step, but more general. Let me improvise, | but still guide me. | heliodor wrote: | A better measure as to whether the user found what they | were looking for would be if Google checked if the user | continues browsing through subsequent search results or | not. | hedgewitch wrote: | Yes. I worked at a site that had an SEO-obsessed boss and | basically the keywords, placement of keywords, formatting | of the page, everything...all affected SEO. | | However, that all likely paled in comparison to him gaming | the system by paying to host separate sites that linked | back to his in an effort to boost legitimacy during the | times when SEO was a make or break thing. | password1 wrote: | That only covers backlinks and authority, it's just one | piece of the puzzle. Ironically, that's called a "black- | hat" way of obtaining backlinks and authority. The | "white-hat" way is to go to legit websites and purchase | links, literally pay them to link your website. This is a | great example of what's considered "ethical" in SEO | seanw444 wrote: | The more I read about SEO, the more dystopian it sounds. | | "Please, I'll write whatever you want. Just list me!" | allochthon wrote: | It's definitely an arms race. Sort of like tax avoidance. | As long as you have search engines ordering results, I | guess you'll have people who seek to game the results. | The question for me is whether what Google does can be | improved upon. I think we can do much better. | throw8383833jj wrote: | And as a result google search in general has been going | downhill for the last 5 years. It's getting so bad, that I've | openly been trying other search engines. Unfurtunately, | duckduckgo has the same problem. I'm keeping an eye out for | other search engines to do most of my searches. | Ansil849 wrote: | > The worst part is that it worked and they earned a lot of | money from it. | | This is the crux of the answer. The reason why recipe sites | are full of garbage? Because it is effective and profitable. | MadeThisToReply wrote: | This is also the reason why most food is full of garbage. | zhte415 wrote: | I also see similar WordPress themes appear on supposedly | independent sites with individual authors. Similar down to the | email sign-up popups. | | I get that some WP themes are more popular than the bazillion | available, but the consistency in look and feel between a | Malaysian immigrant to New York cooking curries I know aren't | that Malaysian and a stay at home mom in Ohio doing baking that | may have been passed down by a great aunt that tweaked a King | Arthur Flour recipe is often remarkable. | kixiQu wrote: | If you don't feel comfortable/confident getting into the | code/markup to customize, you're probably going to pick | something that looks "right" to you, which is then determined | by what you see. Doesn't seem super remarkable to me? | bluGill wrote: | I've learned to only click on allrecipes.com all the others | make it too hard to find the recipe I'm looking for. Please | join me in rewarding the one good site that works. (note, the | parent company was bought out this summer, the new owners may | screw things up, if so punish them like all the others where | you can't find the recipe) | jordansmith wrote: | They goal of a recipe website is to get ad revenue. | | Top tier ad networks won't accept your site if it's just | straight up recipes so you need to have the padding to get | approved. | | And it increases the amount of ads you can squeeze onto the | page for higher RPMs | adwww wrote: | Anyone know why this life story rubbish seems particularly acute | on recipe websites? | | I get the authors are doing it to boost Google rankings. But why | do I only see it on cooking blogs, and not on blogs about | cycling, DIY, programming, urbanism, whatever else I'm | searching.... | | Not many tech blogs start with a 4 page life history before | showing me the code snippet I'm looking for. | BoorishBears wrote: | think of how niche Rust is compared to Apple Pie | jenscow wrote: | Personally, I long for the Rust which I used to smell coming | from my grandma's kitchen when we used to visit on Sundays. | | Unfortunately, she's no longer with us. However, her Rust | continues to be a part of our lives. | | The Rust you buy from shops today just isn't the same. | figbert wrote: | You simply must try https://www.mysaffronapp.com | | It really successfully imports and de-clutters recipes from any | and all recipe sites I've thrown at it. Ben Awad, the programmer | behind Saffron, actually posted about their scraping technique on | HN to significant success: https://www.benawad.com/scraping- | recipe-websites/ (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23142220) | | Their UX is unmatched, they've got apps for iOS and Android in | addition to the web app itself. Undoubtedly one of my favorite | pieces of software. | brutal_chaos_ wrote: | I really like the concept so I gave your PWA a try. The first | recipe I tried[1] did not work as the app said it was unable to | find a recipe. The wording also went down past the bottom of the | screen, but I was unable to scroll to see the rest of the text. I | used the "Desktop site" option my browser has and then was able | to read the full message. | | [1]: https://www.food.com/recipe/homemade-curry-powder-38702 | laurentlbm wrote: | Thank you, I hate blog-post-type recipes! Do you plan on adding a | dark mode? | AwkwardPanda wrote: | Yes. That's in the roadmap. It'll be out soon on both android | and iOS. Then on web. | gedw99 wrote: | aa | mrsuprawsm wrote: | There's this Chrome add-on which also filters out the junk from | recipes: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/recipe- | filter/ahlc... | | It was featured in the MacOS Big Sur keynote being used with | Safari but sadly hasn't made it to the App Store yet. | gedw99 wrote: | nice !! | AlunAlun wrote: | I rarely post on HN, but I'm breaking my silence to say that this | app is amazing and I can see it changing my life! | shaneprrlt wrote: | Is this a real service, or just a portfolio project for your | resume? | AwkwardPanda wrote: | For now it's just a project. I learned Flutter and wanted to | build something with it. | | If enough people like it, I will make this a full-fledged | service. | | And focus on adding features like dark mode, server-sync, sign- | in, account management, export/import of recipes, sharing | screenshots of recipes like this one directly with your friends | https://i.redd.it/kk1goqsswo981.png | ROARosen wrote: | Really nice! I wonder how you get the parsed recipe to load | so fast, much faster than say outline.com (though they prob | have some more server-side stuff going on) | arthurgibson wrote: | I've been using this web app built by typesense as a demo, the | non-clutter is ideal: https://recipe-search.typesense.org/ | | prev: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25365397 | 3guk wrote: | It's such a shame that something like this has to exist and that | the creators have to resort to a fairly fixed playbook of SEO | techniques (like whole life story, recipe development etc etc). | | From my personal experience running a small tech tips site - it | seems that I constantly end up further down the rankings cause I | refuse to stuff each page with information that is not relevant. | kerneloftruth wrote: | Sincere best wishes and good luck with this -- thank you! Then, | please do the same for code sample sites. :) | AwkwardPanda wrote: | Thank you. | perakojotgenije wrote: | Shameless plug: you can save your favorite recipes to | gabngabn.com[1] and then have your recipes without clutter. | | [1] https://gabngabn.com/init/default/about | mothsonasloth wrote: | I would recommend https://based.cooking/ | | It started out as a joke but I have made a point of picking a | recipe out of it every week to try. | | The stone soup one is fun and a nice story - | https://based.cooking/almeirim-stone-soup.html | | You can also submit recipes on the Github repo - | https://github.com/lukesmithxyz/based.cooking | mstudio wrote: | Nicely done! I just ran into this "clutter" issue last week while | trying to read a recipe that kept auto-scrolling due to a pop-up | ad intermittently changing height at the top of the page. Some | quick feedback: it worked perfectly for a recipe at | "simplyrecipes.com" but was unable to find a recipe on the Food | Network, specifically: https://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/alton- | brown/creme-brulee... Keep up the good work! | AwkwardPanda wrote: | Thanks for the feedback.. Yes i am continuously "fixing" some | sites that have very specific issues. | | Should be fixed in a few days. | joshstrange wrote: | If you are looking for a way to tame your recipes look into | Paprika [0]. It can import/scrape recipes from any site and lets | you organize them and save them for later. You can use it to | build a shopping list, meal plan, track what you have on hand, | and more. I always make a point to mention it on posts related to | recipes since it's the best app I've found for recipes and worth | every penny (no subscriptions, 1-time purchase). You can also | export your recipes and share them with other people (last I | checked the export file was essentially a zip with JSON inside | and the pictures). | | [0] https://www.paprikaapp.com/ | yepthatsreality wrote: | Pro tip: if a recipe has a "Print" link on the recipe page, | clicking it will most likely give you a "Reader mode" version of | that page with the clutter removed. | domoritz wrote: | Could someone make a uBlock Origin filter list that removes the | stuff before the recipe? I'd subscribe to that. | datavirtue wrote: | Freaking nice! It feels sooo good to dump that SEO garbage into | dev/null. | vigneshv_psg wrote: | Slightly off topic, but a hack that i have found to read recipe | websites on my phone is to use the "Print Recipe" link that most | websites provide. It gets rid of most of the annoying ads, | autoplaying videos and unzoomable text (or text tapping on which | takes you to some random link because the page resized and you | accidentally tapped on an ad). | | The "Print Recipe" page usually contains just the recipe in a | format which is easy to read without any clutter. | mongol wrote: | My problem with recipes are - how do I know they are good? What | is the quality control? Perhaps someone just grabbed a computer | and wrote a bunch of steps down. | adammenges wrote: | I guess that's what ratings are for. Who knows if it'll taste | good to your taste buds, but if many others like it that could | be a good indication. | schnevets wrote: | In my experience, ratings are an inaccurate measurement. If you | want to learn how to cook Pad Thai, are your going to trust the | 5-star recipe with 30 responses, or the 3.9-star recipe with | 3,100 responses?? | | An active comment section tends to be a step above reviews, | because at least you can see if other people find the recipe | too spicy, or boring, or an exciting base for other | ingredients. And no, 2 comments that say "I loved this recipe!" | and "Thanks!" isn't sufficient. This is usually how you can | tell a recipe on an aggregate of authors like FoodNetwork, | AllRecipes, or NYTimes is legit. | | In my opinion, one step above an active comments section is | following individual recipe writers that you jive with. An | individual writer will usually have a measurement of success | that you can agree with (health-conscious, budget-friendly, | unique flavors, wide appeal), so you can understand their | motivation better. Also, they have some credibility on the | line. When you find writers that you agree with, you may even | find their "filler" text to have some substance (another reason | a "poseur" would feel obliged to include vapid copy before | their recipe). | pfranz wrote: | Honestly, I tend to rely on the "brand" of where I'm getting | the recipe. Ratings are only useful if you trust the site to | have good ratings (either an active audience with similar taste | or editors filtering and publishing with similar taste). I | haven't seen it much, but I also worry about food safety for | random recipes. | adammenges wrote: | I'm curious how you wrote the logic for recipe detection? I've | know some others who've tried to solve this and like many pattern | recognition tasks it turns out to be harder than you'd think, but | not impossible of course. Just curious how you did it. | JonathanBuchh wrote: | It would be amazing if there was something that would convert | recipes to the format used on Cooking For Engineers. It's so | intuitive and easy to read. I never want to look at steps to make | a recipe again. | | Scroll to the bottom to see what I'm talking about: | http://www.cookingforengineers.com/recipe/108/Banana-Nut-Bre... | duckmysick wrote: | Modernist Cuisine has recipes with a similar format. They also | have an ingredient list with baker's percentage using the | largest ingredient by weight as the baseline. | | Example (second image) | https://modernistcuisine.com/recipes/pressure-cooked-vegetab... | yummypaint wrote: | This is a great way to represent recipes! It looks like it | would also allow more info to be fit on a notecard compared to | just text | GrumpyNl wrote: | Great thing about those recipes its not only the layout, it has | the volumes in grams. | midasuni wrote: | How on Earth would you measure volume in grams? | rembicilious wrote: | Easy! water 150ml = water 150g /pedantry | | I think the op means it's nice that the ingredients are | given by weight because it is more accurate than volume. | 6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: | The job isn't over until we have gantt charts! | bloopernova wrote: | Specifically Gantt charts created from Org-mode inside Emacs | :) | dicroce wrote: | Damn, that is awesome. We need an AI to convert text | instructions into this format. | cutoff wrote: | Thanks for sharing. I made digital recipe viewers to replace | the old binders in our restaurants' kitchens. They're old iPad | minis on Mosyle's free MDM plan. I made an HTML/CSS website | hosted on Netlify/GitHub, created a home screen shortcut on the | iPad using a web clip, and hide all other iOS apps so that they | can only launch the recipe viewer. | | Everyone thinks I made an "app" because it launches in full | screen thanks to the MDM. One of our kitchens doesn't have Wi- | Fi, but once the recipe viewer is launched, it doesn't need | connection anymore since it's a single HTML page and the | refresh button is hidden. | | The recipes on my "app" use HTML tables fairly similar to the | tables on the link you shared. I didn't know HTML tables could | be formatted like they are on cookingforengineers. | stuartbman wrote: | I use CookBook which scans websites, and OCRs cookbooks with | good success! I have all my regular recipes on there now | | https://thecookbookapp.com/ | mrestko wrote: | Looks cool but did a very poor job of importing the first | recipe I tried. | Larrikin wrote: | I use Paprika which doesn't ever seem to have problems for | me. They offer a significant sale every year for | Thanksgiving. | eklbt wrote: | I'm a paprika user as well. Recently found "Mela" on the | App Store. Not as many features(yet) but the UI is so | much better than Paprika. | Larrikin wrote: | I'd like an alternative to Paprika that is updated more | often, but the lack of Android app makes Mela an | immediate non starter | mattschkolnick wrote: | I think you'd like Pepper (www.peppertheapp.com/) | mattschkolnick wrote: | Maybe try Pepper (https://www.peppertheapp.com/) | mdaniel wrote: | For those similarly unable to find the pricing, it's hidden | under a link on the Sign Up page: | https://help.thecookbookapp.com/hc/en- | gb/articles/3600025945... | | Currently, some different money for recipes as a service, and | the weird price of $41 for a "lifetime" subscription | | It will interest this audience that they have a public | roadmap, too: https://roadmap.thecookbookapp.com/cookbook | rm_-rf_slash wrote: | Still a lot of text to get up and go, even if the context can | be helpful. | | Personally I am a fan of the Food Network recipes online, | especially Alton Brown's. Straight to the point with no fluff, | and maybe a Good Eats segment if you're lucky. | morsch wrote: | There's a Recipe Card button in the top right; doesn't get | more compact than that. Though I think I'd struggle cooking | an unfamiliar recipe using only the card, like you said, the | context is helpful (and so are some photos, I might add). | djhn wrote: | That is amazing. How is this not famous yet? Its even social | media friendly! | badwolf wrote: | Oh! I love this recipe card style - Thanks for that! | fouc wrote: | You should link to the "recipe card" mode to show it better: | http://www.cookingforengineers.com/recipe/108/Banana-Nut-Bre... | artursapek wrote: | That is very good dataviz | JonathanBuchh wrote: | It looks like my window to edit my comment is over, but I | would have linked to the recipe view if I had know about it. | Thanks! | mdaniel wrote: | It actually seems to mix visual metaphors though, since "Butter | and flour a loaf pan" and "Preheat oven" are temporally top-to- | bottom, until it gets to the ingredients, when it switches to | (depending on how one interprets it) temporally left-to-right | or a dependency tree, but without any visual indication that | change has happened | | I would actually expect the whole process could be laid out in | graphviz since all of those are dependencies of the ultimate | outcome (heh, "enjoy"). I originally thought it may be a DAG, | but I can recall a few recipes that explicitly have a looping | step in them | JackFr wrote: | Honestly it's cute and clever, but not especially useful. I | find it doesn't really add anything and is clever fir it's | own sake. | | I know tastes differ, but personally I think it's terrible. | newfonewhodis wrote: | The fact that this app is stealing content (that mostly makes | money by ads) and monetizing it with ads is horrible. Right up | the entitlement-alley of HN. | shoulderfake wrote: | Good, those sites don't deserve money. | josephwegner wrote: | See otrahuevada's top-level comment. The life story included | in most recipes is not some blogger's attempt to spam you or | sell you something. It's a copyright requirement - the only | way they can protect their content. | Abrownn wrote: | They've been mass-spamming this on Reddit using multiple | accounts and sockpuppeting to promote it too. They also | promoted this in a Show-HN 5 days ago as well and it flopped: | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29733982 | natch wrote: | I take it most of these recipes are hosted on low effort spam | sites that stole the content in the first place. Are they also | entitled to your righteous defense? | drewbeck wrote: | That's a very convenient assumption! "People who blog recipes | are probably crappy anyway, so I'm morally clean" isn't a | successful ethical system. | natch wrote: | But I wasn't sweeping up all recipe blogs, only those that | are festooned with obnoxious ads. As to moral cleanliness | (wow) it matters what use the recipe will be put to. If I | just want to cook something, it's fair use. If I am setting | out to scrape massively and create my own spammy site, | that's not cool obviously. Please consider more angles | here. | PolandKid wrote: | We're considering the angle of an app whose sole purpose | is to capture the valuable IP of an author and remove | their ability to monetize it. | | It's not like they're paying them via some publisher | program, just pure scraping and re-organizing. | natch wrote: | You may be right, if the sites truly own original content | that is then being displayed in the app. It seems that is | often not the case though. | pb7 wrote: | How is this any different than running an ad blocker or using | Reader Mode in Safari, for example? | newfonewhodis wrote: | Ad blockers (the good ones) don't make money (other than by | donations). | knowfilter wrote: | > Right up the entitlement-alley of HN | | What? HN doesn't encourage its users to bypass ad- and | subscription-supported content. | | Oh wait, it does. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989 | pxtail wrote: | I agree, I think it's unethical and also wrong when looking | from the angle of supporting (or at least not damaging) smaller | websites owners and Internet where they are creating and | maintaining own websites. Unfortunately open nature of non- | walled internet makes it easy target for such predatory | disgusting practices like this app is promoting. | wombat-man wrote: | I've given up and just try to find good cook books. I can't deal | with internet recipes anymore. cool idea though! | tonymet wrote: | are you planning to index the recipes ? there are a couple other | recipe transform apps out there but it's the indexing that will | distinguish you . | soamv wrote: | For me, the context and reasoning behind why the recipe does what | it does is much more important than the recipe itself; that makes | such apps counterproductive. | | I can imagine that "just the recipe" is useful for very novice | cooks, but most of the time it's much better to learn the | patterns and techniques than to follow the precise recipe. You'll | be much more prepared that way when things don't go to plan, or | when you're missing a few ingredients. | | And this may be unpopular here, but I often enjoy the "life | story" too: for me, many of the joys of cooking are in the | connections made to other people. And if the recipe writer wants | to build a connection with the cook because they poured so much | effort into the recipe, I'm open to that -- and whatever it may | bring to the actual cooking. | | (Maybe I should make a "just the code" browser extension for | Github that deletes README files ;) ) | jagged-chisel wrote: | The common complaint is about the unnecessary prose around the | author's life history and other fluff that's useless to the | goal of producing the food item. IME, seldom do those sites | actually contain useful information about cooking practices in | addition to the fluff. | soamv wrote: | It's not fluff to me -- it's human connection. Why we cook | the way we do is deeply linked to our history and our "life | stories". | datavirtue wrote: | It's not human connection. It is SEO fluff. Made up | garbage. | butwhywhyoh wrote: | If README files were: | | 1. Full of tangential life-story BS | | 2. Placed far above the content I went to the repo for | | 3. Filled with advertisements | | I would love your browser extension. | | Also, you claim the story is "much more important" than the | recipe itself. So then I guess you would enjoy these recipes | pretty much equally if they completely removed the ingredients | of what they actually cooked? It's so much less important, | after all. | post_break wrote: | How about only the stories from recipes, no recipe. Would be an | ironic coffee table book. | otrahuevada wrote: | According to https://copyrightalliance.org/are-recipes-cookbooks- | protecte...: Recipes can be protected under | copyright law if they are accompanied by "substantial literary | expression." This expression can be an explanation or detailed | directions, which is likely why food and recipe bloggers often | share stories and personal anecdotes alongside a recipe's | ingredients. | | So besides SEO, there's this thing where the recipe itself is | basically defenseless against someone stealing it and calling it | theirs but the sum of the fluff around it plus the recipe on the | other hand can be copyrighted and enjoys all the protections | afforded to these kinds of things. So, if say, Jamie Oliver likes | your recipe and puts it in a book passing it as his, you can now | legally tell him to stop doing that because of said fluff. | alisonkisk wrote: | hackcasual wrote: | I don't think that's the case. He'd only get in trouble if he | reproduced the "substantial literary expression." The actual | list of ingredients and step-by-step procedure aren't | copyrightable. | morsch wrote: | However (from your source), Even if the | description of the recipe is sufficiently creative and | copyrightable, the copyright will not cover the recipe's | ingredient list, the underlying process for making the dish, or | the resulting dish itself, which are all facts. It will only | protect the expression of those facts. That means that someone | can express the recipe in a different way -- with different | expression -- and not infringe the recipe creator's copyright. | | So they can still put your recipe in a Jamie Oliver cookbook, | they just have to put it in their own words as opposed to copy | pasting it verbatim. | tlhunter wrote: | Is that PWA button fair to use? Been looking for something like | that which matches the ubiquitous Android and iOS buttons. | me_me_mu_mu wrote: | One trick you can do is just to Print the recipe, and you get all | ads removed in a nice clean view. Almost all the recipe sites I | use have a Print button somewhere on the page. | | You could make an extension that literally calls Print on the | page, and turn it into a PDF view from which you can save it. | Your recipes could get stored locally or something, so you always | have the website URL + clean recipe view stored. | | That way you support the site, and you get your recipes without | destroying your eyes. | hagope wrote: | Would be cool if you could enter Yotube URL and you parse out the | recipe from the audio/video. | johnwatson11218 wrote: | I have wanted to build something like this for consuming news | sites, especially when my ad blocker has to be disabled. But | thinking more long term ... what about a ML project that can look | at many recipes and do a kind of PCA, figure out the essence of a | pound cake for example and use actual data to show the main | variations as clusters in a high dimensional state space. Or even | try to reduce Thai or Mexican cooking to certain prototypical | dishes and have versions at different skill levels for the | aspiring home chef. | Jonovono wrote: | Awesome, i'm going to add this to my PWA browser: | https://apps.apple.com/ca/app/wapps-private-minimal-browser/... | sct202 wrote: | For people who don't want to install an app, most recipe websites | have a "Jump/Skip to Recipe" link at the top under the header and | sometimes it's mixed up in between the fb/twitter share buttons. | You still get hit with modals and videos but at least it's less. | nucleogenesis wrote: | Some blogs do the extra stuff right. Sally's Baking Addiction's | preceding blog is often invaluable with tips about timing, | temperatures, possible places things can go wrong, etc. | | It has the floating "skip to recipe" button which is handy when | you come back to a familiar recipe for some details. | | The clutter isn't the problem as much as the content quality is | most often for me. | adammenges wrote: | Feature request: Add in the iOS app safari extension thing so you | when you browse to `www.allrecipes.com` or similar it opens in | your app. | bearjaws wrote: | I just happened to be looking into a shakshuka recipe and as per | usual every website is 90% life story, background, history of the | mesopotamia era... | | This worked perfectly and will make shopping a bit easier. | Example below. | | https://onlyrecipe.app/?url=https://www.loveandlemons.com/sh... | shortformblog wrote: | This is theft that gets around a copyright loophole. Don't steal | recipes. | pjerem wrote: | It's complicated. | | Where is the limit ? | | For me it's just a web browser optimized for recipe websites. | It's basic scrapping. Google does it, why can't I do it ? | | Are "reader mode" browser extensions theft ? Are ad blockers | theft ? | | Is using Lynx as a web browser theft ? | | If your business depends on your content never being scraped, | you are screwed. | nybble41 wrote: | It's not that complicated. Copyright was simply never | intended to apply to recipes. The fact that there is nothing | copyrightable about a mere list of ingredients and basic | preparation instructions without any creative elements is not | in any sense a "loophole". | pjerem wrote: | Also that. | short12 wrote: | There is no stealing when it comes to recipes. There is no | loophole it's a very special feature of copyright. One of the | few sane ones | darkstar999 wrote: | Copy Me That does this and more, if anyone is interested in | comparing. It doesn't have a polished UI but it's very useful for | me. https://www.copymethat.com/ | kwerk wrote: | My wife and I are heavy users of CMT. Especially the ability to | add recipes to a specific day and create a unified shopping | list sorted by type (produce, spices, etc). | | I do wish there was a more modern multi-platform alternative. | CPM recently stopped updating their iOS app so we can't use | with recent iOS. | troyvit wrote: | I have to admit that recipes are valuable enough to me that I'm | OK with the crap at the top. It's annoying, but it's an endearing | kind of annoyance. The way I see it, they're providing a service | and if they want to do it in this stupid way I'll go along with | it, especially since the content isn't exactly horrible, it's | just silly and inane and somehow adds to the whole cooking | experience. | | Sometimes the stuff I'm cooking actually turns out differently | because of all the mad scrolling I do trying to find the next | ingredient to add while my sauce pan is boiling over or whatever. | Kindof fun. | | Last, recipe books are a great way to get around this crap, and | then you're actually paying for the knowledge you use. | infini8 wrote: | Love the standardised layout. Another step towards simplified | digital consumption this year. | | Reminds of Tandoor: https://github.com/TandoorRecipes/recipes | y04nn wrote: | It is interesting that there is not yet a Wikipedia of recipes. | It would be the perfect use case for a wiki. People would love to | share their recipes variations and improve/fix existing one. | | There would be a standard layout, introduction paragraph would | explain the history of a recipe and link to other similar | recipes. That would be interesting to read. | | And there would be an endless number of recipes. For-profit sites | are full of ads and SEO optimized to improve user | retention/engagement, which make them annoying to use. A wiki | could be print friendly and distraction-free, which would be | perfect for a recipe. | idontwantthis wrote: | I don't think it would make sense to let everyone edit recipes. | One person's "improvement" is another person's "travesty". Try | adding garlic to carbonara and see what your insult:compliment | ratio is. | elcapitan wrote: | Not a Wikipedia, but in Germany we have chefkoch.de, which is a | commercial user content website which uses a sort of | standardized format. As others have pointed out, recipes are | not meant to be as canonical as dictionary entries. | | Here's an example page of one recipe: | https://www.chefkoch.de/rezepte/343371118405722/American-App... | layer8 wrote: | The edit wars would be horrible. Everyone has their own recipe | for any given food item, plus endless variations. | y04nn wrote: | I'm not sure, is there not one standard, most accepted recipe | and then N variations? Also, I would not except edits to be | on ingredients, but mostly on the method. If a user would | want to modify ingredients, he could create a his "regional" | variation. | | But I see the wiki more as a reference book on recipes and | their well known variations (which is mostly what I'm looking | for when searching for a recipe) than a sharing | platform/pseudo social network. | lazyasciiart wrote: | > is there not one standard, most accepted recipe and then | N variations? | | No. In many cases there are N variations that all claim to | be the standard. | kuschku wrote: | Make it a namespaced wiki. Every user can only create and | edit recipes in their own namespace, or the namespace of | groups they're a member of (like GitHub treats repos for | example). | | Then you could, as user, follow users you like. Each recipe | would be in structured format, but could also have rich text | introductions / explanations, if users wish to add such | information. | | You could even let users add custom styling to their own | namespaces/subwikis, as tumblr, myspace, wordpress, youtube | and reddit used to do / still do (with a way to turn this off | as user, if you just want the plain content) | diogenesjunior wrote: | then it comes down to just building your own reddit style | site centered around food recipes | nybble41 wrote: | > (like GitHub treats repos for example) | | This is the way. Publicly read-only repos with easy access | to forking and pull requests are far superior to wiki pages | with no access controls. Compared to current GitHub you | would mainly need to add support for structured data, | ratings, and indexing. | patrickserrano wrote: | Mela on iOS[0] is a very similar app with some great polish. One | nice thing with Mela at least, is if you use the built-in browser | it can get around some paywalls like NYT Cooking. It also | integrates with the Reminders app for grocery shopping lists. | | [0]: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/mela-recipe- | manager/id15484660... | lifeisstillgood wrote: | Reading good food writers is the whole point of having good food | writers. They can build an evocative sense of the time and place, | the sense of why a recipie is the way it is. Its sometimes a | personal journey, its sometimes escapism. And yes it changes - | Elizabeth David sounds outrageously prissy to modern ears - but | food has always been part of human culture, and as we evolve so | will our food. Its fine to read the wikipedia "plot" section if | you want a shortcut. But its nice to know you can just read the | whole book. Slowly. | brailsafe wrote: | Save it for a read that someone would seek out deliberately for | the long-form content though. This wouldn't exist if people | loved the long rambling intros about how ever since the 1400s | Spaghetti Bolognese has captured the hearts and minds of | italians and their diaspora. blah blah blah | lifeisstillgood wrote: | I did say good food writers :-) | robotpony wrote: | I like the Serious Eats format, where they provide both a brief | recipe and an optional backstory. Some of the research and | reasoning is interesting for certain recipes (like pressure | cooker French Onion soup), though when actually cooking the | story makes finding the details a bit more work. | notyourwork wrote: | The use case sounds great but why does everything need an app | anymore? Everything doesn't need an app, thats why we have the | web. | | /end rant. | fancy_pantser wrote: | In the same vein, I made the Recipe Filter extension for | browsers: | | Chrome: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/recipe- | filter/ahlc... | | FF: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/recipe- | filter... | | Source code (there's Safari in there if you don't mind building | it yourself): https://github.com/sean-public/RecipeFilter | | I was spurred into action by a comment here on HN back in 2017: | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15755378 | | It got demoed to the world during WWDC 2020, which was really | neat: https://youtu.be/Kwh2y6VkzoA | julianlam wrote: | Thanks for creating this! I use this plugin all the time. | | I often don't remember it's running, but then I invariably land | on a recipe site, and then the Recipe Filter modal pops up, and | instantly brings a smile to my face. | john-tells-all wrote: | This extension is wonderful! Using it for a few months. It's | refreshing to go to a recipe page and actually see the recipe | :-D | strig wrote: | Yo thanks for making that extension! I've actually recommended | it to a bunch of friends and family | adammenges wrote: | Is it not on the safari 'store' because of the $99 a year? | mhh__ wrote: | See also https://based.cooking/ | andai wrote: | Discussed previously (446 comments): | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26419717 | megraf wrote: | This is my suggestion as well. I've used it for dozens of | meals. | mvexel wrote: | As some other commenters have said -- often, the "print" function | will give you a more concise / readable version. I keep a recipe | folder with PDFs "printed" from recipe web sites. | | It would be nice if this app would support printing. It does a | great job reducing this recipe page to its essentials: | https://onlyrecipe.app/?url=https://cookieandkate.com/best-v... | but when I try to print, the preview shows a blank page (Safari | on Mac). | brewtide wrote: | I believe this is by design. If you subscribe to their | "premium" model, it lets you print as usual. | | Honestly, not a terrible way to make money, while offering a | free service. | mattschkolnick wrote: | Pepper (https://www.peppertheapp.com/) is the easiest place to | find recipes with no clutter or ads, and also share | recipes/dishes with fam & friends in a standardized view. It's a | social network for cooking. A lot of people and food creators | have joined recently, there's been some great content. | danychok wrote: | Ben Awad developed a great little app which addresses this | problem also. I believe he developed it with his mother - who is | a the designer. https://www.mysaffronapp.com/ | SAI_Peregrinus wrote: | I've been using that app for a while. It's pretty nice. | AwkwardPanda wrote: | It can get frustrating skimming through text walls just to find | the recipe on blogs/sites. Authors do it to get high ranking on | Google. You can use OnlyRecipe.app to extract the recipe | information. It works on almost all sites/blogs which follow a | recipe standard when they post. | | You can also save it to your phone directly using the app. Scan | recipe QR code using your phone camera and voila. | | Android: | https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mysticpeak... | | iOS: https://apps.apple.com/app/id1602130759 | | Short 50-seconds video on how recipe camera scanner works | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziSNwjv9PXo | | Currently working on a feature that lets you share recipe "image | cards" with your friends.. Something like this | https://i.redd.it/kk1goqsswo981.png | | Let me know if you'd use that feature | logifail wrote: | > Authors do it to get high ranking on Google [..] | | I believe it's more likely that it's to do with whether you can | or can't copyright a listing of ingredients and method. | | If you add enough of a story, you definitely can. | weird-eye-issue wrote: | No. As somebody who pays recipe creators and publishes | recipes this is just wrong. | | The recipe is separate from the text that accompanies it | logifail wrote: | > The recipe is separate from the text that accompanies it | | Separate in a copyright sense? | | A web scraping bot won't necessarily make that distinction. | weird-eye-issue wrote: | Yes in a copyright sense. Recipes are also separate in a | technical sense too because for SEO purposes publishers | use markup to help crawlers understand recipes. | zffr wrote: | Could be wrong, but I thought it was so that you spend more | time on their website and have a chance to see more ads | candiddevmike wrote: | The irony of having an ad supported app to scrape recipes from | ad supported websites. I'm not sure how I feel about this. | spacemadness wrote: | Technology companies selling a solution to a problem created | by technology companies instead of coming together to fix the | original problem. This is the world we live in. | massysett wrote: | The original problem is that people want to Google for | recipes and not pay for them. | | As a cook there are several solutions to this: | | 1) pay for a subscription from vendors who are in business | to sell recipes, such as Cooks Illustrated | | 2) get recipes from companies that provide them as a | complement because they sell something else, generally | food-related products. For instance King Arthur Baking has | good recipes, and many are available from food companies | such as Tyson, Kraft, and Betty Crocker. Grocers also have | many recipes. These sources aren't interested in spamming | users with ads because the website is one big ad. | | 3) Buy cookbooks, they're not expensive. | | But yeah as long as people want to crank search terms into | Google and get "free" stuff, it's going to be ad-infested, | and then other ad-seeking folks are going to run their | shakedown operations just like the adblock extensions | charge money to advertisers to let their ads through. | PolandKid wrote: | @AwkwardPanda | | And how does a site opt out of your scraping? Do you have a | unique user-agent when you scrape? A set of IPs? | cryptonym wrote: | Spending time writing user-hostile recipe for SEO purpose, then | someone else building an app trying to undo this and finally | the end user spending time installing app, scanning QR code and | going back to the original user-hostile website because the app | didn't get milk quantity. Now I'm too tired to cook anything. | AwkwardPanda wrote: | Hey can you share the url.. I will fix small issues like | this.. | cryptonym wrote: | It's visible on your video ;-) | [deleted] | shortformblog wrote: | FYI, you are about to get eaten alive by foodies. | https://www.eater.com/22307633/why-are-people-mad-at-recipea... | butwhywhyoh wrote: | Wrong, "foodies" are about to get eaten alive by people sick | of their shit. The only people complaining loudly about that | were the people propagating the BS. I certainly don't see any | complaints from users mentioned in that article. | | If your business model relies on people scrolling past a | bunch of filler to get to a short list of instructions, be | prepared for people to get tired of it and solve the problem. | fleddr wrote: | Agree. Their business model isn't a business model. A | recipe to the audience we're talking about is | worth...nothing. So you're building a business model on | something that has near-zero value. And try to still get | some value out of it regardless: | | "Essays meanwhile allow bloggers to make money off search | engine optimization (or SEO, which scans the essays for | keywords and relevant search terms) and ads allow the blog | to remain free for readers." | | So here they openly admit to the hack. This entire fraud is | one app or google algorithm tweak away from being | annihilated. | | It should be seen as a side job with expectation zero, any | money is a bonus, not something you do to "feed your | family". I mean, read this rant: | | https://www.eater.com/2020/3/31/21201374/why-are-free- | online... | | Delusional. | floren wrote: | They're full of shit, though. Crack open the Better Homes & | Gardens cookbook and find a cookie recipe, then search for | the same recipe name online. You're going to find 1000 word | essays about Dear Meema's Secret Snickerdoodle recipe... | followed by the same damn recipe as the BH&G cookbook. | shortformblog wrote: | This is an anecdote which clearly does not cover all cases. | I think the presumption is that cooking sites are nothing | but spam, but the fact that so many high-profile cooks | complained about this perviously shows that this is not the | case and that their livelihoods would be affected by apps | like these. | mattschkolnick wrote: | check out Pepper https://www.peppertheapp.com/ | floren wrote: | Matt, creating an HN account purely to pitch your product | like this in an only-slightly-related thread ain't cool. | | https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=mattschkolnick | | https://www.peppertheapp.com/about | gitgud wrote: | Interesting that [1] the website in question has been removed | and replaced with an apology. | | [1] https://recipeasly.com/ | mfashby wrote: | similar discussion recently | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29161585 | | similar open-source program plainoldrecipe | https://plainoldrecipe.com/ | Gualdrapo wrote: | https://plainoldrecipe.com/recipe returns a HTTP 400 error, | https://plainoldrecipe.com/ does not. | mfashby wrote: | Ah thanks, fixed | harel wrote: | Every time I open a recipe online these days, I sigh so loudly | out of desperation of what I need to scroll through to get to the | actual recipe. And that is before I do the cookie dance. | | I guess you guys heard my sighs!!! Amazing. Thanks! | notreallyserio wrote: | Feedback: visiting recipe pages, such as the one bearjaws shared, | using Safari[0] can result in you being "trapped" -- the back | button doesn't have the desired effect. It looks like onlyrecipe | may be doing something to the web history. | | 0: Safari on iOS 15.2, iPhone 8. | AwkwardPanda wrote: | Hey, that's surprisingly very annoying. Thanks a lot for that | feedback. I'll fix it ASAP. | | In addition, I would encourage you to try the iOS app. Way | better experience. | | Because this is a app-first service. Web was built later. | mtm7 wrote: | > What is the reason that every single recipe site, without fail, | follows this same horrible pattern? I.e. the twenty paragraph | "When I was a child growing up in Atlanta..." followed by a | crappy in-house video player followed by, finally, the actual | recipe? | | I lived with a food blogger for six years and might be able to | provide some more perspective for these types of comments (beyond | just SEO). | | First, there's actually an audience that _is_ interested in this | type of content. Some are repeat readers who want to follow food | bloggers' lives, similar to how HN readers might follow a | streamer on Twitch. It's a much more rewarding journey if people | don't just see you as a recipe database and bounce, but actually | engage with you and follow you over time. | | Second, a lot of food bloggers simply enjoy writing and see their | blogs as a way to express themselves. Some of them write these | stories for their family and friends and didn't think they'd be | at the top of Google. | | Third, it takes a ton of effort to write a single recipe. I can't | speak for others, but hers involved multiple days of | planning/cooking/shooting, remaking it several times so she knew | it'd be consistent for the reader, planning/shooting/editing the | photos, and even scrapping recipes altogether if they didn't work | out. She also had to deal with the business end of things (like | getting a lawyer, accountant, social media manager, and managing | contracts with sponsors). Her attitude was basically, "if I'm | doing all of these things to provide someone with a free recipe, | they can scroll past my story if they don't feel like reading | it". (That being said, her site was pretty minimalist compared to | other food blogs - she didn't run ads.) | | FWIW, I don't have a problem with onlyrecipe.app, I just wanted | to share this because I'd be interested if I didn't know already. | slingnow wrote: | I have yet to meet or read about a single person who has ever | said "I really enjoy scrolling through twenty paragraphs of | backstory and embedded auto-play videos and advertisements | while I browse for recipes." | | So while I'm sure there exist bloggers who put care into these | things, a tiny minority of people seem to find any value there. | In fact it now seems that so many people are aggravated by this | style that an app to remove them all has been developed. | [deleted] | rbone80 wrote: | Also the story is one thing but the painfully verbose | explanation of each ingredient is ridiculous. I really don't | want or need an explanation of flour, sugar, salt, etc... | That's the content that really makes me annoyed at a blog | recipe. | | Like many others I have mostly abandoned blogs in favor of | tried and true cookbooks. | SllX wrote: | As with all things written: the writing is there for the | audience who will read it, not the people that will not. | lazyasciiart wrote: | I'm not sure that 'people you haven't met' is necessarily a | tiny minority. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-01-04 23:00 UTC)