u/PlasmaHeat

I'm looking to purchase my first weather station and would like to build an app for personal use that ingests the data and manipulates it for display on some sort of custom dashboard.

Does anyone have recommendations for which weather station would be the most developer friendly while also providing accurate results at a fairly reasonable cost?

Ecowitt and Tempest both seem to be fairly well-regarded on this subreddit from the research I've done. Davis seems interesting, but a bit more than I'd like to spend while initially getting into the hobby. The biggest difference from Ecowitt and Tempest from a developer standpoint seems to be how they return data, but I'm not sure if there's anything else that I'm not taking into consideration.

Thanks in advance!

Just as a preface - this post isn't anti-Bunpro or anything like that. Bunpro is actually my most-used study tool. This has just been a point of confusion for me.

The question is in the title, but I'll try to provide a bit of additional context.

In language learning circles, using native-language-to-target-language translations is typically seen as a subpar method for language acquisition in the long run. This opinion is especially widespread in Japanese learning circles, primarily because Japanese is so different from English and a lot of translations aren't 1:1.

My confusion lies in the following: Is Bunpro not considered English to Japanese in the traditional sense?

I know it has cloze elements, but I guess I'm just trying to figure out where the line is drawn between EN -> JP and Bunpro-style cloze fill-in-the-blank systems.

Does Bunpro not count as EN -> JP because it's also providing full Japanese sentences that just have a single missing word? Is the idea that as long as you're reading the full Japanese sentence before filling in your answer, you're gaining additional value that a single-word EN -> JP flashcard wouldn't provide?

Thanks in advance, and please let me know if I can provide any additional clarity on my question.

I'm capping off my first-ever trip to NW Europe with four nights in Paris this fall. I've narrowed down my hotel search to two main areas, but I'm having trouble pulling the trigger on which neighborhood fits best.

The two locations I'm primarily considering are Montmartre and Place de la Nation.

---

Montmartre

• Pros: Gorgeous area, seems fairly unique in terms of vibes
• Cons: Slight concerns about potential noise given how touristy the area can be

Place de la Nation

• Pros: Seems much more local/residential, well-connected as far as transit goes, appears to be a pretty solid selection of cafes/bakeries/bistros/etc.
• Cons: Not quite as visually stunning as the Montmartre area

---

My biggest worry is probably street noise, particularly at night. I'm a light sleeper, so staying somewhere that turns into a loud party street or has heavy traffic all night is something I’d like to avoid if possible.

From the research I've done, it seems like neither option should be particularly loud, but that Place de la Nation probably edges out Montmartre as far as the quieter area goes. Was hoping to get some confirmation on how accurate this is, or if the difference is so negligible that it shouldn't really play into my decision-making process.

1. Do my pros and cons lists feel accurate based on your experience?
2. For a light sleeper spending 4 nights on a first visit, is the transit convenience and quieter residential feel of Nation worth trading away the visual beauty of the streets of Montmartre?

Thanks in advance for the advice!

I have my first ever UK trip coming up in October (Edinburgh -> York -> London, in case anyone is interested), and the only accommodations that I've yet to book are Edinburgh's. We'll be staying in Edinburgh for five days. The main holdup is that I'm struggling to decide where I actually want to stay.

The two locations I'm considering are:

• Staycity - West End (labeled as West End, but I believe it's technically part of the Fountainbridge area)
  • Pros: Cheaper, quieter(?), less touristy
  • Cons: Further out from from most of the stuff we'd like to do, less pretty
• Adagio Aparthotels - Royal Mile
  • Pros: Prettier, very centrally located
  • Cons: A bit more expensive, noisier, more touristy

Out of all these pros/cons, I think my biggest concern is noise. I'm not exactly the world's best sleeper, and I'm a bit concerned by the prospect of staying in a spot with tons of street noise.

From some of the reviews I've seen, the Adagio location may not be as noisy as I'm worried since it's not in the heart of the Royal Mile, although it's still located on the Royal Mile nonetheless.

Does anyone have any feedback on these two locations? Do my listed pros/cons seem pretty accurate? I'm open to other stays, of course, but these are the two that I've mainly narrowed it down to from the research I've done up until this point.

Thanks in advance!

I'm going to be heading to London for my first time this upcoming October and have been researching neighborhoods to stay in that are a nice mixture of affordability + convenience. I often see Bloomsbury recommended as a great central location to stay, but from the research I've done, it and its surrounding neighborhoods seem to be quite expensive. Soho seems like a decent option, although I've heard it can be quite noisy at night, which is something I'd prefer to avoid if possible.

Islington and Bankside seem to be the two options I keep coming back to. They're relatively affordable compared to many of the more typical neighborhoods, and they seem like decent enough areas?

Some of the main things I'm looking for are:

• Pretty streets/buildings
• Relative affordability
• Well-connected via public transportation options for when I want to go to more touristy areas
• Walkable distance to great pubs/taverns/cafes/bakeries/etc.

Between the two, Islington seems like it has the edge for more of a cozy, residential kind of vibe that also meets my needs. Is this accurate? Are there any other neighborhoods that I'm overlooking that do a better job of meeting my needs than Islington?

Thanks in advance!

Anyone have experience with both the Rosebank and Glenkinchie distillery tours? If so, which did you prefer?

I'm going to be heading to Edinburgh for my first time in October, and these seem to be two of the most frequently recommended distillery tours. I only plan on making one day trip to a distillery, so I'll need to pick between the two. Both seem like solid options, so I'm just curious if anyone has any strong opinions between one or the other.

Does anyone in here have experience booking with Icelandair using their Atmos Rewards points through Alaska's booking portal?

I'm wondering if there will be full seat selection where you can choose any seat in the plane and pay for preferred seating like usual, or if you have a restricted selection of seats available when booking with Atmos points through a partner airline (Alaska, in this case).

This is my first time ever booking a partner flight with points, and I'd just prefer to avoid booking the flight then finding out after the fact that I don't have access to the full seat map.

Thanks in advance!

Background:

I'm an American from the Pacific Northwest who's planning on making their first solo trip the first week of this upcoming October. The solo leg of the trip is going to be part of a larger 3-week NW Europe trip, the latter two weeks of which will be spent with my girlfriend once I meet up with her in Edinburgh.

For the solo leg, I'm planning on doing Ireland. There's two potential itineraries that I'm looking at, and they differ based on whether or not I'll be flying in four or seven days ahead of my girlfriend.

Possible itineraries:

• Option A (7-day itinerary):

  • Fly into Dublin, then spend 2-3 days recalibrating here and taking it easy
  • Catch a bus/train out to Galway and then spend 3-4 days here with at least one day trip out to the Cliffs of Moher and potentially other places
  • Return to Dublin either day-of or the night before my flight to Edinburgh. Potentially would fly out of Shannon instead, but it doesn't seem to make a huge difference time-wise or financially either way.

• Option B (4-day itinerary):

  • Fly into Belfast and then spend all four days here
  • Take day trips to Derry and Giant's Causeway

Concerns/questions for each itinerary:

• Option A (7-day itinerary):

  • Am I doing too little for 7 days?
  • With this much time, would I be better off renting a car from Dublin and doing a couple 1-night stops on my way to Galway, perhaps in Kilkenny or Killarney, etc.

• Option B (4-day itinerary)

  • Is four days too little? Should I even be considering this over Option A?

Misc.:

I'm open to any other general feedback that you all may have, although I think I'm fairly set on doing one of the two itineraries I've provided. Mainly, I'm just looking to see if there's anything glaringly wrong with one of them. I know it sounds painfully generic, but I'm interested in things like history, culture, castles, great scenery, food, beer, whiskey, etc.. The weather isn't too big of a concern for me for this time of year, given that I'm from the Pacific Northwest and am actually a pretty big fan of gloomy weather and rainy days.

I will be traveling with a suitcase, a carryon, and a backpack, so I will have all three of those with me on days that I'm switching hotels. I don't want to be a nuisance on public transit, so this would probably rule out places that require traveling to via small local buses, unless I end up taking the rental car route.

Thanks in advance, and please let me know if there's any additional info I can provide to help!

Context:

My girlfriend and I have been planning a 3-week trip this upcoming October to celebrate my 30th. Unfortunately, her time off request was partially denied, and she's "only" going to be able to be able to do two weeks.

The original plan was to fly into Edinburgh and then work our way down through York, London, and Paris over the course of a few weeks, spending 4-5 days per city. However, I think that reallocating our time and squeezing this route into two weeks should be doable at a pace we're comfortable with. This won't be our first international trip, nor will it be our first trip with multiple cities involved (we managed to somehow combine Chicago and NOLA into a single trip last year lol), but it will be our first Europe trip.

I've never gone on a solo trip before, and I'm thinking this could be a good opportunity to give it a shot since I was really hoping to do something a bit longer than just a couple weeks. My thought is that I'll fly out a week before her and then meet up with her in Edinburgh to begin our originally-planned itinerary.

Question:

Which of the following sound like better options for a first time solo traveler while also being relatively cohesive with the rest of the trip?

1. Ireland

• I'd fly into Dublin, likely spend 3-4 days here, then head up to somewhere in Northern Ireland for another few days before either catching a flight to Edinburgh or some kind of ferry-rail combo.

2. Scotland (director's cut)

• This option would still have me coming straight into Scotland. I'd probably find somewhere to stay besides Edinburgh; potentially somewhere in The Highlands.

3. Iceland

• I'll likely be flying Icelandair so I'll have a stopover in Reykjavik anyway, but the affordability doesn't excite me, and I'm unsure how enjoyable it would be as a solo traveler.

4. Voter's choice

• I'm open to anything else, even if it's not in NW Europe. I've lightly considered Prague, although the logistics and seamless integration with the rest of the trip would be a bit odd. We could flip the itinerary and start in Paris and end in Edinburgh, which would open up doing the solo week in France. Bonus points if the option has easy flights to it out of Reykjavik since that's likely where my layover will be.

My personal interests:

My primary interests are history, architecture, food, beer (and other local alcoholic beverages), museums, and scenery in general.

---

Looking forward to hearing what the more experienced European travelers in this subreddit recommend. Thanks in advance!

I've been thinking about upgrading from my Atmos Ascent to the Atmos Summit Infinite, but I had a couple questions I was hoping to get clarity on before doing so:

1. Is the points sharing that comes with the Summit Infinite available to everyone in your network, regardless of their Atmos Rewards account holder status? e.g. if I have the Summit Infinite and my gf has the Ascent, can she transfer her points to me?
2. Will I need to get the card completely new and in addition to my Ascent in order to hit the 100K sign-on bonus, or will the spend threshold effectively reset if I upgrade from and replace my Ascent?
3. Can you use Alaska Airline credits to pay for additional fees when booking with points? For example, the route I'm looking at is 70K points per ticket, and then another ~$450 on top of that. If I have $800 in credits on my Alaskan account, can I pay down that $450 with my credits?

I'm currently looking into potentially using my Atmos Rewards points on a PDX-LHR flight. While finding economy tickets is easy enough, finding premium economy tickets available through OneWorld partners (British Airways in this case, since they're the only carrier offering directs out of PDX) seems to be impossible. Business class seems to occasionally be available with points, but it's more than I'm looking to use/spend.

I've looked at other routes in the past, and for whatever reason, premium economy has just never been available for points.

Has anyone had any luck landing premium economy seats with points? Am I just doing something wrong?

I just purchased my first Bambino Plus and have made three lattes with it so far. While it seems impressive for home coffee, I have a few questions:

1. Is it normal that the portafilter should be extremely difficult to insert and remove? It goes in fairly easily without a basket, but with a basket inserted, I have to wrap my entire arm around the machine and whack the handle firmly to get it to dislodge. I'm wondering if I got sold an item that had a manufacturer defect or something, because it seems like there's no way this would be an intentional design choice.
2. Is it normal for the espresso buttons to produce a bit less than they're supposed to? I read that the single and double buttons should be pulling 30 and 60 ml of espresso, respectively, but they seem to be closer to 15 and 50 ml, even after pulling a blank shot.
3. Is it normal for grinds to make it up into the housing for the portafilter on the machine after pulling a shot? It's not an absurd amount of grinds or anything, but I've been having to wipe it out after every use.

Thanks in advance for the sanity check.

For context, I've been toying around with pour overs for a few years now. I usually use a single cup drip machine because it's just so convenient, but I do grind my own beans. Pour overs are more of a weekend thing for me when I have extra time in the mornings.

Now the thing that has always confused me is ratios. I see 1:12 or 1:15 often touted as the golden ratios, with some people preferring somewhere in between or just slightly more diluted. However, when I try using these ratios, the coffee comes out like absolute rocket fuel. Just way too strong to the point where I think the majority of casual coffee enjoyers would not like it at all. Definitely stronger than I've ever had at a cafe or diner. A more palatable cup of coffee seems to be as low as half of that ratio to a third of that ratio to me, and it doesn't come out watery.

I do prefer darker roasts, which means I'm usually using lower brew temps (~195 F) as well.

I just recently got a V60 kit that comes with a pre-measured spoon that's supposed to contain about 12 grams of grounds. Here's where I'm starting to wonder if I'm doing something wrong and somehow misunderstanding ratios:

The carafe that the V60 came with is intended for up to six cups. However, if I were to put six Hario-sized spoonfuls of grounds into the V60, I think it would be damn near filled up to the rim or even overflowing. Surely that's not right, right? A solid "pot" of coffee with the V60 for my girlfriend and I according to our tastes comes from dumping two Hario-sized spoonfuls of grounds into the V60 and then filling it up to the 6 cup line, which is ~720 ml.

I guess my question is: where could I be misunderstanding ratios? Is there a likely culprit for why my coffee comes out overwhelmingly strong when I do a 1:12 or 1:15 ratio? Or have I just grown up in some weird microcosm where everyone is brewing extremely weak coffee, coffee shops and diners included, and it's what my taste buds are accustomed to?

Edit: To clarify, I do typically use scales. I've only been playing around with the volumetric scoop that the V60 came with for like a week now, and figured the anecdote about how six scoops would nearly overfill it might be helpful context in determining what I'm doing wrong.

Hey everyone,

Just for some context, my girlfriend and I are in our late 20s (soon to be early 30s) and have been teetering back and forth between moving to Portland or Vancouver lately. The main thing spooking us about Portland is the higher utilities costs, along with my employer being in Washington so I'd be avoiding state income tax if we moved to Vancouver.

However, all the stuff we want to do is in Portland, so we're leaning towards it if we can manage to find the right place.

The most important things to us are:

• Being relatively near great spots to eat and drink
• A relatively quiet neighborhood (e.g. not right next to train tracks or a highway)
• A safe enough area to walk our golden retriever
• Neighborhood safety in general; preferably not somewhere with higher-than-average rates of property/violent crime

What neighborhoods fit the bill the most? Three we've identified are Sellwood, Woodstock, and St. Johns, although the proximity to the train tracks in parts of St. Johns potentially seems like a pain. It does seem to have the most rentals available, but they're on the pricier side.

Thanks in advance!

Does anyone know of any better options than Zillow for finding rentals in the Vancouver area? My hopes aren't super high, but figured it's at least worth asking.

We've had alerts set up on Zillow for properties that meet our criteria (allows pets, has AC, not over $3K/mo), but it seems like things matching that don't come on the market super frequently, so I thought I'd ask. I know finding a spot that allows pets and has AC is a bit of a unicorn in the PNW, but might as well try.

Context:

I just hit the milestone of $100K in my HYSA. The APY on it is currently 3.5% for everything up to $100K, and then 2% on everything beyond that.

I live in Oregon, which has a relatively high state income tax, so I'm being hit with that in addition to federal taxes on the interest that I gain on my HYSA.

I'm pushing 30 and not really looking to buy a house at the moment due to not wanting to drain my savings on a down payment just to end up spending more than I currently am on rent. My rent is about $2K/mo split between my gf and I, and I earn about $6.5K/mo before taxes.

I'm already contributing to a Roth IRA. My work doesn't have a 401(k) option, although it does come with a pension plan.

Staying somewhat liquid is fairly important to me. While $100K is more than enough for an emergency fund, I've been starting to prioritize travel a bit more and would like to have money to spend on things that bring me joy, so having some funds to dip into when needed (e.g. for a big trip) is nice for me.

Question:

What is the financially wise thing to do with my money at this point?

I've read a bit about money market accounts/treasury money market funds/treasury bills/etc., but am curious what a Boglehead's recommendation would be. I've followed Boglehead philosophy for self-managing my Roth IRA, and it's done me right so far.

Would I just be better off opening a brokerage account and investing it similarly to how I'm investing my Roth IRA (e.g. with a Boglehead-style portfolio)?