I take the point, but I think the author picked a poor analogy. Cooking even an excellent steak is actually not that hard. In fact, I'd argue that it's among the easiest things to master/make at a top level quality at home. Does it require some modicum of attention and understanding? Sure. But starting with a high quality cut, owning a meat-thermometer, and knowing about reverse searing is about all it takes to reliably and easily get a near perfect steak every time.
There are far, far better cooking examples out there.
I'm more of a coffee nerd than a steak aficionado but I've often made the comparison between those two. In both cases, the enthusiast considers their skill in making coffee/cooking steak to be a differentiator and they immerse themselves deeply into the process, skills, and tools. But for both coffee beans and steak the most important factor for a good end product is starting with high quality inputs. In other words, most of the work is being done by the farmers, the processors, and the quality of the raw stock (the cow or the coffee plant). Your job at the very end of that long value adding chain is to not ruin the hard work that others have put into it.
I'm not sure if this analogy holds up in the AI software metaphor that the author of the blog post is making.
Coffee is a good metaphor here too, because bad technique can ruin a good steak just as surely as good coffee. "knows how to use a meat thermometer and reverse sear" describes like 10% of the population or less, same with coffee - there are people who use a bad grinder and a not-regularly-cleaned Mr. Coffee with good beans and get gas station coffee, and there are people out there making solidly B+ class coffee using costco beans, a no name burr grinder, and a french press.
Edit for people who've never had good coffee:
"I don't like coffee. Can James Hoffmann change that?" <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-iNAyu-ejo" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-iNAyu-ejo
The funny part is steak is one of the easiest foods to cook without a thermometer
You don’t have to worry about undercooking like you do with most other meats and most steak cuts will be delicious anywhere from 11-130 (if you cook a filet to 130, it won’t be the best but it’ll still be good) and some can go even higher
It’s not like poultry where the range where it’s “good” is very small. A 170 chicken breast is almost inedible and 160 is not safe…
I agree with your broader point but the chicken food safety thing is missing a ton of important nuance. The safety comes from how long you hold the meat at the temp. 165 is the safe point if you are only holding for 10s. 145 is safe if you hold it for 10 minutes.
This is why sous vide is such a popular way to cook chicken. You can hold a breast at 145 for hours trivially.
You can be safe down to 135F if you give it enough time.
<a href="https://douglasbaldwin.com/sous-vide.html#Poultry_and_Eggs" rel="nofollow">https://douglasbaldwin.com/sous-vide.html#Poultry_and_Eggs
In particular, I use 135F for 90 minutes (75 minimum recommended) to pasteurize eggs that I am going to be putting into something that asks for "raw" eggs (egg nog, mayonnaise, etc.) that I will serve to other people (if it's just for myself, I'll probably just be lazy and use the raw egg). So far, nobody has noticed any difference from "raw".
MostlyStable · · focus · HN ↗
There are far, far better cooking examples out there.
MerrimanInd · · focus · HN ↗
I'm not sure if this analogy holds up in the AI software metaphor that the author of the blog post is making.
jaggederest · · focus · HN ↗
Edit for people who've never had good coffee:
"I don't like coffee. Can James Hoffmann change that?" <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-iNAyu-ejo" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-iNAyu-ejo
spiffytech · · focus · HN ↗
Knowing really is half the battle.
ddoolin · · focus · HN ↗
lkjdsklf · · focus · HN ↗
You don’t have to worry about undercooking like you do with most other meats and most steak cuts will be delicious anywhere from 11-130 (if you cook a filet to 130, it won’t be the best but it’ll still be good) and some can go even higher
It’s not like poultry where the range where it’s “good” is very small. A 170 chicken breast is almost inedible and 160 is not safe…
kasey_junk · · focus · HN ↗
This is why sous vide is such a popular way to cook chicken. You can hold a breast at 145 for hours trivially.
bsder · · focus · HN ↗
In particular, I use 135F for 90 minutes (75 minimum recommended) to pasteurize eggs that I am going to be putting into something that asks for "raw" eggs (egg nog, mayonnaise, etc.) that I will serve to other people (if it's just for myself, I'll probably just be lazy and use the raw egg). So far, nobody has noticed any difference from "raw".