the-doomed-posts-of-muteKi

I'm the hedgehog masque replica guy

嘘だらけ塗ったチョースト


twitter, if you must
twitter.com/the_damn_muteKi

natescape
@natescape

because I keep seeing some variation of this, mostly from capitalists and tech people (and those subjected to that ideology) with no real sensitivity to what is actually involved in creating or learning. To put it plainly, you know when pasta is finished when it's al dente. You know sausage is finished because it's cooked. All other problems (bringing your $3500 face-mounted camera computer into a hot steam-filled environment) aside, the time given in a recipe isn't the thing. Time passed has only a surface relationship to the processes involved in cooking, but it's the only parameter that can be made cleanly instrumental in a way that doesn't involve a practitioner having to learn how to listen to their body, their eyes, their taste buds, their olfactory faculties, their innate sense of real materials in the existing universe coming into contact with one another.

I had a similar experience, also yesterday, in a musical community. Somebody asked how they should go about ear training - a wonderful question. But I was so shocked when everyone came back with interval-quizzing apps. Software that plays two tones then has you listen and identify that tonal distance as a minor Third, Perfect Fifth, and so on. This is the same exact problem as the cooking with AR headset problem. The intervals aren't the thing. Recognizing that one tone is 6 semitones from another tone can be helpful, in the same way that having a rough sense of how much time something should take in boiling water is helpful. But what your brain actually needs is contextual information. How you build this is by working out how the musical ideas you hold in your head - the birthday song, childrens' rhyming tunes, that song that's been stuck in your head since high school prom, whatever - map to the instrument you're learning, its relationship in physical space to your physical body and mind. Raw intervals are only ever relevant in context, and outside of that context they are actively misleading. But they are the parameter that it's possible to shove into an app. So they're what we get, and they're what we reach for.

Ultimately, I feel it's about maintaining an emotional distance. So many of us are trained to find comfort in distance from our bodies, from our faculties, from perception and relationship to the world around us. Skill-building is so much about re-finding that connection, an engaged curiosity ubiquitous in children then worked out of us in a thousand thousand ways.

It's done when it's cooked. You know it's cooked because you learn to trust yourself. I'm pleading with you: there's no need to be afraid.


the-doomed-posts-of-muteKi
@the-doomed-posts-of-muteKi

The thing that gets me is not even the limited utility of having floating timers over stuff as though processes worked according to video game rules but the implication that this can only be done with a bulky headset costing multiple thousands of dollars. It's a questionable use-case that is, if you really wanted it, vastly more effectively performed by devices that cost less than a tenth of what they're selling this for and they don't obstruct your vision to this degree.

I've always believed VR headsets will never catch on because, even aside from how expensive they are, they are way too uncomfortable, isolating, and, per a prior post of mine, easy to end up breaking or injuring yourself with. If this tech was so significant, everyone would have done the google cardboard thing. At least that didn't demand being physically tethered to something to feed the display.

I'll save my thoughts on interval training for another time.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @natescape's post:

I can almost see the whole cycle: geeklord who doesn't like that cooking is time-consuming (and a distraction from round-the-clock computer noodling) decides to give cooking a try, uses some clockwork "innovation" of this sort in order to perform the cooking job in the most perfunctory manner possible, ends up with a disappointing meal, and thus concludes that cooking is "objectively dumb" ~Chara

Yeah, nobody actually cooking food is going to find this compelling, but it exists as a just-so fantasy that's sometimes enough to tenuously bind a consumer community, or at least keep a product economically semi-viable for a few seasons. Functionally zero people will be using this to bridge the divide to The Thing Itself.

Do none of y'all use timers while cooking? I use them all of the damn time. Not that I need a 3k VR headset for something my phone can already do, but the existence of timers by itself is not antithetical to cooking.

I don't see any indication this timer is automatically generated? In fact, there are even buttons there to increment the time.

And the post by OP leans very heavily into "You don't need timers At All, your senses are all you need"

Watch the video in question, it directly comes from the recipe. And like... yeah? If you rely on a timer for cooking pasta you will not get good pasta, you do in fact have to check on it. Same with sauces, like none of that stuff is helped by timers meaningfully. It cooks when it's done. If you rely on timers for things like that you will always have problems and get mediocre food at best because it's affected by everything from atmospheric moisture to air pressure to - I am not joking, there is research on this - how much sunlight you're getting in the room.

The places I use timers are for things like baking, in which case the timer is useful but the "spatial" bullshit is absolutely not, because the whole reason I'm using the timer is that I'm not sitting in front of the oven for 75 minutes.

This is all just adding complexity where the simpler and more enjoyable approach is also the one that will get you better results, which was, as I understood it, OP's point.

From a recipe still sounds sane? When a recipe tells me to check in on something in X minutes I will also put a timer for X minutes.

And I'm not saying you don't need to taste your pasta. I'm just saying that a timer can be useful despite that - because pasta usually takes a fairly reliable amount to cook, and being able to focus on something else for 10 minutes without worrying about overcooking or needing to check back regularly.

More enjoyable, in either case, is super subjective.

Timers are both plainly useful and also insufficient (they cannot, by the nature of reality and perception, get you all the way there). As a $5-50 (or whatever arbitrary cutoffs) tool, they perfectly complement process and practice. As a $3500 tool with social and political gravity that seeks in some sense to deepen your alienation, it's more complicated.

Something as nebulous as "alienation" aside, I am entirely in agreement that you don't need a $3k tool to do what a $5 tool will. The original post and the comments here totally overcorrect in the other direction though

yeah I definitely agree with you here that a lot of the comments in here are overcorrecting too hard.

it reminds me of about a decade ago when Apple introduced some feature to remind people to go to sleep, and I saw a twitter thread about how it was proof that "techbros" are inventing these things because they don't live with mommy any more. it's very... assuming a lot about someone's emotional state based on very little information.

This is honestly one of the more lucid of the silicon valley mad libs elevator pitches I've heard in the past decade, in that at there's enough there to form a coherent argument against. Probably a coincidence since whether or not the idea is practical or desirable for any end user is clearly irrelevant so long as it's a [hot tech buzzword] disrupting [common activity of mammals]. IoT smart beds! Grocery shopping in the Metaverse! Bitcoin for dogs! ChatGPT crisis hotlines! Master Chief is now a NFT! If any of this crap ever becomes a real product, it'll be long after everyone trying to generate buzz about it has cashed out so why worry about the trifling details of how it'd actually work?

Hard agree with the crankiness, soft quibbles with some details.

Interval quizzing apps can be PART of a decent ear-training practice routine. They provide fast-feedback, and isolate a skill, which can be great when you're a beginner. Using an app helped me grasp the basics enough to start applying my ear-training to more musical contexts, which is ABSOLUTELY the goal. Use them as a scaffold, and ditch them as soon as you can.

Using timers in the kitchen is fine too. They can help you offload some cognitive load while you prep another recipe, or step away to wash the dishes. Of course, the timer should never be the final arbiter of when something is done cooking, and using a fancy expensive computer is laughable when you could use a cheap digital timer just as effectively.

in reply to @the-doomed-posts-of-muteKi's post:

This is so interesting to me (someone asked me recently about automatic transcription and I literally had no idea, but mentally bookmarked the discussion), and a reminder that I need to take care when I talk about musical practice, since mine is from such a specific positionality

I mean, one of the reasons I didn't want to expound on this too hard is that I think that with musical practice the best option is very contextualized to specific traditions, which is at least consonant with your larger point here.

If you're playing in a typical orchestra/wind band then the question of interval training is mostly irrelevant. You'll probably want to learn scales but in general your job is to play the music assigned, typically deferring to a conductor on how to interpret a piece. Of course, if your leader instead happened to be Mingus, then ignore what I just said.

In that sense I would say that I agree with you. I wouldn't openly discount interval training exercises, but they're different from knowing a song and very different from being able to perform a song.

Honestly the more I look at this the funnier it is to me that the purpose of this interface is specifically to place the timer over the food being cooked. This is something that an over-range microwave does perfectly well by nature of existing and those are ALSO a tenth of the price of whatever this is -- and they're a very common kitchen appliance!

Like even outside the question of to what degree we can/should rely on our tools, there's an even more obvious question of why in the fuck we would ever rely on this tool in this way and there are so many better alternatives that people probably already have that I just can't process the idea that this is useful for anyone. I'm no longer flexible enough for that level of mental gymnastics.