4 ms·
> But how would an automatic rice cooker know when the 20 minutes was up? How about a clock? Now, I understand that in 1955 the required components might have
by FrojoS 2y ago
> But how would an automatic rice cooker know when the 20 minutes was up?
How about a clock?
Now, I understand that in 1955 the required components might have been deemed too expensive, or actually the problem is more complex than that. This article is so poorly written. Like almost everything I've read in the last 20 years from IEEE Spectrum.
- jeffalyanak 2y ago> How about a clock? How would the rice cooker know when to start the clock? It needs to be started only after the water reaches a boil.
- FrojoS 2y agoWell, I would have thought that once a temperature sensor reads 100 deg Celsius the clock would start. I'm sure there are good reasons why this wouldn't work well or is overly complex, but I would expect the article to discuss them. From the article: > Fumiko found that heating the water and rice to a boil and then cooking for exactly 20 minutes produced consistently good results. That knowledge about the ideal timespan of 20 min seems to be completely irrelevant to the implemented solution.
- fkyoureadthedoc 2y ago> That knowledge about the ideal timespan of 20 min seems to be completely irrelevant to the implemented solution. Partially. They also mentioned that it was generally believed that you needed to vary the temperature during cooking to get fluffy rice. Fumiko's discovery is just as much about the fact that you can use a straight boil the whole time as it is about the duration.
- rty32 2y agoI had the same question, and this article definitely could have discussed other potential engineering approaches and why they didn't work to provide the full context. To be honest, I learned very little from the article -- I already know how rice cookers work, so I want to learn much more when I decided to read the article