3 ms·

I feel that this actually takes away from the experience of cooking. When I cook, I've always learned from playing around and experimenting, I only ever roughly

I feel that this actually takes away from the experience of cooking. When I cook, I've always learned from playing around and experimenting, I only ever roughly read recipes and never follow one without a little change here or there. With this, people won't learn to cook, they'll learn to do x when y happens. That's not learning to cook, that's being a robot.

dominotw 12y ago
I don't want to learn to cook. I just want to eat cheap/healthy/homemade food.
pjmax 12y ago
It isn't learning at all, the users are just cooking their food, I don't see a problem in that if that's the desired goal.
- cm2012 12y ago
  It's a gateway tool into good cooking - I can see users actually making something tasty and impressing their friends for the first time with this. That will make them want to learn more.
morto091 12y ago
If the end result is better, people will use it. At some point in history people were probably emotionally satisfied by knitting their own clothes. I'm sure some still do this for fun.
compumike 12y ago
If you love experimenting, Pantelligent gives you repeatability and data that you've never had before (Freestyle Mode), and the ability to walk away from the stove or get distracted and still keep an eye on your meal. You're still the chef -- Pantelligent is just a powerful tool.
jkestner 12y ago
"The experience of cooking" - this can be applied to most of the technologies we develop. (i.e. does the Kindle take away from the experience of reading?) But it's not just as simple as "better is better", either. If you want total convenience, you use a microwave, but it's not the do-all kitchen appliance that people originally thought it would be (see: microwave recipe books). If you want total experience and the joy of making something for your family with your own hands, you use traditional tools. Perhaps this pan meets some middle need, or provides a gateway for people who wouldn't cook otherwise, or perhaps it's an expensive novelty. But it's interesting to think about what we're losing when we replace old ways of doing things, and whether any of it's worth keeping around even if it isn't the most efficient way of doing things. The Betty Crocker add-egg trick tells us that there's a big emotional component wrapped up in this that isn't present in most product categories. (I make http://supermechanical.com/range http://supermechanical.com/range and enjoy Soylent, so the balance of new cooking interactions vs integration into an existing kitchen flow is something I think about.)

dominotw 12y ago

I don't want to learn to cook. I just want to eat cheap/healthy/homemade food.

pjmax 12y ago

It isn't learning at all, the users are just cooking their food, I don't see a problem in that if that's the desired goal.

cm2012 12y ago
It's a gateway tool into good cooking - I can see users actually making something tasty and impressing their friends for the first time with this. That will make them want to learn more.

morto091 12y ago

If the end result is better, people will use it. At some point in history people were probably emotionally satisfied by knitting their own clothes. I'm sure some still do this for fun.

compumike 12y ago

If you love experimenting, Pantelligent gives you repeatability and data that you've never had before (Freestyle Mode), and the ability to walk away from the stove or get distracted and still keep an eye on your meal. You're still the chef -- Pantelligent is just a powerful tool.

jkestner 12y ago

"The experience of cooking" - this can be applied to most of the technologies we develop. (i.e. does the Kindle take away from the experience of reading?) But it's not just as simple as "better is better", either. If you want total convenience, you use a microwave, but it's not the do-all kitchen appliance that people originally thought it would be (see: microwave recipe books). If you want total experience and the joy of making something for your family with your own hands, you use traditional tools. Perhaps this pan meets some middle need, or provides a gateway for people who wouldn't cook otherwise, or perhaps it's an expensive novelty. But it's interesting to think about what we're losing when we replace old ways of doing things, and whether any of it's worth keeping around even if it isn't the most efficient way of doing things. The Betty Crocker add-egg trick tells us that there's a big emotional component wrapped up in this that isn't present in most product categories. (I make http://supermechanical.com/range http://supermechanical.com/range and enjoy Soylent, so the balance of new cooking interactions vs integration into an existing kitchen flow is something I think about.)