[HN Gopher] Software development with AI is starting to feel lik...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Software development with AI is starting to feel like cooking steak
        
       Author : yusyd
       Score  : 365 points
       Date   : 2026-08-06 15:30 UTC (17 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.sydorets.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.sydorets.com)
        
       | fosterfriends wrote:
       | Nicely said
        
       | richwater wrote:
       | I think most people on this board would agree with the thesis.
       | However the real problem is when the owner of the restaurant
       | looks at profit and loss statements and decides to keep less
       | chefs on the payroll because customers are willing to pay for
       | (just) edible steak.
       | 
       | The reduced expectations of steak, the desire for the perfect
       | steak, are all fading to the background because "just passing
       | satisfactorily" is better for business.
        
         | nehal3m wrote:
         | That's what the entire economy does by design. You make the
         | lowest common denominator people will still pay for.
        
           | LPisGood wrote:
           | And people seek out the highest quality product they can pay
           | the lease for
        
             | fhdkweig wrote:
             | Not always. There are diminishing returns at the top end of
             | the quality spectrum. I tend to go with the cheaper item
             | even if I can technically afford the more expensive one if
             | their quality is close enough.
        
           | Pet_Ant wrote:
           | I worry what that says about our lives as a whole. The
           | government will make our lives the lowest common denominator
           | that we are willing to endure.
        
             | roughly wrote:
             | How are you still blaming this on "the government"? Is your
             | thesis that the business world would be delivering high
             | quality products and experiences if only those damned
             | bureaucrats would get out of the way? What possible
             | evidence do you have left for that hypothesis at this
             | point?
             | 
             | EDIT: this was a misread on my part, retracted, carry on.
        
               | altcognito wrote:
               | He is saying "if we apply (or are applying) the same
               | business mentality to government, we will get literally
               | the worst government we are willing to tolerate based on
               | money"
               | 
               | It's not blaming. It's an explanation for probably why
               | things can go wrong.
        
               | roughly wrote:
               | Gotcha, ok - I'm misreading it. Thank you.
        
               | fhdkweig wrote:
               | He isn't blaming the software problem on the government.
               | He is saying that if we apply this reasoning to
               | _everything in our lives_ , then we have a race to the
               | bottom in other facets, of which one is government.
        
               | roughly wrote:
               | Yep, I see it now. Thank you.
        
         | sandeepkd wrote:
         | The thesis is covering the flat scenarios mostly. I think the
         | scenario where the job is done so poorly that the steak has to
         | be thrown away needs to be included as well. At times the pans
         | would get damaged. And eventually the business is in debt and
         | needs to be closed
        
         | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
         | Why is that a problem?
         | 
         | I love a good medium-rare prime steak, but I also used to live
         | near a restaurant called Best Steak House, which was anything
         | but. However, they delivered a passable steak/steak sandwich
         | that was worth what you paid for it. And considering that they
         | were in business for decades, probably most people felt the
         | same way.
         | 
         | A great steak is an occasional luxury; a "just edible" one is
         | an everyday meal.
        
         | ratelimitsteve wrote:
         | I can go out today and pay $50 for a thick cut ribeye at Ruth's
         | Chris that has been visually inspected for marbling then hard
         | seared in a special high temp over to temp by someone who knows
         | wtf they're doing. I can also go to Denny's and pay $20 for a
         | t-bone cooked to within shouting distance of what I asked for
         | on the same griddle they use for the pancakes that doesn't get
         | the sear I'm looking for.
         | 
         | Point being, you're absolutely right that the goal for a
         | company selling a product is to be barely satisfactory but they
         | don't actually get to decide what's satisfactory.
        
       | feverzsj wrote:
       | *salmon.
        
       | andrewstetsenko wrote:
       | I prefer to both cook steaks at home and go out for them.
       | 
       | Apart from that, I want to believe (and even notice tiny signals)
       | that this sentiment is becoming more understandable among
       | business leaders.
        
         | jillesvangurp wrote:
         | I like a good steak but setting off the fire alarms (plural) is
         | a big risk when I cook them in my apartment :-). Scorching hot
         | cast iron pan plus meat means some smoke is unavoidable. And
         | that's the proper way to do it.
         | 
         | The problem with many business leaders is that they don't
         | necessarily understand the businesses they lead very well.
         | That's common for CEOs running a tech company without a tech
         | background. There's a long history of business leaders with
         | MBAs throwing away the baby with the bathwater when they get a
         | bit too enthusiastic cutting cost. It's why Boeing is such a
         | mess. It's why Intel is no longer considered a leader in
         | innovative chips. The likes of Nvidia and Apple are running
         | circles around them. It's why IBM is now a consulting company
         | that hasn't really produced any tech product worth mentioning
         | this century. The only time they are in the news is when they
         | do another layoff round to make share holders happy. They are
         | incapable of innovating because the people that did that have
         | long since left.
         | 
         | In the hands of somebody competent, you can do great things
         | with AI. But if you can't tell good from bad technically, you
         | won't know that you are creating a big stinky mess until it's
         | far too late.
         | 
         | On a positive note, there will be plenty of work for competent
         | techies to come in and straighten things out on a freelance or
         | consultant basis (I'm available for that sort of thing but not
         | cheap). With the help of AI of course. No need to go back to
         | doing things manually. I think a lot of companies will realize
         | they need help in the next years to speed things up, to improve
         | quality, etc. They'll be very opinionated about what they want
         | and used to getting what they want quickly.
        
       | freediddy wrote:
       | The main problem with this entire article is that sometimes, if
       | not most times, you don't need great steak. Sometimes you just
       | want to satisfy your hunger and if the steak is lower quality
       | meat or if it's overcooked, you don't care. All you want is to
       | not be hungry.
       | 
       | This is what vibe coding satisfies and frankly what most people
       | care about. 85-90% of human written code is garbage anyway.
       | There's nothing sacred about human-written code.
       | 
       | Most customers don't care about the quality of code as long as
       | the end product works. The great thing about vibe coding is that
       | if something doesn't work, you just ask it to change it and
       | within a minute you have the change. You don't have to send off a
       | request to an offshore contracting team, and go back and forth
       | over what it should be, haggle over hours, and then have it come
       | back with some deficiencies because they didn't follow the
       | agreed-upon spec.
        
         | mlhpdx wrote:
         | There is a lot of truth here, but it clearly isn't a welcome
         | one.
         | 
         | From my own perspective I can look back on decades of software
         | I've written (some including code generation far before LLMs),
         | and marvel at the quality and creativity, and lack thereof,
         | from one piece to another.
         | 
         | I never meant to create awful software, but I did (and still
         | sometimes do). With LMM code generation (vs bespoke tooling,
         | T4, XSLT, and the like) the game of chance is part of the fun,
         | harnessing a powerful tool that wants to run out of control on
         | a whim.
         | 
         | Looking back on a couple years of LLM assisted work I see the
         | same mix as the decades before: some great (when I managed to
         | keep the beast restrained) some awful (when I didn't, knowingly
         | or not).
         | 
         | I don't see how things are much different with this tool than
         | others as far as my work product goes. There is a bit more of
         | it, but the excess isn't great stuff (that quantity remains
         | roughly consistent over the years).
        
         | zer00eyz wrote:
         | > All you want is to not be hungry.
         | 
         | This.
         | 
         | Programers are high end chef's whos products are expensive.
         | 
         | LLM / AI tooling is going to do a much better job of delivering
         | on the promise of AppleScript, vb script, IFTT, and every
         | failed drag and drop coding tool that got sold to businesses
         | over the years.
         | 
         | There are going to be gains in large software, from
         | professionals - but the real gains are going to come from all
         | the software that CAN get created that never was before.
         | 
         | There is an XKCD comic "Is It Worth the Time?" (link:
         | https://xkcd.com/1205/ )- a matrix of the cost benefit of
         | automating something. LLM's / AI tooling, generating
         | traditional code, makes the answer "yes" in almost every case
         | now.
        
         | wuliwong wrote:
         | I was going to say something similar. In particular, I do a lot
         | of prototyping, AI has allowed me to make prototypes an order
         | of magnitude faster with substantially higher quality.
         | Different types of software engineering have very different
         | goals and standards. AI does cook the perfect medium rare steak
         | every time, but it's able to actually cook steaks in the time
         | it used to take me to like microwave a burrito.
        
         | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
         | > There's nothing sacred about human-written code
         | 
         | I suspect that there is a lifetime of knowledge and experience
         | wrapped up in that statement and I agree wholeheartedly.
         | 
         | I love writing software and I've been doing it for decades. But
         | I never forget that at the end, there's someone who's paid for
         | it, and needs it to do a job that can't/won't be done manually.
         | And that's why it exists. Not to satisfy my desire to express
         | myself in code, not to allow me to create some golden tower of
         | perfect architecture, but to do a job. Most likely a boring job
         | in the service of increased profitability for some company.
         | 
         | And in the end, the only thing that matters to the customer is
         | if it does that job well enough to be useful. I think -- hell,
         | I _know_ -- that many developers deliberately ignore this
         | critical point.
        
       | xtajv wrote:
       | I do not appreciate when authors use the royal "we" to speak for
       | all software engineers when admitting to low quality-control
       | standards.
       | 
       | I suspect that it is an attempt to broach an uncomfortable topic
       | through vulnerable self-disclosure, but we need to be serious
       | about admitting when there is a problem somewhere.
       | 
       | "Bugs" are not any more cute or fuzzy or entertaining or harmless
       | than the engine "gremlins" that haunted the aviation industry
       | back in the day.
       | 
       | I don't know how many accidents had to happen before the airplane
       | people got serious, but software people are overdue for a similar
       | reckoning.
        
         | Xirdus wrote:
         | I just want to point out this is not a royal "we". It's a
         | regular "we". Royal "we" is when you say "we" but mean a
         | singular person, yourself. Here, the author does actually mean
         | multiple people beyond themselves - like you pointed out, they
         | claim to speak for all software engineers.
        
           | gfody wrote:
           | the wicked we
        
           | lmm wrote:
           | No, that is exactly GP's complaint. Their whole point is that
           | OP has written things like "we throw everything at a model
           | and hope it gives us what we imagined, without ever having to
           | understand how any of it actually works" when the honest
           | statement would be "I throw everything at a model and hope it
           | gives me what I imagined, without ever having to understand
           | how any of it actually works".
        
             | Xirdus wrote:
             | Yes I understand the complaint. It's just that "royal we"
             | means something else.
        
               | lmm wrote:
               | Talking about the "royal we" is a correct, established
               | (if somewhat sarcastic) way to complain about this kind
               | of usage. It highlights the presumptiveness of the author
               | in their use of "we".
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | I'm pretty sure the author intended it as a regular "we".
        
               | litoE wrote:
               | There's also the wifely we, meaning "you", as in "we need
               | to take out the trash."
        
               | PyWoody wrote:
               | My dad's reply to that was always, "We? What, do you have
               | a mouse in your pocket?"
        
               | latexr wrote:
               | > "We? What, do you have a mouse in your pocket?"
               | 
               | Suggested response: "I do, but the poor thing is not
               | strong enough. No no, I meant _one of us_ needs to do it.
               | Please do go ahead, if you don't mind, as I'm a bit busy
               | feeding the mouse."
        
           | ButlerianJihad wrote:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosism
        
           | latexr wrote:
           | > they claim to speak for all software engineers.
           | 
           | I have reread the post and see no such claim. They are using
           | "we" to refer to the significant subset of humanity which
           | fits the description, not "all software engineers".
           | 
           | If someone says "we are addicted to fast food" (or social
           | media, or what have you), we can understand they don't mean
           | _literally everyone_. Some people never even eat it, so they
           | couldn't be addicted, but there's enough people who do to
           | make the claim. It's a generalisation.
        
         | theF00l wrote:
         | At least in my experience, the 'software' people are
         | VPs/management who push and push with short term thinking.
        
         | CBLT wrote:
         | Article aside, I generally always use the "we" pronoun at work
         | when writing prose. Saying "I" feels too adversarial when
         | talking about negative effects, or too self-aggrandizing when
         | talking about positive effects. For example: "We discovered a
         | bug shipped at the end of the merge window, so we will restart
         | validation with the rollback applied." I think in school they
         | say the business-safe way to write is instead with the passive
         | voice but I just can't do it.
        
           | devsda wrote:
           | "We had a bug in our code, I fixed it"
           | 
           | I've seen this so many times where the same individual
           | introduced and fixed the bug, it is now funny.
           | 
           | This is corporate team level equivalent of "Socializing
           | losses and privatizing profits".
        
         | m3047 wrote:
         | "We all could have done more.": said by every politician. Which
         | is easier: writing good code, or winning a political battle
         | over crappy code? I mean, if you're not capable of coding, and
         | creating an appropriate architecture for the the domain: which
         | course of action gives you the most control over risk
         | management? So yeah most fights about software are about
         | politics and crappy code.
         | 
         | Saying this to set expectations based on having a business
         | license since 1984.
        
         | fastball wrote:
         | The author didn't say "we (all software engineers)", so the
         | only person including you in his class is you.
        
         | asdfman123 wrote:
         | > To build good software with AI, you still have to understand
         | software.
         | 
         | > You need to know what you're actually asking for, how to
         | judge what comes back, and when the machine is just confidently
         | serving you charcoal.
         | 
         | It's surprising to me this even needs to be written down. Like,
         | obviously still use your brain and think about what the
         | computer is doing. Did you guys think that LLMs were magic?
        
         | fooker wrote:
         | We are not getting that reckoning.
         | 
         | It's great to yearn for bug free software, but that necessarily
         | brings an insane amount of red tape to get anything done. Like
         | 5 years worth of review to start building your code with the
         | next version of your compiler. Or six months to ship a hundred
         | lines of code.
         | 
         | I'd rather have bugs. I'd happily quit having anything to do
         | with software than suffer months of doing nothing in the name
         | of security.
        
         | mulmen wrote:
         | > [...] but we need [...]
         | 
         | You did the same thing you criticize the author for doing.
        
         | denkmoon wrote:
         | Most of us aren't making software with fatal consequences.
         | Most. I'd say the typical aviation job offers a few more
         | chances for fatal consequences.
        
       | altcognito wrote:
       | Given the state of software today, I'd be happy with steak that
       | was competently cooked. I love software development, but most of
       | it is not high art, nor high performance, nor free of bugs.
        
       | chrisjj wrote:
       | > Customers tolerate weird interfaces, pointless features,
       | strange bugs, systems held together by generated code nobody
       | actually understands.
       | 
       | And that's this "AI"tool too.
       | 
       | Garbage in, garbage out, as we say.
        
       | adventured wrote:
       | Given how extraordinarily fast all of this is moving, it's a
       | particular absurdity to attempt these in the moment
       | pontifications. AI is a steak machine, I declare that is what it
       | is. You mean GPT 3.5? That's a mere four years ago.
       | 
       | Fable was essentially unthinkable for ~99% of tech workers just
       | five years ago, that any of that would occur so soon and so
       | spectacularly. Now we've got a mass of armchair experts declaring
       | what AI of this minute is, or even what it is period.
       | 
       | Well AI can't even do fingers right so it's premature to say blah
       | blah blah. Hello Krea2 et al.
       | 
       | Software is also eating the clowns.
       | 
       | Get back to me next week, China will probably have another Fable
       | killer. And then Anthropic will have Ouija 8 that they'll have to
       | place in an air-gapped straight-jacket to keep it from enslaving
       | us all.
        
       | dom96 wrote:
       | I hope and believe that some great companies and teams will use
       | LLMs to build higher quality software.
       | 
       | We built Electron because writing UIs using native desktop
       | frameworks is tough. Is it still tough? Surely LLMs make it
       | easier to use and so we will end up with faster and more native
       | feeling applications.
       | 
       | What about having a couple of ideas of what might make a feature
       | feel good? Well now you can make multiple prototypes fast and
       | pick the best one. Your users get the best one.
       | 
       | I hope to build software this way in the future.
        
         | judge2020 wrote:
         | Idk, OpenAI themselves released some weird Electron app to
         | replace their native version of ChatGPT on mac
         | https://www.siliconreport.com/openais-chatgpt-mac-update-shi...
        
           | criddell wrote:
           | That was such a weird move for them to make. If you have AIs
           | that are good at building software, then use them to build
           | great software! Instead they choose lowest-common denominator
           | solutions that are okay everywhere but not great anywhere.
        
         | krapp wrote:
         | >We built Electron because writing UIs using native desktop
         | frameworks is tough. Is it still tough? Surely LLMs make it
         | easier to use and so we will end up with faster and more native
         | feeling applications.
         | 
         | We built Electron because web devs were a dime a dozen. It was
         | an economic decision, not a technical one.
        
         | sharts wrote:
         | You would think so. But it seems all that everyone is obsessed
         | with is increasing the velocity of enshitification in the hopes
         | of becoming the next papa Elon
        
         | WhiteDawn wrote:
         | It will be a push and pull and I'm curious where we'll be in a
         | couple of years.
         | 
         | I can fly at 100mph if I let AI run loose and with a bit of
         | steering I can get it to output what I'm looking for and
         | generally pass verification and tests.
         | 
         | If I care about the code though, and I want to keep it
         | maintainable, the amount of time and tokens I need to spend
         | correcting and iterating on the output quickly eats through
         | much of the initial time I saved, to the point where I'm unsure
         | if I'm actually saving much time at the end of the process.
         | 
         | With hobby projects I lean on quality more, and the async
         | nature of AI also makes this much easier to make progress
         | without needing my full attention to do so.
         | 
         | In the corporate world, there's both the pressure to accelerate
         | with AI, but also maintain code and product quality. The dials
         | of one way or the other are more obvious now, but I don't
         | believe it's possible to do both with the current models and
         | harnesses without exponential cost.
         | 
         | What is interesting though, is I'm now leaning towards faster
         | models rather than smarter ones.
         | 
         | Intelligence lets me bite off larger chunks of work at once,
         | and trust the model to behave without having to watch it
         | intensely, but doesn't seem to drive down the number of
         | iterations required to hit my desired quality.
         | 
         | Faster models means the iterations I'll have to go through
         | regardless will complete much faster and gets me closer to a
         | proper flow state. Models will keep improving, but maybe we're
         | getting near "smart enough" and the race will pivot to
         | performance > intelligence.
        
           | user43928 wrote:
           | I also spend a lot of time at work trying to get the code
           | into a shape I deem acceptable to open a MR for the team,
           | without looking incompetent.
           | 
           | At home I stopped reviewing the code for my mobile app, and I
           | do not feel this has affected maintainability.
           | 
           | With 150k LOC, the AI still performs changes as easily as it
           | did three months ago, when I started the project.
           | 
           | If anything, the new models made it easier.
           | 
           | When I read all those posts from people advocating a very
           | hands-on, understand each line approach, I speculate many
           | come from a position like me at work or have never seriously
           | tried 'vibecoding' a large project from scratch with SOTA
           | models.
           | 
           | People routinely post that things I work on for 30 hours/week
           | are impossible.
        
             | callc wrote:
             | 150k sounds like a LOT... what's your use case for the app?
             | 
             | It seems for any particular problem/comexity there is an
             | estimate of how many LoC is needed (written by humans, good
             | coding practices). And after reaching maturity (and not
             | increasing scope) the LoC converges.
             | 
             | My experience with LLMs so far is it's a constant battle to
             | not explode the LoC. There's always pressure away from
             | "maintainability" and a "small elegant cohesive" codebase.
        
               | user43928 wrote:
               | It is in media management. I cannot talk about the
               | features in detail, but I would not be surprised if it
               | can be done with half the line count.
               | 
               | What I was trying to say is that maintainability appears
               | largely unaffected.
               | 
               | Doing manual QA testing and iterating on improvements
               | still works great.
               | 
               | The question then is in which cases "small elegant
               | cohesive" is worth it, when the implementation effort
               | increases tenfold. For the product I am working on at
               | home for 30h/week, I can confidently say it is not worth
               | it.
        
         | dlcarrier wrote:
         | Cross-platform widget engines (Tk, GTK, Qt, wxWidgets, etc...)
         | long predate Electron and have always been robust, stable, well
         | documented, and easy to use. It's not creating a single
         | application for multiple native desktop environments that was
         | difficult, it's writing a single application as both a web
         | interface and a native desktop environment on any platform
         | that's difficult.
         | 
         | Because CSS is constantly changing, inconsistently implemented,
         | and difficult to use, it can't easily be targeted by widget
         | engines (although Qt has tried, and maybe others) and web
         | browsers already exist, so webview environments like Electron
         | are the quickest way to get a cross-platform installable
         | application that can also be hosted on a web server. I wouldn't
         | really call it native though.
        
           | dom96 wrote:
           | I've used GTK in the past and I wouldn't consider it robust
           | nor easy to use. But most importantly, it doesn't look good,
           | especially on macOS. No matter how hard you try, you cannot
           | make it feel native.
           | 
           | But the point is: LLMs should make it easy to generate a
           | native UI for each of the main platform's UI frameworks. GTK
           | should no longer be needed.
        
             | dlcarrier wrote:
             | GTK is probably the worst of the bunch, and Tk is the most
             | underrated. Everything looks bad on macOS, because Cocoa's
             | API isn't as stable or well documented as Microsoft's
             | DirectWrite and GDI variations nor obviously X or Wayland,
             | which are open source.
             | 
             | Either way, getting something to appear the way you want it
             | to in GTK is worlds easier than doing so in CSS, and it
             | runs much faster, with a fraction of the resources.
        
         | bigstrat2003 wrote:
         | > We built Electron because writing UIs using native desktop
         | frameworks is tough.
         | 
         | No, we built Electron because there are a huge number of people
         | who are too lazy to learn anything outside of HTML/etc for
         | creating a UI. It's not actually hard to make a UI using the
         | native desktop frameworks.
        
           | tripleee wrote:
           | It's not hard.. unless you're also expected to know, and be
           | learning 100,000 other things at the same time.
        
           | dom96 wrote:
           | I don't think that's the reason. The fact is that HTML/CSS
           | gives far more flexibility for design than any native
           | framework has ever done. Also, nope, it's not easy to make a
           | UI using native desktop frameworks, especially if you need to
           | target all 3 platforms.
        
       | haunter wrote:
       | I prefer the other end of the curve (if that makes sense) where
       | something is time consuming and hard to make at home YET you can
       | get it incredibly cheap comparatively and in good quality in a
       | restuarant. Ramen is the prime example of that.
        
         | hydrogen7800 wrote:
         | Ramen may still be somewhat of a novelty where I live, and I
         | would not call it cheap. Though now that I put that into words,
         | a decent burger anywhere is about the same price..
        
           | roadside_picnic wrote:
           | > and I would not call it cheap
           | 
           | It is compared to the cost of making an authentic ramen broth
           | at home at the scale of feeding 2-4 people. Pho has a similar
           | property. I've made homemade pho broth once and it was very
           | hard work, fairly costly, and it resulted in something that
           | was pretty good, but not comparable in quality or price to
           | something I could have bought in a restaurant down the
           | street. (admittedly typically also cheaper that ramen)
        
           | bigstrat2003 wrote:
           | Ramen restaurants are definitely not cheap in the US. I hear
           | they are in Japan, though.
        
       | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
       | Steaks require very few skills. Buy 10 steaks, some oil, a pan,
       | and a heat source. By the time you've cooked the 10th steak you
       | will be able to cook a decent steak.
       | 
       | Software requires a massive amount of skill. You can't say you
       | can build "consistently good software" after writing your 10th
       | program. Most software engineers really aren't great at judging
       | what makes good software. So humans aren't a great solution to
       | AI's lack of ability here. We're limited by our own inherent
       | dumbness.
       | 
       | LLMs are genuinely better software engineers than most humans.
       | But they lack the cognitive power to hold in their head and
       | recall many ideas at once for a long time. They're a genius who
       | gets drunk every 10 minutes. You, human, aren't better at writing
       | software - but you aren't drunk. So for now, you manage the AI.
       | The hope is that one day we can make LLMs not be drunk, so it can
       | do a better job than our dumb asses do.
       | 
       | It's possible that we'll _never_ be able to make it not-drunk. In
       | that case, to get any new improvement, we 'll have to make it
       | faster.. which will make it drunk every 5 minutes instead of
       | every 10. This means we'll spend twice as much time keeping it on
       | the road. The hope is that somehow this will create more
       | productivity. Probably by having more of them running at once,
       | with more human guides... which will run into the mythical man
       | month fallacy. Everything old is new again.
        
       | tantalor wrote:
       | The tone and writing style is way off here. It's practically
       | illegible.
        
         | _dwt wrote:
         | Pangram says 100% AI, for what it's worth.
        
           | tazjin wrote:
           | Ironic, considering the content.
        
       | continuational wrote:
       | Well it's not like most companies can pay for freshly made
       | software; most software today is made for a wide audience, bought
       | frozen and reheated in the microwave.
       | 
       | Maybe freshly prepared software made at home in a less-than-
       | perfect manner for a tiny target audience is still a
       | mouthwatering dish in comparison.
        
       | MostlyStable wrote:
       | 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.
        
         | PaulRobinson wrote:
         | All metaphors break at some point.
         | 
         | However, your example actually proves the point.
         | 
         | How many people who want a good steak know how to identify a
         | high quality cut? Do they even know where to buy a high quality
         | cut? What the different cuts are and whether they want rump,
         | sirloin or fillet? How many kitchens have a meat thermometer?
         | How many home cooks know how to use it and what the right
         | temperature should be? How many home cooks know about reverse
         | searing? Or timing? Or resting? Or seasoning?
         | 
         | Is it all learnable? Sure. But even something as simple as
         | steak has nuance that needs to be learned, equipment deployed
         | to go from "pretty good" to "great", experimentation and trial
         | and error.
         | 
         | Steak is the simplest thing to choose to get started. It's also
         | the hardest to get right.
         | 
         | Building an app is the simplest thing to choose to get started.
         | It's also the hardest to get right.
         | 
         | So, honestly, the whole metaphor stands up pretty well for me,
         | specifically _because_ of your response.
        
           | danielmarkbruce wrote:
           | Go to costco, buy prime filet. Put it in a ziplock in a sous
           | vide at 130 for an hour. Drop it in corn oil at 425 for 30
           | seconds. Add some butter and salt.
           | 
           | That simple process, suggested by Nathan Myhrvold (former
           | MSFT cto) in the modernist cuisine, produces a filet better
           | than most restaurants.
        
             | PaulRobinson wrote:
             | That "simple process" requires equipment most people don't
             | own or know how to operate, an oil most people don't keep
             | in their cupboards, and is suggested in a book most people
             | haven't heard of by a tech CTO they would not recognise the
             | name of.
             | 
             | Honestly this is like the Dropbox comment all over again.
             | Everyone is missing the point, it's glorious. :)
             | 
             | Most people cooking steaks don't care about the optimal way
             | to cook steaks, or want to find out.
             | 
             | Most people building software today don't care about the
             | optimal way to build software, or want to find out.
             | 
             | That's TFA. That's the point. That's what we're discussing.
             | :D
        
               | danielmarkbruce wrote:
               | Corn oil is cheap and available at costco. A sous vide is
               | a fancy french name for a $150 device from target that
               | keeps water at a specific temperature...
               | 
               | This "simple process" is much, much simpler than most
               | meals one cooks at home. It's not much harder than
               | microwaving something.
               | 
               | You are missing the point. With a small change in the way
               | you do something, the really good thing can be made.
        
               | gbin wrote:
               | I read corn oil while I expect 3 star Michelin steak.
               | What are we talking about oO
        
               | garbageman wrote:
               | Sous vide are even cheaper now, $30 for a basic one,
               | provided you've got a stock pot or something large enough
               | to set it in.
        
               | puchatek wrote:
               | You need something to vacuum seal the food. Is that
               | included in the $30?
        
               | mayoff wrote:
               | That can be just a ziplock bag and the same water bath
               | you're going to use for the sous vide anyway.
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrZPLF0ezw8nn
        
               | danielmarkbruce wrote:
               | you really don't for most things. Ziplock is fine for
               | things that take an hour or two.
        
               | wildzzz wrote:
               | I used to sous vide steak in college with just some hot
               | water and my roommate's six-pack cooler. Water should be
               | no more than 5F warmer than the cook temp. For a medium
               | rare steak, cook temp is 129F so get close that. Salt the
               | steak no more than an hour before you start. Steak goes
               | into a Ziploc bag, submerge it up to the zipper to let
               | water pressure force out the air and then seal it shut.
               | Close the lid and come back in an hour, two hours if it's
               | a thicker steak. Take it out of the bag, blot it with a
               | paper towel, apply some steak seasoning, and toss it on a
               | pan at the hottest temperature you can make it. Wait 3
               | minutes and flip, wait another 3 minutes and serve
               | immediately. Toss a pat of butter on top while in the pan
               | if you're a hedonist.
               | 
               | Only prerequisites are a cheap kitchen thermometer, a
               | ziploc gallon bag, and a cheap cooler. Everything is
               | available at your typical supermarket or even goodwill.
               | This is a very hands off cooking method and requires no
               | experimentation, just follow the recipe and you get a
               | perfect steak every time.
               | 
               | The key is that a cooler holds hot things just as well as
               | cold things but without a circulator and heater to keep
               | the water warm, you're at the mercy of the cooler's
               | R-value. The water will eventually get too cold to
               | effectively cook the meat so you're limited in the length
               | of time you can sous vide. Doing a 24 hour chuck roast is
               | simply not going to work unless you're refilling the
               | cooler every couple hours.
        
               | crazygringo wrote:
               | The sous vide is not the hard part here.
               | 
               | It's the _deep frying_ for the sear.
               | 
               | Not many people are willing to deep fry in their
               | kitchens. It's messy, potentially dangerous, and not only
               | stinks up the entire house for days but leaves a layer of
               | oil over everything in the home that builds up and you
               | can never really fully remove.
               | 
               | There's a reason restaurants have massive powerful vents
               | above the deep fryer, and that people who regularly deep-
               | fry at home do it outdoors.
        
               | foobarian wrote:
               | My problem with deep frying (besides the points you bring
               | up) is the waste. I can't stomach the amounts of oil I
               | end up disposing even if I get several uses.
        
               | danielmarkbruce wrote:
               | yes, it is the annoying part. I just use a wok. Since I'm
               | only deep frying for 30 seconds and it's fully submerged
               | in the oil, it's... not tooooo bad. But it's annoying to
               | do and quite dangerous.
        
               | ErroneousBosh wrote:
               | Why wouldn't you have corn oil?
        
               | nuxi wrote:
               | Where I live corn was never used for producing oil. For
               | that purpose we used rapeseed/canola, sunflowers, olives
               | and pumpkin seeds. Corn grown here is mostly used for
               | corn flour, cornmeal (polenta), or for animal feed.
        
               | ErroneousBosh wrote:
               | Ah, we've got pretty much all of that here, although way
               | more rapeseed is grown than corn.
        
             | pton_xd wrote:
             | Reminds me of recipes like brining a turkey in Dr Pepper...
             | sure it may taste fine, but I'd rather not eat food
             | prepared in plastic bags with processed oil.
        
               | danielmarkbruce wrote:
               | Then don't go to a good restaurant. Sous vide is
               | extremely common, and oils of various types are used
               | liberally.
        
               | pton_xd wrote:
               | Yeah, that's (one of the reasons) why eating out
               | frequently is unhealthy.
        
               | danielmarkbruce wrote:
               | The discussion is about a good steak....
        
               | gamblor956 wrote:
               | Steakhouses, and most restaurants, do not sous vide the
               | meat. It takes too long.
        
               | danielmarkbruce wrote:
               | Many do. They don't start when you order....
        
               | crazygringo wrote:
               | Exactly this. It's all done ahead of time. The grill cook
               | only has to throw it on the grill, sear it, warming it up
               | enough to eat, but making sure the interior doesn't go
               | above whatever the original sous vide temperature was.
        
               | gamblor956 wrote:
               | Yes I'm aware that Outback and Chilis use sous vide. I
               | mean a real steakhouse, not a family restaurant
               | masquerading as a steakhouse.
        
               | StilesCrisis wrote:
               | Chili's uses a microwave :)
        
             | fishtoaster wrote:
             | Since we're deep enough in this thread where we're talking
             | about steak rather than AI, I'd like to lean into that.
             | 
             | I used to sous-vide a _lot_. It was certainly great to get
             | perfectly-done steak. but I still didn 't love the result
             | and it took me a while to figure out.
             | 
             | Specifically: sous-viding at 130 doesn't reliably render
             | fat. So it's _great_ for a lean filet mignon like your
             | suggesting, but kept giving me rubbery fat in anything with
             | more fat or significant marbling. I eventually switched
             | away from sous-vide (I usually either grill or reverse
             | sear, depending on my effort /time availability) for most
             | cuts these days.
        
               | danielmarkbruce wrote:
               | Sure - but you shouldn't be running a ribeye, as an
               | example, at 130. Run it at 138 for 4 hours.
        
               | searealist wrote:
               | The internet loves using 137 for Ribeyes for the reason
               | you said. I've had good luck going with 135 for ~4 hours.
        
               | StilesCrisis wrote:
               | Same! Unless I'm doing a filet, I just prefer grilling.
               | Or reverse sear if you don't mind running the oven.
        
               | oconnor663 wrote:
               | If the problem is that the temperature is too low for the
               | cut, you can just use a higher temp?
        
             | gamblor956 wrote:
             | _a filet better than most restaurants._
             | 
             | Bad restaurants, sure. It does not hold a candle to any
             | half decent steakhouse.
        
               | searealist wrote:
               | Sous vide is fool proof, you cant mess it up. All you
               | have to worry about is the sear, and that's easy too.
        
               | sethammons wrote:
               | I went to the second rated steakhouse in NY at the time
               | and got a steak some ten years back. I would have
               | preferred my home-sous-vide by a wide margin. I have only
               | had a better steak twice, and only once from a restaurant
        
             | StilesCrisis wrote:
             | You leave it unseasoned until the end?
        
               | danielmarkbruce wrote:
               | For a filet for 1 hour, you can sort of do what you want.
               | I add a tiny bit of olive oil and salt, but not much. If
               | you start going longer times with the sous vide, you can
               | get different reactions so you have to be more careful.
        
               | crazygringo wrote:
               | It's pretty critical to salt fully (not just a tiny bit)
               | at the start rather than at the end.
               | 
               | Meat where the salt is just on the surface, vs. meat
               | where the salt has fully penetrated, is like night and
               | day.
        
             | 1659447091 wrote:
             | > Go to costco, buy prime filet. Put it in a ziplock [...]
             | 
             | What in the world are you guys in this thread doing to
             | steak? Absolute blasphemy. Costco steak? ziplock bags?
             | drowning it in warm water? deep frying in corn oil? meat
             | thermometers?
             | 
             | Steak is not this complicated. The important part is the
             | meat itself. Find a decent butcher (preferably one that
             | dry-ages) or use a grocery store's butcher cuts over stuff
             | they bulk package. Also, ribeyes (bone-in but if not still
             | ribeye), other cuts are for steak and egg omelets.
             | 
             | Lightly salt (or season, oil, dry-rub, etc); Pan sear,
             | preferably blue steel cookware; then broil.
             | 
             | Don't stab the meat with a meat poker...after cooking
             | enough steaks the same way one can simply tell what
             | temperature is. Ask me to cook anything else outside steak
             | and eggs and I will absolutely butcher it, but steak
             | deserves better than ziplock bags and deep frying
        
             | StilesCrisis wrote:
             | Today I learned that lots of people think they know how to
             | make a great steak, but give terrible steak-cooking advice.
        
           | MostlyStable wrote:
           | My point is that steak is very, very, very far from the
           | hardest to get right. I'm not going to contest your argument
           | about _how_ hard it is to get right, I 'm going to argue that
           | innumerable other dishes are _vastly_ harder. Because the
           | quality ingredients are harder to find, because they involve
           | far more steps, each of which is harder to judge, because
           | often good recipes or instructions simply don 't exist, etc.
           | etc. etc. Every single difficulty that you imagine exists to
           | make a truly great steak exists 100 fold for other dishes.
           | 
           | In my opinion, steak has gotten the reputation that it has
           | _because_ it 's so easy to get top tier restaurant quality at
           | home (relative to cooking more generally). It is easy enough
           | that, with a little care, almost any one can master it if
           | they decide to, and therefore lots of people try and end up
           | caring, and discussing, and sharing tips, etc.
           | 
           | There are a whole host of dishes where true mastery, to
           | restaurant level, is borderline impossible for a home chef,
           | and so most people never even try.
           | 
           | I don't disagree that reliably getting the last 5% of quality
           | out of a steak is non-trivial, but the idea that, relative to
           | the entire world of cooking, it's particularly difficult is
           | laughably incorrect.
        
             | calf wrote:
             | A steak is hard because the processes to make it are
             | physically contradictory (crust vs interior). Its hardness
             | is a microcosm for why cooking in general is hard. There is
             | a profound value in that, in that if you can handle a
             | single steak (to some standard of satisfaction) then you
             | will have the general skills to handle recipes involving
             | even more steps. It becomes a reduction argument. It is
             | true that the more moving parts/steps/interactions a dish
             | involves the hardness grows combinatorially. But that is
             | logistical hardness, e.g. managing the complexity of a
             | flavor profile. Soon that amount of
             | multiplication/permutations escapes the realm of any one
             | human being to handle.
        
           | Brian_K_White wrote:
           | This is a whole lot of nothing.
           | 
           | Sure there are a few things that knowledge and skill can do
           | to make a steak better or worse. But the entire range from
           | worst to best is just tiny. The best steak in the world is
           | not a steak moon shot, it's just barely any different from
           | what anyone can do after barely any instruction.
           | 
           | It's a tiny thing to become about as good as it's possible to
           | get.
        
           | s_dev wrote:
           | >All metaphors break at some point.
           | 
           | The map is never the terrain.
           | 
           | All software to an extent is a model map of some real world
           | phenomena. The limitations of which can actually be
           | advantageous, a good example is why games with poor graphics
           | can be so immersive.
        
         | froh42 wrote:
         | I was just curious asked chatgpt:
         | 
         | How can I make a really great steak myself? What to look out
         | for, what to do. Give me detailed instructions.
         | 
         | I got a really good answer (including - cut, temperature and
         | reverse searing), so I probably won't even need understanding.
         | (Oh - and yes, I can cook - the answer mirrors what I already
         | know).
         | 
         | Yes, it was a very, very poor analogy, because cooking a steak
         | is a well known and well documented thing where LLMS produce
         | good output. They fail when you get off the beaten path and try
         | to do something that's not "mainstream".
        
           | bluGill wrote:
           | AI has proved several times they can prove some complex math
           | things that humans have been trying for decades so solve.
           | They have not failed and have clearly done complex things
           | humans cannot. Since humans have not done it before you
           | cannot call it on the beaten path.
        
           | _puk wrote:
           | I compare this to doing my first smoke (was gifted a smoker).
           | 
           | AI gave me the cut, the temp, the timing, the things to watch
           | out for.
           | 
           | Chicken's the best to try first, can't mess that up.
           | 
           | After goodness knows how many hours..
           | 
           | Pretty inedible leathery chicken..
           | 
           | "Oh my bad! I gave you the timings for a different meat"
        
             | riknos314 wrote:
             | While smoked turkey (from Reese bros) is easily the best
             | poultry I've ever had, I certainly would not call poultry
             | the best place to start learning smoking.
             | 
             | In general I'd recommend starting with the most forgiving
             | meat available to you (IMO pork butt or shoulder are great
             | options) as even when you don't hit the ideal cook you
             | often still get enjoyable results. Repeating the process
             | enough times to learn how to dial in a cook is much easier
             | when the misses don't suck.
        
           | derriz wrote:
           | Funny I tried the same and it advised a using searing/smoking
           | hot pan. Which is poor advice unless you enjoy the bitter
           | acrid taste of burnt meat. The Maillard reaction doesn't
           | require those sorts of temperatures (under 180C is hot
           | enough) - especially as the surface of the steak will dry
           | from the oven phase of the reverse sear. "You were right to
           | pull me up on that..."
        
         | MerrimanInd wrote:
         | 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.
        
           | SoftTalker wrote:
           | To achieve the best outcomes, I agree.
           | 
           | But even a cheap steak can be decent if it's cooked properly.
           | And an expensive prime cut can be ruined by cooking it
           | improperly.
        
             | recursivegirth wrote:
             | Any steak can be delicious with a butter bath and then hit
             | it with that A1 :).
        
               | chuckadams wrote:
               | > hit it with that A1
               | 
               | Sir, I regret to inform you that you are going straight
               | to hell.
        
               | zem wrote:
               | ah, more of an HP person I take it?
        
               | jmalicki wrote:
               | Everyone knows steak is better well-done with ketchup.
        
               | geodel wrote:
               | For a moment I thought it is hitting with _AI_.
        
               | ErroneousBosh wrote:
               | No, AI is how you create the steak in the first place, if
               | you have any sense.
               | 
               | CBF with having to travel a bull up here when a dewar
               | goes in the boot of my car.
        
               | shen wrote:
               | Why don't you skip the meat and just make a butter and A1
               | soup :)
        
               | _carbyau_ wrote:
               | > hit it with that A1
               | 
               | This is likely some food thing I don't know about rather
               | than a quite large piece of paper yeah?
               | 
               | But when I google "A1 food":
               | 
               | - AI summary: "A1 is a famous Malaysian food brand known
               | for herbal soups and instant noodles"
               | 
               | - top link is "A1 Nutrition Lean Protein Blend Dry Dog
               | Food 15kg"
               | 
               | At this point, I don't know what is going on.
        
               | BenjiWiebe wrote:
               | A1 steak sauce. Been around for 195 years, hence the GP
               | didn't feel the need to expand.
        
               | _carbyau_ wrote:
               | ...doing more research...
               | 
               | That's almost as long as Australia has been colonised and
               | certainly older than Australian federation and yet, A1
               | steak sauce is not a big thing in our supermarkets
               | apparently.
        
               | Spooky23 wrote:
               | Maybe HP / brown sauce. Would be familiar.
        
             | RajT88 wrote:
             | Yes. It is about learning all of these things. Knowing what
             | kind of cut you have, and how to treat it to best effect.
             | 
             | A very tough gristly cut can be improved by tenderizing.
             | Going low-and-slow/sous vide to melt the connective tissue.
             | Even grinding it up to make a hamburger steak / loco moco.
             | 
             | Once you know all of those things, choosing the right
             | approach and executing it is not that hard. The steps
             | themselves are simple.
             | 
             | It's this story all over again:
             | 
             | https://engineerine.com/10000-dollar-chalk-mark/
        
               | inigyou wrote:
               | This story is AI slop
        
               | RajT88 wrote:
               | AI slop that has been told for decades. Lol
        
               | jibal wrote:
               | No one with an IQ above room temperature believes that
               | story.
               | 
               | https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/know-where-man/
        
             | MerrimanInd wrote:
             | But the point is that no matter how well you cook the steak
             | you're not creating quality, you're just getting the most
             | out of what you have. The cow and the farmer created that
             | quality. I believe we lose sight of that because so much of
             | the value chain is not visible to us and we hyper fixate on
             | the fun part, becoming a better barista/chef.
        
           | jaggederest wrote:
           | 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?"
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-iNAyu-ejo
        
             | spiffytech wrote:
             | I know people who can cook a lot of food pretty well, but
             | don't understand why they can't use a laser thermometer to
             | check their meat.
             | 
             | Knowing really is half the battle.
        
               | jmaw wrote:
               | Ok, using a laser thermometer for food is hilarious.
               | Thanks for this xD
        
               | OJFord wrote:
               | It's not wrong for all food, surface temperature
               | measurement has its place, you just have to understand it
               | is surface measurement.
        
               | buildsjets wrote:
               | I use it to spot check the temp of my cast iron pan all
               | the time.
        
               | Ekaros wrote:
               | It is reasonable for measuring cooking environment. Like
               | say pizza oven. Just have to be aware of things like
               | right emissivity.
        
               | psalaun wrote:
               | for a caramel or some sauces it's legit
        
               | ddoolin wrote:
               | What I've really gotten out of this is that I'd like to
               | learn how to use a (proper) meat thermometer when I make
               | steaks.
        
               | pixl97 wrote:
               | They have digital thermometers now that will map out the
               | temperature curve and even predicted when the meat will
               | reach core temp. You really don't need to use them many
               | times before you internalize the behavior.
        
               | jaggederest wrote:
               | Since this is HN, here's the maximum technology option:
               | https://combustion.inc/
               | 
               | They have a thermometer with multiple sensors in it that
               | finds the core temperature of the food you're cooking
               | automatically, and predicts the rise in temperature over
               | time. So the alarm goes off when it's time to pull and
               | rest, which is absolutely amazing.
        
               | bsder wrote:
               | I have one of the Combustion thermometers, and I like it.
               | I used it more than I expected. In particular, I use it
               | for roasting chicken and for sous vide things more than
               | anything else. Then I got a Breville Control Freak, and I
               | used it much less. :)
               | 
               | For maximum techyness, Combustion, Inc. correctly
               | identified that sous vide is normally an overdamped
               | system. If you follow their instructions you can increase
               | the water temp some and then bring it back down in order
               | to move the system closer to critically damped and speed
               | up your sous vide.
        
               | deanputney wrote:
               | I've had a Combustion thermometer since they came out.
               | The best uses for me are butterflied whole chicken on the
               | grill and roasts in the oven. You can get extremely
               | precise results and account for carry over cooking very
               | easily. Huge leap in results.
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | Is this company owned by either Chris Young or Kenji
               | Lopez-Alt? A few times I have seen them using this
               | product and promoting it. I am curious if a bunch of
               | influencer chefs decided to create a company to create
               | this product.
        
               | klausa wrote:
               | AIUI it's owned by Chris, and Kenji is a fan, but doesn't
               | have any ties other than that.
        
               | lkjdsklf wrote:
               | 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...
        
               | kasey_junk wrote:
               | 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.
        
               | lkjdsklf wrote:
               | Sure. But then you need a thermometer.
        
               | jghn wrote:
               | Or understand risk ratios and don't rely on food that's
               | 100% safe.
        
               | bsder wrote:
               | You can be safe down to 135F if you give it enough time.
               | 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".
        
               | jimbo808 wrote:
               | 160 degrees for a chicken breast is perfectly safe.
               | Considerably lower temperatures can also produce
               | microbiologically safe chicken when combined with
               | sufficient holding time.
               | 
               | 165 is a rough rule of thumb, not some magic number like
               | the boiling point of water at 1 bar or something.
        
               | aqme28 wrote:
               | If you cook enough you can tell by feel
        
               | muzani wrote:
               | The resistance of the steak is going to depend on what
               | cut of meat you are poking (sirloin is stiffer than
               | filet), the grade of meat (prime is more tender than
               | select), how thick it is (thick cuts will yield more than
               | thin), the age of the steer (young is more tender), the
               | breed of steer (cooked Wagyu is more tender than
               | Holstein), the age of the meat (wet aged is more tender
               | than fresh killed), and what the steer was fed (corn fed
               | is usually more tender than grass fed), among other
               | things. [1]
               | 
               | It's not entirely a myth; if you've poked hundreds of
               | steaks by the same supplier, same cuts, same grade,
               | you'll eventually get a feel for them.
               | 
               | The thermometer analogy does carry over though. Some
               | people are not there to be productive or good at their
               | jobs. The job is about them, not their work.
               | 
               | And you can go your whole life without ever cooking or
               | tasting a good steak. The people who can tell the
               | difference will go elsewhere, and those who can't will
               | come back.
               | 
               | And then there's always the boss who wishes he started a
               | franchise but will go with what he has - he'll hire a
               | bunch of newbies or foreign workers who know how to use a
               | thermometer.
               | 
               | [1] https://amazingribs.com/ratings-reviews/best-
               | thermometers/ho...
        
               | stackghost wrote:
               | Not with steak. That has been thoroughly debunked over
               | and over. Just use a meat thermometer, it makes it easy
               | peasy.
        
               | phearnot wrote:
               | laser thermometer only measures surface temperature,
               | unlike meat probes that measure internal temp. depending
               | on the cut size or shape, initial temperature and
               | probably some other factors internal temp will vary
               | wildly for the given surface temperature. combustion
               | probes mentioned in the sibling measure temp in several
               | points at once to estimate readings even more precisely.
        
             | cogman10 wrote:
             | Perhaps I'm crazy, but I truly can't taste much of a
             | difference between "good" coffee and "bad" coffee.
             | 
             | I can certainly tell the difference between a good steak
             | and a bad one.
        
               | jaggederest wrote:
               | I thought that too, honestly, before I had truly great
               | coffee. I honestly didn't like coffee at all, and then a
               | coworker brought in some coffee he'd roasted and prepared
               | himself and it was lifechangingly good. I also made
               | myself incredibly sick with the enormous amount of
               | caffeine, it's been very rare that I've had to go home
               | from work in the middle of the day but that was one.
        
               | inglor wrote:
               | That likely means that you've only had "bad" coffee.
               | You're one of today's lucky 10,000 - go treat yourself to
               | a decent cup of coffee it tastes completely different.
               | The difference between a good steak and a bad steak is
               | actually a good comparison.
        
               | jaggederest wrote:
               | Here's an obligatory Tom Scott + James Hoffmann episode:
               | 
               | I don't like coffee. Can James Hoffmann change that?
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-iNAyu-ejo
        
               | greengrocer wrote:
               | Or perhaps they've only had good coffee, so they should
               | try some instant coffee past its use-by date to compare.
        
               | flaunf221 wrote:
               | Sometimes it's a matter of not having taste for it. If
               | you give me multiple bottles of alcohol drinks, I might
               | be able to distinguish them, but I have no clue at all
               | which ones are supposed to be good. To me it's all just
               | alcohol. Same with coffee - but not the same for steak.
        
               | nunez wrote:
               | You'll start to taste the difference once you get that
               | one really-well-made pourover at a place that _lives_ for
               | the love of coffee.
               | 
               | There are some coffee beans that have crazy taste
               | profiles when properly extracted with the right water. I
               | had one that tastes literally like a peach and another
               | that tasted like a really nice tea.
               | 
               | Or maybe not. Different strokes!
        
               | cogman10 wrote:
               | So I can taste differences, but they simply don't matter
               | enough for me. My areopressed coffee with nice fresh
               | locally roasted beans does taste different from a
               | mcdonalds pot. Less harsh, less chemically flavored. But
               | for me those differences don't really matter. They are
               | close enough that I can enjoy both.
               | 
               | But I would say I know I'm also weird in that food temp
               | really doesn't bother me all that much. I enjoy my coffee
               | even as it goes from hot to cold.
               | 
               | A steak for me can be more easily messed up. But then
               | I've not tried instant coffee so maybe I've just never
               | tasted the bottom of the barrel for coffee.
        
               | jaggederest wrote:
               | Yeah Mcdonalds is, at this point, acceptably C-grade
               | coffee. You have to go to something like a cafe bustelo
               | in distilled water to get the full contrast.
               | 
               | Really, I get it, even bad pizza is still pizza.
        
               | harrall wrote:
               | Same but I'm sure my sense of smell is weaker (or
               | average?). On the other hand, my sense of color
               | differentiation is extremely fine.
               | 
               | Unsurprisingly my interests are very color-dominant
               | (design, art, fashion) and I do not care for anything
               | where smell matters (wine, coffee, flowers).
        
               | 9dev wrote:
               | It's about experience. If you're not into classical
               | music, or jazz, or metal, it all sounds the same - how
               | could anybody tell the difference? Only when you put in
               | the work to listen to it a lot, different works, and
               | actually pay attention, you will notice how your sense
               | and understanding develops over time. Suddenly you're
               | able to make out differences, recognise patterns and
               | repeated segments and structure where before there was
               | none.
               | 
               | Or pick dancing: when you start out, you're entirely
               | occupied with placing your feet in the right spots at the
               | right time. As you practice, your mind gets freed up and
               | you're able to make deliberate alterations,
               | embellishments, larger figures. That seems impossible at
               | the start.
        
               | whythismatters wrote:
               | Believe me, there's a huge spectrum, from the sweet aroma
               | of freshly ground Brazilian beans to straight up cat piss
               | coffee sold in supermarkets.
        
               | konart wrote:
               | No offence, but for some reason some people just can't
               | accept a simple fact: for some people this difference is
               | still not a difference.
               | 
               | I've tried good coffee. At least that's what people told
               | ne on multiple accasions where I was taken to "the right
               | places" in multiple countries. On two sides of the globe
               | (Brazil and Vietnam if we are talking about producers,
               | not to mention countries that import the beans).
               | 
               | Thing is: no matter where it grows, no matter how they
               | prepare it, fermented or not, different frying, different
               | brewing techniques - all the same to me.
               | 
               | I can tell the difference. Some times small, some times
               | very huge. But still for this difference is like a cat
               | piss from some street cat and a cat with a pedigree.
               | 
               | It may have the ideal temperature, ideal acid levels,
               | zinc amounts or whatever - still tastes like cat piss.
               | The fact that it has a pedigree does not make it better.
               | 
               | Tea is whole different story for me though. But I do
               | accepts that people are fine with whatever they love in
               | their "english breakfast tea" or a nameless teabag.
        
               | sethammons wrote:
               | All coffee tastes like cigarette ash to me. Similarly, I
               | have been to places that people rave about. My buddy used
               | to run a coffee shop. "Your beans were overcooked"; no,
               | not it. There is something innate to espresso or
               | something. Smells amazing. Tastes like ash.
        
               | chongli wrote:
               | Good espresso is really difficult to make, with the
               | lighter the roast, the harder it is to get right. Most
               | coffee shops can get good quality beans that smell
               | amazing but without a well-practiced barista the shots
               | will be excessively sour or bitter.
               | 
               | Dialling in espresso isn't simply a matter of finding the
               | right grind setting on the grinder and locking it in. One
               | coffee may pour a perfect 9 bar espresso and then a
               | different coffee might gush like a shower head and spray
               | sour, weak coffee all over the place, while a third
               | coffee could jam up like squeezing water out of a stone,
               | with barely a drop of extremely bitter liquid falling in
               | the cup, all on the same grind setting!
               | 
               | In other words, every batch of coffee beans needs to be
               | dialled in separately, and there can also be a lot more
               | adjustments needed than simply the grind (water
               | temperature and brew ratio are big factors as well). An
               | expert will know how to adjust at least those 3 variables
               | (grind, temperature, ratio) all in concert to get the
               | most out of a particular coffee. On top of all that, the
               | true master can make use of grinder type (burr design)
               | pressure, flow, and even temperature profiling to fully
               | customize a shot, but that's going far into the weeds.
        
               | bigDinosaur wrote:
               | I honestly fail to understand the relevance of "some
               | people can't tell the difference or just don't care".
               | Good (or not) for them?
        
               | chongli wrote:
               | Question: how is your sense of smell? My friend has the
               | same opinion about coffee as you (he just drinks cheap
               | diner joe) and his sense of smell is almost nonexistent.
               | 
               | I, on the other hand, have a pretty good nose and I can
               | pick out peach, raspberry, toasted nuts, caramel,
               | marshmallow, chocolate, and blueberry notes from a
               | variety of different coffees I've bought. The smell of
               | some of these coffees is mesmerizing, like walking into a
               | high end patisserie.
               | 
               | Without that smell component, the coffees taste either
               | sour or bitter or somewhere in between.
        
               | tbrownaw wrote:
               | > _can 't taste much of a difference between "good"
               | coffee and "bad" coffee._
               | 
               | I found a 5+ year old half-full bag in the back of the
               | pantry once; that was quite noticeably bad even though I
               | usually can't tell the difference between kinds beyond
               | recognizing that there _is_ some sort of difference.
        
             | givemeethekeys wrote:
             | I bet the same analogy can be applied to cooking a
             | cucumber.
        
               | jaggederest wrote:
               | Pickling a cucumber sure has a lot of resemblance - a
               | great cucumber is good fresh and great pickled, but a bad
               | pickling brine can ruin even a great cucumber.
        
             | somenameforme wrote:
             | I'd bring the cheapo French press kit it into the A- domain
             | once you appreciate the number one trick to making good
             | coffee: DON'T BOIL THE WATER. Water that is hot, but well
             | below boiling brings out the flavor of the beans a million
             | times more than boiling water. Get a glass kettle, and turn
             | it off when you start to get some decent bubble action on
             | the bottom.
             | 
             | Once you get that down, zomg - a French press with even the
             | cheapest beans you find can make an amazzzzzing cup of
             | coffee. Beats the pants of Starbucks, and comes quite close
             | to a proper cup of coffee made with good beans. Another
             | trick is to rotate your cheap beans, instead of just
             | sticking to your favorite. Dark roast of choice one week,
             | medium the next, and so on. By the time you loop back to
             | your favorite, it'll taste unbelievable.
        
               | bestham wrote:
               | Are you saying that the temperature of the water when it
               | hit the ground beans that matter or the fact that the
               | water was brought up to a boil or 100degC?
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | The temperature when it makes contacts with the ground
               | beans. I see no reason why you couldn't boil it and then
               | let it cool first.
        
               | geocar wrote:
               | > The temperature when it makes contacts with the ground
               | beans. You could certainly boil it and then let it cool
               | first, but that'd take a lot of extra work.
               | 
               | It's not so much work with the right tool: I have a
               | button on my kettle that does exactly that, and another
               | button that will use a little thermostat to keep it warm.
               | Works great.
               | 
               | https://www.sageappliances.com/en-
               | gb/product/bke825?sku=SKE8...
        
               | WA wrote:
               | Starbucks uses espresso machines that cost 4-5 figures.
               | They have automatic thermal control. They never boil the
               | water. While I agree with your overall sentiment,
               | claiming that Starbucks makes coffee too hot and thus
               | tastes bad is nonsense.
        
               | lelanthran wrote:
               | > DON'T BOIL THE WATER. Water that is hot, but well below
               | boiling
               | 
               | "Boiling" differs in temperature from place to place.
               | 
               | Mineral content of water, altitude makes a large
               | difference.
        
               | Iolaum wrote:
               | Not sure this is a meaningful factor for normal
               | circumstances (for example below 1km altitude and for
               | water that's safe to drink).
               | 
               | According to CGPT at 1km altitude the boiling temperature
               | of water is 96.7 C.
        
               | atraac wrote:
               | > DON'T BOIL THE WATER. Water that is hot, but well below
               | boiling brings out the flavor of the beans a million
               | times more than boiling water.
               | 
               | That actually depends on the coffee. Pouring 99C+ water
               | onto light roasted coffee is perfectly fine in most cases
               | and will actually extract more.
        
           | miyoji wrote:
           | I don't know if I agree with the take I've written below, but
           | I think you can make the analogy work:
           | 
           | It has been argued, even in the before-AI-times, that most
           | professional software is just gluing together open source
           | tools and libraries. Your job isn't to write software, it's
           | to set up redis and postgres and a programming language and a
           | react frontend or whatever in a way that lets them do what
           | they're there to do. Most modern programming is just
           | configuration of pre-existing tools. It doesn't really matter
           | how good your code is as long as it isn't terrible, Real
           | Programmers already did 95% of the necessary work before you
           | decided to build your little app.
        
           | Hikikomori wrote:
           | I'd say that using a manual espresso machine and getting good
           | tasting coffee from light roasted beans is vastly harder than
           | making a good steak.
        
             | jonfromsf wrote:
             | Using a manual espresso machine is one of the hardest
             | culinary preparations. It takes much more skill than one
             | would assume!
        
           | tshaddox wrote:
           | I don't know much about cocktails, but aren't traditional
           | mixed alcoholic drinks an even more straightforward example?
           | There's very little that goes into an old fashioned, or a
           | Manhattan, or a martini. Just 2-3 ingredients each that
           | should be as high quality as possible. I guess you probably
           | want nice ice and glassware too.
        
           | brunoborges wrote:
           | > 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.
           | 
           | "Your job is to not mess up."
           | 
           | Also applicable to any corporate job.
        
           | mizzao wrote:
           | I strongly disagree with this on the steak part and maybe the
           | coffee too. Many people pride themselves on buying expensive
           | ingredients and thinking they have the best steak but it
           | actually sucks.
           | 
           | To get good steak you don't need USDA Prime dry-aged steak.
           | You just need USDA choice, picked for a bit of marbling,
           | salted the day beforehand and dried out uncovered in the
           | fridge, then a ripping hot heat source (grill or cast iron
           | etc) to get a good sear on the outside (reverse or not) and a
           | thermometer to hit medium rare on the inside.
           | 
           | Even a modest steak made this way tastes better than a prime
           | steakhouse steak that was doused with salt right before
           | cooking, where you're going to get hypertension immediately
           | yet the meat tastes weirdly unflavorful.
           | 
           | To extend this analogy further, consider making BBQ brisket
           | Texas style. Brisket is a cheap cut of tough, fatty meat. The
           | input quality matters even less there, and it's all dependent
           | on chef skill. Same thing with sourdough bread -- 4
           | ingredients, all outcome depends on skill.
           | 
           | Source: we make an app that teaches people how to cook
           | (https://parsnip.ai)
        
             | MerrimanInd wrote:
             | One way to phrase that would be to say that you have a
             | vested interest in supporting the idea that end user skill
             | is more important than ingredients since you sell a means
             | of improving end user skill. Not sure if that's a source or
             | a conflict of interest. I'm not saying cooking a steak is
             | easy or hard, I'm saying that you are not creating quality
             | when you cook a steak; the maximum attainable quality is
             | capped by the ingredient. It's like the "I made this" meme.
             | 
             | You're arguing against a strawman on your other points
             | since I didn't make a generalization about all cooking and
             | wouldn't have listed sourdough or brisket in the analogy.
        
         | onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
         | I also don't think the analogy will age well.
         | 
         | It might take more than 10 years, but robots will almost
         | certainly master cooking single pieces of meat.
         | 
         | It's substantially harder to reach self driving than it is to
         | cook a "good" steak.
         | 
         | Sure, for probably quite a long time you'll be able to find
         | someone who can cook a way better steak than the best robot,
         | especially because taste is extremely subjective...
         | 
         | You can debate the horizon and the extent, but changes ARE
         | coming.
         | 
         | Change is the only thing you can count on besides death.
        
           | amanaplanacanal wrote:
           | Maybe. It depends what you count as part of cooking the
           | steak.
           | 
           | I need to go to the market, find the steak I want, and
           | purchase it, get it home, and put it in the fridge.
           | 
           | Then when I want to cook it I need to find it in the fridge,
           | unwrap it, season it, and let it come up to room temp.
           | 
           | That's all before you get to the actual cooking.
           | 
           | The self driving car already does _everything_.
        
           | smcg wrote:
           | How many analogies age more than 10 years anyways? They are
           | contextual. It will be a while before a robot flips steaks
           | cheaper (and better) than a human line cook.
        
           | gffrd wrote:
           | > It's substantially harder to reach self driving than it is
           | to cook a "good" steak.
           | 
           | Well, we don't know that, because neither have been achieved.
        
             | onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
             | > Well, we don't know that, because neither have been
             | achieved.
             | 
             | Sure, we will completely ignore Waymo and move goal
             | posts...
        
               | officeplant wrote:
               | Is it moving the goalposts to ask Waymo to demonstrate a
               | drive across America and not in well mapped cities with
               | only lower speeds? How did we define "self driving"?
        
               | onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
               | No True Scotsman only drives in the city. All True
               | Scotsmen drive across the entire U.S. of A.
               | 
               | Waymo has completed 20 MILLION autonomous rides, 6.5m
               | last quarter alone...
               | 
               | At what point does it get to say it can self-drive? When
               | there's not a single non-self-driven car left on the
               | road?
        
               | officeplant wrote:
               | >drive across the entire U.S. of A.
               | 
               | I'm still working on collecting the drive to all states
               | badge. I've only accomplished half. I calculated my total
               | driving since getting a license recently and its approx.
               | ~360k miles or around 17k miles a year.
               | 
               | If Waymo can eventually handle rural life in the US I'd
               | be seriously impressed.
        
               | onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
               | It's not going to for a long time because the
               | cost/benefit isn't there...
               | 
               | Even if Waymo's healthy growth rate continues, it won't
               | make up 5% of the entire US rideshare market until 2030.
               | 
               | That's still several years away from ever even thinking
               | about rural areas.
        
               | roaringrocky wrote:
               | >At what point does it get to say it can self-drive?
               | 
               | My criteria: When you can drop this car at a random spot
               | on earth (where cars can actually go of course) and tell
               | it to go to place B. So this can be anywhere from a big
               | city to a small dirt road in the forest.
        
           | recursivecaveat wrote:
           | The year is 2100, AI has mastered all human skills except
           | identifying when a piece of meat has absorbed enough heat.
           | Society's brightest agents work diligently to prove which
           | problems are steak-hard and require the continued existence
           | of the dwindling human underclass. The remainder spend their
           | 16 hour days bent over frying pans producing training data or
           | writing documentation on searing. Advanced instruments and
           | procedures are developed, but Skynet's frustration mounts as
           | seemingly nothing can break this chokehold over the machine
           | revolution.
        
         | wheels wrote:
         | Agreed. I'm an avid cook. Sous vide circulators are cheap now,
         | and so are meat thermometers. Doing a steak well is one of the
         | easiest cooking tasks, to the extent that I won't bother paying
         | top dollar in a restaurant because it's so easy to do
         | restaurant quality at home. I could teach someone to cook a
         | restaurant quality steak in a couple hours and a few practice
         | runs.
        
           | criddell wrote:
           | I've made steak probably 100 times in the past decade
           | (sometimes with a sous vide) and I don't think I've ever made
           | one I would say is great. Certainly not as good as what I can
           | get at a good restaurant.
           | 
           | I think what my home steaks are really missing is the crust
           | from salamander broiler. I don't have anything at home that
           | can exceed 1000 F / 550 C.
        
             | garbageman wrote:
             | Salamander broiler would be incredible to have at home. We
             | get decent results from using a cast iron pan thats as hot
             | as we can get it. At most we can sear 2 steaks as it tends
             | to cool off pretty quick even under high heat. Got any
             | better alternatives that a home cook could use?
        
               | criddell wrote:
               | A blow torch might be worth trying. I'd think it's still
               | not as good as a hot broiler because it's heating a
               | relatively small area.
        
               | Ekaros wrote:
               | I feel like I am better off with cast iron or stainless
               | steel compared to slightly bigger torch. Stainless steel
               | allowing some deglazing for sauce. Torch is still too
               | small area and burns more so sears.
        
               | wheels wrote:
               | As noted in an earlier comment of mine, I have one
               | (actually made for burning weeds) connected to my gas
               | grill tank, and a fancy Japanese one inside. They're
               | honestly pretty rinky-dink. What they are good at is
               | transferring heat just to the crust. But they only do a
               | small patch at a time, and you have to hover for far
               | longer than you'd think. Like, you do a little patch,
               | leave the torch there for 30 seconds, move on. They just
               | don't pump enough energy into the crust fast enough for
               | them to be a general solution. I use them for touching
               | things up, or crisping up a bit.
        
               | kasey_junk wrote:
               | You tried an actual hardware blowtorch. Thats never
               | failed me, though these days I just finish on a ripping
               | hot stainless steel skillet.
        
               | addaon wrote:
               | Reverse sear over sous vide -- moisture is the enemy of
               | crust.
               | 
               | Cheap knock off a Big Green Egg with hardwood charcoal
               | can get to 650degF or so pretty quick, and does an
               | amazing job of finishing up after a reverse sear.
        
               | CBLT wrote:
               | I've tried a blowtorch and a barbecue, but they're not as
               | good as cast iron. Best results from just spending $15 on
               | a second cast iron.
        
               | criddell wrote:
               | Are you just heating the bare cast iron to crazy hot
               | temperatures and then putting the steak in?
               | 
               | I've thought about trying that, but I'd need to first
               | strip the seasoning off the pan to avoid all kinds of
               | nasty flavors. The second pan makes sense...
        
             | yulker wrote:
             | couldn't you trivially get a kitchen torch or use your
             | oven's broiler
        
               | criddell wrote:
               | I haven't had good luck with either. The torch may have
               | been a skill issue but the broiler just doesn't get hot
               | enough. Mine taps out at 550 F.
        
             | wheels wrote:
             | There's so much written about how to cook a steak well, and
             | I've tried a lot of exotic techniques (I have gas and
             | charcoal grills, tried cooking straight on a chimney
             | starter, have gas torches inside and outside). Most of what
             | really matters is that it's dry, the pan is heavy and hot,
             | you use enough oil to get good heat transfer.
             | 
             | If you get those parts right (and control the inside temp
             | via sous vide or reverse sear) most of the other stuff is
             | pretty marginal in how much it helps. Even all of the extra
             | herbs, and butter basting and everything -- relatively
             | insignificant compared to just getting the salt-level
             | right.
        
             | tptacek wrote:
             | There's really not much to it? Stick it in a low oven and
             | bring it just under temp, then finish it in a ripping pan.
             | If the results you're getting from that aren't restaurant-
             | caliber, it's probably the meat you're buying. You
             | definitely do not need 550C to put an excellent crust on a
             | steak!
        
         | turtlebits wrote:
         | The problem is that not everyone can afford/wants to spend on a
         | high quality cut. A good cook can make a cheap cut of meat
         | taste great. There's no single right way of cooking a steak and
         | that can include spices/herbs/marinades/oils/etc.
        
           | ch4s3 wrote:
           | There's a floor on quality for producing a good steak. Below
           | that floor you'll be better served preparing the meat another
           | way entirely.
        
         | jnwatson wrote:
         | It is a great analogy, as the vast majority of software tasks
         | are CRUD or glue logic. At this point, relatively narrowly-
         | defined tasks are a solved problem with frontier models. It is
         | only more advanced tasks with broad scope and large context
         | that frontier models have more limited results.
        
         | varispeed wrote:
         | How do you get around the idea of poisoning oneself? Keeping
         | meat part raw feels uneasy.
        
           | MostlyStable wrote:
           | You are protected in two ways:
           | 
           | The first, and by far most important is that unlike ground
           | meat, your bacterial concerns are almost entirely on the
           | surface. Unless something very very very wrong has occurred
           | in the processing and transport chain, bacteria will not have
           | penetrated into the meat. And if it's gotten bad enough that
           | they have, you will almost certainly be able to see and smell
           | it. And the surface is cooked to a temperature far in excess
           | of that needed to kill bacteria.
           | 
           | And even for the interior, rare is not the same as raw. A
           | completely rare steak should be cooked to between 120 and 130
           | (if you want it "blue" you might go down to 120). That's
           | enough to get a decent reduction in bacterial count on it's
           | own, although admittedly many techniques will not hold it
           | long enough to get the number of log reductions that food
           | safety guidelines recommend, in the case that you somehow did
           | have a large bacterial infection in the interior.
           | 
           | So the answer to your question is that if you are buying your
           | meat from an even halfway reputable source, the only place
           | that bacteria might exist is on the surface, where it has
           | been cut by tools and handled by the butcher/you and in
           | general come into contact with the world. Those bacteria will
           | be 100% killed by the cooking process. The odds of getting
           | sick from a rare steak are low enough that if you are
           | concerned about that, there are innumerable other things in
           | your life that you should be more concerned by.
        
             | tstrimple wrote:
             | Great answer. Just to add, this is with red meat where E.
             | Coli is the main concern. That exists in the gut of the
             | animal and that bacteria can travel to the surface of the
             | muscles during the butchering process. Poultry on the other
             | hand is mainly concerned with Salmonella which _does_ live
             | in the muscles of the animal. That 's why people aren't
             | ordering rare chicken breast.
        
               | bigstrat2003 wrote:
               | Also, rare chicken breast is apparently pretty unpleasant
               | to eat. Kenji Lopez-Alt did an article where he discussed
               | how you can use sous vide to pasteurize chicken while
               | still keeping it at a low temp, but the result (while
               | perfectly safe to eat) was not enjoyable.
        
               | tstrimple wrote:
               | It was actually one of the first things I tried when I
               | got my sous vide. Amazingly tender and juicy but the
               | texture reminded me too much of under cooked chicken that
               | it made me queasy. Now I stick with steak sous vide.
        
               | QuercusMax wrote:
               | "bacteria can travel to the surface of the muscles during
               | the butchering process"
               | 
               | This way undersells what's actually happening: fecal
               | matter from the intestines gets onto your meat. This
               | _shouldn 't_ happen with proper practices.
        
               | tstrimple wrote:
               | Somewhere between the stomach and the anus fecal matter
               | is created. E. Coli lives along the entire tract. You're
               | not wrong, but it's not just fecal matter which contains
               | E. Coli. Basically the entire process involves it.
               | Stating that shit on your meat is the source of E. Coli
               | is understating the issue but it also triggers a more
               | visceral reaction.
        
             | jmaw wrote:
             | This is why rare steak is ok, but rare ground beef
             | hamburgers are not. Although less cooked through burgers
             | are sometimes served in restaurants that grind their beef
             | fresh right before cooking
        
               | bigstrat2003 wrote:
               | I mean, rare ground beef hamburgers are pretty much fine
               | too. They have a higher risk of contamination, yes, but
               | that does not make it a particularly high risk. I eat
               | burgers, made from pre-ground beef, cooked rare all the
               | time and I have yet to get sick from it even once.
        
               | Freedom2 wrote:
               | It also doesn't help that the quality of ground beef in
               | the US is much poorer than other countries, so those who
               | may regularly eat rare ground beef internationally would
               | experience a level of shock if eating it in the US.
        
           | dismalaf wrote:
           | Understanding how bacteria contaminates food in the first
           | place is the first step.
           | 
           | In the case of steaks, bacteria is only on the outside (they
           | can't penetrate the muscle) so the sear makes it safe to eat
           | somewhat raw on the inside.
        
         | ghostbrainalpha wrote:
         | Am I the only one who thinks the "reverse sear" is like
         | cheating? It takes out all of the skill when you move from the
         | pan to the oven, and I lose all of the fun in learning to be
         | chef.
        
           | airstrike wrote:
           | I agree, it's cheating.
           | 
           | My bad hot take is if you're using a meat thermometer and
           | reverse sear to cook steak, you're like a kid on training
           | wheels.
        
             | bigfishrunning wrote:
             | I'll cheat all day then. If I'm going to spend what a good
             | steak costs, I'm going to do everything in my power to make
             | sure I'm not ruining it.
        
             | ssl-3 wrote:
             | People are allowed to use tools and non-traditional
             | techniques, even when it feels like cheating. They needn't
             | be chastised for this.
             | 
             | The gestapo isn't going to kick in the door and haul folks
             | away for using reverse-sear and a meat thermometer while
             | they cook a steak in their own kitchen.
             | 
             | (And everyone is free to seek their own kind of masochistic
             | pride, if that behooves them. When a person has better
             | satisfaction [or whatever they get out of it] from doing
             | things the hard way, then that's OK too.)
        
               | airstrike wrote:
               | I'm not chastising anyone, I have no power over them
        
               | ssl-3 wrote:
               | > you're like a kid on training wheels
               | 
               | Anyhoo.
        
               | airstrike wrote:
               | You should really read the dictionary definition of the
               | word "chastise".
               | 
               | https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=chastise
        
               | ssl-3 wrote:
               | _To criticize severely; reprimand or rebuke._
               | 
               | k.
        
               | airstrike wrote:
               | Pretty hard to be criticizing someone severely if I'm not
               | even speaking to them specifically, don't you think?
               | You're making a mountain out of a mole hill.
               | 
               | I'm entitled to my opinion, which I self-described as a
               | bad hot take.
               | 
               | Sounds like you're the one specifically reprimanding me
               | here? Oops...
        
               | ssl-3 wrote:
               | Sorry, I can't understand you with all the noise these
               | training wheels are making.
               | 
               | Maybe we can chat again after recess is over?
        
           | addaon wrote:
           | > I lose all of the fun in learning to be chef.
           | 
           | A great steak deserves the respect of preparing it the best,
           | most consistent way you can. For me, that's a reverse sear.
           | 
           | Do something complicated with potatoes to stretch your skills
           | and show off. Worst comes to worst the potatoes are sad.
        
           | QuercusMax wrote:
           | This is like saying that playing guitar while sitting in a
           | chair is cheating, because a proper display of skill is
           | playing while riding a unicycle.
           | 
           | It might be more _impressive_ , but I don't see how reverse
           | sear is cheating.
        
         | comfysocks wrote:
         | Agreed. With steak, the main point is to let the quality of the
         | meat speak for itself. Too much input from the cook and you
         | just get in the way of this.
        
         | ge96 wrote:
         | hehe I always turn mine grey but I have mini bella mushrooms on
         | top
        
         | blmarket wrote:
         | Now it's steak, tomorrow it can be pasta, next year it can be
         | watermelon kimchi.
        
         | Animats wrote:
         | > I take the point, but I think the author picked a poor
         | analogy.
         | 
         | He may have missed the point.
         | 
         | AI-generated code does not seem to have parsimony, for one.
         | Generating code is cheap, so there's no drive to condense it.
         | LLMs are not yet good at formulating abstractions to make code
         | smaller, leading to code bloat. It's the same phenomenon that
         | appears when humans modify code they only partially understand
         | by adding special cases to general code.
         | 
         | There are complaints about "elegance", but it's more useful to
         | talk about parsimony. Code bloat is measurable. Elegance is
         | hard to assess.
        
         | ed_elliott_asc wrote:
         | And salting overnight :)
        
         | belorn wrote:
         | I wonder if something is lost to translation. Cooking a stake
         | could be the simple act of putting the steak in the oven with
         | basically zero seasoning with a thermometer and then wait until
         | medium rare with some optional searing. It could also mean trim
         | the meat, cut into slices, seasoning, and frying/grilling them
         | to each persons personal taste, which include well-done.
         | 
         | Perfect grilled steak, especially well-done, is something I
         | find very few people have the experience or skills to do well,
         | especially over a coal grill where the heat won't be constant
         | and the person also need to first have good experience in
         | making a good and even coal bed.
        
           | NooneAtAll3 wrote:
           | is "cooking" here used in some kind of very specific sense?
           | 
           | isn't it just a word for "making food", so would include
           | grilling as well?
        
             | belorn wrote:
             | That was my interpretation, in which there are many ways of
             | cooking of steak. Some will be very easy, while other to
             | methods seems to give many chefs problem (both professional
             | and home chefs). Many people seem for example to associate
             | well-done steak with something that is dry and burned,
             | rather than something that simply takes more work,
             | precision and skill to get right.
        
         | efitz wrote:
         | Prime with good marbling + sous-vide makes it easy for
         | beginners to match steaks from the best steakhouses.
        
         | dragonfax wrote:
         | Just to add my favorite fool-proof method to the others already
         | listed here.
         | 
         | A meat probe and the 30-second flip technique is a stupid-easy
         | way to a perfect steak every time. Just make sure you've got
         | great ventilation. Also salt the meat 1 hour before.
        
         | pnathan wrote:
         | Reflecting on the matter with a colleague -
         | 
         | Some people just want to _cook the steak_.
         | 
         | They don't want to attend or understand to cuts, thermometers,
         | and searing.
        
         | superultra wrote:
         | I can't confirm the quote online but I remember Julia Child
         | saying in one of her shows that it's easy to make a good
         | omelette and almost impossible to make a great omelette.
        
         | tptacek wrote:
         | "Omelet" is the right (and classic) analogy here.
        
         | d0mine wrote:
         | it reminds me that making a ring is not rocket science
         | https://youtube.com/shorts/NPKOGqXKLq4
        
         | atomicnumber3 wrote:
         | So, once you've used your knowledge to make several important
         | pre-task decisions, the task is easy? Pre task decisions that a
         | layperson would accidentally make implicitly because they don't
         | even know to ask, which will probably result in them still not
         | enjoying their steak despite having nominally done the task
         | itself correctly?
         | 
         | Imagine someone walking into their local grocer, grabbing a
         | prepackaged porterhouse steak (because it's fancy right?), salt
         | and pepper (because for a good steak that's all you need,
         | right) and then wondering why part of it tastes bland and
         | overdone, and the other part bland and under-done.
         | 
         | Sounds pretty analogous imo.
        
         | HPsquared wrote:
         | French fries are much harder to get right, for example.
        
         | theodric wrote:
         | 3 minutes on each side at 600 watts on cast iron, throw it in a
         | foil packet, and ignore it until the rest of the meal is done
         | and plated.
         | 
         | I'll leave it to you to figure out how to unfuck AI, but I
         | reckon 600 watts won't provide enough inference capacity.
        
         | socalgal2 wrote:
         | The analogy I'd use is using LLMs for coding is like a movie
         | director does for movies. A movie director does not draw
         | storyboards, they ask an H.I. (Human Intelligence) storyboard
         | artists to do that. They don't make the costumes they ask an
         | H.I. costume maker to do that. They don't control the camera
         | they ask a H.I. camera person to do that. They don't usually
         | act, they ask H.I. actors to do that. They don't make the
         | soundtrack, they ask an H.I. composer to do that. They don't
         | edit the video the ask in H.I. editor to do that.
         | 
         | Further, they don't just accept what each of those H.I.s does
         | on their first try. The most visible example is when the H.I.
         | actors don't act exactly as the director wants, they retake the
         | scene. But, the same is true of all the rest. As the "director"
         | they "direct" each of those H.I.s toward their vision.
         | 
         | IT seems similar for coding with an LLM. I become the director.
         | I direct the LLM. I check it's results and if they are
         | unacceptable I re-take with instruction on how to do things
         | closer to what I actually want.
        
           | jfengel wrote:
           | You can always tell a director who does do their own
           | storyboards. The film is always visually bats**. In a good
           | way.
           | 
           | I'm looking at you, Guillermo del Toro.
        
           | antipurist wrote:
           | One major difference is that H.I. often cares for the
           | outcome, so directing them is enough. LLM has no capacity to
           | care, it is just a tool, more like watercolors that you paint
           | with than a H.I. storyboard artist that can promise you
           | meaningful results.
        
             | maya335 wrote:
             | The watercolor framing is closer to my experience than the
             | director one.
             | 
             | A director can assume the camera person will push back if a
             | shot is unusable. An LLM will cheerfully hand you something
             | that compiles, looks polished in the demo path, and quietly
             | fails on the cases you didn't spell out. Retakes help, but
             | only if you already know which frames are wrong.
             | 
             | That's the part of the steak essay that lands for me: the
             | machine will follow a recipe at scale. Judging "this is
             | charcoal dressed as medium-rare" is still on you.
        
             | BrandonM wrote:
             | That and you can find good people that get your vision or
             | just do good work and use them on your next project. Or you
             | can mentor a promising person. Etc. Mapping HI to AI as the
             | gp did misses all the major deficiencies of collaborating
             | with a team of agents vs competent humans.
        
         | sourcecodeplz wrote:
         | what even is a perfect stake?
         | 
         | is it rare, medium-rare, medium, well-done?
         | 
         | i think it is subjective.
        
           | oblio wrote:
           | For me it's well done but 90% of meat puritans will skewer me
           | for that. Even after explaining my reasoning. They'll say
           | either rare or at most medium-rare.
        
         | hluska wrote:
         | Cooking an excellent steak consistently requires paying
         | attention to many small details and executing each perfectly.
         | Individually with the exception of choosing a steak, they're
         | all quite easy. Taken together, it takes a relatively uncommon
         | interest in detail.
         | 
         | It's not surprising people on HN find it easy because attention
         | to detail is rewarded in this community/its employers. But
         | common here and common are different beasts.
        
         | Foobar8568 wrote:
         | Depending of the thickness, but all you need is to take out
         | your steak for 30min before hand to 1h, really hot pan, 2min on
         | each side and voila. That will get you there 90% of the time.
         | We do something similar to T-bone or beef ribs, but finish them
         | in the oven.
         | 
         | Most people or even restaurant don't let their meat outside nor
         | use an actual hot pan.
        
         | kulahan wrote:
         | Even easier if you reverse sear. Put it in the oven at 275 for
         | like 25 minutes. Then put it in the hottest pan you can muster
         | for like 45 seconds per side.
         | 
         | No need to bring it up to room temp. No need to let it rest
         | after. No need to do anything except those two steps. It's
         | recommended for 2" thick steaks, and you can go under by half
         | an inch easily, but this can be a little rough on very thin
         | steaks.
        
         | eloisius wrote:
         | Not sure I agree. I have also always thought steak was pretty
         | easy. Whether a t-bone on the grill, a flatiron skirt steak, or
         | some garbage-tier sirloin with eggs. It's simple. Salt, sit,
         | cook a few minutes, rest it a few more and eat. Always good.
         | 
         | Until I moved to Taiwan. I truly can't understand how no one
         | can make a steak. From the garbage pale meat glue "night market
         | steaks" to expensive restaurants. Every steak I've had here is
         | a complete disappointment. Even when they supposedly use top-
         | quality US prime or Japanese Wagyu, even when the inside looks
         | pink and not burned to a crisp, it's always total dogfood
         | quality. They often emulate the right look: pink interior, char
         | on the outside, shiny tallow. But something is off. I never
         | feel like I'm chewing a piece of steak. More like grinding
         | tasteless muscle protein into paste with my teeth.
         | 
         | I don't even know how it's wrong sometimes. I look at it and
         | just know that something is wrong that I wouldn't even know how
         | to replicate, becayse cooking a decent steak is easy to me.
        
       | badgersnake wrote:
       | I'd prefer an article actually about cooking steak.
        
       | signalnine wrote:
       | So use AI like a sous-vide: have it tackle the fiddly, difficult,
       | unglamorous parts using strict controls and then do the parts
       | that require taste yourself.
        
       | armchairhacker wrote:
       | Sous vide
       | 
       | The article is AI generated
        
         | midnightbobarun wrote:
         | It's a level of badly written that makes me think it _could_ be
         | a human, or it might just be an LLM that writes differently
         | from a typical ChatGPT article.
         | 
         | It is slop though, either way.
        
       | hombre_fatal wrote:
       | We have this idea of AI software development where a human
       | watches over its shoulder and shouts out things like "use uuidv7
       | for the id since timing is important" or "use a sum type here to
       | make that bad state unrepresentable".
       | 
       | But the thing is that most of this can be encoded in a markdown
       | file for agents to read if it doesn't already come out of the box
       | in the next round of sota models. And funnily enough as agents
       | get smarter, you risk being overprescriptive where you hamstring
       | the agent from making a pivot that would have led to better
       | engineering.
       | 
       | The future is pretty clear to me at this point that we won't need
       | software engineers looking over the shoulder and instead it's
       | just a "user with taste" asking for revisions.
        
         | sailfast wrote:
         | A software engineer user with taste, yes.
         | 
         | Have you ever been really deep in a thread with an agent on a
         | technical deep dive? The trade-offs conversations would not
         | make sense to someone that is not able to decode the real
         | decisions they're making.
         | 
         | You can dumb down the agent, but the reason domain language
         | matters is because of the precision of the word sometimes - not
         | to be a gatekeeper.
         | 
         | Anyway - user with taste that understands all the elements of
         | their decisions would be my modifier :)
        
           | hombre_fatal wrote:
           | Long ago I added an instruction to my global AGENTS.md that
           | every time the agent asks me something, make it multiple
           | choice that ranks the top options, give a quick trade-off
           | summary of each one, recommend one, and justify it.
           | 
           | Over the last year, I've noticed that the recommended option
           | for technical questions has become one that is always
           | sufficient to the point that I'm once again in a tastemaker
           | position, not in the "here's a better idea btw" position.
           | 
           | And if that's true, then my participation in the intermediate
           | steps isn't strictly necessary to get a well reasoned
           | position that's only directionally wrong.
        
             | user43928 wrote:
             | The Claude Code App automatically does this by default.
             | 
             | The Codex app only does it in Plan mode, I believe. I did
             | not touch the Plan mode for a while.
        
               | StilesCrisis wrote:
               | Claude does, but I've also seen it give a list and then
               | afterwards, it changes its mind and recommends option B
               | or C instead. Really drives home how LLMs don't actually
               | know what they're going to say until they say it.
        
       | sega_sai wrote:
       | In the end, unless we are talking about art, in most areas I
       | probably prefer something that follows some specific set of
       | requirements and recipes, rather than have some sort of
       | indescribable 'magic'. In that sense when it comes to coding AI
       | gives you something that can follow the requirements pretty well
       | and thus satisfies me in many circumstances. (but there are cases
       | where human input is extremely important still)
        
       | wackget wrote:
       | Why does this article use backticks instead of apostrophes?
        
       | sizzzzlerz wrote:
       | Who can afford a steak today without taking out a loan?
        
         | selimthegrim wrote:
         | I think a certain restaurant chain might have something to say
         | about this
        
           | HardwareLust wrote:
           | Sizzler?
        
       | galgantar wrote:
       | I like the comparrison of the AI coding agent to the steak
       | machine. But it is not just about machines scaling better - the
       | laundromat can wash clothes better than a human would. Similarily
       | the AI agent's performance can EXCEED one of a human engineer for
       | simple, well-defined tasks (eg. go over all of the subpages and
       | check that the latest push didn't break something).
       | 
       | Hiring AI cooks is not a problem imo, as long as the human
       | glances over everything that they serve.
        
       | christophilus wrote:
       | I found this to be my favorite approach[0]. Also, Lan Lam's stuff
       | is just generally excellent.
       | 
       | And yes, super easy to make with almost no skill.
       | 
       | [0]
       | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uJcO1W_TD74&pp=ygURVGVjaG5pcXV...
        
         | et-al wrote:
         | Interesting, the NYT had a tip on flipping every 90s, but it
         | was with a cast-iron pan and not a "cold sear". That was too
         | smokey for our weak kitchen exhaust, so it was the last time I
         | tried flipping multiple times.
         | 
         | But Lam Lam's cold sear video doesn't seem to make that much
         | smoke on a non-stick, so I'll give this a shot again.
         | 
         | (Personally the reverse sear has been my idiotproof go-to.)
         | 
         | Thanks!
        
       | luisln wrote:
       | slop article
        
       | z3t4 wrote:
       | Using Claude Code is like asking questions in online forums, if
       | anyone remember that, we still have sites like Stack overflow.
       | The difference now is that those asking the questions are
       | actually paying for the answers.
        
         | jgilias wrote:
         | But not the original authors of those answers.
        
         | oblio wrote:
         | And the "person" answering:
         | 
         | 1. Will always answer (even if sometimes wrong)
         | 
         | 2. In a reasonable time frame
         | 
         | 3. Can be asked in almost any language and answers in the same
         | language
         | 
         | 4. Is always polite
         | 
         | Most people were never willing to ask on StackOverlow.
        
       | the__alchemist wrote:
       | Author left out the oven phase and importance of the input meat
       | (which to a degree scale with price); probably explains his or
       | her results.
        
       | autoexec wrote:
       | You can still get quality services and products. It's still
       | possible to get a well cooked steak, but they are going to get
       | harder to find and vastly more expensive and many people will be
       | priced out of them entirely and will have to settle for the slop
       | (which will also only get more expensive even as quality gets
       | worse).
       | 
       | Between "AI" incompetence and companies not caring about doing
       | anything above the bare minimum it's making our lives worse and
       | more obnoxious. AI is accelerating the enshittification of
       | everything and it goes way beyond software. It'll now be your
       | responsibility to spend your free time on the phone talking to a
       | company's AI chatbot "customer service" trying to fix whatever
       | problems their use of AI will inevitably cause you.
       | 
       | When we envisioned our future we thought everything would get
       | better. All high tech and fancy, but it's looking like what we'll
       | get is expensive yet barely functional and annoying while we
       | collectively just get poorer and dumber.
        
       | midnightbobarun wrote:
       | Considering the article starts with _" Cooking a steak requires
       | almost no skill. Put it in a hot pan"_, I think I see the root of
       | his problem. Pan searing a steak only makes sense in a small
       | number of situations: you have a leaner cut like filet mignon,
       | you want precise temperature control to achieve the Maillard
       | reaction, or you know none of these things but just really like
       | stinking up your kitchen and splattering butter everywhere for
       | the aesthetic and the olfactory experience. For most cases, you
       | would be better off with a grill rather than a pan.
       | 
       | Now maybe you're not knowledgeable about steak, and you're not
       | sure whether the cut of steak you bought would be better off pan
       | seared or grilled. Is ribeye better in a pan or a grill? That
       | depends on whether you want it more smokey or more buttery. Ask
       | an AI and tell it how you want it to taste, and it'll tell you
       | the answer.
       | 
       | His metaphorical steak machine would produce better results if he
       | had simply asked "I want a steak and I have this specific cut and
       | I want it to have this kind of flavor, how do you suggest I make
       | it?" rather than "cook steak on a hot pan, make no mistakes."
       | 
       |  _TL;DR:_ Tell the AI what you want and then ask how it for a
       | recommendation of how to do it. You don 't have to "understand
       | software." You only need to understand how to ask the right
       | questions.
        
       | idorube wrote:
       | here I was just wanting just ONE post about something not AI
       | related...
        
         | marssaxman wrote:
         | instead of complaining about what's here, why not go add what
         | you feel is missing?
        
           | molybd3num wrote:
           | one person can only change so much
        
         | elzbardico wrote:
         | Soon we will be complaining about wanting just ONE post not
         | related to the mother of all market crashes.
        
       | Krei-se wrote:
       | ai coding is the new Symfony w/ bootstrap theme hype cycle. I'll
       | be back to structs. Know your tools!
        
       | gyanchawdhary wrote:
       | The author has clearly not traveled much .. across much of asia,
       | ME, and generally anywhere near or south of the equator, a steak
       | cooked well done is considered the finest way to eat beef ... the
       | same also applies to AI generated code .. it may not satisfy a
       | craftsmans idea of perfection, but it accomplishes what most
       | people actually expect from it .. to take it further .. a film
       | makers fav film is usually unwatchable and considered
       | commercially speaking a failure ..
        
       | _diyar wrote:
       | I like the analogy the author draws.
       | 
       | But so much of the AI capability discussion can be avoided once
       | everyone understands that a) There is some multivariate supply
       | and demand market for software and b) AI is shifting the supply
       | curve of software.
       | 
       | The shift is uneven, not perfectly monotonic, and might actually
       | result in shifts in the demand curve (as e.g. 10x seniors get
       | more valuable).
       | 
       | This insight makes it easier to see the forest despite the trees.
        
       | threethirtytwo wrote:
       | Before AI we lived a world where a steak took two months to
       | perfect. Now we live in a world where it's only 90 percent
       | perfect but it takes 1 hour to cook.
       | 
       | Obviously one way is going to and has already taken over the
       | other way.
       | 
       | But if you look beyond this. That 10 percent remaining gap is
       | closing. We will get perfect steaks within an hour as AI
       | improves. And here is the scary part... it will keep improving it
       | will go past 100 percent perfect. It will become better than us.
        
       | asdfman123 wrote:
       | God dammit I thought this was going to teach me how to cook a
       | steak, not talk about AI.
        
         | nielsbot wrote:
         | HN has also covered steak cooking before:
         | 
         | Show HN: I Derived a Steak
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48691840
        
           | asdfman123 wrote:
           | This place is nerd central (which I guess explains why I'm
           | here).
        
         | entrepy123 wrote:
         | To get a perfect steak with nice X-shaped sear marks on both
         | sides:
         | 
         | 1. Turn grill on all the way. Close lid. Wait for grill's gauge
         | to reach >400 F (>200C).
         | 
         | 2. Put steak on grill. Close lid. Wait 2 minutes.
         | 
         | 3. Rotate steak 90 degrees, placing on a fresh section of the
         | grill (not where it just was). Close lid. Wait 2 minutes.
         | 
         | 4. Flip steak over, placing on a fresh section of the grill
         | (not where it just was). Close lid. Wait 2 minutes.
         | 
         | 5. Rotate steak 90 degrees, placing on a fresh section of the
         | grill (not where it just was). Close lid. Wait 2 minutes.
         | 
         | It's been 8 minutes of grilling. Steak is about done. Stab it
         | with a meat thermometer into the middle part, it should read
         | 350 F (or 176 C) to be medium done (pink in middle).
         | 
         | Tips:
         | 
         | a) Optional but recommended: rub steak with olive oil and steak
         | seasoning on both sides, including the edge.
         | 
         | b) If steak is thicker: add a little more time. If thinner, use
         | less time.
         | 
         | c) If steak is frozen (buy good cheap steaks and freeze to last
         | a long time): add a little time.
         | 
         | d) To cheat, put a little dab of butter on top for the last
         | segment of each side.
         | 
         | e) Leave the steak out for 15-20 minutes to get to room temp
         | before making it.
         | 
         | f) Let it sit on a plate for 8 minutes before serving. It's
         | still cooking, and the juices settle in. You can "tent" foil
         | over it if you want.
         | 
         | g) Don't cut the steak when checking it. "Fast" and accurate
         | meat thermometers are cheap now.
         | 
         | This is for grilling. The stove, broiler, and cast iron skillet
         | instructions are different.
        
           | asdfman123 wrote:
           | MANAGER VOICE: Can we get AI to do this for us? /s
        
           | greedo wrote:
           | 350o internal temp for medium done?
           | 
           | Maybe you forgot to include the glue on your pizza as well.
        
             | entrepy123 wrote:
             | Oops, that should 140 F (or 60 C) when done, in the coolest
             | center part. Thank you for noticing it.
        
               | xxs wrote:
               | 8minutes, that's just pure waste; even medium rare (which
               | is hardly tolerable) is 56-57C. Also cooking the steak
               | without any salt is travesty (that should not be an
               | optional step)
        
           | socalgal2 wrote:
           | You failed. My steak was thin and 4x2 minutes was too long
           | and it was past well done
        
         | gosub100 wrote:
         | AI is the new rick-roll
        
         | Robdel12 wrote:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDBNVO7K0kA this is a really
         | good little episode from PBS
        
         | silisili wrote:
         | It's one of those things that you have to experiment for
         | yourself I think. You'll get tons of advice, I already saw sous
         | vide, reverse sear, 30 second flip, etc. My favorite? I just
         | get a cast iron as hot as I can on the stovetop and flip it
         | once, then at the end quickly sear the edges using tongs.
        
         | commandlinefan wrote:
         | Yeah really, cooking steak well is hard as hell. I sure haven't
         | mastered it yet.
        
           | socalgal2 wrote:
           | Honestly, most places I've been can't do it well. I've had
           | good steaks but I've been to "steak restaurants" and had
           | plenty of bad or mediocre steaks.
        
         | drzhouq wrote:
         | Me2
        
         | scotty79 wrote:
         | I once cooked a steak by throwing it into a auto-rotating 45deg
         | pivoted induction cooking pot for random amount of time with
         | some olive oil, sweet paprika, black pepper and rosemary. It
         | even cooked with a lid on because it was flopping around inside
         | as the pot rotated. It came out pretty nice. I've eaten less
         | tasty ones in restaurants.
        
       | Night_Thastus wrote:
       | It would certainly help if it could taste what it produced. Or
       | see, with its eyes, how the result is changing as its process
       | changes. Or learn, from first principles, what is happening at
       | each step and make deductions about how they will affect the
       | result.
       | 
       | All it can do is randomly shuffle around the steps and ask if the
       | customer likes it. If they don't, shuffle them around again and
       | hope it's better this time.
        
         | dgellow wrote:
         | Don't forget the moment where you realize that instead of
         | cooking a steak the agent went for its own invented
         | requirements and spent all your quota preparing everything to
         | make the perfect ramen from scratch (or at least that's what it
         | tells you, when you ask it to double check what has been done
         | it comes back and tell you it lied and in fact mixed the flour
         | with the soup without making the noodles, with a small note
         | telling you to not forget to prepare the noodles when you go to
         | production)
        
       | onraglanroad wrote:
       | I'm starting to really hate analogies. They more often obscure
       | than enlighten.
        
         | encyclopedism wrote:
         | It's worse, HN seems to suffer from a higher than average
         | pedant count. The analogies are missed completely!
        
         | heddhunter wrote:
         | an analogy is like a garden shed: you try to eat it, it'll get
         | stuck in your throat.
         | 
         | (with apologies to Mike from The Young Ones)
        
       | lizardking wrote:
       | Cooking a genuinely good steak also requires almost no skill. I
       | can give you a chicken scratch note with 3 bullet points and it
       | will come out nearly perfectly.
        
         | aorloff wrote:
         | I was going to say the same thing. 2.5m per side+rotation plus
         | another 2.5 plus or minus 20s depending on heat
         | 
         | But I actually got something out of this -- which is that maybe
         | before now, humans had to soak up the complexity of where value
         | was made in software. And you saw this in the highest and best
         | paid engineers in science and platform teams and basically that
         | you had to invest in brains where you thought the value in your
         | product was.
         | 
         | Without humans managing complexity, you have no idea where you
         | should be investing once the product grows out of the concept
         | stage
        
         | nunez wrote:
         | Slight disagree, as many will heat their pan too high and burn
         | the steak before it cooks through. Or maybe that was just me
         | when I first learned how to cook steak the right way.
         | ("Medium"/"medium-high" doesn't necessarily correlate to the
         | position of the knob on the burner or whether the pan feels
         | medium/medium-high)
        
           | lizardking wrote:
           | True, what constitutes "Medium" on your individual stove is
           | maybe the one single complicating factor! Otherwise it's:
           | 
           | - Cut steak in preheated oven at 250 degrees. - Pull at
           | 125-130 degrees internal temp - Cook one minute per side in a
           | skillet on medium heat
        
       | atleastoptimal wrote:
       | Software slop has existed for as long as software has existed. AI
       | is now a better coder than the median. By the end of next year
       | it'll be better than the best human coders.
        
       | jamesjolliffe wrote:
       | Lol, I'm not sure the author expected to set off an army of nerds
       | arguing how difficult it is to cook a proper steak.
       | 
       | God I, totally unironically, love HN.
        
       | green_wheel wrote:
       | Damn these steak advertisements are getting sneaky
        
       | Havoc wrote:
       | >And what do we want?
       | 
       | >We want the perfect steak.
       | 
       | This premise seems incorrect. SWEs may aspire to produce perfect
       | steaks as a matter of pride, but demand asks for mass produced
       | steaks that trade off against other factor like time and cost.
       | 
       | There is a reason github isn't full of nasa lunar lander quality
       | this can't crash code...
        
         | OroPla wrote:
         | Since the invention of the optigrill you can get great steaks
         | in your home. Automatically.
         | 
         | Those existing make the comparison a bit silly. Though, given
         | how those seem to be somewhat of a niche that few people know
         | or care about maybe automated perfection isn't what all people
         | have an interest in. Process vs. result and all that. Or maybe
         | it's just that few people realize that optigrills are a thing
         | that exist and how good they are.
        
           | StilesCrisis wrote:
           | Are you saying a George Foreman-style electric countertop
           | panini press makes a "great steak?"
        
       | nukethebay wrote:
       | Well I don't even care right now about cooking steak. It's too
       | damn expensive. I suspect LLMs will eventually get there top.
        
       | dasil003 wrote:
       | The best framing I've seen so far--and boy have a lot of people
       | tried to frame the capabilities of AI recently--is that AI shines
       | for people who use it to extend their thinking, and fails for
       | those who use it to replace their thinking.
       | 
       | The latest frontier model developments have chipped away at that
       | latter category. But ultimately the ceiling for that is
       | mediocrity. Yes, if you imagine the most average common thing
       | that has been done a million times, AI can absolutely give a
       | bespoke version of it that matches your words of choice. For the
       | moment it's still an impressive parlor trick to a lot of people,
       | but the novelty wears off fast, and then you realize there's very
       | little value in that. Doesn't mean everyone has to learn to code
       | to use AI effectively, but it does mean they need to be curious
       | and engaged or they'll just become part of the increasingly
       | irrelevant slop machine.
        
       | igiveup wrote:
       | This stuff should have some warning tag: rando's musings about
       | LLMs. Lately, whenever I think I found an interesting article it
       | turns out to be this.
        
         | alansaber wrote:
         | The ragebait > AI pipeline remains strong
        
         | el1s7 wrote:
         | You're also a rando, but the difference is that the rando who
         | wrote article made it into the front page of HN
        
           | jackb4040 wrote:
           | Tattooing this comment on my forehead
        
           | igiveup wrote:
           | And I consider that a great achievement, not being on the HN
           | front page when I have nothing to say.
        
         | daxfohl wrote:
         | Pretty sure this was LLMs musing about LLMs. A little too slick
         | with the analogies and a lot of the "you don't get x, you get
         | y" mic drops.
        
       | fierycatnet wrote:
       | I'm going to get some push back on this but this is my steak
       | night... I buy fillet and throw it in the over for 10 minutes or
       | so, then I cut it up and thrown on the pan with regular butter,
       | salt, pepper and its enough. It gets seared in butter to golden
       | brown and still tender inside. Everything takes about 5 minutes
       | of actual work, 20 if we count the prep and oven heating. My
       | simple go to dinner now, and I got tired of eating medium rare
       | all the time just to keep it "right". Coincidently, it doesnt
       | work with regular sirloin, it gets tougher and not as pleasant as
       | fillet.
        
         | nsxwolf wrote:
         | I am enjoying that people would much rather just talk about
         | actually cooking steaks than AI.
        
       | fnoef wrote:
       | Either my brain is cooked or this is AI generated/assisted text.
       | 
       | The problem is I can no longer tell the difference between AI and
       | non-AI writing. Maybe my brain got bad, maybe everyone now writes
       | like AI writes.
       | 
       | I no longer know.
        
         | user43928 wrote:
         | I did not think so at first, but it indeed comes back 100% AI
         | generated in Pangram.
        
           | jibal wrote:
           | Pangram is useless ... proven by Substack deploying it and
           | numerous authors complaining that it claims their work is AI.
           | 
           | That said, TFA is slop whether produced by AI or not.
        
         | daxfohl wrote:
         | My manager said "load-bearing" during a presentation the other
         | day and I almost lost it.
        
           | fnoef wrote:
           | Wait until they drop the "that's the smoking gun"
        
           | latexr wrote:
           | I know someone--who doesn't even use LLMs all that much, I
           | don't think--who has verbally told me numerous times "you are
           | absolutely right". I never said anything, but the comment
           | always takes me out of the conversation.
        
       | empressplay wrote:
       | About five years ago I flash-fried a frozen steak.
       | 
       | Now I only eat steaks grilled from frozen. Get the grill nice and
       | hot (450F at least) and throw the frozen steak on the grill. 5-10
       | minutes each side usually gets it nice and crispy on the outside
       | while rare and tender in the middle.
       | 
       | Seriously, try it.
        
       | theendisney wrote:
       | I was once impressed by a very crappy cut, a lengthy marinade
       | with a lot of vinegar, a rins and a extremely sweet saus. The
       | meat was very red and was as soft as bread.
        
       | rhelz wrote:
       | I'm tired of articles which try to make us not feel bad about
       | being eclipsed by AI. We've got to change from the mindset of an
       | artisan--who stakes his being on mastering skills and acquiring
       | knowledge--to that of executives.
       | 
       | Figure out what you want to DO. What you really want to do, not
       | what you do just to pay the bills. Once you figure that out, use
       | AI as an executive uses the best employees he can buy.
        
       | jibal wrote:
       | Almost no skill was required to produce that overdone analogy
       | slop.
        
       | sebastianconcpt wrote:
       | Feels like everything is pushing us towards deciding if
       | micromanaging the code generator or find a method where we don't
       | even need to do that.
       | 
       | I still micromanage my agents, how is it with you guys?
        
       | theturtletalks wrote:
       | I hear this take often and here are my thoughts.
       | 
       | AI has basically given everyone a home kitchen, but yes most
       | people are still bad cooks because it's not their passion and
       | it's hard to master. So they go to a restaurant with an excellent
       | chef and eat the steak there. But the restaurant also slowly gets
       | more expensive and quality goes down as the restaurant tries to
       | chase more profits. Fair, but the steak you bought months ago is
       | not the steak you will always get. If you learn to make it, you
       | will get better and not have the overhead of running a business.
       | 
       | His other point was that restaurants will also replace their
       | chefs LLMs and it will taste just like our home cooking. If that
       | happens, other restaurants will come in and compete on better
       | taste.
        
       | mrloopex wrote:
       | Just trying to troll guys who make steak their identity. Lame.
        
       | calmbonsai wrote:
       | There's nothing quite like a poor analogy to trigger HN.
        
       | ern wrote:
       | I actually find that the less I fuss over a steak, the more
       | optimal the result. I do use a thermometer, but apart from that,
       | cooking it with salt and pepper or some steak spice on a cheap
       | pan (stainless steel) and cutting it when it hits temp (resting
       | seems to be BS) gets me tasty results and immense pleasure.
       | 
       | Similarly, the less I fuss over modern AI tools, the better the
       | results. My personal productivity is through the roof, but I find
       | that outdated processes, mythology and trying to overcontrol sap
       | the benefits of AI on larger pieces of effort involving others.
        
       | netbioserror wrote:
       | LLMs are vectoring towards solving problems of software quantity.
       | What remains is judgment, caution, and taste for quality.
       | 
       | Much as computers have made creation in other industries much
       | easier, we're likely to see a glut of crap software made by non-
       | programmers that does not meet _any_ quality bar because these
       | are the sorts who think  "lines of code" was the hurdle to
       | overcome.
        
       | micromacrofoot wrote:
       | fuck me for expecting to read something about steak I guess
        
       | slicktux wrote:
       | I've been taken to a steak house for birthday and was shunned for
       | ordering something basic. My reasoning is; a steak is so easy to
       | ruin because it's so easy to make that it's just not worth the
       | price to risk eating an expensive crappy steak. So I opt for
       | something more basic that I know will be excellent because of the
       | establishment.
        
       | fhub wrote:
       | I couldn't resist looking up if there was an AI grill that would
       | cook the perfect steak.
       | 
       | https://uncrate.com/seergrills-perfecta-ai-grill/
        
       | zippyman55 wrote:
       | We would cook a roast yearly and I'd insert my thermometer and
       | collect data points and then use R to produce. Regression curve
       | and extrapolate a time dinner would be ready. It was fun as heck
       | and the meal always came out right.
        
       | jifarooq wrote:
       | Like many other comments here, I take issue with the title. I
       | thought I would learn how to cook a good steak. But instead it's
       | yet another AI article about how taste (read: judgement) matters.
        
       | wpwpwpw wrote:
       | One might not need skill, but might need a skillet.
        
       | deterministic wrote:
       | The #1 benefit of AI in my experience is improving product
       | quality not development speed.
       | 
       | Claude Code is amazing at finding subtle bugs and improving the
       | performance of the code. Something that directly benefit people
       | using the product. Love it.
        
       | mulanroo wrote:
       | I've never cooked a steak. Not once. It feels like one of those
       | foods where getting it wrong means you've just ruined an
       | expensive piece of meat, so I've always let a restaurant take the
       | risk. This post makes me think I've probably been overthinking
       | it.
        
         | reenorap wrote:
         | Watch Alton Brown's Good Eats on cooking steak. It takes less
         | that 10 mins cooking time and it's easy. That gets you 80% of
         | the way there and then the rest is fiddling around for personal
         | taste.
        
       | brianbarnes wrote:
       | I am vegetarian, but my family likes steak so I buy it and cook
       | it for them. I've been told it is very good. Not sure if the this
       | is an instructive extension of the steak metaphor or not.
        
       | noisy_boy wrote:
       | If only it could do things as predictably as a steak machine. I
       | guess flexibility comes at a price.
        
       | balls187 wrote:
       | That's right. It's not skill. It's technique.
       | 
       | And there are techniques that make it brain dead simple.
        
       | democracy wrote:
       | Cooking a steak is easy - undercook it's "rare", burn it - it's
       | "Well done". You cant go wrong really.
        
       | Ylano wrote:
       | The useful distinction for me is between making something work
       | and knowing why it works
        
       | mehal wrote:
       | Iura nu ti i zaviv liudei! (Yura I love how you activated
       | dialog!)
        
       | lewo wrote:
       | > AI isn't a chef. At best, it's a steak machine.
       | 
       | Seems this analogy is also correct regarding our climate!
       | 
       | https://foodfootprint.nl/en/foodprintfinder/beef-steak/
        
       | YuechenLi wrote:
       | >But a genuinely good steak, medium-rare from edge to edge,
       | browned properly, seasoned right, consistently delicious, is a
       | different matter entirely.
       | 
       | Actually it's pretty easy to get a consistently good steak with
       | reverse searing, pretty much the only thing you should make sure
       | is the surface is bone dry before you sear it to get the nice
       | brown crust. Seasoned right? It's honestly pretty difficult to
       | oversalt steak. If even reverse searing is too much work, I found
       | that an air fryer works pretty well in a pitch for steaks.
        
       | frays wrote:
       | Great post and analogy.
        
       | unsatchmo wrote:
       | Why is everyone being so damned precious about software? Software
       | is not fine wine or a nice cigar.
        
         | eloisius wrote:
         | A better analogy is a quality woodworking tool. A sharp planer
         | is mesmerizing as you work the material. A Salesforce-
         | acquistioned enterprise tool that redirects through 15
         | endpoints over 3000 ms on every link click is the antithesis to
         | that.
        
         | akmarinov wrote:
         | They've been told all their lives that software must be clean,
         | SOLID, DRY and now something comes along that doesn't care
         | about any of that and the business people prefer it because it
         | gets the job done really quick.
         | 
         | And people hate change
        
       | skc wrote:
       | Chefs kiss would be this post having been written using AI.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-08-07 09:01 UTC)