Speaker 1: Brought to you by Toyota. Let's go places. Welcome to
Speaker 1: Forward Thinking. Hey, they're in weld into Forward Thinking, the
Speaker 1: podcast that looks at the future and says John Belaiah
Speaker 1: and the Crawfish Pie and a Dele Gumbo. I'm Jonathan Strickland,
Speaker 1: I'm Lauren block Oban, and I'm Joe McCormick. And today
Speaker 1: you're hungry. Well, actually I am hungry. I'm pretty much
Speaker 1: always hungry. I too early today and now I am hungry.
Speaker 1: It's my secret. I'm always hungry. So today for lunch,
Speaker 1: I went to a local h what would you call it, shrine,
Speaker 1: local local establishment called eats. It's a Southern cafeteria. It's
Speaker 1: called Eats. The sign for which I always think. I
Speaker 1: don't think anybody agrees with me, but to me, the
Speaker 1: sign for Eats looks like it says ants, so I
Speaker 1: call it iNTS. So, so lunch there can last upwards
Speaker 1: of ten years. It really could. It could be in
Speaker 1: your body that long. Uh, Joe. Joe decided to be
Speaker 1: adventurous and try something that he doesn't normally try. Yeah. Well,
Speaker 1: I didn't like my my new dishes as much today
Speaker 1: as I like their their standard like jerk chicken, which
Speaker 1: is pretty good. They're really known for it. But it
Speaker 1: is definitely always worth being a little adventurous in the
Speaker 1: kitchen trying something new. Yeah, and and another thing we
Speaker 1: wanted to mention. The new thing is going to become
Speaker 1: really important later on and it gets weird, y'all, but
Speaker 1: before we get there. Uh, you know, the other thing
Speaker 1: I wanted to mention is that the kitchen has for
Speaker 1: a really long time been kind of a gateway to
Speaker 1: technology in the home. H Yeah. Yeah, people are very
Speaker 1: technologically adventurous in the kitchen as well as food wise. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I think I even was looking around and the reason
Speaker 1: why whenever c e S rolls around that used to
Speaker 1: be known as the Consumer Electronic Showcase, but now it's
Speaker 1: just c E S. Uh. There's always a huge number
Speaker 1: of various alliances and inventions that our kitchen oriented, and
Speaker 1: it's largely because when it comes to technology, we tend
Speaker 1: to adopt it for the kitchen pretty early. People love
Speaker 1: kitchen gadgets. Yeah, late night TV filled with the various
Speaker 1: kitchen gadgets of questionable quality, many of which I own. Uh.
Speaker 1: So I wanted to talk a little bit about how
Speaker 1: the kitchen is kind of this this gateway to home
Speaker 1: automation and programmable appliances before we get into the concept
Speaker 1: of robot chefs and AI getting involved in our food,
Speaker 1: just to kind of illustrate how it's been changing, even
Speaker 1: uh just recently. Oh sure, we take all of these
Speaker 1: automated kitchen devices very much for granted. These days, you know,
Speaker 1: you're your coffee maker that you can program to go
Speaker 1: off whenever you want coffee, uh, in anticipation of when
Speaker 1: you're going to want coffee, but which is always. But
Speaker 1: getting to this point has been kind of uckey. The
Speaker 1: very first computer that was built for the kitchen was okay,
Speaker 1: to be fair more of a marketing ploy than it
Speaker 1: was a real product. But this was in nineteen sixty
Speaker 1: nine and at the time even Jane Jetson's kitchen still
Speaker 1: ran on punch cards. Uh. So to stir up publicity,
Speaker 1: retailer Neiman Marcus paired up with technology innovator Honeywell to
Speaker 1: promote a kitchen computer which would plan menus for you
Speaker 1: based around a single main course. It also weighed about
Speaker 1: a hundred pounds uh and was so large that it
Speaker 1: came in the form of like a small kitchen island
Speaker 1: with a cutting board and everything. Uh, it was it
Speaker 1: was really a repackaged Honeywell three sixteen, which was a
Speaker 1: sixteen bit mini computer. By mini computer, they meant smaller
Speaker 1: than a room at the time, and and and these
Speaker 1: things were commonly used in like commercial and industrial applications,
Speaker 1: So it was it was so complex to use that
Speaker 1: the come but he has offered a complimentary two week
Speaker 1: programming course to potential buyers. Like it had it had
Speaker 1: no screen, It was just like a flashing light display.
Speaker 1: The communicated in binary code. So uh, only twenty were
Speaker 1: ever produced, and those only after public interest was way
Speaker 1: higher than they anticipated. It was basically it was like, hey,
Speaker 1: talk about this thing that we might possibly do to
Speaker 1: be fair Enow, this is an era where people were
Speaker 1: really looking forward, like the home of the future, right,
Speaker 1: this this idea of everything is going to be easier
Speaker 1: from now on because it's all going to be automated.
Speaker 1: This is still a story we're telling today, but it's
Speaker 1: obviously taken a lot longer than what we anticipated. So
Speaker 1: I'm curious if back in those days, I wanted one
Speaker 1: of these miraculous machines to grace my kitchen, how much
Speaker 1: might I be expected to pay for such a thing. Well,
Speaker 1: it was priced at wow. Yes, but when you account
Speaker 1: for inflation in today's dollars, that is worth sixty thousand,
Speaker 1: nine hundred and twenty five So so for the price
Speaker 1: of just a couple of automobiles, Yeah, it's it's unlikely
Speaker 1: that anywhere ever sold. Wow. That's pretty amazing. But you know,
Speaker 1: obviously that was not just the beginning and the end
Speaker 1: of this this you know trend in trying to create
Speaker 1: automated devices for the kitchen. Oh sure, it would take
Speaker 1: the level of miniaturization and the level of Internet access
Speaker 1: that came along in the late eighties and early nineties
Speaker 1: to really kick off the creation of inexpensive and actually
Speaker 1: marketable devices that do not talk to you in binary code.
Speaker 1: The first touchscreen fridge, for example, debuted in from electric Lux,
Speaker 1: and basically after that, we've been living in a in
Speaker 1: a rush of kitchen tech. You know, I feel like
Speaker 1: crowd fun ending websites are just chock full of kitchen
Speaker 1: gadgets people are trying to fund, like immersion cookers, that
Speaker 1: kind of thing. I mean, I remember seeing that, like
Speaker 1: for suvied type approach. I've been seeing those crowdfunded for
Speaker 1: a while, but all sorts of kitchen gadgets are up there.
Speaker 1: And uh, I mean I think of like when you're
Speaker 1: thinking about the the the history of automation in the kitchen,
Speaker 1: things like dishwashers obviously spring to mine, and coffee coffee makers,
Speaker 1: like we were saying earlier, and also things like bread makers.
Speaker 1: I mean, I remember when bread makers really became a thing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: my parents got one when I was a kid, and
Speaker 1: I remember, I remember it being an extremely long, laborious
Speaker 1: process to make, even with the bread makers. But if
Speaker 1: you if you were doing something like putting the ingredients
Speaker 1: in the morning and starting it off and then just
Speaker 1: letting it go, then by evening you had a fresh
Speaker 1: baked loaf of bread. The house smelled of bread. This
Speaker 1: was a miracle machine as far as I was concerned,
Speaker 1: because my mom makes amazing homemade bread, but because doing
Speaker 1: it by hand is even more laborious than using a
Speaker 1: bread maker, it was so infrequent that this went that
Speaker 1: we actually got to have it more often, which in
Speaker 1: my mind was amazing. Yeah. So some of the things
Speaker 1: I wanted to mention before we get into the robots stuff,
Speaker 1: just some some more examples of uh technology that's becoming
Speaker 1: available now, stuff that that general automated cooking gadget. Yeah,
Speaker 1: things that have debuted at c e S recently that
Speaker 1: kind of stuff. One was the Rodi Matic. I love
Speaker 1: the name already, but it's an automatic Rodi cooker. So
Speaker 1: you can get like r O T I R O
Speaker 1: T I h the Indian pancake type of thing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so you just load the ingredients. They have these different
Speaker 1: canisters that hold the various ingredients so that they mixed
Speaker 1: them in the proper proportions and and uh you then
Speaker 1: said it and it cooks about one per minute. So uh,
Speaker 1: if I had more room in my kitchen, I would
Speaker 1: get one of these because I think that is amazing.
Speaker 1: But I think my wife would kill me. I'm the
Speaker 1: cook in our family, by the way, so to me, like,
Speaker 1: these are the things that appeal to me, And then
Speaker 1: I think I don't have physical space for it, so
Speaker 1: it's hard for me to justify purchasing it. Um the
Speaker 1: Smarter coffee maker. Uh, this is one of those things
Speaker 1: that you you wouldn't really think you needed until you
Speaker 1: see it, and then you think, but I don't understand
Speaker 1: the appeal what's the deal. So the smarter coffee maker
Speaker 1: goes beyond programming, like we're used to the programmable coffee
Speaker 1: makers at this point. If you have one of those,
Speaker 1: then you can you know, you load it up and
Speaker 1: you say, all right, at at six thirty in the morning,
Speaker 1: start brewing my cup of coffee. So that way I
Speaker 1: have it as soon as I get up and come
Speaker 1: downstairs or whatever. The smarter coffee maker goes beyond that.
Speaker 1: You can actually access it through an app. So you
Speaker 1: use your app to tell your coffee maker exactly how
Speaker 1: much coffee you want to make, so if you want
Speaker 1: a big cup of coffee, you say, use this much
Speaker 1: water versus that much water. Um. It also will keep
Speaker 1: track of how many beans are still in the coffee maker,
Speaker 1: so when it gets low, you can reload it add
Speaker 1: more beans to it. So uh, kind of an Internet
Speaker 1: of things approach to making coffee. There was the x
Speaker 1: y Z printing three D food printer which was shown
Speaker 1: at c e S that was capable of using sweets
Speaker 1: ort of cookie dough and printing it in different shapes.
Speaker 1: So not quite the three D printer that makes a pizza,
Speaker 1: but one that could make you know Christmas cookies if
Speaker 1: you wanted or whatever shape cookies you wanted. Uh. So,
Speaker 1: I don't know how many people would actually get one
Speaker 1: of those. Again, like my immediate responses, I totally don't
Speaker 1: need that, but I totally kind of want one. Uh
Speaker 1: There was the Pico brew Zymatic, which is an automated
Speaker 1: beer brewing device. It takes four four hours to brew
Speaker 1: an unfermented beer. I looked I saw your note on this,
Speaker 1: and I was like, an unfermented beer fermentation the point
Speaker 1: of beer. Yeah, it is, no, So the unfermented beer
Speaker 1: is not what you drink, and so it'll make this
Speaker 1: and then you can ferment it and then you can
Speaker 1: have beer. Because I was thinking what would that be like,
Speaker 1: I'm sure it would be gross. I don't think they're
Speaker 1: suggesting you drink it at this stage. En Fermented beer
Speaker 1: is called wart wart with an o wart word. I
Speaker 1: don't know how you say it. I guess it's just
Speaker 1: we're saying like one of the crunts from Halo. I
Speaker 1: don't know what you're talking about, not a Halo player anyway,
Speaker 1: but it's this this sugary grain based liquid that becomes
Speaker 1: beer through the process fermentation, Right, so this would be
Speaker 1: something that would speed up that process and automated so
Speaker 1: that you don't have to have the same level of
Speaker 1: um you don't have to babysit it as much. Right,
Speaker 1: that's the that's the big thing, until you get to
Speaker 1: the fermentation stage, which obviously would go outside of this
Speaker 1: this device. Yeah, I was reading a little bit about
Speaker 1: it and it said that the main appeal of this
Speaker 1: thing is if you want to be able to experiment
Speaker 1: with a lot of different recipes with very precise measurements. Also,
Speaker 1: it appeals to pete who live in a place where
Speaker 1: they might not have a lot of space to do
Speaker 1: this kind of stuff on their own. Uh So, people
Speaker 1: who might live in an apartment or a townhouse where
Speaker 1: they don't have like a big garage or something. It
Speaker 1: was very appealing for those folks as well. Whirlpool went
Speaker 1: bonkers at c S and showed off a fully interconnected
Speaker 1: kitchen with all the different appliances able to talk to
Speaker 1: all the other different appliances. It even included an interactive
Speaker 1: backsplash so you could get like recipes printed on your
Speaker 1: backsplash while you're working on stuff, and cook tops that
Speaker 1: could actually link to your social media profiles. So if
Speaker 1: you wanted, if you wanted to take the step out
Speaker 1: of tweeting what it is you're having for dinner, Jonathan
Speaker 1: Strickland is using medium high heat exactly. I can't say
Speaker 1: that I immediately recognized the appeal, but it certainly was
Speaker 1: built into it. People are very fond of, you know,
Speaker 1: posting their dinner. That's true social media, that's true. And
Speaker 1: you know, if you if you're doing that three times
Speaker 1: day every day, it just wears out your type and thumb,
Speaker 1: you know. I feel like people are more fond of
Speaker 1: posting their brunch or lunch rather than dinner. Maybe I'm wrong.
Speaker 1: I think it depends on where you're eating, if you're
Speaker 1: eating at home, um like a weekend to brunch or lunch.
Speaker 1: I'm sure there's their statistics out there for this big
Speaker 1: data get back to us. Yeah. I think it probably
Speaker 1: also would give you an indication of how well someone's
Speaker 1: date is going based upon the number and frequency of
Speaker 1: food related tweets you see from that person. Okay, Jonathan, Sorry,
Speaker 1: everything you've said so far, I'm unimpressed. I want a
Speaker 1: robot or cyborg type organism or machine that cooks for me. Well,
Speaker 1: I have some good news for you, Joe. They're top people.
Speaker 1: I always want to see top men because that's the raiders.
Speaker 1: Come on, let's be fair. There are tough. In fact,
Speaker 1: one of the people who is behind one of the
Speaker 1: robots chefs I'm gonna talk about is an eighteen year
Speaker 1: old lady and she really impressed me because I got
Speaker 1: to meet her in person on an airplane on the
Speaker 1: way to see es. But so, why don't we have
Speaker 1: robot cooks? Well, I mean that's that could be asked
Speaker 1: about almost anything where. Why don't we have robot butler's. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: why don't we? I mean, that's a good question, and
Speaker 1: the answer is, actually, I think fairly similar because these
Speaker 1: jobs require all kinds of versatility, of movement and recognition,
Speaker 1: you know, multiple different types of artificial intelligence converging on
Speaker 1: a task. That can become pretty intuitive to us. But
Speaker 1: think about all the different types of AI it needs.
Speaker 1: It needs spatial awareness and manipulating objects and visually recognizing
Speaker 1: things and understanding what tastes are. I mean a lot
Speaker 1: of manual dexterity. Yeah, yeah, it is incredibly complicated, but
Speaker 1: that hasn't stopped various people from trying to create types
Speaker 1: of robots that would help with cooking. So you know,
Speaker 1: we've already talked about some automated devices that are you
Speaker 1: could think of them almost like robots. Uh. And they
Speaker 1: certainly have some functions that are are similar to robotic functions,
Speaker 1: but they're very very specific in there the tasks they
Speaker 1: can do, which not a big surprise, right, because when
Speaker 1: we talk about robots, that's that tends to be the case.
Speaker 1: We talk about people designing robots for very specific tasks.
Speaker 1: That's way easier than designing a robot for general tasks.
Speaker 1: So one of those companies is called a Serenity Kitchen.
Speaker 1: Serenity is spelled s e r e n e t I. Uh. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I keep on and calling calling it a sereneti kitgenimate
Speaker 1: Serenity Kitchen. This is this is the group that I
Speaker 1: got to meet on an airplane trip to c e S.
Speaker 1: I was flying in the very back of a plane
Speaker 1: and the road immediately ahead of me were the people
Speaker 1: from Serenity Kitchen, which was three young students, uh, one
Speaker 1: of whom was the person who came up with the idea.
Speaker 1: She was the brains behind the concept. And it is
Speaker 1: a brilliant concept. So the basic idea was that you
Speaker 1: have a essentially a cooking surface and a robotic arm
Speaker 1: mounted above the cooking surface, and the robotic arm could
Speaker 1: create a stirring motion to stir whatever was in a
Speaker 1: pan that's on top of that cooking service. So you
Speaker 1: would put ingredients into the pan, the robot arm would
Speaker 1: continuously stir it until the food is done, and that
Speaker 1: way you wouldn't have to babysit stir. Yeah. Yeah, oh
Speaker 1: that's just just the application for making a ru Yeah, exactly, yeah,
Speaker 1: something like that. Now they were looking they were actually
Speaker 1: using it to show off things like pad tai. Uh.
Speaker 1: They were showing a lot of Eastern dishes and they said, well,
Speaker 1: we also have applied this for Western dishes like a
Speaker 1: you know, if you want to make a spaghetti or whatever.
Speaker 1: And they said, really, the first target audience, we're looking
Speaker 1: at our college students, people who would maybe go and
Speaker 1: buy a cheap microwave dinner, which typically doesn't taste very
Speaker 1: good and usually isn't very good for you. So what
Speaker 1: if you would create a device that would make uh,
Speaker 1: the the healthy food for you. You You know, you're just
Speaker 1: dumped the ingredients into whatever and it would do the
Speaker 1: rest of the work because college students are lazy, and
Speaker 1: it would allow them to to not have to put
Speaker 1: forth that kind of effort and they would get the
Speaker 1: benefit of a healthy dinner h cooked for them. And
Speaker 1: the brilliant part of their approach was that their plan
Speaker 1: wasn't to sell expensive robot cooks. Uh. They were actually
Speaker 1: looking at using the robot cook is sort of a
Speaker 1: lost leader the same way that video game consoles come out.
Speaker 1: That's immediately what I thought of, like that they you know,
Speaker 1: they're not making a lot of money selling you a
Speaker 1: PlayStation for something. They're hoping that you're they're going to
Speaker 1: make it back and you're buying games, right, so instead
Speaker 1: of games, we're talking about meals. So they actually compared
Speaker 1: it to curig, which makes sense, the coffee maker that
Speaker 1: uses the little pods. They said, well, you know, you
Speaker 1: could buy this this device, Uh, if you wanted to
Speaker 1: buy it out right, you could, but would cost somewhere
Speaker 1: around the neighborhood of five nine U s dollars. It's
Speaker 1: pretty expensive, you know for something that would not be
Speaker 1: a direct replacement for a large appliance in your kitchen.
Speaker 1: But they had a subscription plan where you can subscribe
Speaker 1: to a service that would send you the ingredients for
Speaker 1: ten meals a month for three years. So it's a
Speaker 1: three year commitment, and then the robot would cost just
Speaker 1: ninety nine dollars. The subscription would be fifty dollars a month,
Speaker 1: and that sounds like a lot at first, but then
Speaker 1: when you figure weight, it's ten meals in a month.
Speaker 1: That's five bucks a meal. That's a fast food meal
Speaker 1: right there, but you're getting fresh ingredients. So the idea
Speaker 1: being that, uh, you know, this would be a way
Speaker 1: to get people locked into a system where they would
Speaker 1: get the delivery ten meals a month. They'd be able
Speaker 1: to use this. They could use it for other things too,
Speaker 1: if they had the ingredients on hand, but these would
Speaker 1: be things that robot would be specifically programmed to handle.
Speaker 1: So you put the ingredients in either directly in the
Speaker 1: p in or their actual plan has a robot that
Speaker 1: would have trays and you put the ingredients into the
Speaker 1: the individual trays according to the directions of the recipe,
Speaker 1: and then the robot would add the ingredients as needed
Speaker 1: in the process of making that. After two minutes of
Speaker 1: sauteing the onions, then you put in the carrots, and
Speaker 1: then you put in the meat and then right exactly. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So that way you you cook the various ingredients the
Speaker 1: right amount of time so that it's the right consistency, texture,
Speaker 1: nutritional value, all that kind of stuff. And I thought
Speaker 1: this was brilliant. I thought that their business plan really
Speaker 1: appealed to me because you could tell they got it.
Speaker 1: They it was a very uh, innovative approach, not just hey,
Speaker 1: we'll sell them the equipment, more like, hey, we'll sell
Speaker 1: the equipment at a big discount, but will really make
Speaker 1: the money on the food part. And as long as
Speaker 1: the food is good and the robot does what it's
Speaker 1: supposed to do, then that's a great business plan. So
Speaker 1: if you look at the images of what it actually
Speaker 1: the working model they brought to see, yes, what it
Speaker 1: looked like, and then you look at the mock ups
Speaker 1: of what they wanted to look like when it's an
Speaker 1: actual consumer product, it's miles apart. But that makes sense
Speaker 1: because it's a prototype versus what would be the finished product. Uh.
Speaker 1: But you know, they did launch an indie go go campaign,
Speaker 1: which they ended early. I think they ended it after
Speaker 1: four days. Uh, And the reason they did was They
Speaker 1: said they got a lot of feedback that they thought
Speaker 1: was helpful and they wanted to incorporate in the design,
Speaker 1: but they didn't feel like continuing with the indie go
Speaker 1: go campaign would reflect that. So they ended in and
Speaker 1: said we're gonna come back in a few months with
Speaker 1: a new design based upon the feedback we're receiving. Um.
Speaker 1: They also were talking about that it would be great
Speaker 1: in the future if the robot could do more than
Speaker 1: just you know, essentially it's just adding ingredients and stirring um.
Speaker 1: If it could do more than that, like do more
Speaker 1: of the prep work or or you know work, or
Speaker 1: maybe maybe even something a little more simple, like being
Speaker 1: able flip over an omelet or something. Because as opposed
Speaker 1: to just stirring um. So that was really interesting to me.
Speaker 1: And like I said, I was really impressed by their
Speaker 1: their ingenuity, uh and really their business plan. It was
Speaker 1: beyond just the technology, which was already interesting, but the
Speaker 1: idea that they were like, well, convincing people to buy
Speaker 1: an expensive robot is kind of a no win approach,
Speaker 1: Like it's you know, unless you are just you know,
Speaker 1: determined to go after a very niche audience, you're not
Speaker 1: really gonna make a lot of sales that way. But
Speaker 1: then we can look at a different one, a different
Speaker 1: approach that doesn't really concern itself too much with making
Speaker 1: affordable robots. Yeah. Yeah, let's let's say that that we
Speaker 1: are still or that Joe at the very least is
Speaker 1: still deeply unimpressed like this entire plan. Like he he
Speaker 1: needs something that's going to do way more work than
Speaker 1: just stirring the food. And he says, you know those
Speaker 1: kids over at Sertainity, they're they're great and all, but
Speaker 1: I need I need a heavy duty robo chef, not
Speaker 1: just a cook. I need a chef. I want arms
Speaker 1: that operate on a rail above the stove encounter. Well,
Speaker 1: I have news for you, my friend, Moly Robotics. It's
Speaker 1: a London based company that created a robo chef. It's
Speaker 1: more advanced than the cookie concept. Cookie, by the way,
Speaker 1: is the name of the robot from Serenity Kitchen. Uh
Speaker 1: so it actually incorporates learning algorithms, or at least the
Speaker 1: end product is supposed to, meaning that you can show
Speaker 1: the robot how to make something and then it will
Speaker 1: then be able to make it. You know, repeat that
Speaker 1: that process and make that thing for you in the future. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so I watched a demonstration video of this robot trying.
Speaker 1: I think it was making some crab bisk. I'm not positive,
Speaker 1: but that's the impression I got because they mentioned crab
Speaker 1: bisk and the soup looked kind of bisky. It took
Speaker 1: a fresh crab and cracked it over the pot, crack
Speaker 1: into fresh crab exactly. Uh no, but it was. It
Speaker 1: was kind of like it was a pair of arms
Speaker 1: that are hooked to a ray all over the stove
Speaker 1: area and then yeah, moving back and forth, grabbing ingredients,
Speaker 1: pouring them into the pot, stirring them up, adding things.
Speaker 1: But but but how does it learn how to do
Speaker 1: all of this? Well, the funny thing is it doesn't
Speaker 1: have any idea what the heck it's doing, so it doesn't,
Speaker 1: you know, when it grabs the olive oil and adds
Speaker 1: that to the pot. If you were to put a
Speaker 1: bottle of arsenic where the olive oil is, it would
Speaker 1: just add that all the same. It learns based on
Speaker 1: basically spatial memory from observing a human do the same actions,
Speaker 1: which means that you have to place the ingredients in
Speaker 1: the same spots as when you taught the robot how
Speaker 1: to do this thing. Sure, sure, And and it could
Speaker 1: be slightly less catastrophic than arsenic its olive oil. It
Speaker 1: could be as vinegar that would make the taste of
Speaker 1: the dish quite different. Y. Yeah, and also from the
Speaker 1: cooking pattern, Yes, the ingredients, the ingredients you would use,
Speaker 1: you might put in very special containers that are specific
Speaker 1: sizes and shapes, and that would allow the robot to know,
Speaker 1: all right, the thing that's in the round container that's
Speaker 1: three inches tall goes in next, then the squarish container
Speaker 1: that's four inches tall that gets at it after that.
Speaker 1: Like it has it's like a program. It follows a
Speaker 1: specific set of steps, and you can show it what
Speaker 1: steps it has to follow. But you then have to
Speaker 1: set everything up exactly the same way so it can
Speaker 1: follow those steps. It can't just take raw ingredients that
Speaker 1: are piled in on the kitchen counter and then chop
Speaker 1: them up figure out what to do with them. Yeah.
Speaker 1: But but it's still pretty cool because once you show
Speaker 1: it how to create a recipe, it can it can
Speaker 1: remember that forever, and it can create that recipe without
Speaker 1: any variation. Like it could be perfectly consistent, so you
Speaker 1: can see how something like this would be incredibly useful
Speaker 1: in a restaurant. And yeah, where your goal is to
Speaker 1: do it the same every time. Want you want the
Speaker 1: dishes to be as consistent as possible. You don't want
Speaker 1: there to be a lot of variation unless there's, you know,
Speaker 1: a request from a customer saying, you know, I'm allergic
Speaker 1: to such and such. Don't put that. Please replace my
Speaker 1: olive oil with yeah when you're you know that person.
Speaker 1: Uh so the oh man, what a great kurdled biscuit.
Speaker 1: So one of the big challenges they had was creating,
Speaker 1: uh hands that would mimic the the utility of a
Speaker 1: human hand because they're pretty complex. That's still a robotics problem. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's tough, and they did a pretty good job. They
Speaker 1: said that they had almost all the same degrees of
Speaker 1: freedom of movement that a human hand has. They said,
Speaker 1: the really the only part of a human hand that
Speaker 1: they weren't they didn't replicate for the purposes of this
Speaker 1: robot was the ability to kind of not dislocate, but
Speaker 1: but to shift your thumb over and like they that one,
Speaker 1: they said, wasn't necessary for them to be able to
Speaker 1: hold onto the various implements, and they used the exact
Speaker 1: same type of kitchen utensils that we humans would use,
Speaker 1: like a ladle or spoon or whatever. Uh. Those can
Speaker 1: be hung up and the robot can can recognize which
Speaker 1: ones are which and grab the appropriate one at any
Speaker 1: given point of the recipe. Um. They said, it was
Speaker 1: really tough. I'm sorry, I'm just imagining a scene in
Speaker 1: a movie where somebody has one of these in their
Speaker 1: house and they get murdered because somebody comes in and
Speaker 1: teaches the robot how to stay. Let's hope that that
Speaker 1: would be against its product, Like I would say, I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: that's against my my law of cooks robotics division. Um.
Speaker 1: So it also can't send some of the more delicate
Speaker 1: processes that are involved in cooking things that have some
Speaker 1: variability to them. And the example that they gave, which
Speaker 1: I thought was a very uh it was a great example,
Speaker 1: was if you want to beat eggs so that they
Speaker 1: start to peek, Yeah, egg whites, Like if you're trying
Speaker 1: to like you're trying to get to a meringue or
Speaker 1: something like that, and you're beating these egg whites, it
Speaker 1: doesn't Sometimes it takes a little longer than other times,
Speaker 1: Like it can depend upon the you know, whatever eggs
Speaker 1: you've got at whatever time of year. Yeah, that the
Speaker 1: temperature of the bowl and of the eggs, and the
Speaker 1: humidity in the room. Yeah, So these these variables may
Speaker 1: be difficult for a robot to sense initially. So that
Speaker 1: would mean the robot would not necessarily have the the
Speaker 1: ability to predict how long it would take to get
Speaker 1: to the right point. So for something like that, you
Speaker 1: would need to build in other elements for the robot
Speaker 1: to be able to sense when it needed to stop,
Speaker 1: like right, like um, like the resistance of the whisk
Speaker 1: going through. Yeah, or it may it may be as
Speaker 1: simple as some stereoscopic cameras that can get a good visual,
Speaker 1: uh idea of what's going on, or the resistance sensors.
Speaker 1: It might be a combination. Probably would be to try
Speaker 1: and increase the accuracy as much as possible, although peaks
Speaker 1: are stiff. You have to you know, you have to
Speaker 1: balance the accuracy versus the cost that it adds to
Speaker 1: the overall device obviously. But yeah, that's one of those
Speaker 1: things where that would they hope to have that built
Speaker 1: into future versions of this. The BBC covered this robot
Speaker 1: Chef in a story and mentioned that it was being
Speaker 1: trained by Tim Anderson. It was a BBC Master Chef
Speaker 1: Champion in two thousand eleven. I want to be a
Speaker 1: cooking robot? Yeah, yeah, would you learn from Tim Anderson? Yeah?
Speaker 1: I keep wanting to call him master Chief instead of
Speaker 1: master Chef. I see master Chef and I'm like, he's
Speaker 1: master Chief. Uh. This is the most halo centric cooking
Speaker 1: episode that has ever been recorded by anyone war war.
Speaker 1: So ideally you would end up getting this this very
Speaker 1: consistent results. So it might not be the most exciting
Speaker 1: thing for a home chef, like a home cook, unless
Speaker 1: you just you know, as you know, there's this one
Speaker 1: dish that you love and you love you know how
Speaker 1: it's made every time, then obviously that would be desirable
Speaker 1: to you. But some people say, well it kind of
Speaker 1: takes the experimentation part out of cooking. Um, And so
Speaker 1: it really depends upon your approach to cooking in the
Speaker 1: first place. Some people take a more out and brown
Speaker 1: kind of chemist approach and physics based approach, and some
Speaker 1: people are a little more we call them bakers. Some
Speaker 1: people are a little more loosey goosey. We call them
Speaker 1: me and uh, yeah, I am not. I don't bake
Speaker 1: well because I'm a little too loosey goosey with the
Speaker 1: rules and that does not work in baking. Do you
Speaker 1: not own a scale? I do own a scale, Actually
Speaker 1: I don't use it. Some people were really bad at
Speaker 1: potions or chemistry, depending on which universe you live in,
Speaker 1: and uh and and and some you know, yeah, I was.
Speaker 1: I was. That was always my strong point. I am,
Speaker 1: in fact baker great in charms, but terrible in potions. Uh.
Speaker 1: So they want to develop this further. They want to
Speaker 1: make the finished consumer version smaller. It's a larger form
Speaker 1: factor than they would prefer right now to try and
Speaker 1: put on a consumer market. And they also want to
Speaker 1: incorporate other things in the robot itself, like a ball
Speaker 1: refrigerator and a dishwasher, so would actually replace certain things
Speaker 1: in your home and therefore maybe justify the incredibly expensive
Speaker 1: price tag. So the BBC says the estimated price will
Speaker 1: be around ten thousand pounds or fifteen thousand, six hundred
Speaker 1: dollars US for the for the cheap version. The expensive
Speaker 1: version would be closer to dollars more expensive than the
Speaker 1: Honeywell commutery. Yeah, I was about to say, we're getting
Speaker 1: right back into Honeywell territory. That's exciting. Yeah. So this
Speaker 1: would not necessarily be something your average home would would
Speaker 1: have uh incorporated into the kitchen. I mean, kitchen appliances
Speaker 1: are expensive. But I will start thinking about going to
Speaker 1: the bank and getting alone for this. If this thing
Speaker 1: can deveye shrimp and pitch cherries throwing, throwing a cherry
Speaker 1: pitter and an in, I feel your pain. I certainly would.
Speaker 1: You know, for me, it's like the idea of cleaning fish.
Speaker 1: I can't do that, but I would buy a machine
Speaker 1: that could um. So one of the things we also
Speaker 1: wanted to mention was that, you know, robots are one thing, right,
Speaker 1: the automation of these tasks, that would free up a
Speaker 1: lot of time for us, so we could do something else.
Speaker 1: And for those of us who you know, we might
Speaker 1: enjoy cooking, but there's certain parts of cooking that we
Speaker 1: find tedious. We could give that over to the machines.
Speaker 1: But what about going a step further and having artificial
Speaker 1: intelligence inform the types of foods we prepare in the
Speaker 1: first place. So there, you mean the capacity of a
Speaker 1: chef not to do the physical act of cooking, but
Speaker 1: to come up with recipes something vent dishes exactly, to innovate,
Speaker 1: not just to follow a set of instructions, but to
Speaker 1: come up with new instructions, perhaps combinations and instructions that
Speaker 1: have never before been attempted by humans and should be
Speaker 1: some of which may fall into that out ofgory. So
Speaker 1: we when we can talk about it, Yeah, we're going
Speaker 1: to talk about chef Watson. Uh so Watson. Hey, we
Speaker 1: talked about Watson recently, so this would be the it's
Speaker 1: been a Watson kind of month, it has been. Yeah, Watson.
Speaker 1: It's funny. On forward thinking, I've been talking all about
Speaker 1: Watson and on tech stuff. I've been talking about the
Speaker 1: Manhattan Project, Manhatton project, and the post apocalyptic technology and
Speaker 1: radiocarbon dating. So I guess I just get on a
Speaker 1: kind of a streak after a while. But with Watson,
Speaker 1: in case you don't remember, Watson's the computer developed by IBM.
Speaker 1: It played on Jeopardy and One against two returning champions
Speaker 1: because humans aren't smart I know who, I'm just kidding.
Speaker 1: They were very smart, but the computer had a very
Speaker 1: impressive performance. Yeah, and it's a it's a cognitive computer.
Speaker 1: It learns UH and as as it is trained, it
Speaker 1: learns how to perform certain tasks, whether it's actual physical tasks,
Speaker 1: you know, if you have a robotic component, or just
Speaker 1: you know, the process of something better and better as
Speaker 1: it as it's as you train it and tell it, yes,
Speaker 1: you've done a good job. That's exactly what we want,
Speaker 1: or no, this is not the result we wanted, then
Speaker 1: it can start to learn and do them more and
Speaker 1: more efficiently. So Watson has been used for all sorts
Speaker 1: of stuff we talked about in the Tone Analyzer episode.
Speaker 1: It's also been used to help with UH in the
Speaker 1: medical field to help lots of different processes and anything
Speaker 1: that you want to do that requires you to to
Speaker 1: bring a whole bunch of information to the table. It's
Speaker 1: it's really great for yeah, and it can it can
Speaker 1: end up kind of weighing that information and giving you
Speaker 1: at least an idea of what information seems to be
Speaker 1: the most relevant. UH. And it's obviously making guesses in
Speaker 1: some cases, but they're very educated guesses based upon huge
Speaker 1: volumes of information. Well, Chef Watson is using that same technology,
Speaker 1: but in the process of creating recipes uh IBM calls
Speaker 1: it cognitive cooking, and it's based upon a couple of things,
Speaker 1: the historic uses of various ingredients as well as the
Speaker 1: chemical composition of those ingredients themselves and which chemical compositions
Speaker 1: would be most likely to complement one another. So it
Speaker 1: is going to be learning in large part from recipes,
Speaker 1: from recipes that exist. It did. Yeah, they they fed
Speaker 1: it thirty five thousand recipes along with a whole lot
Speaker 1: of information like like food pairing theories and that that
Speaker 1: flavor compound chemistry and just cultural taste preferences. Right, So
Speaker 1: that way, with all that information combined, it could start
Speaker 1: coming up with really interesting recipes recipes. So they showed
Speaker 1: this off. IBM showed this off in in the perfect
Speaker 1: way in my mind. They got a food truck and
Speaker 1: they sent it to south By Southwest Interactive, which makes
Speaker 1: perfect sense as a huge festival, a lot of a
Speaker 1: lot of influential people from various businesses are there, and um,
Speaker 1: what they did was they gave people the opportunity to
Speaker 1: vote on one of several different dishes that had been
Speaker 1: invented by chef Watson. So Watson would go through its
Speaker 1: data base and say, all right, well, traditionally this ingredient
Speaker 1: could be paired with this other ingredient, but I'm going
Speaker 1: to do that and because I know that that's going
Speaker 1: to produce this one type of taste, that taste would
Speaker 1: probably go really well with this other thing that no
Speaker 1: one's ever really bothered to combine with these and that's
Speaker 1: gonna be my recipe. So attendees would end up seeing
Speaker 1: the the candidates and then vote on Twitter essentially do
Speaker 1: a hashtag and their choice, and then whichever one got
Speaker 1: the most votes would be the one that the the
Speaker 1: food truck would deliver the next day, So you could
Speaker 1: go to the food truck and get a sample of
Speaker 1: that and try it out. Not to be clear, this
Speaker 1: food was not prepared by robots. No, no, what Watson
Speaker 1: was not in the food truck. No Watson and Spirit
Speaker 1: was in the food. Yeah, the Watson technology remained back
Speaker 1: at IBM and was connected through the cloud. Uh. The
Speaker 1: humans were actually preparing the stuff, but they were preparing
Speaker 1: the recipes based off of an artificial intelligence creation. So
Speaker 1: this was innovated by a machine, not by a human humans.
Speaker 1: This is kind of like the opposite of what we
Speaker 1: were just talking about, right, So instead of the robot
Speaker 1: preparing these ingredients and making a meal. The robot came
Speaker 1: up with which ingredients you were going to use, and
Speaker 1: then you created the meal. So this is the model
Speaker 1: where you become the robot and just perform out of
Speaker 1: blind faith, exactly what the machine tells you to do. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you become one of the drones in the nineteen eight
Speaker 1: for Macintosh commercial. But hey, you're a robot that gets
Speaker 1: to eat some potentially tasty and probably really weird food.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about that. Well, all right, let's talk about
Speaker 1: some of the examples that they came up with that
Speaker 1: the food truck. So uh, they had stuffed like Belgian
Speaker 1: bacon putting. I don't know exactly what that was. The
Speaker 1: one that they gave the most attention to in the
Speaker 1: videos I watched was an apple cobb, Vietnamese apple cobb.
Speaker 1: That sounds pretty good to me. It was apples and pork,
Speaker 1: which have been used quite a few times like apple pork,
Speaker 1: apple sausages kind of stuff. And mushrooms were the other
Speaker 1: key ingredient in this, along with some other ones. Um
Speaker 1: and the program had identified a common flavor compound and
Speaker 1: apples and pork and calculated that if the two combined
Speaker 1: that make a pleasant flavor and added the mushrooms in,
Speaker 1: and in fact, the people behind it said this was interesting.
Speaker 1: I never would have thought to add mushrooms to this
Speaker 1: particular dish, but people seemed to react to it positively.
Speaker 1: They also had other stuff like coconut caribbean snapper fish
Speaker 1: and chips, which I'm down with great. They had a
Speaker 1: beef burrito that contained two ounces of dark chocolate, which
Speaker 1: I first reacted. Yeah. First, my first reaction was weird,
Speaker 1: and then I thought chicken. I put a tiny amount
Speaker 1: of dark chocolate into my chili recipe, which that makes sense.
Speaker 1: You know, I end up putting in an adult beverage
Speaker 1: in my chilly recipe, and I might surprise you. Because
Speaker 1: I don't drink adult beverages. It often means that I
Speaker 1: am left over with quite a bit of adult beverage
Speaker 1: that you can get rid of because they don't sell
Speaker 1: it in the small amount I need. Not usually no.
Speaker 1: But anyway, if you wanted to give this a try,
Speaker 1: you don't have to wait for the food truck to
Speaker 1: show up in your neighborhood. Instead, you can actually go
Speaker 1: to the website, the Chef Watson website, and you can
Speaker 1: sign in using something like a Facebook profile or the
Speaker 1: IBM I D and you then can experiment. So it
Speaker 1: has a place where you can put in an ingredient
Speaker 1: and you can put I think up to four ingredients,
Speaker 1: maybe more than that. I just I remember seeing four
Speaker 1: on the screen. And you can start with just putting
Speaker 1: in a single one and then I'll fill out the
Speaker 1: rest for you, or you can go in and fill
Speaker 1: in you know, no, I want these two paired together,
Speaker 1: and then tell me what I can make from that.
Speaker 1: And you can also fill in things that you don't
Speaker 1: want to put in. For for example, I really shouldn't
Speaker 1: have bell peppers, so I could say no bell peppers, yep. Yeah.
Speaker 1: And in fact I did that as well, because I thought, hey,
Speaker 1: I might actually use this in the near future. But
Speaker 1: one of the people I'll be cooking for can't have tomatoes,
Speaker 1: so I have to eliminate tomatoes from that. Otherwise I
Speaker 1: would just have to go through recipe by recipe, you know,
Speaker 1: and that gets t d s. Yeah, well yeah. IBM
Speaker 1: teamed up with Bonappetite to create this app, and they
Speaker 1: they've also published a cookbook of Watson's recipes with the
Speaker 1: Institute for Culinary Education, which is the team of chefs
Speaker 1: that they work together with to develop the software. In
Speaker 1: the beginning, recipe I want to try is called Broccoli Frecacy,
Speaker 1: which is pretty interesting to me, like it actually sounded
Speaker 1: really appealing. It was also kind of odd because broccoli
Speaker 1: was the ingredient I put in at the beginning, so
Speaker 1: I was like, tell me the kind of stuff I
Speaker 1: can make with broccoli. It filled out the other ingredients.
Speaker 1: I think it added colligue. Well, first added tomato and
Speaker 1: its no, no, I can't have that. Knocked it off.
Speaker 1: They replaced tomato with cauliflower, and then I can't remember
Speaker 1: what the other two ingredients that it added before it
Speaker 1: just gave me the list of recipes. But it was
Speaker 1: funny because it's it's called broccoli Frecacy. And then I
Speaker 1: looked at the the recipe itself and I was like, oh,
Speaker 1: this does sound really good. And then it occurred to me, hey,
Speaker 1: I haven't seen broccoli yet. And it turned up that
Speaker 1: the broccoli was an optional ingredient in broccoli Frecacy, and
Speaker 1: instead of using noodles, which is how the regular recipe
Speaker 1: was being presented, it said you could replace the noodles
Speaker 1: by boiling broccoli and then mashing it up and then
Speaker 1: putting the rest of the dish on top of that.
Speaker 1: That would be a base. Okay, so optional broccoli broccoli frecacy. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so freacacy, which may or may not have broccoli. So
Speaker 1: that's just one example of something odd that might happen.
Speaker 1: But that's not the strangest thing we discovered while using
Speaker 1: Chef Watson. No. I was like, well, I'll give this
Speaker 1: a spin. I am also the cook in our household,
Speaker 1: and I feel like I have fairly decent culinary instinks,
Speaker 1: so I decided to give it a try. I was
Speaker 1: disappointed to find that you can't start with whatever ingredients
Speaker 1: you want. They're they're limited by stuff the the you
Speaker 1: know database whatever it is, already recognizes. So I tried
Speaker 1: to start with rat meat, and it just didn't know
Speaker 1: what to do with it. Apparently you're like, hey, what
Speaker 1: if I am living in a fallout vault and I
Speaker 1: have a limited group of ingredients. That's exactly when something
Speaker 1: like this would be really useful. All right, we'll go on.
Speaker 1: But okay, so no rat meat recipes. But then I thought, okay,
Speaker 1: maybe mustard greens. I like mustard greens. I'll see what
Speaker 1: I can do with that. One of the top results
Speaker 1: was something called a mustard greens dumpling, like a Chinese
Speaker 1: style dumpling with wanton wrappers. Yeah, that sounded interesting to me.
Speaker 1: I was just like, okay, I'll give it a look.
Speaker 1: And I clicked on this recipe. And I promise I
Speaker 1: wasn't doing this to be mean. I wasn't trying to
Speaker 1: make Watson cry or intentionally display its shortcoming. But I
Speaker 1: think the results were quite bizarre. So the first thing
Speaker 1: it tells you to do in the mustard greens dumpling
Speaker 1: is to fill the dumplings with a food processor minced
Speaker 1: combination of vegetables and seasonings. I quote, finally mince scotch, bonnet, pepper,
Speaker 1: and garlic. In food processor add okra and okra, Brian
Speaker 1: cured olives, Nisa olives, sesame oil, garlic, chili sauce, and
Speaker 1: soy sauce. Well, first of all, let me say, you
Speaker 1: can never have too much okra. I like okra, but
Speaker 1: it I don't know what to do with the okra
Speaker 1: and okra. You have to finally mince it. It tells
Speaker 1: you at the beginning of the sentence okay to add
Speaker 1: in all the Okra. Uh yeah, well, okay, so I
Speaker 1: also like Okra a lot too, But even as a
Speaker 1: fan of Okra, this sounds kind of strange to me.
Speaker 1: And maybe I'm just not being open minded enough, but
Speaker 1: based on my like human culinary instincts, a Chinese dumpling
Speaker 1: paste that is literally half by way made up of
Speaker 1: brine cured olives, nice Swa olives, and Scotch bonnet peppers
Speaker 1: sounds absolutely disgusting. Now you say that, and have you
Speaker 1: tried one yet? No, I haven't say that. For those
Speaker 1: who are not familiar with Scotch bonnet peppers, they they
Speaker 1: pack a bit of a punch. Yes, these are going
Speaker 1: to be hot. They're hotter than how many arrows they're Yeah,
Speaker 1: they're quite spicy. Yes, these are gonna be very spicy.
Speaker 1: I mean I like spicy food. That's fine, But more
Speaker 1: than half of what makes up the filling is going
Speaker 1: to be olives. And then you're gonna add soy sauce
Speaker 1: to it, and chi sauce, which is I'll talk about
Speaker 1: an ingredient that didn't pop up. Oh yeah, wait a minute,
Speaker 1: I thought I was making mustard green dumplings. What happened
Speaker 1: to the mustard greens. Well, finally I kept reading through
Speaker 1: it to find where they came in, and finally I
Speaker 1: got to the step pour enough water into the pot
Speaker 1: to reach depth of one half inch line steamer rack
Speaker 1: with mustard greens leaves. So, in other words, the steam
Speaker 1: is going to be passing through the mustard leaves, right.
Speaker 1: So well, I mean, so if you've ever made dumplings
Speaker 1: in a steamer, it's a very common practice to lay
Speaker 1: out cabbage leaves or let us leaves or something in
Speaker 1: the steamer just to sit the dumplings on while they steam. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so they don't stick to it in the end, and
Speaker 1: those kind of things can impart a little bit of
Speaker 1: flavor to the dough. So the thing that it calls
Speaker 1: mustard green dumplings is is might have a waft of
Speaker 1: mustard green, but it has no mustard greens as an ingredient.
Speaker 1: Maybe what this tells us is that Watson really hates
Speaker 1: mustard greens. Could be I just wanted to be tangentially
Speaker 1: related to the cooking process. Also, there's another thing that
Speaker 1: kind of surprised me, which is that it said this
Speaker 1: recipe makes thirty six surveys when they're they're about four
Speaker 1: cups of filling, it looks like an appetizer, clearly, Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: And if I don't know, if the filling is mostly
Speaker 1: salty olives and so I sauce, that might be for
Speaker 1: the best. Anyway, I I don't mean to rag on
Speaker 1: it too much. I mean, I think the idea of
Speaker 1: creating an AI chef is really cool, and I can
Speaker 1: actually see a recipe synthesizer being a better investment, at
Speaker 1: least in the short term than a physical robot cook,
Speaker 1: just because of all the problems of you know, how
Speaker 1: to navigate the kitchen and recognize ingredients and stuff if
Speaker 1: you're talking about the physical cook. But to me, this
Speaker 1: shows the limitations of a system like this when it's
Speaker 1: trying to work with unstructured data, because there, I mean,
Speaker 1: I understand that the data that they fed it is
Speaker 1: I think somewhat structured, maybe partially structured, but it seems
Speaker 1: like it could be more well structured. So in other words,
Speaker 1: one of the limitations you would say is that it's
Speaker 1: listed as the principal ingredient, but in truth, the mustard
Speaker 1: greens are just used to incidental to the recipe. But
Speaker 1: but the the AI can't tell that, right to the
Speaker 1: AI that because that's involved in the process, it must
Speaker 1: therefore be as as important as these other anything else
Speaker 1: elements inside the recipe. Yeah, so, in my opinion, I
Speaker 1: would think to design like reliably good cooking instructions without
Speaker 1: a lot of human compensation, because we can look at
Speaker 1: recipes like these and say, okay, I could maybe take
Speaker 1: some of the suggestions of this recipe, but I mean
Speaker 1: not follow it word for word because that would be insane.
Speaker 1: And in fact, they even tell you to do that.
Speaker 1: They say, quote, these quantities and steps are ideas, but
Speaker 1: Chef Watson really needs you to use your own creativity
Speaker 1: and judgment. Let us know how to make chef smarter.
Speaker 1: So they, I mean they understand the limitations obviously there.
Speaker 1: We're not like pointing out something they haven't figured out
Speaker 1: in this to point out cognitive computing. That's how cognitive
Speaker 1: computing works, right, is that you tell the computer, hey,
Speaker 1: I made this thing. You made It was a monstrosity
Speaker 1: and it it made me want to burn my house down.
Speaker 1: Don't do that. Then the computer says, got you, good,
Speaker 1: but I'll not do it again. But I do think
Speaker 1: something like this could maybe work better if you start
Speaker 1: with more structured data. Well, personally, before we make such
Speaker 1: a bold statement as that, Joe, I think we really
Speaker 1: do have to make these and find out what happens. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: so you want me to make some olive dumplings and
Speaker 1: bring them in. I'll eat one if you bring it in. Well,
Speaker 1: I like Scotch bonnets. I'll bring the water, you bring
Speaker 1: the water. Well, Yeah, it's too bad we don't have
Speaker 1: like a farmer's market near by the office, because I
Speaker 1: think that would be amazing. It would be we can
Speaker 1: shoot a video where we make Yeah, we make the Watson.
Speaker 1: We should each pick a Watson based recipe and do
Speaker 1: a video of it and say, here's the future of recipes.
Speaker 1: I think, do you have any day and dates coming up?
Speaker 1: Let's let's you know. I'm pretty much sold for the
Speaker 1: rest of the year. But I'm okay, but I think
Speaker 1: I think it actually would benefit us from doing it.
Speaker 1: I think we need to do this, Okay, Yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: totally in. I mean because because this is really fun.
Speaker 1: It's such a fun demonstration of how a tool as
Speaker 1: powerful as Watson can be used in in perhaps unexpected ways. Uh,
Speaker 1: and you know the application of Watson's processing power. The
Speaker 1: same application can also help us find more effective treatments
Speaker 1: for diseases, or identify drugs that could be therapeutic in
Speaker 1: ways other than what they were originally developed for right,
Speaker 1: or even find potential problems of different medications interfering with
Speaker 1: one another before you actually prescribe them to a patient.
Speaker 1: So incredibly powerful tool. And you know, yes, this this
Speaker 1: application we're talking about seems a little frivolous, but honestly,
Speaker 1: I'm excited by it because I love the idea that
Speaker 1: the recipe for the next amazing dish might be created
Speaker 1: by an artificial intelligence because it doesn't know, it doesn't
Speaker 1: know that it's breaking a rule necessarily. Now I don't.
Speaker 1: I don't think the mustard green dumplings, what's gonna be it? Well, hey,
Speaker 1: I want to end with some good news. Now. I
Speaker 1: did find another recipe under the mustard because it gives
Speaker 1: you lots of different recipes to choose from. I found
Speaker 1: another one that was called grilled mustard greens, and it
Speaker 1: was not for grilled mustard greens. It was actually for
Speaker 1: grilled cod served on a mustard green salad. But it
Speaker 1: sounded pretty good. I was like, well, maybe I will
Speaker 1: give this a try cod with mustard greens. Now, the
Speaker 1: picture it had associated with it was a picture of
Speaker 1: grilled shrimp, and the first step in the cod recipe
Speaker 1: was one word. It said, d vane. I think, uh,
Speaker 1: I think what we're gonna need I don't think applies
Speaker 1: to God. I think at some point what we're gonna
Speaker 1: have to do is create our own Like this will
Speaker 1: probably be how the singularity actually happens, y'all. What we
Speaker 1: will do is we will create a well, we'll cook
Speaker 1: a dish that was created by Chef Watson maybe if
Speaker 1: we were you know, the Serenity Kitchen folks are located
Speaker 1: all Atlanta. Maybe we'll use a robot to help prepare
Speaker 1: a dish that was made by a different robot, and
Speaker 1: then we'll take a picture of that and feed the
Speaker 1: picture through Google Deep Dream. And that's how the Singularity happens.
Speaker 1: All right, I think we've got it planned. You know,
Speaker 1: So finally that April Fool's episode we released will become true.
Speaker 1: I'll just be a little there'll be a little prematures.
Speaker 1: All well, let we'll let you know when we're when
Speaker 1: we're pulling the trigger. Yeah, but no, I really do.
Speaker 1: I really am excited about trying this, whether we do
Speaker 1: a video on it or not, I am excited about
Speaker 1: about using this and seeing how it turns out, because
Speaker 1: even if it fails, it's interesting, right and uh and
Speaker 1: I love again being being a gadget guy and being
Speaker 1: the cook. This is the kind of stuff that just
Speaker 1: appeals to me all on its own. But I'm curious
Speaker 1: to hear what our listeners think. Would you, guys, use
Speaker 1: a robot in your kitchen or do you think that
Speaker 1: that takes the fun out of cooking? Would you follow
Speaker 1: a chef Watson recipe or have you? And if you have,
Speaker 1: let us know what the results were like, Um, shove
Speaker 1: Watson is a very easy app to you, So if
Speaker 1: you want to go out there and give it a shot,
Speaker 1: let's know your results. Please do. I would love to
Speaker 1: hear it more. Of course, if you have any suggestions
Speaker 1: for future topics, you can let us know. Send us
Speaker 1: an email. The address is f W thinking at how
Speaker 1: Stuff Works dot com, or drop us a line on Twitter,
Speaker 1: Google Plus or Facebook. At Twitter and Google Plus, we
Speaker 1: are fw thinking at Facebook. Just search f W thinking
Speaker 1: in the search bar will pop right up you can
Speaker 1: leave us a message and we will talk to you
Speaker 1: again really soon. For more on this topic in the
Speaker 1: future of technology, visit forward Thinking dot Com, brought to
Speaker 1: you by Toyota. Let's Go Places,