Newsletter Subject

I swear to God, if y’all AI Anthony Bourdain...

From

eater.com

Email Address

newsletters@eater.com

Sent On

Sun, Jul 23, 2023 01:00 PM

Email Preheader Text

Robots cannot understand food in the way that flesh-and-blood humans can.

Robots cannot understand food in the way that flesh-and-blood humans can.                   [View on web]( Important reminder: Robots cannot eat. | Getty I am so tired of hearing about artificial intelligence that I could just about die. Over the past couple of months, we’ve been inundated with stories about what AI can and cannot do, specifically as it relates to the future of workers in industries like [tech](, [fast food](, and, ahem, [journalism](. The cumulative effect of this constant preoccupation with AI is [a heavy shroud of existential dread looming over the entire internet as we all sit and wait for the robots to take our jobs](. And then, the Washington Post managed to find a way to make it all feel even worse. This week, reporters from the newspaper [used a new tool from online learning platform Khan Academy that allows students to “have conversations” with famous figures from history; in this case, they used it to “interview” Harriet Tubman](. They asked “her” about everything from her heroic work in helping enslaved people to freedom to her favorite song and her thoughts on critical race theory, a legal framework that didn’t really exist until 60ish years after she died in 1913. The tool coughed up inaccurate information about Tubman’s work and dodged the political stuff, ultimately resulting in a piece that is neither interesting nor illuminating. But it did get me thinking about how AI enthusiasts might try to replicate this experience in the world of food. [Recipe websites]( and [chefs]( are already thinking about how they can tinker with AI. If things keep going as they are, I can imagine a near future in which you can just chat with the long-dead Julia Child about the best way to make sauce bordelaise, or bug the late Anthony Bourdain about his favorite cebicherias in Lima. It’s a bit of a tempting prospect, the idea of accessing those wealths of wisdom and insight that are no longer with us. Who wouldn’t want to hear Bourdain wax poetic about a late-night Tokyo noodle spot one more time? Why wouldn’t I want to hear Child’s distinctly comforting laugh as she walks me through making a dish? I’ll tell you why: Because it’s not real. The whole reason we loved someone like Anthony Bourdain is because of his authenticity, his distinct humanness that let us know we could trust him. Audiences fell in love with Julia Child not because she was technically the best French chef, but because she made us feel like we too could make beef bourguignon. No matter how much it learns by [stealing the work of actual humans without giving them credit or recompense](, AI fundamentally cannot understand food in the way that flesh-and-blood humans can. Robots, after all, cannot eat. And we are fortunate to have lived in the era of celebrity chefs, at least in this sense, because there are still so many ways that we can learn and take inspiration from these towering culinary figures. They left us thousands of pages of writing to read and countless hours of television to watch, veritable gold mines of their knowledge for us to learn from forever. Not to sound like the crustiest old broad alive, but if you’re dying to talk to Anthony or Julia or the late Marcella Hazan or Auguste Escoffier himself, pick up a damn book! —Amy McCarthy, staff writer Related reading: - Right now, [executives in the fast-food industry are looking to AI to replace everyone]( from dishwashers to workers that make guacamole at Chipotle. - My brilliant colleague Jaya Saxena on [why AI recipes are terrible and suck](. - [AI is one of the biggest issues in the ongoing writers and actors strikes](. Read more about why actors and writers are so concerned about AI’s role in their industry. - According to the New York Times, Google has already [held a demonstration of an AI tool capable of writing news stories for executives]( from the New York Times, the Washington Post, and News Corp, which owns the Wall Street Journal. For better or worse, AI might be here ASAP. If you like this email, please forward it to a friend. If you aren't signed up for this newsletter, you can [do so right here](.   [Facebook]( [Twitter]( [Instagram]( This email was sent to {EMAIL}. Manage your [email preferences]( or [unsubscribe](param=today). View our [Privacy Notice]( and our [Terms of Service](. Vox Media, 1201 Connecticut Ave. NW, Floor 11, Washington, DC 20036. Copyright © 2023. All rights reserved.

Marketing emails from eater.com

View More
Sent On

08/11/2024

Sent On

04/11/2024

Sent On

01/11/2024

Sent On

22/10/2024

Sent On

17/10/2024

Sent On

16/10/2024

Email Content Statistics

Subscribe Now

Subject Line Length

Data shows that subject lines with 6 to 10 words generated 21 percent higher open rate.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Words

The more words in the content, the more time the user will need to spend reading. Get straight to the point with catchy short phrases and interesting photos and graphics.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Images

More images or large images might cause the email to load slower. Aim for a balance of words and images.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Time to Read

Longer reading time requires more attention and patience from users. Aim for short phrases and catchy keywords.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Predicted open rate

Subscribe Now

Spam Score

Spam score is determined by a large number of checks performed on the content of the email. For the best delivery results, it is advised to lower your spam score as much as possible.

Subscribe Now

Flesch reading score

Flesch reading score measures how complex a text is. The lower the score, the more difficult the text is to read. The Flesch readability score uses the average length of your sentences (measured by the number of words) and the average number of syllables per word in an equation to calculate the reading ease. Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy.

Subscribe Now

Technologies

What powers this email? Every email we receive is parsed to determine the sending ESP and any additional email technologies used.

Subscribe Now

Email Size (not include images)

Font Used

No. Font Name
Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2019–2025 SimilarMail.