Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tyson Foods CEO: The Future of Food Might Be Meatless

foxbusiness.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–205 of 205 posts

Re: Tyson Foods CEO: The Future of Food Might Be Meatless

#201

Post by kranner »

soheil wrote: post #200
kranner wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cows don't understand what's happening to them I don't believe this is as true as you seem to think. Supposing someone proved to you with some future subjectivity-detecting tricorder that cows do understand all they go through, will you change your mind about the humane bullet method?

Yes and then I'll use my transporter to beam myself to the past to right all the wrongs. > cows do understand all they go through Also you seem to be exaggerating a bit, what do you exactly mean by all? Are you talking about their entire life or just when they're about to be slaughtered, because I think for most parts cows have a pretty happy life. The slaughtering could be done more precisely and quickly but that's…

So it should be perfectly all right to raise humans for slaughter then, as long as we can manage to keep them unaware that they are going to be slaughtered until the last moment?

Re: Tyson Foods CEO: The Future of Food Might Be Meatless

#202

Post by soheil »

soheil wrote: post #200
kranner wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cows don't understand what's happening to them I don't believe this is as true as you seem to think. Supposing someone proved to you with some future subjectivity-detecting tricorder that cows do understand all they go through, will you change your mind about the humane bullet method?

Yes and then I'll use my transporter to beam myself to the past to right all the wrongs. > cows do understand all they go through Also you seem to be exaggerating a bit, what do you exactly mean by all? Are you talking about their entire life or just when they're about to be slaughtered, because I think for most parts cows have a pretty happy life. The slaughtering could be done more precisely and quickly but that's…

If cows killed other cows I'd think there was something wrong.

"Cows don't understand what's happening to them, we would! Unless we wouldn't, as aliens might already be secretly controlling us and that's why we don't understand 'the meaning of life' etc. in which case it's not that bad is it?"

Re: Tyson Foods CEO: The Future of Food Might Be Meatless

#203

Post by nickpsecurity »

SN76477 wrote: post #199
bglazer wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Baby Jacks BBQ You're from Memphis? It's so rare to run into another Memphian on HN.

Im in Memphis. PM me for the local slack info.

Is your username the Slack ID or something? Nothing on your profile page.

Re: Tyson Foods CEO: The Future of Food Might Be Meatless

#204

Post by grue0 »

bane wrote: post #152
grue0 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can plants suffer? How much energy/resources/time does it take to raise plant food sources vs an analogous amount of animal food sources? Do plants require antibiotics to raise at scale? What are the environmental tolls taken by raising plants vs animals?

> Can plants suffer? Let's say I were to describe a living thing, that despite having no nerves or brain we could identify, responded to favorable stimuli in ways we could easily describe as a "favorable response" -- for example, the presence of usable energy would provoke the movement of appendages towards that energy source, and the presence of unfavorable or damaging stimuli would provoke an "unfavorable response"…

So until we can give a precise, reductionist definition of what suffering is - and enumerate all that can/can't experience it - then animal treatment is not an ethical question? Given a hammer and a choice to hit either a kitten or a rock for $10, what distinctions between the two would you make to help your decision? I think a central nervous system and/or an analogue for a response that we recognize as pain are a decent starting point.

What proportion of meat-based meals are eaten instead of plant-based meals specifically because of that lack of human ready plant food being available?

Do the bacteria which are targeted by plant antibiotics pose a similar risk to humans as the bacteria that affect livestock such as pigs?

It might be ethical to euthanize a majority of cows etc., if it could be done instantaneously, painlessly, and somehow without creating humanitarian or environmental issues. It would have to be a perfect hot swap, though.

When technology and space exploration allows, I would also support simply relocating these Earth species en masse to other customized planets where they can live/suffer/die in more natural or "fair" terms without our systematic interference.

Re: Tyson Foods CEO: The Future of Food Might Be Meatless

#205

Post by halcyondaze »

Mathnerd314 wrote: post #113
notyourwork wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You mean you planted that whole acreage with seed, let them grow, watered and fertilized them all the while, just to cut them down, chop them up and ship that to people?"

Hydroponics is actually a ton easier (at scale): http://www.epicgardening.com/hydroponics-vs-soil/ Seems like a good argument.

Appreciate you sharing this, I wrote this years ago and am glad to see it's still getting traction :)
Post reply on HN