71–80 of 205 posts
Soylent will likely become a billion dollar global enterprise, and even "disrupt" the food industry. It will also ultimately be a failure and frowned upon in modern society. Why? Because a Soylent-saturated world would rob families and loved ones of the ritual and benefits of eating together. Eating together civilizes people. It's emotionally and socially edifying. Studies show that families that dine together stay t…
Soylent will likely become a billion dollar global enterprise, and even "disrupt" the food industry. It will also ultimately be a failure and frowned upon in modern society. Why? Because a Soylent-saturated world would rob families and loved ones of the ritual and benefits of eating together. Eating together civilizes people. It's emotionally and socially edifying. Studies show that families that dine together stay t…
Your comment reads like you're living in the 60s. I don't think that modern families have the kind of "ritualistic" meals you're describing.
Food production and eating are not problems to be solved[0]. If you don't enjoy sitting down to a good meal, well, that's okay by me. Personally, I think you're missing out on something, but that's just my opinion. But please don't act as if giving up on sharing a meal with friends or family is a step forward for humanity.
[0] Famine and food shortages notwithstanding. I could see the benefits of Soylent in areas where there are food shortages and people suffer malnutrion.
Soylent will likely become a billion dollar global enterprise, and even "disrupt" the food industry. It will also ultimately be a failure and frowned upon in modern society. Why? Because a Soylent-saturated world would rob families and loved ones of the ritual and benefits of eating together. Eating together civilizes people. It's emotionally and socially edifying. Studies show that families that dine together stay t…
> I'm glad to see so many people disagree with me. It means I'm on the right track. Does anyone else find this "first they ignore you" style of belief-reinforcement to be vaguely troubling? Don't get me wrong, you shouldn't just believe your critics without further inquiry, but the presence of critics shouldn't be used as supporting evidence in and of itself . You risk creating a kind of insular belief system where a…
But this is not a new phenomenon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People keeping bringing this up. What is so difficult about the concept that not everyone wants to, or even can, cook meals that are nutritionally suitable, healthy or even intended to be consumed collectively - all the time?
Imagine people said that you could save time and money by replacing friends with Facebook. Or you could stop walking a buy a segway. Soylent appeals to exactly those people. If we wanted to live like this we'd just buy a bag of rice and a box of vitamins. We all understand that it's technically possible to use soylent, just that like replacing all your friends with Facebook, or riding a segway, it's social suicide.
Unless your social life is at a deeper level than simply putting food in your mouth around certain people. Either way, I don't think many people would _replace_ food with Soylent so much as they would drink it instead of eating some meals. I'd love to just drink a glass of liquid instead of preparing and eating a lunch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine people said that you could save time and money by replacing friends with Facebook. Or you could stop walking a buy a segway. Soylent appeals to exactly those people. If we wanted to live like this we'd just buy a bag of rice and a box of vitamins. We all understand that it's technically possible to use soylent, just that like replacing all your friends with Facebook, or riding a segway, it's social suicide.
>it's social suicide Unless your social life is at a deeper level than simply putting food in your mouth around certain people. Either way, I don't think many people would _replace_ food with Soylent so much as they would drink it instead of eating some meals. I'd love to just drink a glass of liquid instead of preparing and eating a lunch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where would you rather eat on the go? Mcdonalds? Or a Soylent vending machine? I've had enough Mcdonalds for this lifetime. Bring on the Soylent vending machines!
Hmm, delicious cheeseburger or tasteless goop in a can? That's a tough one. Maybe my sarcasm detector is off but I don't see how this is a real question.
Delicious cheeseburger? Have you even eaten at a McDonalds?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm glad to see so many people disagree with me. It means I'm on the right track. Does anyone else find this "first they ignore you" style of belief-reinforcement to be vaguely troubling? Don't get me wrong, you shouldn't just believe your critics without further inquiry, but the presence of critics shouldn't be used as supporting evidence in and of itself . You risk creating a kind of insular belief system where a…
Very true. You can't use the fact that someone has something bad to say about you to actually improve your perceived value. It's strictly[1] more probable that you're worse if there is criticism than if there isn't. [1] EDIT: as pasquinelli noted, I didn't actually mean "strictly" here, I meant >=. Also, pasquinelli, you've been hellbanned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm glad to see so many people disagree with me. It means I'm on the right track. Does anyone else find this "first they ignore you" style of belief-reinforcement to be vaguely troubling? Don't get me wrong, you shouldn't just believe your critics without further inquiry, but the presence of critics shouldn't be used as supporting evidence in and of itself . You risk creating a kind of insular belief system where a…
Very true. You can't use the fact that someone has something bad to say about you to actually improve your perceived value. It's strictly[1] more probable that you're worse if there is criticism than if there isn't. [1] EDIT: as pasquinelli noted, I didn't actually mean "strictly" here, I meant >=. Also, pasquinelli, you've been hellbanned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why don't you just buy Ensure or Carnation Instant Breakfast? They already exist and are well known, that you can buy anywhere. Or make yourself a bowl of oatmeal. Or eat leftovers from the night before. I think that the only reason that anyone's interested in Soylent is the current startup/crowdfunding bubble hype, not because it's actually anything particularly new. Soylent is to Ensure as Groupon is to coupons. Be…
Ensure tastes like shit. If Soylent tastes reasonably OK, and has stronger guarantees that it can be a true meal replacement than supplements like Ensure, then sign me up.
Soylent will likely become a billion dollar global enterprise, and even "disrupt" the food industry. It will also ultimately be a failure and frowned upon in modern society. Why? Because a Soylent-saturated world would rob families and loved ones of the ritual and benefits of eating together. Eating together civilizes people. It's emotionally and socially edifying. Studies show that families that dine together stay t…