A well-written response. Soylent have handled this extremely well and the fact they've partnered up with a HACCP certified manufacturer with over 20 years experience will prevent any mishaps with future production of Soylent. Really looking forward to giving this a shot, none of the issues highlighted in the beta have deterred me from trying as they won't be present in the main manufacturing process.
Soylent on the latest Vice piece
101–110 of 205 posts
Re: Soylent on the latest Vice piece
#102Soylent 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…
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?
[deleted]
Re: Soylent on the latest Vice piece
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's right here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6720193
It has practically disappeared and the submitted link was substituted[1]. I think this is a first. I doubt that PG is aware of this type of orchestrated manipulation going on. It is quite dangerous for the credibility of HN. Soylent seems interesting and potentially disruptive. However, it is FOOD and deserves to be put under the microscope. Anyone conniving to make them dodge scrutiny (especially via underhand moves…
>I doubt that PG is aware of this type of orchestrated manipulation going on.
I don't doubt it, and I also don't care. He's a business man. He's got money at stake. It's his site. Why shouldn't he use it to help market this stuff? Nobody is being forced to buy it. I see nothing wrong with that.
Re: Soylent on the latest Vice piece
#104Soylent 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…
Re: Soylent on the latest Vice piece
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Hahah, delicious?
This is one of the more obscure "internet things that irk me", but particularly on HN I keep seeing the word "delicious" applied to any food that is minimally palatable.
The word itself is starting to grate on me, as "lecker" in German already does thanks to its overuse.
Re: Soylent on the latest Vice piece
#106Earlier 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.
> Ensure tastes like shit.
What, all different flavours of Ensure? All different styles of Ensure?
> supplements like Ensure,
Ensure is a sole source of nutrition. Your ignorance about the product speaks volumes.
Re: Soylent on the latest Vice piece
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is every single meal a social event for you? I eat out at least a few times a week with friends. But if I'm stuck at the office working late or home alone one night, I don't cook. I order off seamless, and a lot of it is garbage. Sure, I should learn to like cooking, but I've failed to do that and that's unlikely to change. So in my mind, replacing the shitty delivery meals with something optimally nutritious would b…
Given you're at a computer using HN, then at any off time a good meal is no meal. You can safely say stuffing more food into you is not needed. So the only real reason you eat in these off periods is enjoyment of food, stopping feeling hungry and habit. This is not what Soylent is for as far as I can see.
Given you're at a computer using HN, then at any
off time a good meal is no meal
You can safely say stuffing more food into you
is not needed.
I have to say that I very much follow what the parent is saying. I love eating with people and all, but, I'm not always with someone, and more often than not am too lazy to cook (or I've just forgotten to shop groceries).
Re: Soylent on the latest Vice piece
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has practically disappeared and the submitted link was substituted[1]. I think this is a first. I doubt that PG is aware of this type of orchestrated manipulation going on. It is quite dangerous for the credibility of HN. Soylent seems interesting and potentially disruptive. However, it is FOOD and deserves to be put under the microscope. Anyone conniving to make them dodge scrutiny (especially via underhand moves…
Soylent is a food, like the McDonald's McRib sandwich, the Baconator from Wendy's, the Denny's Grand Slam Breakfast, and the delicious beef tacos from my local Mexican restaurant. Why does Soylent need more scrutiny than any of these or the hundreds of thousands of other food products on the market today?
> Why does Soylent need more scrutiny than any of these or the hundreds of thousands of other food products on the market today?
An excellent question. It doesn't, it needs the same scrutiny as those products.
Because they're telling the FDA that it's a supplement they get by with lower levels of regulation and inspection.
Re: Soylent on the latest Vice piece
#109Many startups put the word "utilize" in their press releases to sound fancier and more official: "This...prompted us to utilize more robust packaging." You can always say "use" instead of "utilize" to avoid buzzwords and sound more conversational. In fact, there are only a few specific cases (mostly in science writing) where "utilize" is necessary: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/use-versu...
Now if only I could get everyone to stop using the word "performant." Good heavens, let's not rely on rusty old words like efficient or fast!
I dislike jargon, but in this case, neither "efficient" nor "fast" captures the same concept as "performant".
First, both are open-ended and relative. "Fast" and "efficient" compared to what? A cheetah is "fast", but it's not fast if I'm trying to use them to propel fighter jets. If I say, "my code is fast", am I saying it's fast enough for the problem at hand? Faster than it was before? Fast compared to most other code that solves the same problem?
"Efficient" has all of the same problems and it's also ambiguous. If my library is efficient, does that mean it runs fast? Starts up fast? Uses memory efficiently? Bandwidth?
"Performant" is etymologically strange, but in the place I've seen it used, it has an effective, precise meaning: "well-performing in speed relative to the needs of the problem". It means "fast enough" without the negative connotations of "enough", sort of like "plenty fast". Likewise, it's negation is usefully precise, "not performant" means "however fast it is, that isn't enough for our needs".
Re: Soylent on the latest Vice piece
#110Many startups put the word "utilize" in their press releases to sound fancier and more official: "This...prompted us to utilize more robust packaging." You can always say "use" instead of "utilize" to avoid buzzwords and sound more conversational. In fact, there are only a few specific cases (mostly in science writing) where "utilize" is necessary: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/use-versu...
Why say "use" when you can say "leverage"?