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

Soylent Campaign

campaign.soylent.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 608 posts

Re: Soylent Campaign

#351

Post by sillysaurus »

w1ntermute wrote: post #338
sillysaurus wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

God, you are just embarrassing yourself now. Please just stop. Actually, he's not. He's presenting an argument. You're presenting a personal attack. What's distressing is that you're being upvoted for it.

> What's distressing is that you're being upvoted for it. Because I'm right, and he's wrong. For fuck's sake, everyone on here needs to educate themselves about the basics of nutrition before commenting on something they don't understand. What you have here is a bunch of 20-something coders, most of whom don't know jack shit about cooking or biology but wish they didn't have to think about cooking so they could spend…

Because I'm right, and he's wrong. For fuck's sake, everyone on here needs to educate themselves about the basics of nutrition before commenting on something they don't understand.

Why not educate people, rather than call them wrong?

The reasons you're not being convincing are:

- you attack based on age.

- you attack based on lack of credentials.

- you attack based on the idea that someone might get hurt, when you don't have any evidence Soylent is dangerous.

- your entire tone is one of talking down to your audience.

If your arguments had substance, you wouldn't need to resort to any of that.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#352

Post by antihero »

marknutter wrote: post #156
chasing wrote: post #65

"Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition." Bull-fucking-shit. This is a product made by four twenty-somethings, none of whom appears to have a background in nutrition or any kind of health studies. To trust your health to these people would be fucking stupid. Jesus. Also:…

Have you ever bought a red bull? Read the can. It says "vitalizes body and mind." I'm sure a lot of people read than and believe it's true. Heck, it may even be true. But it's not breaking any FDA rules, and it's not a harmful claim any more than the claims the Soylent folks are making. Do we not hold any responsibility for what we put into our bodies?

Well that's the thing about food. We can drink about a litre of that shit and a bottle of vodka and feel great for the night, and shitty in the morning.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#354

Post by scott_s »

sillysaurus wrote: post #335
scarmig wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be clear, you're embarrassing yourself because multivitamins are the modern equivalent of magical totems of other civilizations that we patronizingly mock. Or, to reach more into our own history, they're the modern snake oil.

multivitamins are the modern equivalent of snake oil You'll need to post some sort of citation in order to convince anyone of that.

Study Finds No Benefit From Daily Multivitamin, http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/study-finds-no-bene...

Is This the End of Popping Vitamins?, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020464450457665...

Re: Soylent Campaign

#355

Post by chetanahuja »

fc2 wrote: post #311
[deleted] wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

Your only argument is an argument from authority. Sorry, I'm just not impressed at all.

"Maybe Soylent is okay. Maybe. But there are well established, scientific methods to evaluate these claims. I know it tempting to want to believe the claims in the video, but they have done NONE of this!"

That sounds like a pretty reasonable argument to me. Pointing out that the soylent proponent's "evidence" does not stand up to scientific scrutiny does not sound like "argument from authority".

Re: Soylent Campaign

#356

Post by DanBC »

ph0rque wrote: post #341
[deleted] wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

Maybe Soylent is okay. Maybe. But there are well established, scientific methods to evaluate these claims. Why don't you summarize them here, and ask if the people behind Soylent have utilized them?

Some of the methods were summarized in all the previous threads. The people saying that Soylent were not being rigorous enough with the science were told that it's just someone doing a personal project and of course it doesn't need to be scientific.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#357

Post by w1ntermute »

sillysaurus wrote: post #351
w1ntermute wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's distressing is that you're being upvoted for it. Because I'm right, and he's wrong. For fuck's sake, everyone on here needs to educate themselves about the basics of nutrition before commenting on something they don't understand. What you have here is a bunch of 20-something coders, most of whom don't know jack shit about cooking or biology but wish they didn't have to think about cooking so they could spend…

Because I'm right, and he's wrong. For fuck's sake, everyone on here needs to educate themselves about the basics of nutrition before commenting on something they don't understand. Why not educate people, rather than call them wrong? The reasons you're not being convincing are: - you attack based on age. - you attack based on lack of credentials. - you attack based on the idea that someone might get hurt, when you do…

> Why not educate people, rather than call them wrong?

http://www.businessinsider.com/rob-rhinehart-food-substitute...

> you attack based on the idea that someone might get hurt, when you don't have any evidence Soylent is dangerous

It's like talking to a brick wall. How many times do I have to tell you? The burden of proof is on the people making Soylent. You can't just apologize after the fact, when people are already in the hospital.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#358

Post by zobzu »

shubb wrote: post #334
[deleted] wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

Actually, reading this, I can see your point. It's all very well to say 'other people can test this out', but the possible consequences are pretty bad. Thanks. As I say, I'm waiting a year before having anything to do with this. But I hope it is okay. Because I'd like the product, but also because someone will eat it for a year now.

Not sure if its much worse than genetically modified food tbh. Certainly the testing isn't all that different.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#359

Post by princess3000 »

ellyagg wrote: post #292
alex_c wrote: post #224

I read this initially assuming it to be a clever spoof on the whole startup / crowdsourcing scene, because of the name: pick something that is obviously a joke product ("Soylent Green is people!") and run with it - start piling on impressive claims, include startup-y backgrounds for the founders, and be really vague about what the product actually is. Given my initial interpretation, I thought the "Is soylent vegan a…

Yep, I thought it was a joke at first, too. Since the term soylent is widely understood to mean human remains masquerading as food, the name suggests pretense. He wrote: Before I rarely had enough energy to go to the gym, but this day I had plenty so I decided to put the diet to the test. I'd been running off and on for several months, never able to do more than a mile straight, but this day I ran 3.14 miles non-stop…

Also notable is that he ran exactly pi miles.

e: AND called that an "irrational improvement." That must be a joke or something...

Re: Soylent Campaign

#360

Post by josh2600 »

DanBC wrote: post #323
josh2600 wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It is NOT sufficient for trying a radically new diet like this one. To you. It's your opinion, not mine. You could say "The FDA would strongly condemn something like this" or "I think this is unsafe" but you can't say it is not sufficient for everyone just because you feel that way. You can't make blanket claims that apply to all of humanity; being an absolutist only works if you're a Sith Lord.

> You can't make blanket claims that apply to all of humanity Except Soylent are doing exactly that.

That's called marketing. When a business does it, you take it with a grain of salt. When an individual says something like this, you have to take it a little more seriously otherwise you're not giving the person their due.

But I do appreciate your point and you did make me scratch my head when I first read it.

Post reply on HN