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

481–490 of 608 posts

Re: Soylent Campaign

#481

Post by baddox »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #450
blhack wrote: post #369

Wow there is a lot of hate in this thread... A lot of the arguments here seem to boil down to "Much smarter people are working on this and they haven't solved it, who the hell does this KID think he is?!?" That's pretty depressing for a website that, at least originally, was to help startups talk to one another. Shame on you, hacker news. You're smarter than this. By this logic, never ever trust your data to anybody…

Except that those hippies don't raise $100k+ on the web. "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" The techniques and the wording seem snake oilish. Also, if anything those dumb hacker kids build breaks (email, web app, game) etc, they won't hurt you physically. The body…

All of those seem like valid reasons for you to not back the project.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#482

Post by ceejayoz »

gwern wrote: post #414
ellyagg wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Want to bet on the results of a double blind study? Unfortunately, I don't think such a study is runnable. How do you blind 'oil-sludge' against 'real food'? That said, randomizable is perfectly doable: Rhinehart could flip a coin each week to decide whether to eat real food or Soylent. I suggested as much on his blog a while ago, but he never responded.

> Unfortunately, I don't think such a study is runnable. How do you blind 'oil-sludge' against 'real food'?

If nothing else, it could be compared to something like formula that's used to keep folks on feeding tubes alive.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#483

Post by Selfcommit »

Anyone else pick up on the fact that they claim to be allergen free? They use whey protein in the drink, so way are they even close to allergen free.

They also have a poor understanding of what constitutes an allergen.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#484

Post by ceejayoz »

saalweachter wrote: post #424

How well does this stack up against the milk-and-potatoes diet? According to the popular science/history book 1493 , it is more-or-less a complete diet in itself. The two datapoints it uses to back this up are a story about two Polish scientists who ate nothing but potatoes and milk (or milk products, like cheese and butter) for a year, and remained in perfect heath for the duration, and the claim that prior to the P…

I don't know where you buy your milk and potatoes but they shouldn't be costing you $65/day. :-)

Re: Soylent Campaign

#485

Post by baddox »

vecinu wrote: post #197
iandanforth wrote: post #88

I really enjoy this campaign because it gave me an excuse to compare it with snake oil labels. ( https://www.google.com/search?q=snake+oil+label&tbm=isch... ) The characteristic of this kind of marketing that I enjoy the most is the presence of what I call 'linguistic asymptotes.' These are words that imply a product has unparalleled or infinite properties. On the soylent page we have "ubiquitous", "perfectly", "opti…

That's a very good point and very observant. I too am highly skeptical of ALL of these claims. My main gripe with Soylent (ever since I first saw it here on HN a month ago) is that they are making cooking seem like a horrible chore that nobody wants to do. Shopping is convenient because I go whenever I have time and only buy exactly what I need. At the same time, I also ensure I only buy the best ingredients I can at…

> My main gripe with Soylent (ever since I first saw it here on HN a month ago) is that they are making cooking seem like a horrible chore that nobody wants to do.

On the contrary. I think they're doing something reasonable, which is purposefully marketing the product to people to whom cooking is a horrible chore they don't want to do. I'm one of those people, and I suspect there are others.

I despise all the time I have to spend on food preparation. I'm annoyed that even if I eat out regularly, I have to spend time planning my nutrition and budget or risk being unhealthy or broke. Other people (or machines) can prepare food better than me, so I think it's ridiculous that it's still expected that each adult (or household) should learn to cook personally. Sure, it's not terribly difficult, but neither is making clothes, fixing many home plumbing issues, cutting hair, performing an oil or tire change, and many other things that are well-accepted as outsourceable.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#486

Post by ruswick »

chasing wrote: post #119
evv wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not like one article would change the behavior of everyone on here. HN has pessimism in its culture, and most of the best comments are the critical ones.

I find criticism to be much more helpful (usually) than cheers. For what it's worth.

I agree. Mindless consensus is not the way to probe issues and engage in meaningful discussion; contentious discourse is.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#487

Post by pbreit »

DanBC wrote: post #196
Kell wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hu? Not telling you what's in it ? Isn't the recipe open sourced and extensively discussed on their website ? Like here for example : http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 ?

Weirdly, that page tells you that the creator himself thinks Soylent may be dangerous for people other than him. > I am reticent to provide exact brand names and instructions because I am not fully convinced of the diet's safety for a physiology different than mine. What if I missed something that's essential for someone of a different race or age group? Why does he now think it's acceptable to market this to everyon…

> Why does he now think it's acceptable to market this to everyone?

Because he and a number of people have been "eating" it for a number of months?

Re: Soylent Campaign

#488

Post by frankacter »

vhost- wrote: post #217
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:…

I would really like an ingredients list.

http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424

Re: Soylent Campaign

#489

Post by saalweachter »

ceejayoz wrote: post #484
saalweachter wrote: post #424

How well does this stack up against the milk-and-potatoes diet? According to the popular science/history book 1493 , it is more-or-less a complete diet in itself. The two datapoints it uses to back this up are a story about two Polish scientists who ate nothing but potatoes and milk (or milk products, like cheese and butter) for a year, and remained in perfect heath for the duration, and the claim that prior to the P…

I don't know where you buy your milk and potatoes but they shouldn't be costing you $65/day. :-)

Whoops, meant $65 / month.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#490

Post by cscurmudgeon »

baddox wrote: post #481
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that those hippies don't raise $100k+ on the web. "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" The techniques and the wording seem snake oilish. Also, if anything those dumb hacker kids build breaks (email, web app, game) etc, they won't hurt you physically. The body…

All of those seem like valid reasons for you to not back the project.

Well, a fool and his money are easily parted.

We have enough knowledge and resources to lead healthy lives without believing in possible snake oil. There is a whole bunch of physiological feedback that they are glossing over. E.g. the act of eating a meal mindfully.

I don't wish them ill. If they have a product which is better than the best thing out there for us, I wish they succeed.

I would not have stopped you if you wanted to invest with Ponzi himself.

Post reply on HN