Soylent Closes $50M Series B Round Led by GV • Hacker News Board

Re: Soylent Closes $50M Series B Round Led by GV

#501

Post by derefr » Thu, May 04, 2017, 10:28 PM UTC

deeth_starr_v wrote: post #409

chaostheory wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're betting on us figuring out food? Things like Soylent are already here. It's not vaporware. Yes it's not perfect or ideal but it's an answer to really inefficient food production whose water and nutrient needs aren't sustainable for a growing population.

I'm not calling it vaporware. We don't understand clearly about our gut bio/digestion/food absorption. It'd be great to hear an expert on this chime in, but my guess they would say "we don't know yet". I'm not telling you to not eat Soylent or that it won't potentially be great for the human race. But again, we don't know. Edit: fixed wording Edit: What if they get something wrong like including trans fats? I know th…

People have been eating imperfectly for millenia and keeping on nevertheless. How many billion (trillion?) Chinese peasants, across history, do you think ate only rice their entire lives?

Sure, said peasants probably had vitamin A deficiency—but they managed to live long, mostly-healthy lives despite that. Which is my point: we don't need to get "food" perfect in order to ensure that 10x as many people as today can live "long, mostly-healthy lives." It's not unethical to feed starving people food that's missing some micronutrient we aren't yet aware of, because they'll still be better off than if they were starving. The human body is hardy.

Re: Soylent Closes $50M Series B Round Led by GV

#502

Post by phantom_package » Thu, May 04, 2017, 10:30 PM UTC

rubatuga wrote: post #155

Although I was initially brought onto the hype train by great marketing and the promises of health and complete nutrition, I realize that my initial reliance on Soylent was actually part of a deeper problem, brought on by problems such as depression and inappropriate time management. When in reality I should have had enough time to eat out or possibly even cook a meal, I found myself relying on Soylent. I didn't leav…

> inappropriate time management

This resonates with me. When I tried Soylent, it was because I was working WAY too much, and that "always-on" mindset carried over into other parts of my life. I felt like I didn't have time for food - I needed to be productive instead! Soylent markets to this extremely well, and it worked on me.

I stopped using Soylent when I found a healthier work/life balance, started meditating regularly, did a bit of traveling, started exercising more often, and met a new love interest. I wouldn't say that I'm a stellar cook, but I enjoy preparing meals - it's just another thing to try to do well.

So Soylent isn't really for me - though there probably are some lifestyles in which it makes sense.

Re: Soylent Closes $50M Series B Round Led by GV

#503

Post by humanrebar » Thu, May 04, 2017, 10:32 PM UTC

deeth_starr_v wrote: post #469

humanrebar wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only one of these is a "chemical" is the vernacular. The vernacular is wrong in this case and encourages ignorance. "Preservatives", "dyes", "perfumes", "thickeners", and "artificial sweeteners" are all words that everyone understands. We can say "artificial ingredients" instead if we want a catch all. The English language is really expressive. "Chemicals" is a buzzword used a lot by hucksters to push sales through…

I apologize for using "chemicals" rather than using correct terms. I was just using it as a shorthand for something grown vs something made. Edit: This seems to be your argument, that engineered is the same as non-engineered. Because they are all the same basic building blocks. Right?

> ...that engineered is the same as non-engineered

I was just saying the vague and abused "chemicals" is a bad descriptor. It's fair to rail against "manufactured", "under-researched", or "engineered" ingredients.

Re: Soylent Closes $50M Series B Round Led by GV

#504

Post by derefr » Thu, May 04, 2017, 10:34 PM UTC

GavinMcG wrote: post #202

mojowo11 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is kinda silly. Like, the problem here isn't Soylent, it's that you were depressed. And the problem with your friend using Soylent to watch her weight isn't Soylent, it's that she ate more of other crap when she drank Soylent as a meal replacement. I drink Soylent occasionally -- once every two or three weeks, maybe. Normally I use it if I know I'm going to eat a huge dinner, or if I ate a giant lunch an…

Sure, the underlying problem is depression. We can still have a reasonable discussion about things that enable that depression, or extend it. That's not at all a silly concern.

It seems to me that everything that enables depression is almost always otherwise an objective good. Internet access enables depression. Having shelter that won't be taken away from you for lack of monthly payment enables depression. A family willing to take care of you enables depression. Remote work enables depression. Etc.

Depression, in this way, is kind of a weird bogeyman of an argument: its prevalence would be increased by anything that makes life easier. And so, naturally, the solution is reactionary: eliminate depression by eliminating progress! (This is the same sentiment behind the phrase "idle hands are the Devil's workshop"—made clearer with the knowledge that Christianity considers sloth–or in other translations, sadness—a sin.)

Re: Soylent Closes $50M Series B Round Led by GV

#505

Post by SimbaOnSteroids » Thu, May 04, 2017, 10:37 PM UTC

briandear wrote: post #483

hammock wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"eat what your grand-grand parents ate" Not possible, unfortunately. Meat and vegetables are so totally different now. For example meats are raised on GM corn and antibiotics, altering their balance of omega 3's, impact on gut health, and other things. While today's vegetables are massively decremented in micronutrients- and may have less arsenic-based pesticide residue than your greatgrandparents', but more of othe…

Any peer reviewed, legitimate studies that suggest GM corn causes problems with beef? It's popular to critique GM, but it often seems like a knee-jerk reaction rather than based on actual scientific studies. And by studies, I don't mean an article in Mother Jones, but actual science.

I mean it tastes better but that's not peer reviewable, the major issue currently is that the microbiom of a cow's digestive track really can't handle corn that well and as a result methane output of the live stock skyrockets contributing more drastically to anthropomorphic climate change.

Re: Soylent Closes $50M Series B Round Led by GV

#506

Post by greenshackle2 » Thu, May 04, 2017, 10:40 PM UTC

axlprose wrote: post #356

wdmeldon wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only items in that list that require less than 10 servings to get to 2000 calories are the ones with serving sizes that are twice as large. Not even remotely comparable.

The "Recommended Serving Size" for these products can effectively be considered as just another part of the marketing. Comparing them based on their superficial face value is as useless as comparing apples and oranges, you have to actually calculate the amount of nutrients per quantity of mass if you want to compare them thoroughly. Right off the bat, it's worth noting that Soylent has an unusually large serving size…

Uh yeah I looked at a 6-7 of the "meal replacements" you linked randomly, they all have way too much protein.

> Soylent has 20g of protein per serving, and most of the products listed above are also in that 15-30g of protein range and share most of the same micronutrients, so functionally they're about equivalent.

The point is that they have 15-30 g of protein per 120-150 kcal serving as opposed to 20g per 400 kcal serving for soylent.

The macro ratios are not comparable at all. Point me to a single meal replacement that has comparable macros. If it's actually cheaper I will gladly cancel my soylent order and buy that instead.

Re: Soylent Closes $50M Series B Round Led by GV

#507

Post by tedmiston » Thu, May 04, 2017, 10:43 PM UTC

tonydiv wrote: post #496

tedmiston wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's not defensible in many of the ways a software company is As a customer, I don't think about that at all. They may open source their recipes and products, but buying bottles from them is still relatively cheap and by far the most convenient option. Also, whenever mistakes do happen, their support is excellent. This is why they'll continue to get my business.

you will begin to consider alternatives when they are available, and at a lower cost

I'm not so sure — alternatives at a comparable price are already on the market. I could make it myself and save more but it's not worth the tradeoff of time and inconvenience to save $1–2.

Personally my price sensitivity for it is pretty low. At $2–3 per meal, it's cheaper than any other meals besides breakfast throughout the week.

Re: Soylent Closes $50M Series B Round Led by GV

#508

Post by rexreed » Thu, May 04, 2017, 10:46 PM UTC

There's no saying more true than you are what you eat (or drink). Soylent drinkers are definitely Soylent people. I prefer a world of flavor, spice, and variety. I also wonder if it's a coincidence that the funders of the Juicero (solving a problem no one knew they had for people who clearly have too much disposable income) are the same as the funders of Soylent. I know there's a high overlap of HN readers and Soylent drinkers, but I think there's a big disconnect with the rest of the non-Silicon Valley populace.

Re: Soylent Closes $50M Series B Round Led by GV

#509

Post by vkou » Thu, May 04, 2017, 10:46 PM UTC

Lambdanaut wrote: post #453

hammock wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"eat what your grand-grand parents ate" Not possible, unfortunately. Meat and vegetables are so totally different now. For example meats are raised on GM corn and antibiotics, altering their balance of omega 3's, impact on gut health, and other things. While today's vegetables are massively decremented in micronutrients- and may have less arsenic-based pesticide residue than your greatgrandparents', but more of othe…

> Not possible, unfortunately My wife raises our livestock and garden while I work. Yesterday I had a sandwich and I know where every ingredient came from(our yard). Look, it's not impossible. It just requires you to look outside of your modern context.