4 ms·

It's interesting to compare this with Soylent: while Soylent provides nutrition without the pleasure of eating, this provides the pleasure of eating without ris

It's interesting to compare this with Soylent: while Soylent provides nutrition without the pleasure of eating, this provides the pleasure of eating without risking overnutrition (in other words, getting fat). I wonder why aren't there VC firms dumping huge amounts of funding in stuff like this (or maybe I'm just not aware of)? On a separate note, why would someone eat Soylent? Oily farty flavorless sand milkshake? I wouldn't eat it even if it was free! Now this wooden noodles stuff? Sign me up!

outside1234 11y ago
I used Soylent on a super long backpacking trip where space and weight were huge considerations. It tasted awful but was incredibly effective from a dietary perspective.
- dagw 11y ago
  Is Soylent really that much more space and weight efficient than existing[0] dehydrated meals? These dehydrated meals have the added advantage of not only tasting fairly decent (especially if you also bring a small selection of spices and dry herbs), but also lets you eat something different every day. [0] http://drytech.no/?lang=en http://drytech.no/?lang=en is my personal favorite, but there are dozens of others.
- ucaetano 11y ago
  I agree with the practical uses of it: emergency rations, etc. But why would anyone voluntarily unnecessarily eat it is beyond my comprehension. But then, some people might not enjoy eating as much as I do :)
  - dasboth 11y ago
    The positive stories I've heard about Soylent revolve around convenience. Even for someone who loves to eat, Soylent can be practical for 50-70% of your meals which makes you enjoy the other 30-50% more. I assume Soylent is also cost-effective, but I have no idea. I tried DIY Soylent (as the 'real' stuff wasn't available in Europe) but after one batch of disgusting sawdust I gave up. It was a shame as I could see the benefits.
drumdance 11y ago
I thought it tasted fine. Not the best thing I've ever eaten but comparable to most other supplement shakes.
glenra 11y ago
> why would someone eat Soylent? Oily farty flavorless sand milkshake? You seem to be reacting to version 1.0; the current shipping versions are 1.5 (in powder packs) and 2.0 (in liquid bottles) Soylent being an engineered food which is versioned, it gradually improves over time as issues are discovered and solutions found. The "oily" attribute only applied to the first couple versions of the product when you had to add oil separately and it didn't mix well. (Now that the oil is sourced in powdered form this is no longer an issue.) The "farty" and "gritty" attributes were similarly resolved by tweaking other ingredients. The "neutral flavor profile" is a deliberate product feature that makes it easy to add your own flavoring if you care to. but if adding a little cocoa powder or peanut butter or cinnamon when you mix it up is just too hard I'm sure they'll eventually come out with pre-flavored variants. (Though I personally like the bland version) (1.4 was probably the biggest change. Here's a review of it: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/04/soylent-1-4-formula-changes-taste-shifts-macronutrients-ditches-oils/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/04/soylent-1-4-formula-c... )

outside1234 11y ago

I used Soylent on a super long backpacking trip where space and weight were huge considerations. It tasted awful but was incredibly effective from a dietary perspective.

dagw 11y ago
Is Soylent really that much more space and weight efficient than existing[0] dehydrated meals? These dehydrated meals have the added advantage of not only tasting fairly decent (especially if you also bring a small selection of spices and dry herbs), but also lets you eat something different every day. [0] http://drytech.no/?lang=en http://drytech.no/?lang=en is my personal favorite, but there are dozens of others.
ucaetano 11y ago
I agree with the practical uses of it: emergency rations, etc. But why would anyone voluntarily unnecessarily eat it is beyond my comprehension. But then, some people might not enjoy eating as much as I do :)
- dasboth 11y ago
  The positive stories I've heard about Soylent revolve around convenience. Even for someone who loves to eat, Soylent can be practical for 50-70% of your meals which makes you enjoy the other 30-50% more. I assume Soylent is also cost-effective, but I have no idea. I tried DIY Soylent (as the 'real' stuff wasn't available in Europe) but after one batch of disgusting sawdust I gave up. It was a shame as I could see the benefits.

drumdance 11y ago

I thought it tasted fine. Not the best thing I've ever eaten but comparable to most other supplement shakes.

glenra 11y ago

> why would someone eat Soylent? Oily farty flavorless sand milkshake? You seem to be reacting to version 1.0; the current shipping versions are 1.5 (in powder packs) and 2.0 (in liquid bottles) Soylent being an engineered food which is versioned, it gradually improves over time as issues are discovered and solutions found. The "oily" attribute only applied to the first couple versions of the product when you had to add oil separately and it didn't mix well. (Now that the oil is sourced in powdered form this is no longer an issue.) The "farty" and "gritty" attributes were similarly resolved by tweaking other ingredients. The "neutral flavor profile" is a deliberate product feature that makes it easy to add your own flavoring if you care to. but if adding a little cocoa powder or peanut butter or cinnamon when you mix it up is just too hard I'm sure they'll eventually come out with pre-flavored variants. (Though I personally like the bland version) (1.4 was probably the biggest change. Here's a review of it: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/04/soylent-1-4-formula-changes-taste-shifts-macronutrients-ditches-oils/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/04/soylent-1-4-formula-c... )