3 ms·

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

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.

w1ntermute 13y ago
> 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 more time working on their Rails or iPhone apps, getting excited that one of their own has "disrupted" a new industry. In reality, it's just another example of the blind leading the blind. But failures in the food industry don't just end with a site shutting down and some commenters on HN complaining about losing their favorite service while some others explain why it didn't survive. They can end with people in the hospital or in the grave.
- sillysaurus 13y ago
  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.
  - w1ntermute 13y ago
    > Why not educate people, rather than call them wrong? http://www.businessinsider.com/rob-rhinehart-food-substitute-eating-disorder-2013-3 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.

w1ntermute 13y ago

> 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 more time working on their Rails or iPhone apps, getting excited that one of their own has "disrupted" a new industry. In reality, it's just another example of the blind leading the blind. But failures in the food industry don't just end with a site shutting down and some commenters on HN complaining about losing their favorite service while some others explain why it didn't survive. They can end with people in the hospital or in the grave.

sillysaurus 13y ago
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.
- w1ntermute 13y ago
  > Why not educate people, rather than call them wrong? http://www.businessinsider.com/rob-rhinehart-food-substitute-eating-disorder-2013-3 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.