5 ms·
What happened to the original HN submission of the vice article?
by ericmsimons 13y ago
What happened to the original HN submission of the vice article?
- tptacek 13y agoIt's right here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6720193 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6720193
- OoTheNigerian 13y agoIt has practically disappeared and the submitted link was substituted[1]. I think this is a first. I doubt that PG is aware of this type of orchestrated manipulation going on. It is quite dangerous for the credibility of HN. Soylent seems interesting and potentially disruptive. However, it is FOOD and deserves to be put under the microscope. Anyone conniving to make them dodge scrutiny (especially via underhand moves) is not doing them any favours. [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6720515 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6720515
- meritt 13y agoYC owns a portion of Soylent. It is not in the best financial interest of YC to portray them in a negative light. You can't reasonably expect impartial and unbiased information to come from this site, can you? They have a vested interest in seeing the success of their children.
- DanBC 13y ago> YC owns a portion of Soylent. No they don't. Unless you can point to something that shows they do?
- nchuhoai 13y agoUm, yes they do http://blog.soylent.me/post/64789154918/soylent-funding-announcement http://blog.soylent.me/post/64789154918/soylent-funding-anno...
- pg 13y agoActually we go out of our way to avoid killing stories critical of YC cos, to forestall exactly that complaint. Not that it works.
- sker 13y agoIt's not a first. It happens all the time. And for the first time I'm glad we have editorializing mods. The original article was blatant blogspam. It even said so in the title: Oh look, let's focus only on the negative aspects of the original source.
- k-mcgrady 13y agoThen it's up to the community to read it and flag it. Having mods change title's is one thing but this if the first I've ever seen links change (and it's actually only one of two articles today where I've seen links change). Although I'm against mods changing things there should at least be a system where it's made clear that a change has happened.
- KevinEldon 13y agoSoylent is a food, like the McDonald's McRib sandwich, the Baconator from Wendy's, the Denny's Grand Slam Breakfast, and the delicious beef tacos from my local Mexican restaurant. Why does Soylent need more scrutiny than any of these or the hundreds of thousands of other food products on the market today?
- whyenot 13y ago> Soylent is a food The company is claiming that it is a dietary supplement and NOT food in order to avoid FDA scrutiny. At least that is what the PandoDaily article that was originally linked to claims.
- oftenwrong 13y agoBecause your local Mexican restaurant doesn't claim that you can eat nothing but their tacos and maintain perfect health.
- sneak 13y agoThat should not change the standards they are held to. Nobody's forcing people to eat soylent 24/7, any more than they're forcing people to eat supersized big macs for three meals a day.
- DanBC 13y agoExcept food is held to a different standard than supplements. Soylent is regulated as a supplement, but sold and promoted as a food. People aren't asking for weird amounts of scrutiny, just for the same amount of regulation as the rest of the food chain. Seeing the filthy conditions that the beta product was made in was surprising - the founders knowing how bad it was but continuing to ship beta product to paying beta customers is weird.
- oftenwrong 13y ago>I doubt that PG is aware of this type of orchestrated manipulation going on. I don't doubt it, and I also don't care. He's a business man. He's got money at stake. It's his site. Why shouldn't he use it to help market this stuff? Nobody is being forced to buy it. I see nothing wrong with that.
- pg 13y agoThe mods constantly replace blogspam with the original source. Probably several times a day.