3 ms·

Soylent is betting on the fact that consumers want to separate the nourishment of food from the ritual of eating. That's a bit like saying, "We can offer you th

Soylent is betting on the fact that consumers want to separate the nourishment of food from the ritual of eating. That's a bit like saying, "We can offer you the ability to reproduce without the inconvenience of having sex." Don't get me wrong...I hope that this startup will succeed and prove me wrong. And to be fair, they aren't calling for people to abandon solid food. It's just that, as technical people, I think we sometimes overemphasize the efficiency of this product and underemphasize the cultural attitudes of everyday consumers.

dpapathanasiou 13y ago
"Soylent is betting on the fact that consumers want to separate the nourishment of food from the ritual of eating. That's a bit like saying, 'We can offer you the ability to reproduce without the inconvenience of having sex.'" This is the best criticism of soylent; what they're doing just goes against the grain of how peoples' minds are wired. Maybe it'll wind up gaining traction as a fad instead, like the meal replacement product on House of Lies[1] this past season[2]. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLPhbw0IBk8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLPhbw0IBk8 [2] When I saw that episode, I wondered if it was meant as a deliberate spoof of soylent.
- gfodor 13y ago
  Many people eat mediocre or plain food, particularly for lunch. If you could substitute something that was healthier and more convenient you're not exactly forgoing "sex" if you are replacing a turkey sandwich, fast food, etc.
- _greim_ 13y ago
  > This is the best criticism of soylent I disagree. With sex, the enjoyment can be had no matter what, while the biological part (reproduction) is optional. But with food, it's often a mutually exclusive choice between enjoyment and biology (proper nutrition). Especially when you have three dollars and ten minutes to spare. So it isn't quite a valid comparison.
- pbreit 13y ago
  People's minds are wired basically to get whatever food they need to remain alive so I'm not sure quite what you mean. They are also wired to optimize repetitive actions.
- psychometry 13y ago
  I don't know about you, but my brain is not wired to go grocery shopping twice a week and spend an hour a day preparing 3 meals and cleaning up afterward.
inigoesdr 13y ago
> Soylent is betting on the fact that consumers want to separate the nourishment of food from the ritual of eating. They aren't necessarily looking to replace the ritual of eating for the average consumer, and there are applications outside of that market that Soylent could be extremely beneficial for. For example they have cited it being a useful replacement for people who can't eat certain types of foods, or who can't eat solid foods.
scott_karana 13y ago
I agree with you. That said, the creator claims that he "appreciates" food more, while on soylent. Rather than paraphrase, here's the relevant quote: Soylent has changed my relationship with food. Before I probably craved pizza and cheeseburgers because that was the easiest way to provide my 6'3" frame with the calories it needed. Now that my nutritional needs are always met I am able to appreciate food more for its flavor, and started really enjoying sushi. Sushi is especially interesting because there is such range and intensity of flavors, and it is so difficult, yet rewarding to make well. This makes it pricey, but I spend so little on food I can enjoy nice sushi once or twice per week. Fast food restaurants look laughably obsolete to me, like a Blockbuster. http://robrhinehart.com/?p=570 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=570 Whether this holds true for the majority of people, time will tell. I'd be interested in trying, at least.
fernly 13y ago
"Soylent is betting on the fact that consumers want to separate the nourishment of food from the ritual of eating." Not at all! The ideas is that many, or at least enough, consumers want nourishment without the effort or time spent on prepping, cooking, and cleaning up after a meal. Aside from Soylent, the only way the person who can't cook -- or can't cook well, or hasn't access to good cooking facilities, or just doesn't want to spend time cooking -- can get good nourishment is to pay a lot to eat at high-quality restaurants -- and end up spending almost as much time on the process. Or, much more likely, to eat crap such as Ramen, MacD's, frozen dinners, PB&J sandwiches or take-out pizza slices and beer. And ironically still pay a very high price per protein calorie and fall far short of MDRs of many things. Soylent's market is obviously not the people who like to cook, or have partners who like (or have the time) to cook, and access to a proper kitchen and pantry and such. It's the bachelors of the world, the grad students, the people living in studio apartments writing code all night. And I think it will do very well from and for them.
- pbreit 13y ago
  I think you're both still wrong. It's perfectly fine to Soylent 10, 14 or 18 times a week and still have 11, 7 or 3 non-Soylent meals to really go nuts. In fact, Rob mentioned that non-Soylent meals taste even better either because they are comparatively better but also because your taste buds aren't so overworked.

dpapathanasiou 13y ago

"Soylent is betting on the fact that consumers want to separate the nourishment of food from the ritual of eating. That's a bit like saying, 'We can offer you the ability to reproduce without the inconvenience of having sex.'" This is the best criticism of soylent; what they're doing just goes against the grain of how peoples' minds are wired. Maybe it'll wind up gaining traction as a fad instead, like the meal replacement product on House of Lies[1] this past season[2]. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLPhbw0IBk8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLPhbw0IBk8 [2] When I saw that episode, I wondered if it was meant as a deliberate spoof of soylent.

gfodor 13y ago
Many people eat mediocre or plain food, particularly for lunch. If you could substitute something that was healthier and more convenient you're not exactly forgoing "sex" if you are replacing a turkey sandwich, fast food, etc.
_greim_ 13y ago
> This is the best criticism of soylent I disagree. With sex, the enjoyment can be had no matter what, while the biological part (reproduction) is optional. But with food, it's often a mutually exclusive choice between enjoyment and biology (proper nutrition). Especially when you have three dollars and ten minutes to spare. So it isn't quite a valid comparison.
pbreit 13y ago
People's minds are wired basically to get whatever food they need to remain alive so I'm not sure quite what you mean. They are also wired to optimize repetitive actions.
psychometry 13y ago
I don't know about you, but my brain is not wired to go grocery shopping twice a week and spend an hour a day preparing 3 meals and cleaning up afterward.

inigoesdr 13y ago

> Soylent is betting on the fact that consumers want to separate the nourishment of food from the ritual of eating. They aren't necessarily looking to replace the ritual of eating for the average consumer, and there are applications outside of that market that Soylent could be extremely beneficial for. For example they have cited it being a useful replacement for people who can't eat certain types of foods, or who can't eat solid foods.

scott_karana 13y ago

I agree with you. That said, the creator claims that he "appreciates" food more, while on soylent. Rather than paraphrase, here's the relevant quote: Soylent has changed my relationship with food. Before I probably craved pizza and cheeseburgers because that was the easiest way to provide my 6'3" frame with the calories it needed. Now that my nutritional needs are always met I am able to appreciate food more for its flavor, and started really enjoying sushi. Sushi is especially interesting because there is such range and intensity of flavors, and it is so difficult, yet rewarding to make well. This makes it pricey, but I spend so little on food I can enjoy nice sushi once or twice per week. Fast food restaurants look laughably obsolete to me, like a Blockbuster. http://robrhinehart.com/?p=570 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=570 Whether this holds true for the majority of people, time will tell. I'd be interested in trying, at least.

fernly 13y ago

"Soylent is betting on the fact that consumers want to separate the nourishment of food from the ritual of eating." Not at all! The ideas is that many, or at least enough, consumers want nourishment without the effort or time spent on prepping, cooking, and cleaning up after a meal. Aside from Soylent, the only way the person who can't cook -- or can't cook well, or hasn't access to good cooking facilities, or just doesn't want to spend time cooking -- can get good nourishment is to pay a lot to eat at high-quality restaurants -- and end up spending almost as much time on the process. Or, much more likely, to eat crap such as Ramen, MacD's, frozen dinners, PB&J sandwiches or take-out pizza slices and beer. And ironically still pay a very high price per protein calorie and fall far short of MDRs of many things. Soylent's market is obviously not the people who like to cook, or have partners who like (or have the time) to cook, and access to a proper kitchen and pantry and such. It's the bachelors of the world, the grad students, the people living in studio apartments writing code all night. And I think it will do very well from and for them.

pbreit 13y ago
I think you're both still wrong. It's perfectly fine to Soylent 10, 14 or 18 times a week and still have 11, 7 or 3 non-Soylent meals to really go nuts. In fact, Rob mentioned that non-Soylent meals taste even better either because they are comparatively better but also because your taste buds aren't so overworked.