5 ms·

I've been reading HN's overwhelmingly negative treatment of Soylent (as the concept) with some amusement. It's interesting. HN is supposed to represent some of

I've been reading HN's overwhelmingly negative treatment of Soylent (as the concept) with some amusement. It's interesting. HN is supposed to represent some of the world's most dynamic, forward-thinkers. However almost every truly disruptive development is greeted with small-minded negative thinking and parochialism. Bitcoin is scam money for paranoiacs who don't trust banks. Inflation is good for economies. The rich are too rich. We need more and higher taxes and more socialist redistribution of wealth. Soylent tastes bad and destroys traditional food cultures. Uber is too powerful and going to become a monopoly. Google is evil. Without the protection of friendly governments capitalism will exploit the poor. People are too stupid to protect themselves from predatory opportunists (and the government is somehow a perfect vessel to counteract them.) Everything is scary and the way things should be is how a small group of white men who are very good friends with the US government tell us how it should be, which happens to be very similar to today but with more friendly government intervention to fix everything white male programmers are scared of and don't understand. I guess it'll be entertaining to watch people changing their tune over the coming decades.

TheCapn 12y ago
You're using this as a platform to address other issues than what I think the OP is hinting at. Soylent isn't "new". It isn't "disrupting" anything. Meal replacement alternatives have existed for decades and there are numerous brands out there that have a medical proven trackrecord that can be obtained for cheaper than the Soylent we're seeing pushed today. What we have here is a case of "forward thinkers" believing that some crackpot idea from the startup culture is suddenly revolutionary because they marketed it best to this subculture of life. You're a sucker to believing Soylent offers anything revolutionary yet paying above market to have them feed you that lie. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/tLIC_oIeeORWgna6kbpW1ug/htmlview#gid=0 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/tLIC_oIeeORWgna6kbpW1...
- aianus 12y ago
  I don't know where you're getting these prices from. In Toronto Boost and Ensure cost CAD$11 for 2000 calories (in bulk at Costco!) while Soylent costs CAD$10.75. The Soylent has more protein, a more balanced nutritional profile, less wasteful (and annoying) packaging, and is lactose free too. Edit: and the Ensure has 0 fiber!
- jasonisalive 12y ago
  Hey, pretty good! Let me have a go. Ahem: The iPhone isn't "new". It isn't "disrupting" anything. Smartphones have existed for years and there are numerous brands out there that have a commercial proven trackrecord that can be obtained for cheaper than the iPhone we're seeing pushed today. What we have here is a case of "forward thinkers" believing that some crackpot idea from Apple is suddenly revolutionary because they marketed it best to this subculture of life. You're a sucker to believing iPhone offers anything revolutionary yet paying above market to have them feed you that lie. How did I do?
  - res0nat0r 12y ago
    Great, except this is More like it could be one of those knock off iPhones from China that electrocutes you since they are "disrupting" the field by not having anyone who's qualified in food nutrition working on their product day to day?
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - jschwartzi 12y ago
    Smartphones did exist for years before the iPhone. Take a look at Windows Mobile sometime. The main problems with them were that the screens sucked.
    - jasonisalive 12y ago
      (That was the point)
    - Decade 12y ago
      The whole system sucked. Those things has little memory or CPU. Windows Mobile didn't have memory protections or preemptive multitasking. Pocket Internet Explorer sucked even worse than Internet Explorer 6. It was challenging to find apps for them. But the real disruption was the disruption in the carrier relationship. A lot of smartphones didn't have WiFi, and the carriers would nickel and dime you for every kilobyte. Apple convinced them to do the flat rates and big chunks of data. Apple introduced manufacturer control of the user experience, instead of Verizon disabling every feature that would allow you to avoid the carrier's fees. When the iPhone was announced, the feature I was most impressed by was the visual voicemail. Voicemail was so tedious and inefficient before iPhone.
- Decade 12y ago
  Snowden didn't disrupt anything. We have always known that the NSA spies on electronic communications and interferes with encryption standards. A lot of the time, it's not the specific artifact that is disruptive, but it's the vision behind it. The iPhone is Unix on a phone. Qt had that years before Apple. Apple actually shipped, and added freedom from the carriers' horrible user experience. Ensure and Shakeology and Slimfast and Garden of Life have been around forever, but Rob is interested in Soylent being a complete replacement for your normal, everyday nutrition. He's not just resting on his laurels, having an obviously desirable product, but he's continuing to work on improving it, and he inspired a community to join him. Soylent is not big enough to disrupt the food industry yet, but if he succeeds, then it will.
philwelch 12y ago
Soylent isn't "disruptive innovation", it's Ensure for hipsters.
- jasonisalive 12y ago
  Nice, nice. Let me have a go. Google.com isn't "disruptive innovation", it's Altavista with the good links taken out. Was that about right?
  - 0xDOOD 12y ago
    Now please demonstrate how Soylent is as great a leap forward from existing nutritional shakes as you infer Google was from Altavista. Ridiculing an argument is not the same as countering it.
    - jasonisalive 12y ago
      I already did: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8887167 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8887167 What if Ensure had a cool name and didn't carry connotations of age and disease? What if it was sexily marketed? What if it was easy to flavour and make delicious? What if you signed up for a subscription and never thought about it again? What if you got it from vending machines that were everywhere you went and recognised you as you approached, having a glass perfectly formulated to your tastes and needs at that precise moment ready? What if it came out of a tap? What if your home 3D printer could form it into a multitude of shapes and textures (bar, cookie, cereal) and it would still be nutritionally balanced? What if it was surrounded by a devoted and inventive community of DIY hackers? What if the creator of Ensure was rapidly iterating it and discussing engineering microbes to produce pure versions of it? Oh, or is it easier, instead of using your imagination and a bit of enthusiasm, to point to how it's similar to a crappy product that nobody bothered to market, and imply that it won't be sucessful - because we all know the success and impact of a product has nothing to do with the creativity, perserverance and vision of the creators, right?
      - philwelch 12y ago
diminoten 12y ago
> HN is supposed to represent some of the world's most dynamic, forward-thinkers. Where in the hell did you get that idea?
chasing 12y ago
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html
vtlynch 12y ago
Holy shit you sound despicable.
- jasonisalive 12y ago
  Sorry bud. Here, I found a little friend for you, should be much more your taste: http://www.nytimes.com/column/paul-krugman http://www.nytimes.com/column/paul-krugman
  - vtlynch 12y ago
    Yeah you probably prefer professional idiot Thomas Friedman
  - stouset 12y ago
    To be sure, I think most people would get more value out of the writings of a Nobel laureate than some pseudonymous guy ranting off-topic on HN.
    - jasonisalive 12y ago
      Mmm, I hope you got some value from him when he made this pearler: "By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet's impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine's."
throwaway124093 12y ago
While HN can be negative, it's not primary reason I don't read HN much anymore. It's because (as demonstrated by your comment) people just state opinions without any arguments attached. When people say "X is bad" rather "X is bad for Y reason" it's leaves all the argumentation up to the reader. It's these kind of attacks that make HN emotionally draining.

TheCapn 12y ago

You're using this as a platform to address other issues than what I think the OP is hinting at. Soylent isn't "new". It isn't "disrupting" anything. Meal replacement alternatives have existed for decades and there are numerous brands out there that have a medical proven trackrecord that can be obtained for cheaper than the Soylent we're seeing pushed today. What we have here is a case of "forward thinkers" believing that some crackpot idea from the startup culture is suddenly revolutionary because they marketed it best to this subculture of life. You're a sucker to believing Soylent offers anything revolutionary yet paying above market to have them feed you that lie. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/tLIC_oIeeORWgna6kbpW1ug/htmlview#gid=0 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/tLIC_oIeeORWgna6kbpW1...

aianus 12y ago
I don't know where you're getting these prices from. In Toronto Boost and Ensure cost CAD$11 for 2000 calories (in bulk at Costco!) while Soylent costs CAD$10.75. The Soylent has more protein, a more balanced nutritional profile, less wasteful (and annoying) packaging, and is lactose free too. Edit: and the Ensure has 0 fiber!
jasonisalive 12y ago
Hey, pretty good! Let me have a go. Ahem: The iPhone isn't "new". It isn't "disrupting" anything. Smartphones have existed for years and there are numerous brands out there that have a commercial proven trackrecord that can be obtained for cheaper than the iPhone we're seeing pushed today. What we have here is a case of "forward thinkers" believing that some crackpot idea from Apple is suddenly revolutionary because they marketed it best to this subculture of life. You're a sucker to believing iPhone offers anything revolutionary yet paying above market to have them feed you that lie. How did I do?
- res0nat0r 12y ago
  Great, except this is More like it could be one of those knock off iPhones from China that electrocutes you since they are "disrupting" the field by not having anyone who's qualified in food nutrition working on their product day to day?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- jschwartzi 12y ago
  Smartphones did exist for years before the iPhone. Take a look at Windows Mobile sometime. The main problems with them were that the screens sucked.
  - jasonisalive 12y ago
    (That was the point)
  - Decade 12y ago
    The whole system sucked. Those things has little memory or CPU. Windows Mobile didn't have memory protections or preemptive multitasking. Pocket Internet Explorer sucked even worse than Internet Explorer 6. It was challenging to find apps for them. But the real disruption was the disruption in the carrier relationship. A lot of smartphones didn't have WiFi, and the carriers would nickel and dime you for every kilobyte. Apple convinced them to do the flat rates and big chunks of data. Apple introduced manufacturer control of the user experience, instead of Verizon disabling every feature that would allow you to avoid the carrier's fees. When the iPhone was announced, the feature I was most impressed by was the visual voicemail. Voicemail was so tedious and inefficient before iPhone.
Decade 12y ago
Snowden didn't disrupt anything. We have always known that the NSA spies on electronic communications and interferes with encryption standards. A lot of the time, it's not the specific artifact that is disruptive, but it's the vision behind it. The iPhone is Unix on a phone. Qt had that years before Apple. Apple actually shipped, and added freedom from the carriers' horrible user experience. Ensure and Shakeology and Slimfast and Garden of Life have been around forever, but Rob is interested in Soylent being a complete replacement for your normal, everyday nutrition. He's not just resting on his laurels, having an obviously desirable product, but he's continuing to work on improving it, and he inspired a community to join him. Soylent is not big enough to disrupt the food industry yet, but if he succeeds, then it will.

philwelch 12y ago

Soylent isn't "disruptive innovation", it's Ensure for hipsters.

jasonisalive 12y ago
Nice, nice. Let me have a go. Google.com isn't "disruptive innovation", it's Altavista with the good links taken out. Was that about right?
- 0xDOOD 12y ago
  Now please demonstrate how Soylent is as great a leap forward from existing nutritional shakes as you infer Google was from Altavista. Ridiculing an argument is not the same as countering it.
  - jasonisalive 12y ago
    I already did: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8887167 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8887167 What if Ensure had a cool name and didn't carry connotations of age and disease? What if it was sexily marketed? What if it was easy to flavour and make delicious? What if you signed up for a subscription and never thought about it again? What if you got it from vending machines that were everywhere you went and recognised you as you approached, having a glass perfectly formulated to your tastes and needs at that precise moment ready? What if it came out of a tap? What if your home 3D printer could form it into a multitude of shapes and textures (bar, cookie, cereal) and it would still be nutritionally balanced? What if it was surrounded by a devoted and inventive community of DIY hackers? What if the creator of Ensure was rapidly iterating it and discussing engineering microbes to produce pure versions of it? Oh, or is it easier, instead of using your imagination and a bit of enthusiasm, to point to how it's similar to a crappy product that nobody bothered to market, and imply that it won't be sucessful - because we all know the success and impact of a product has nothing to do with the creativity, perserverance and vision of the creators, right?
    - philwelch 12y ago

diminoten 12y ago

> HN is supposed to represent some of the world's most dynamic, forward-thinkers. Where in the hell did you get that idea?

chasing 12y ago

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

vtlynch 12y ago

Holy shit you sound despicable.

jasonisalive 12y ago
Sorry bud. Here, I found a little friend for you, should be much more your taste: http://www.nytimes.com/column/paul-krugman http://www.nytimes.com/column/paul-krugman
- vtlynch 12y ago
  Yeah you probably prefer professional idiot Thomas Friedman
- stouset 12y ago
  To be sure, I think most people would get more value out of the writings of a Nobel laureate than some pseudonymous guy ranting off-topic on HN.
  - jasonisalive 12y ago
    Mmm, I hope you got some value from him when he made this pearler: "By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet's impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine's."

throwaway124093 12y ago

While HN can be negative, it's not primary reason I don't read HN much anymore. It's because (as demonstrated by your comment) people just state opinions without any arguments attached. When people say "X is bad" rather "X is bad for Y reason" it's leaves all the argumentation up to the reader. It's these kind of attacks that make HN emotionally draining.