Soylent 2.0 Comes Bottled and Ready To Drink

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Soylent 2.0 Comes Bottled and Ready To Drink

Posted by samzenpus on Monday August 3, 2015 @06:35AM from the it's-made-of-algae dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Soylent has announced today their latest product, Soylent 2.0. It comes premixed and ready to drink in recyclable bottles. Each bottle is one fifth of a scientifically balanced daily meal plan, will last up to a year unrefrigerated, and will cost you $2.42. A Soylent blog post reads in part: "Not only are its ingredients vegan, Soylent 2.0 reaches an unprecedented level of environmental sustainability with half of its fat energy coming from farm-free, algae sources. This next generation agricultural technology has the potential to reduce the ecological impact of food production by orders of magnitude, signifying a major step towards a future of abundance, a world where optimal nutrition is the new normal."

397 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Oblicatory by mitcheli · 2015-08-03 06:37 · Score: 5, Funny

I'm waiting for their Green formula.

--
Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
1. Re: Oblicatory by ArmoredDragon · 2015-08-03 06:42 · Score: 1
  
  But that wouldn't be vegan.
2. Re:Oblicatory by ITRambo · 2015-08-03 06:43 · Score: 1
  
  With all due respect, I'd rather eat Ramen and take a vitamin pill than consume the current Soylent formulations and fart all night long.
3. Re:Oblicatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 06:47 · Score: 0
  
  Practically.. with so many of the nutirients being "permenantly" sequestered in Cemetaries as Soap Mummies.. how sustainable is our civilization? Unless you take natural leeching from perculating water through the substrate into account.
  Hmm.. perhaps that's the solution.. liquifaction of the surrounding soil.. hence "Soilent Green"
4. Re:Oblicatory by XxtraLarGe · 2015-08-03 06:50 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  With all due respect, I'd rather eat Ramen and take a vitamin pill than consume the current Soylent formulations and fart all night long.
  Why choose only one when you can do both?
  
  --
  Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
5. Re:Oblicatory by geekmux · 2015-08-03 07:08 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I'm waiting for their Green formula.
  Regardless of company name, choosing to name a new oddball food product Soylent (as in Green) was the result of someone sitting in the marketing department wondering how they could possibly create more controversy than GMO has ever managed to muster...
6. Re:Oblicatory by bev_tech_rob · 2015-08-03 07:11 · Score: 1
  
  With all due respect, I'd rather eat Ramen and take a vitamin pill than consume the current Soylent formulations and fart all night long.
  Either that or the screamin' shits......
  
  --
  You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
7. Re:Oblicatory by ArcadeMan · 2015-08-03 07:11 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  This Soylent Green tastes funny... Oh look, the box says "May contain clowns".
  
  --
  Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
8. Re:Oblicatory by knightghost · 2015-08-03 07:17 · Score: 1
  
  Or even better... start building GMO people! You can have the worst of both worlds when you bottle them.
9. Re:Oblicatory by volkerdi · 2015-08-03 07:35 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I've had no issues with Soylent 1.4/1.5 producing the kind of room-clearing gas that earlier versions did. It's really rather disappointing.
10. Re:Oblicatory by penguinoid · 2015-08-03 07:40 · Score: 2
  
  I know that this is the website I visit to get all my soylent news.
  
  --
  Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
11. Re: Oblicatory by bjohnson · 2015-08-03 07:41 · Score: 2
  
  Oh, I don't know; I was actually wondering what their business plan is once they run out of vegans to grind up and bottle...
12. Re:Oblicatory by OrangeTide · 2015-08-03 07:51 · Score: 1
  
  There is probably more nutrition in the ramen packaging than in the ramen itself. And vitamin supplements are somewhat controversial as many of them are not significantly bio-available, meaning when you're popping vitamins you're throwing your money down the shitter.
  But who is to say that something like Soylent can't be done in a ramen form factor? It kind of defeats the philosophy of Soylent, but if you never bought into that philosophy then no real loss there. Top Ramen or someone ought to invest in some R&D so they can dominate this industry.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
13. Re:Oblicatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:58 · Score: 0
  
  That's like saying, "I'd rather sit at home and puke and vomit rather than go to Disneyland and ride on all the rides with no lines."
14. Re:Oblicatory by fahrbot-bot · 2015-08-03 08:00 · Score: 1
  
  Regardless of company name, choosing to name a new oddball food product Soylent (as in Green) ...
  
  Not as in "Green". According to the FAQ Why is it named Soylent?
  
  Our name was inspired by Harry Harrison's 1966 science fiction novel Make Room! Make Room!, which explores the impact massive population growth could have on world resources. In the book, "soylent" is made of soy and lentils and is a new food source used to accommodate overpopulation.
  
  --
  It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
15. Re:Oblicatory by jedidiah · 2015-08-03 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  Don't kid yourself.
  Both of those options are like "I'd rather sit at home and puke and vomit".
  Although the Soylent option still fails based on price.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
16. Re:Oblicatory by SuricouRaven · 2015-08-03 08:41 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  I've seen the film. The official explanation is that the Soylent product line was named as it was originally made from soy and lentils, though it was implied that marine algae farms were also required. At the end it is revealed that the new product Soylent Green is made from reprocessed human corpses - a desperate attempt to maximize production when environmental damage has crippled agriculture, which the government tries to hide from people out of concern there will be mass panic if it becomes known how close to starvation the world is.
17. Re:Oblicatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:08 · Score: 0
  
  Yes as in Green: the movie Soylent Green was based upon Make Room! Make Room! and the plot (as anyone that knows the movie knows) is that the first products of Soylent were made from soy and lentils until soy and lentils became hard to source (too expensive/died off) and so they created their infamous "Green" variant, which, as everyone now has been spoiled to due to pop cultural awareness as the end of the movie became cultural zeitgeist, is people.
18. Re:Oblicatory by godel_56 · 2015-08-03 09:09 · Score: 1
  
  With all due respect, I'd rather eat Ramen and take a vitamin pill than consume the current Soylent formulations and fart all night long.
  According to an Ars Technica review the extreme farts are gone with the latest versions.
  If you don't like the real thing, there are a bunch of DIY recipes that you can try for yourself.
19. Re:Oblicatory by fahrbot-bot · 2015-08-03 09:09 · Score: 1
  
  I've seen the film.
  
  Me too. I was just remarking that the developers (claim they) named it after the product in the book, not movie - the latter which many posters here seem to think (they having not read TFFAQ - shocker).
  
  --
  It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
20. Re: Oblicatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:14 · Score: 0
  
  We need more than liquid nutrients. The body, even if vegan, at the very least needs fiber - solid fiber. this is pretty much just a fancy supplement, and as a liquid, that's all it will ever be. Complete nutrition is more than just vitamins, minerals, and calories, folks.
21. Re: Oblicatory by St.Creed · 2015-08-03 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  True. What I've read over the past few years is that fiber is actually much more important than previously considered, and not just a filler but quite essential in keeping healthy. Especially in preventing various sorts of darm cancer. So I'm wondering as much as you whether this soylent stuff is good for your health in the long term.
  
  --
  Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
22. Re: Oblicatory by St.Creed · 2015-08-03 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  Okay, and then I went, read the review from Ars Technica and found this quote:
  "While most americans do not consume enough fiber, the amount present in 1.4 is well above the average intake," [the company president] elaborated, "and, given the elemental nature of the product, is ample to maintain a healthy digestive system while consuming Soylent along with other food."
  Not sure how much is in there, but I read 30 grams. This is actually the recommended amount. And fiber never goes in "dry" anyway, the mouth chews it up and then mixes it with saliva. So I think that may be covered.
  
  --
  Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
23. Re: Oblicatory by reboot246 · 2015-08-03 10:19 · Score: 1
  
  Remember to take into account the two kinds of fiber, soluble and insoluble. You'd be surprised what foods have fiber, even coffee has some.
  
  I keep up with all of it because of IBS.
24. Re:Oblicatory by meerling · 2015-08-03 10:35 · Score: 1
  
  Interesting.... Last year he claimed to have NEVER even heard of Soylent Green, and now he's saying it was inspired by it?!?!?!
  He's full of it.
25. Re:Oblicatory by Sponge+Bath · 2015-08-03 13:44 · Score: 1
  
  The Logan's Run film also had a bit about the population served by "protein from the sea" which turned out to be frozen people. The 70s was a weird time.
26. Re: Oblicatory by KGIII · 2015-08-03 16:05 · Score: 1
  
  They do make drinkable fiber. Maybe they could add that in? I have no idea but it may already contain it.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
27. Re:Oblicatory by dargaud · 2015-08-03 19:35 · Score: 1
  
  If you think the movie was depressing, DON'T read the book !
  
  --
  Non-Linux Penguins ?
28. Re:Oblicatory by dunkelfalke · 2015-08-03 21:13 · Score: 1
  
  Not really. There is nothing about "soylent green" in the actual book. All this "made of people" is only in the movie.
  
  --
  "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
29. Re:Oblicatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 22:13 · Score: 0
  
  You should go to Soylent News instead :)
30. Re:Oblicatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 00:42 · Score: 0
  
  The film is only loosely based on the novel.
  There is no cannibalism in the novel.
31. Re:Oblicatory by Lord+Bitman · 2015-08-04 01:24 · Score: 1
  
  The explanation of it all being a way to maximize production to prevent panic sure makes a lot more sense as a reason to get upset than the one Charlton Heston's character nonsensically blurts out
  
  --
  -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
32. Re:Oblicatory by Jakeula · 2015-08-04 02:03 · Score: 1
  
  Whats the pricing issue? It comes down to about $3 dollars a meal. Thats very cheap for getting a nutrient complete meal for every serving. I spend far more than $3 a meal and I eat way less healthy food per sitting. I also didn't find its taste to be vomit worthy. its not as good as pizza, but its not the worst tasting thing in the world. It tastes like uncooked oatmeal.
33. Re:Oblicatory by SuricouRaven · 2015-08-04 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  The movie also mentions that the global population is a classified number, again due to fear of inducing a panic.
  The famously blurted line is in the context of the character exhausted and traumatised by their discovery. They aren't acting in the most rational way, just trying to scream their terrible finding to as many people as they can before the authorities catch up. The authories seek to surpress the truth about Soylent Green both because they know many people would react with instinctive disgust to the realisation that they have been unknowing cannibals, and because of what it implies about the sustainability of the food supply: The earth is farmed out, the oceans are dead, and the government has had to resort to the desperate measure of reprocessing the deceased to feed the living.
34. Re:Oblicatory by Muad'Dave · 2015-08-04 04:32 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not sure that was the implication. Box said that when the fish stopped coming he started preserving people instead. He kinda went nuts when his primary function was no longer needed - I don't think any of his corpsickles were actually eaten.
  
  --
  Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
35. Re:Oblicatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 04:32 · Score: 0
  
  Planned Parenthood indicates they have a reliable supply of raw materials available and would like the Soylent people to reach out to them.
36. Re:Oblicatory by SuricouRaven · 2015-08-04 04:32 · Score: 1
  
  Which may be why the film is now a famous classic, and the novel is known only to fans of sci-fi novels.
37. Re:Oblicatory by Sponge+Bath · 2015-08-04 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  That is possible. You don't see any processing facilities, just storage. The important thing in that movie is Jennifer Agutter got naked repeatedly.
38. Re:Oblicatory by Muad'Dave · 2015-08-04 05:14 · Score: 1
  
  The 11 year old me had the same idea when that movie came out. Also, Farrah Fawcett - what a magnificent smile.
  
  --
  Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
39. Re:Oblicatory by Cinnamon+Beige · 2015-08-04 07:49 · Score: 1
  
  There is probably more nutrition in the ramen packaging than in the ramen itself. And vitamin supplements are somewhat controversial as many of them are not significantly bio-available, meaning when you're popping vitamins you're throwing your money down the shitter.
  But who is to say that something like Soylent can't be done in a ramen form factor? It kind of defeats the philosophy of Soylent, but if you never bought into that philosophy then no real loss there. Top Ramen or someone ought to invest in some R&D so they can dominate this industry.
  My problem is that most measures given for nutritional content are, in fact, based on the total content of the substance and not the amount in a bioavalible form--and we're still revising every so often what is in fact a 'nutritionally complete diet' as we become more aware of just how subtle the signs of malnutrition can actually be. The traditional measures actually were based basically on when you saw the catastrophic signs--we didn't have the ability to detect or recognize some of the mildest forms.
  Something like Soylent probably would be really good for getting a better idea of what's actually required for proper nutrition and for emergency food stocks, but overall I doubt it'll ever really be acceptable for everyday use by everybody because nutritional needs are, well, highly variable and can differ by age, sex, metabolism, and genetic heritage. For it to totally replace everybody's diet, you'd basically have to do a custom formula for every single human being and adjust it daily because what Bob needs today cannot be assumed to be the same as what Bob needed yesterday. (This is, in fact, why the body keeps stores: it allows on-the-fly readjustments, much like keeping on hand spare parts for doing emergency repairs is wise.)
40. Re:Oblicatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 08:28 · Score: 0
  
  As if soylent's vitamins aren't from the same chemicals they fortify other foods with. As if the vitamins in all our processed food is 'fortified' and can't simply possibly exist in the food itself as "processing" means whatever the hell anyone wants it to mean regardless of how nebulous or unscientific or just plain assumed. Either way your body does not store vitamins the way it stores energy, you will be urinating the extra no matter where it comes from. The bio availability of nearly all food is not known with absolute certainty
41. Re:Oblicatory by repressitol · 2015-08-04 12:20 · Score: 0
  
  This Soylent Green tastes funny... Oh look, the box says "May contain clowns".
  aaaand there goes the milk out my nose. thanks. thanks a bunch.
42. Re:Oblicatory by rtb61 · 2015-08-05 00:26 · Score: 1
  
  Taste is Soylent's biggest mistake. You really do need multiple compositions with varying flavours, as you need to be able to adjust you consumption to your current dietary needs ie sweeter in you need more energy, saltier for recovery. They should also steer clear of soy as the amount of chemical processing in that product is extreme and contaminants become a huge risk.
  
  --
  Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
43. Re: Oblicatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-05 08:57 · Score: 0
  
  Geez, can't take you anywhere. You must have had a really good or really shitty childhood.
44. Re:Oblicatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-11 02:56 · Score: 0
  
  I read the article and was ready to jump on it with my own 'green' comment but you guys have said it all! Soylent Green, the film, was more than just a sci-fi horror flick, but a real warning. The writer and directors did more than just create a sensational film for profit, but indeed did prophesy a probable outcome if we did not change the course of our canoe in midstream. Did they consciously realize that they were doing the human race more a service than just a quick profit? I don't know but the way I see it, is that this film should be shown in schools and other educational venues. It is as important as 'Silent Spring'.
  PS...I am NOT posting as 'Anonymous Coward' I am joerog55 and all you have to do is Google that to know who I am.
I'm waiting for the by p51d007 · 2015-08-03 06:41 · Score: 1

Soylent is people...
1. Re:I'm waiting for the by thinkwaitfast · 2015-08-03 08:26 · Score: 2
  
  Soylent is people.
  Happy now?
Re:Obligatory by Irate+Engineer · 2015-08-03 06:41 · Score: 5, Funny

I'm waiting for their Green formula.
I've heard it tastes like ass.

--
Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
Vote for Bernie in 2016!
They aren't revolutionizing shit. by bistromath007 · 2015-08-03 06:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

Congratulations, soylent, on perfecting your middle class hipster chow. Wake me when a month's supply of your gross bullshit doesn't cost half again as much as my SNAP benefits.
1. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Isarian · 2015-08-03 06:46 · Score: 1
  
  There are a lot of complaints and replies to the announcements regarding pricing. Not only regarding the price hike of pre-mixed Soylent vs the powder, but regarding the fact that the base powdered form is going up in price a fair bit (especially because the subscription benefit for those who buy by the month is decreasing).
2. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 06:48 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Your steadfast determination to show everyone how unimpressed you are shows you're more of a hipster than you'll ever accuse anyone of being.
3. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by bistromath007 · 2015-08-03 06:54 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  *rolleyes*
  
  I remember looking into this stuff a while ago. It was already too expensive for what it was when it was only powder, and since you can only get it online anyway, it's always been unavailable to people who could genuinely benefit from something like it.
  
  Part of their hype... Er, stated goals, is to change the way the world thinks about food supply, reduce environmental impact, and improve the affordability of nutrition. But their crap is only cheap if you customarily go to Starbucks every morning. They have made the Tesla of food: big promises about social goals that go nowhere and just give horn-rim wearing assholes another status symbol.
4. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Isarian · 2015-08-03 07:01 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I wouldn't shove them into the same category as Tesla myself. Soylent's hype was about taking something existing (liquid food) and retooling it for the masses (basically liquid food but with a different nutrient balance for the non-bedridden). If they had met their promise and actually produced a product that would reduce food costs for the masses and be accessible to the general public on basic food benefits it would have been great, but hey, like you said - hype.
  Tesla/SpaceX on the other hand are developing revolutionary technologies that didn't exist previously and building a massive electric vehicle infrastructure available to all EVs as well as opening up their tech to the competition. If they tip the automotive balance over to EVs and help to produce a market of affordable electric vehicles they'll have surmounted a significant environmental and social hurdle to the benefit of the entire planet.
5. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:06 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  In this case, he's got a fair complaint. The original concept of THIS soylent was to make a cheap food to get poor people their nutrients (especially those out in "food deserts").
6. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by cayenne8 · 2015-08-03 07:07 · Score: 1
  
  So, the important part.
  What exactly does this stuff TASTE like?
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
7. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by aaaaaaargh! · 2015-08-03 07:08 · Score: 1
  
  He just sounds like a reasonable guy to me.
8. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by bistromath007 · 2015-08-03 07:16 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Thank you for confirming that a vegan diet is fundamentally a middle class affectation that should offend anyone who actually understands global food supply problems at all.
9. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:20 · Score: 1
  
  , reduce environmental impact, and improve the affordability of nutrition.
  These two goals are often contradicting. While there are ways to improve either independently, when you get down to making food as cheap as possible to compete with a lot of the mass market stuff, you will be increasing the environmental impact. Producing food without large externalities will cost more.
10. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Isarian · 2015-08-03 07:22 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Well first I'd say that you have to have it for a few days before getting used to the taste. The closest thing I could use as an analogy is VERY thin pancake batter. Very little texture to speak of, just mostly drinks like water and is very slightly sweet. I enjoyed the taste but the liquid part of it set off my reflux :/
11. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:29 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not vegan, but you don't have to be eating smoothies to be vegan. In fact, for a long time I made curries for my lunch which were vegan; they were very cheap to make in a big batch once a week. Some brown rice, various beans & lentils, onions etc, and spices. Tasty, nutritious, and cheap.
  A lot of the poorest people in the world are de facto vegan, because it's the cheapest (because most efficient) way to eat.
12. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by bistromath007 · 2015-08-03 07:41 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  And they also frequently struggle with malnutrition. Because a vegan diet that is actually complete is unquestionably harder and more expensive than a non-vegan one. It is something you can only really reliably do in a first world country, where it is therefore an infuriatingly hypocritical exercise of privilege.
13. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:44 · Score: 1
  
  The only reason to take offense that vegans exist is that you're an insecure twat.
  And that's coming from a carnivore.
14. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:44 · Score: 0
  
  I agree. Besides which, the main problem in most modern markets is overabundance of food (soylent certainly does not address the food availability for those who don't have enough). Providing effectively pre-digested food will leave consumers feeling hungry even having consumed their daily allotment of calories, which means that they are likely to be snacking a lot, offsetting the 'eco footprint' benefits, and contributing to the obesity problem. What we need is less liquid food, and more roughage in our diets. Soylent is a solution looking for a problem to solve.
15. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:46 · Score: 0
  
  If you're on SNAP, you shouldn't be on the Internet you moocher. Who pays your ISP bill?
16. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by bistromath007 · 2015-08-03 07:48 · Score: 1
  
  I'm disabled, so the state pays that too! Tell me how much you hate it, capitalist. :^)
17. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:49 · Score: 1
  
  Malnourished according to what guidelines? Who published those guidelines, and who funded the research? I've heard of doctors saying that one or two Diet Cokes a day is part of a healthy diet.
  The thing is, say you eat enough grain/etc to not be malnourished. Now say you cut your grain intake down, but supplement your diet with beef. How much grain did that cow have to eat to grow large enough to slaughter for food? It'd be more than if you had just stuck with the grain yourself. It's a basic law of the universe: you lose energy when converting it. Since you're (rhetorical) not a first-worlder, why not just leave the cow out of it and save on that grain it wastes?
18. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by sabbede · 2015-08-03 07:51 · Score: 1
  
  Or you've had to listen to them talk about how superior they are for not eating meat. Torquemada could take lessons...
19. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by mattack2 · 2015-08-03 07:53 · Score: 1
  
  ... your middle class hipster chow. ...doesn't cost half again as much as my SNAP benefits.
  Well, if you got off your food stamps, maybe you could become middle class and afford it too.
  (BTW, I think it's overpriced too, but have still been vaguely interested in trying it. I wish there were a low(er) cal version though. I *know* that's not the point, but a version that provided all of the nutrition necessary but was ALSO low(er) calorie, could be a way to skip some meals..)
20. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by OrangeTide · 2015-08-03 07:55 · Score: 2
  
  What exactly does this stuff TASTE like?
  disturbingly neutral. Like scientifically engineered inoffensive blandness.
  I think if I were too busy to care about eating, it would be a useful product. Imagine the weightloss if eating became a boring chore. I might even find other things to do instead to avoid eating, like clean the house.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
21. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 08:02 · Score: 0
  
  how rapidly non-vegan agriculture destroys the environment
  Since vegan agriculture is such a new invention, it can't be all that rapid.
22. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by OrangeTide · 2015-08-03 08:03 · Score: 1
  
  Because something requires education doesn't make it wrong. The expense is somewhat hard to measure, because we subsidize the meat and dairy industry in the US by $5B. With estimates of around $400B in cost to society (I'm a bit skeptical of that one, I have no done the research myself, relying on Google here).
  If meat were more expensive, such that the poor could not afford it, then we as a society would be forced to educate everyone on how to get the necessary nutrition on a vegan diet. I don't think this is impossible, and there are other cultures that have huge sections of society that are meat-free and a few that are also dairy free.
  ps - I had a meatball panni today. vegetarian/veganism is a scientific curiosity to me, I haven't adopted it as a religion.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
23. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 08:06 · Score: 0
  
  Tastes bland, slightly sweet to me. It's not bad at all. I use it as my lazy food option, I make about 250-500 calorie's worth at a time and have that instead of breakfast or a late snack/meal.
  
  It's not a bad product to replace common quick foods like fast food or poptarts.
24. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by bistromath007 · 2015-08-03 08:14 · Score: 1
  
  That's a great idea. Starving myself will be a great motivator to solve the problem several doctors have been unable to do much about for years.
25. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 08:16 · Score: 0
  
  Cows are supposed to eat grass, asshole. Stop feeding your cows the wrong food and you don't have to worry about your dumb little conversions.
26. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by HornWumpus · 2015-08-03 08:16 · Score: 1
  
  There are _many_ good reasons not to associate with Vegans. But the fact they leave more meat for the rest of us is not a reason to be offended.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
27. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 08:18 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe open up your mind a bit and do your own research.
  Spotted the redditor
28. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by rogoshen1 · 2015-08-03 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  on the other hand, a purely vegan food system would also destroy the environment. where do you get your fertilizer for example? (hint: it won't be from animals, and synthetic fertilizer from fossil fuels is also a non-winner in the long term.)
29. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by GLMDesigns · 2015-08-03 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  So. Then you're in favor of de-regulating part of the agriculture business by removing subsidies?
  
  Good. I agree, No more subsidies of any kind for farming. If beef prices go up. So be it.
  
  --
  If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
  Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
30. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by ThatAblaze · 2015-08-03 08:27 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, this is the worst idea since the pet rock!
  owai...
31. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by thinkwaitfast · 2015-08-03 08:30 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  disturbingly neutral. Like scientifically engineered inoffensive blandness.
  So English food?
32. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 08:30 · Score: 0
  
  Your just a bitter gamer misogynoerd. Get on the right side of history pleb. Enjoy your shipping container mortgage.
33. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 08:33 · Score: 0
  
  Ya, it needs to be $12.10 per week, not per day. I can eat real food for $10.00/week.
34. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by jedidiah · 2015-08-03 08:42 · Score: 2
  
  Ironically, something that looks like a cracker would probably be a much better option. That's a much more portable approach that doesn't require extra resources when eating in the field. Armies have even used this sort of concept for their field rations.
  Something that requires mixing assumes infastructure and resources that may not exist.
  Plus everyone knows that real Soylent looks like crackers...
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
35. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by thinkwaitfast · 2015-08-03 08:42 · Score: 1
  
  I eat very well for ~$250/month/3 people. Granted I have a large garden, but it's not the primary sources of calories . The trick is to have youtube and be able to follow cooking directions.
  The poorest people on Earth eat the best because they know how to cook.
  It takes less time than going out to eat.
36. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by AmiMoJo · 2015-08-03 08:42 · Score: 1
  
  I'd be happy with a pill I could pop in the morning, or a drink I guess. Just something that means I have everything I need and don't need to eat again that day. I waste so much time eating.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
37. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by smooth+wombat · 2015-08-03 08:47 · Score: 1
  
  disturbingly neutral. Like scientifically engineered inoffensive blandness.
  
  So it's essentially what they were eating in the movie, "The Matrix".
  
  It's a single celled protein combined with synthetic aminos, vitamins, and minerals. Everything the body needs.
  
  --
  We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
38. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by ExekielS · 2015-08-03 08:49 · Score: 1
  
  Not really. We would just let the poor replace the meat with pasta and develop even more severe obesity and malnurishment than they already experience. This is America, we don't give a fuck about the poor and we certainly aren't going to let ourselves be forced to help them. And even without subsidies, the meat would still be rounghly as affordabe, maybe a 5% increase at most.
  
  --
  ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
39. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by jedidiah · 2015-08-03 08:51 · Score: 2
  
  Been there. Did that. Moved on. Grew Up.
  We could also feed the world by simply distributing the food that we let rot because it isn't perfect enough or to prop up commodity prices.
  Haitians don't want our feed corn.
  Although I could see you forcing it on yourself strangely enough.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
40. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 08:56 · Score: 0
  
  Wake me when you stop selling your SNAP benefits for crack benefits.
  The Sale and distribution of Crack Cocaine is tightly controlled by the man. By supporting you drug dealer you are supporting The Kock brothers.
41. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:04 · Score: 0
  
  To me, it has a neutral taste.
  If you shake it per the instructions, the powder mixes well.
  If you shake like I do, it has a gritty feel.
  Either way, I find the taste pleasant and the well-shaken-smooth feel or the less-shaken-gritty feel are fine with me.
  Not everyone will agree since one of my taste nerves has been damaged.
42. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:06 · Score: 0
  
  No, it tastes much better than English food.
  You don't waste a whole meal-time sitting and eating an English meal.
  You just fill up the glass, drink it and go.
  If it tastes as bad as an English meal to you, it only takes about 5% of the time -- the time factor, alone, makes it better!
43. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by BigDukeSix · 2015-08-03 09:15 · Score: 1
  
  You're giving Soylent way too much credit. Nestle and Mead-Johnson have sold healthy-people formulas (along with a bunch of others for sick people) for decades. Soylent have reinvented these into what is, by all accounts, a shittier-tasting version.
44. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Isarian · 2015-08-03 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  Don't the variants from Nestlé, Mead-Johnson, etc come at even higher premiums and at much higher glycemic index/sugar content than Soylent though?
45. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:21 · Score: 0
  
  When have you had to listen to this? I have met many vegans and have never endured such a lecture.
  I am not denying that self-righteous asshole vegans exist...there are self-righteous assholes of every variety after all. But I have not experienced an over-representation of assholery in the vegan community. So, I wonder at how much of your reaction is from some over-developed sense of defensiveness on your part.
46. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by revaleis · 2015-08-03 09:22 · Score: 1
  
  Well YOU are not technically conserving it.. most likely it is still being used and someone is still eating that meat.
47. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:54 · Score: 0
  
  No one wants to hear it, but we're healthiest eating raw vegetables, fruits, and nuts/seeds/legumes as well. Stop feeding us the wrong foods, and obesity, heart disease, diabetes, colon cancer, and many many other serious medical issues basically go away.
48. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Oligonicella · 2015-08-03 10:04 · Score: 1
  
  PeeWee translation: "I know you are, but what am I?"
49. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by ponraul · 2015-08-03 10:17 · Score: 1
  
  Mostly, like the protein powder they use.
50. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Oligonicella · 2015-08-03 10:23 · Score: 2
  
  No one is feeding you anything. You feed yourself. That makes you responsible, not a food supplier. I'd far rather live in a world where I watch some dumbass eat himself to death than live in one without Twinkies because some crusade removed everything dumbass could hurt himself by eating.
  
  You suffer from that magical view of the past thing as well. Your list ("obesity, heart disease, diabetes, colon cancer, and many many other serious medical issues") existed prior to modern foods. We just died of other stuff first and more often.
51. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 10:25 · Score: 0
  
  >big promises about social goals that go nowhere and just give horn-rim wearing assholes another status symbol.
  You're really bitter, not clever.
52. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 10:25 · Score: 0
  
  Hard to get all that SJW in when your chewing your cud huh.
53. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by koick · 2015-08-03 10:33 · Score: 1
  
  Stated goals aside, I suspect they are beta testing on hipster consumers so they can make their real money with massive purchases via emergency support services (think pallets and pallets of this stuff delivered to disaster areas), and probably even patents/trademarks/market share so it's the go-to food for inner-planetary space missions.
54. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by chill · 2015-08-03 10:36 · Score: 1
  
  keeping in mind that they intentionally engineered it to be bland. the point is it takes on the flavor of whatever you mix it with.
  for me, toss some in a blender with a handful of ice and a quarter cup of fresh or frozen fruit and it makes a great smoothie. the added benefit is it is nutritionally complete.
  
  --
  Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
55. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by meerling · 2015-08-03 10:37 · Score: 1
  
  I had plenty of tasty food when I was in the UK. It would probably have made a modern nutritionist have an apoplectic fit, but still.
56. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 10:39 · Score: 0
  
  and ur uh hipster.
57. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by cheesybagel · 2015-08-03 10:58 · Score: 1
  
  There are all sorts of protein drinks you can buy in sports stores in case you are interested.
  Or you could just drink milk. I bet it's cheaper. I think Tesla himself survived on milk and cookies. But who am I to know...
58. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 11:10 · Score: 1
  
  I've never been a vegetarian, and like BBQ too much to try any time soon. I've also seen two different assholes be self-righteous about being vegan. Although they were self-righteous about everything they did, and even the one that stopped being vegan would continue to act superior about his new diet. I've also seen more than a couple dozen cases following variations on:
  Carn:"Why have you helped yourself to the wings?"
  Veg: "I've had enough other food"
  Carn: "Just try some, I insist, these are great"
  Veg: "... I'm vegetarian"
  Carn: "Why?"
  Veg: "I don't feel like going into it."
  Carn: "No, tell me"
  Veg: "I don't like how animals are mistreated
  Carn: "Well that's stupid, but more meat for me. You should check with a doctor if you're healthy, because you need nutrients found in meat... "
  (10 minutes later after vegetarian leaves)
  Carn: "Ugh, vegetarians are so self-righteous assholes who won't stop tell others what to eat and always talk about how superior they are."
  Anyway, people in general are self-righteous, and a lot will talk about anything to feel superior. This includes food choices, whether vegetarian or not.
59. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 11:29 · Score: 0
  
  I've heard of doctors saying that one or two Diet Cokes a day is part of a healthy diet.
  No you haven't. Not once, not ever.
  You MIGHT have seen a doctor say that you can be healthy despite the occasional Coke.
  But that's not even close to what you're claiming, and you know it.
  Stop lying.
60. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 11:33 · Score: 0
  
  Protein shakes that you get from the fitness stores aren't designed to be meal replacements. They even warn you on the pouch that you're not supposed to use it that way.
61. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 11:37 · Score: 0
  
  That wasn't the original concept for Soylent at all. It was meant to be a drink for busy people who don't have time to cook meals and want something healthier than fast food fare. The idea of taking the drink out to food deserts was talked about but was a secondary and distant goal at best.
62. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by cheesybagel · 2015-08-03 11:52 · Score: 1
  
  Neither is Soylent. Notice the author doesn't make any claims that it can replace all meals.
63. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 12:20 · Score: 0
  
  Grew Up.
  Obviously not.
64. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by mjwx · 2015-08-03 12:42 · Score: 1
  
  I had plenty of tasty food when I was in the UK. It would probably have made a modern nutritionist have an apoplectic fit, but still.
  There's a reason why British TV chefs who refuse to eat junk food are still a bit chunky. British comfort food is typically carb or sugar loaded (or both).
  
  But your diet is not meant to consist mainly of comfort foods but occasionally someone eats all the pies.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
65. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 12:49 · Score: 0
  
  It is funny how much more often I hear of non-vegetarians complaining about vegetarians, than the other way around. And I often get the sense that such complainers get a sense of superiority, even when trying to attribute superiority complex to others.
66. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by mabu · 2015-08-03 13:10 · Score: 1
  
  >No one wants to hear it, but we're healthiest eating raw vegetables, fruits, and nuts/seeds/legumes as well. Stop feeding us the wrong foods, and obesity, heart disease, diabetes, colon cancer, and many many other serious medical issues basically go away.
  [citation needed]
67. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by myowntrueself · 2015-08-03 13:23 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not vegan, but you don't have to be eating smoothies to be vegan. In fact, for a long time I made curries for my lunch which were vegan; they were very cheap to make in a big batch once a week. Some brown rice, various beans & lentils, onions etc, and spices. Tasty, nutritious, and cheap.
  A lot of the poorest people in the world are de facto vegan, because it's the cheapest (because most efficient) way to eat.
  What you are describing isn't 'curry' its dhal.
  
  --
  In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
68. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by myowntrueself · 2015-08-03 13:25 · Score: 1
  
  And they also frequently struggle with malnutrition. Because a vegan diet that is actually complete is unquestionably harder and more expensive than a non-vegan one. It is something you can only really reliably do in a first world country, where it is therefore an infuriatingly hypocritical exercise of privilege.
  Try being vegan in Mongolia. Almost all of those fruit and vegetables have to be shipped from China. Not only are they heavily loaded with pesticides and herbicides they also cost quite a lot of energy to ship. And in winter... good luck with that.
  First world people typically have zero idea of whats really involved in feeding most of the world.
  
  --
  In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
69. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by myowntrueself · 2015-08-03 13:26 · Score: 1
  
  The only reason to take offense that vegans exist is that you're an insecure twat.
  And that's coming from a carnivore.
  Absolutely. I hear vegans are delicious.
  
  --
  In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
70. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 13:40 · Score: 0
  
  oh, do you mean that website I only view to listen to unsigned artists looking for feedback on their music?
71. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Greyfox · 2015-08-03 13:48 · Score: 1
  
  Heh. Yeah. I can squeek a six quart crock pot of lentil soup (Lentils, Chicken, Canned Tomatoes, Onion, Garlic, Carrots and Potatoes) under $10. Half that if I leave out the chicken. A bit more if I also add bacon and my home-ground curry mix. I can get cumin for practically free at the moment, though. And that'll keep me fed the entire week. It's damn good, too, just not something I'm in the mood for in the middle of August.
  
  --
  I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
72. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 14:01 · Score: 0
  
  I'm not a vegan, but I do eat an almost exclusively vegetarian diet. I have no issues feeding myself with $100 per month. I don't buy organic produce, I buy whatever is cheap. Meat's expensive, yo.
73. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 14:43 · Score: 0
  
  Uh yes they do. And I believe he consumed it for several months straight and did numerous blood tests posting the results. So the hype was that this is a true meal replacement system as in you can live off it exclusively.
74. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by KGIII · 2015-08-03 16:10 · Score: 1
  
  Wait... I am paying to feed you?!?
  Actually, I am okay with that. If you were hungry I would expect you to steal for food. I'd rather people not do that. If anything, I think they should make it more readily available and work to take the social stigma out of benefits. I suspect more people would apply if it were not embarrassing. Well, I am assuming it is embarrassing, I do not really know. It should not be, however. When I am supreme rule of the galaxy, I will make sure to change that.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
75. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by KGIII · 2015-08-03 16:23 · Score: 1
  
  Yup. For every dead animal they do not eat - I will eat two. I am old and I still can not get much heavier than 170 pounds no matter how much I eat. I am exactly 172 pounds on my scale and I have been that exact weight for as long as I have owned the scale. I do not seem to lose or gain any weight. Strange, really.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
76. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Evtim · 2015-08-03 16:54 · Score: 1
  
  Share and enjoy?
77. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 17:32 · Score: 0
  
  This reminds me though that vitamin pills have been largely found to be useless because the body can't take up vitamins processed this way. Are we sure this hokey idea actually can substitute for real food?
78. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 18:19 · Score: 0
  
  >So English food?
  English kitchen is actually awesome. I bet you never had well made English food.
79. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by freeze128 · 2015-08-03 18:28 · Score: 1
  
  It would probably be cheaper if they just used Soy beans and lentils, like their name suggests.
80. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Dr_Barnowl · 2015-08-03 19:14 · Score: 2
  
  The guy lived on it exclusively for a few months and had regular blood tests to make sure his health was maintained.
81. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Dr_Barnowl · 2015-08-03 19:21 · Score: 1
  
  The EU equivalent, Joylent, costs about €6 a day.
  Pre-prepared bottles are the real WTF here - they're heavier, more wasteful.
82. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by phil.swansborough · 2015-08-03 20:34 · Score: 2
  
  Wow, what a load of absolute crap! I've been a vegan for nearly a decade and I spend less than anyone I know, including all of my vegetarian friends, on food. Why talk about something you clearly know nothing about? And you get modded +5 insightful basically because it's an anti-vegan comment to go with the group think.
83. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by bingoUV · 2015-08-03 21:32 · Score: 2
  
  Oil the hinge of the needle of your scale.
  
  --
  Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
84. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by sabbede · 2015-08-03 23:36 · Score: 1
  
  An excellent point.
85. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 01:55 · Score: 0
  
  "And they also frequently struggle with malnutrition."
  You have no idea what you're talking about.
86. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Jakeula · 2015-08-04 02:05 · Score: 1
  
  At around $3 dollars a meal, the pricing isnt so terrible. Find me another nutrient complete meal that has that low cost, and low prep time. Sure there is room for improvement in taste and cost, but I don't think this is overly expensive. I spend way more than $70 a week on food and its not nearly as healthy.
87. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 02:50 · Score: 0
  
  the technology for electric cars has existed for a while.. there is nothing revolutionary there. their technology is nothing but 18650 cells for the battery pack and a custom motor (which is nothing new). yes they polished it up and found a business process that worked but its nothing revolutionary about it.. the only thing that is revolutionary is the fact that they told big oil to shove it and that they didnt care. (this is something that any other car manufacturer is unable to do regardless of how profitable it may end up being)
88. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by KGIII · 2015-08-04 04:32 · Score: 1
  
  It is digital. I am not taking it apart anyhow. My doctor's scale says I weigh the same. His is digital too. I do not see the analog scales so often these days.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
89. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by TheTrueScotsman · 2015-08-04 04:39 · Score: 1
  
  where do you get your fertilizer for example?
  The Haber-Bosch process fixes nitrogen from the air. All it needs is power.
90. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by cbhacking · 2015-08-04 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  Hey asshole, fun fact: there are jobs which requires a bachelor's degree in a scientific field (the specific example I'm thinking of is oceanography), and still only earn minimum wage (in the state with the country's highest state-set minimum wage, but still). You can work full time at that job (earning significantly more than federal minimum wage), and still qualify for SNAP.
  Not everybody can break 6 digits (or even half of that) by age 25, and if everybody who had a shot at it made the attempt then your (and my) jobs would probably pay a lot less because there'd be a glut of people in the field.
  Seriously, take that attitude of yours and shove it back in next to your head. We already know where you keep that...
  
  --
  There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
91. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 08:33 · Score: 0
  
  So what? You'd be surprised at how much crap you can eat and still have blood tests come out clean and normal.
  In fact it's a guarantee you will be surprised because we don't determine what is healthy or not by blood tests in a controlled environment. If they did the entire health food industry would explode the second they start finding out that high sugar and high fat diets still get good and healthy blood test results. After like, the 6th person they test.
92. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 09:34 · Score: 0
  
  What's a hipster? Did you mean hamster?
93. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Vastad · 2015-08-04 09:44 · Score: 1
  
  Do you even fat boy's brekkie? Even once?
  English food tastes of delicious slightly-burnt bacon fat and lard-infused pastry topped off with mildly acidic tea and skimmed milk
94. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 11:49 · Score: 0
  
  It would probably be cheap as hell if they were producing in very large volume. All the ingredients are cheap and the entire manufacturing process can probably be automated.
  Right now they are producing on a boutique scale, and the result is boutique prices. I think that the humanitarian and environmental goals are genuinely plausible (if people are willing to eat bland white mush), but it's fair to say that they can only be achieved if the company first manages to develop a big customer base or convince some institutional customer to put down a really huge order. Developing such a large customer base takes time, and in the meantime they will only survive if they can convince people to buy the stuff at a much higher price that covers the cost of small batch production. Same is true of Tesla, independent breweries, and any other small scale manufacturing.
95. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 11:56 · Score: 0
  
  Did God give you a quota for condescending to poor people?
  Remember if you meet your quota every time the boss will just raise it! Now God's got me condescending to five poor people a day plus I have to find a three-legged puppy to kick.
96. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 12:22 · Score: 0
  
  That's bullshit. Meat and cheese are expensive. Beans are way cheaper. The place with the most vegetarians is India, and most of those vegetarians are extremely poor. (Yeah yeah, you said vegan, but the vegetarian Hindus don't eat eggs either; and I doubt they're swimming in milk, because they're fucking poor).
97. Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-05 07:58 · Score: 0
  
  I mean, if you're going to be critical, it could be argued that they don't have the demand to warrant significantly increasing their capacity, which is a necessary component in decreasing their prices. It's a new product, by a new company, in a new plant. They've only been selling product for a little over a year, and they've already re-tooled their ingredients list 7 times. You don't think you might be expecting a bit much out of them this early on?
  Your comparison to Tesla (aka saying they're completely different) is a bit odd, being that Tesla has started and continues on with vehicles that are cost prohibitive for the masses, and has existed for about 13 years now. You mention that they're building a vehicle infrastructure. Yes, that only their expensive vehicles can currently use. In the future, yes, it may go a long way to developing cheaper models that are available to the masses.. but not yet.
  You could compare that to Soylent by saying the ingredients / packaging it's using are the infrastructure it's building. By it using these products, it's building a market for them. If those markets catch on, then it very well could affect the food industry to the benefit of the entire planet.
  Soylent is MUCH MUCH younger and smaller than Tesla ever was. It also didn't start of with backing from a billionaire owner. It was a kickstarter project!
98. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Fieryphoenix · 2015-08-05 22:23 · Score: 1
  
  I make mine with less water and it's like thick pancake batter. Chewing becomes involved; I find that more satisfying. I drink a lot of water through the day so I don't need it with my Soylent.
99. Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-10 09:09 · Score: 0
  
  All I know is my gut says maybe.
Bowl of snot by TWX · 2015-08-03 06:43 · Score: 4, Funny

It's a single-celled protein combined with synthetic aminos, vitamins, and minerals. Everything the body needs.

--
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
1. Re:Bowl of snot by preaction · 2015-08-03 06:52 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  ... It doesn't have _Everything_ the body needs...
2. Re:Bowl of snot by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:19 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  It has electrolytes, and that's what a body craves.
  Now stop talking like such a fag.
3. Re:Bowl of snot by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 08:00 · Score: 0
  
  Did you ever eat Tasty Wheat?
4. Re:Bowl of snot by TWX · 2015-08-03 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  No, but technically, neither did you.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
5. Re:Bowl of snot by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 16:08 · Score: 0
  
  Digital pimp, hard at work...
6. Re:Bowl of snot by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 19:32 · Score: 0
  
  Matrix, say hello to Idiocracy
I don't get it,... five a day? by Selur · 2015-08-03 06:43 · Score: 5, Interesting

"Each bottle is one fifth of a scientifically balanced daily meal plan, "
$2.42 per 400-calorie bottle so $12.08 a day,... cooking my self I can manage a (I hope) tastier alternative for less,...
Sorry, but I really don't get why this is interesting at all, for a short moment I thought: "Okay, may be for long term 'food' storage, then I read '"However, we counter that by the fact that the drink does not require refrigeration and also does not spoil until at least one year."
=> What is the gain in using this?
1. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by TWX · 2015-08-03 06:46 · Score: 1
  
  I can only think of specific applications when this might be worthwhile, like where one has to remain mobile for some time and carry one's supplies in an area with very little water available, but that's a pretty unusual set of circumstances. You almost have to be a refugee or a forward-deployed soldier to involuntarily enter those conditions, and only militaries would have the supply capability to afford to intermittently replenish stock at that price.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
2. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by TWX · 2015-08-03 06:49 · Score: 1
  
  I suppose I should add, even in those circumstances it would be demoralizing to rely entirely on this drink for complete nutritional sustenance, and at least one real, substantial, solid meal per day would be needed. Soldiers on-patrol or on-alert that simply can't stop to have a meal would probably be the only ones that would 'benefit' from this.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
3. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Isarian · 2015-08-03 06:50 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  The idea was to have foodstuff that is easy to prepare, low-cost, and includes all of your dV of various dietary needs. One of the promises/mission statements by Rob Rhinehart was to reduce the cost of Soylent over the time - there's some consternation in the Soylent community right now because with the announcement of 2.0 they are also increasing the cost of the base powder form of Soylent with no material change to the formula - your standard price hike, quite contrary to the promise of lower costs over time.
4. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 06:51 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  => What is the gain in using this?
  Silicon Valley 1.0: Let's build something cool and make the world a better place.
  Silicon Valley 2.0: FUCK YEAH DISRUPT ALL THE THINGS BECOME BILLIONAIRE!
  The "benefit" of Soylent is you can make millions of dollars by convincing other wannabe-millionaires by giving them Life Hacks(tm) so they can Bro Down(tm) and Code(tm). Flavor is an impediment to Productivity(tm). Concern for presentation is an impediment to Agility(tm). Time that you spend cooking and eating food with flavor is time that could be spent Disrupting(tm).
  You have time for eating something as pedestrian as food, and you further demand that your food have flavor? If you aren't spending every waking minute on your Startup(tm), you're obviously not Passionate(tm) about it. Bro, do you even Lyft(tm)?
5. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:02 · Score: 0
  
  I bought a month's worth of the powder and the guy that delivered it accused me of buying a box of bricks. I'm terrified to imagine how much a month's supply weighs premixed with water.
6. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by pr0t0 · 2015-08-03 07:04 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  I don't think it's really meant to be a complete food replacement for most people. I make my own based off of what I saw on the DIY Soylent page. Mine's a bit more nutritionally complete than most DIY stuff, is a little cheaper, and is fewer calories than actual Soylent. It also contains no soy or oats (which can cause gas). I only consume it for breakfast and lunch, Monday through Friday. I really love it though. It's quick, easy, low cost, filling, and nutritionally complete. How much molybdenum do you get? How about Selenium? Enough?
  My only worry is absorption. It's all well and good to say that I am putting the National Institute of Health's RDI of each vitamin, mineral, and macronutrient; but I don't really know if I'm absorbing all of that. Still, I feel great, I'm losing weight, and my bloodwork is good.
  My guess is the bottled product is part of a long-term strategy to eventually push to sell the product in grocery stores. It will be meant for grab-and-go eating that some people will pay a higher price for given the convenience. Soylent will wholesale it to the stores who will then mark it back up to a price that Soylent can say people are already comfortable paying.
  
  --
  I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
7. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by FudRucker · 2015-08-03 07:04 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  i can buy a pound of hamburger, one tomato, one onion, head of lettuce, loaf of bread, for about 20 bucks, and cook four hamburgers, and feed four people and it will taste a heck of a lot better, thats about 5 bucks each a day, a lot better than a liquid diet too
  
  --
  Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
8. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by lbmouse · 2015-08-03 07:06 · Score: 1
  
  Plus you can have bacon and chocolate chip cookies.
9. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by lisaparratt · 2015-08-03 07:17 · Score: 1
  
  Whereas everyone else who does this just buys protein shakes...
10. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:31 · Score: 1
  
  The idea is not to cook, not to enjoy food, and save time. I'm not joking, that's really the idea behind it from what I've gathered.
11. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:31 · Score: 0, Funny
  
  I get plenty of Selenium while writing automated tests for webpages for 8 hours a day. :]
12. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by sumdumass · 2015-08-03 07:38 · Score: 1
  
  Soldiers typically need a lot more calories. Where it would interesting is an emergency food source or part of one for disasters ans such. I keep MREs around just because in the winter, it is possible i can get snowed in for two or three days without power or water (well run off electric )
13. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:41 · Score: 0
  
  "Each bottle is one fifth of a scientifically balanced daily meal plan, "
  $2.42 per 400-calorie bottle so $12.08 a day,... cooking my self I can manage a (I hope) tastier alternative for less,...
  Sorry, but I really don't get why this is interesting at all, for a short moment I thought: "Okay, may be for long term 'food' storage, then I read '"However, we counter that by the fact that the drink does not require refrigeration and also does not spoil until at least one year."
  => What is the gain in using this?
  My Subway meal was just $9.08. That's one meal. So this is definitely cheaper than all 3 meals combined.
14. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:44 · Score: 0
  
  i can buy a pound of hamburger, one tomato, one onion, head of lettuce, loaf of bread, for about 20 bucks, and cook four hamburgers, and feed four people and it will taste a heck of a lot better, thats about 5 bucks each a day, a lot better than a liquid diet too
  Except that's in no way eating vegetarian.
15. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:55 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, grab and go. Like bag salad.
16. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by mattack2 · 2015-08-03 07:58 · Score: 1
  
  => What is the gain in using this?
  I think it's the food equivalent of (the apparently apocryphal story that) "Albert Einstein had 7 of the exact same suit".
  Some people apparently don't like food much, so they just want to get the nutrition and be on with their day.
17. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Jack9 · 2015-08-03 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  > cooking my self I can manage a (I hope) tastier alternative for less,...
  I don't eat much (once a day). I routinely forget to eat. I do not cook (my home's kitchen is pristine). For me, it's been a chore to eat, for as long as I've been alive.
  
  --
  
  Often wrong but never in doubt.
  I am Jack9.
  Everyone knows me.
18. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by OrangeTide · 2015-08-03 08:05 · Score: 1
  
  I've lived through both 1.0 and 2.0 Silicon Valley. It eventually always becomes about money. Sellout Valley
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
19. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by fahrbot-bot · 2015-08-03 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  Whereas everyone else who does this just buys protein shakes...
  Perhaps, but protein shakes are not nutritionally complete and not intended to be a complete food replacement. Soylent is and you can literally live off it and nothing else - presumably the stuff GP makes based on the Soylent DIY pages is also or close. Granted Soylent is not very satisfying from a food enjoyment standpoint, but to each their own.
  
  --
  It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
20. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by OrangeTide · 2015-08-03 08:09 · Score: 1
  
  we obsessive about food in out society, this attempts to solve that, but to me it looks like a different flavor of food obsession rather than the elimination of it.
  Call me when I can get a photosynthesis upgrade.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
21. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 08:13 · Score: 0
  
  To me the selling point is the ease. It takes under 5 minutes total to make a single (or half) serving, drink it, and clean my bottle. Great for breakfast before work, or if hungry before bed and just need something quick.
  
  I still cook some, I still order food, I still go out to eat, this is just something I can have around to eat without thinking or without putting in any effort.
  
  Making burgers involves going out to buy ingredients, actually making it, then cleaning all that stuff, plus I live alone so it's hard to cook for one, and I hate eating leftovers so making food "for the week" doesn't sound appetizing to me.
22. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by HornWumpus · 2015-08-03 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  ...that's a feature.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
23. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by HornWumpus · 2015-08-03 08:21 · Score: 1
  
  Life is bittersweet. For every good thing their is a bad. The only thing that makes it worth going on is good food.
  Paraphrased: B. Desraeli.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
24. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by HornWumpus · 2015-08-03 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  Your mom was a bad cook. Seriously, there isn't one thing that tastes really good to you? Sympathies.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
25. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by SuricouRaven · 2015-08-03 08:44 · Score: 1
  
  I've seen numbers crunched on photosynthesis. Not worth it. Even if you sunbathed naked most of the day, you're still not going to get enough energy to be worthwhile.
26. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by jedidiah · 2015-08-03 08:54 · Score: 1
  
  That's already covered. Someone managed to patent the idea of fortified Nutella.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
27. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by jedidiah · 2015-08-03 08:57 · Score: 1
  
  I did this in the 70s with Milk and Nesquick.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
28. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Shadow+of+Eternity · 2015-08-03 08:57 · Score: 1
  
  Soldiers already have first strike rations which can be eaten on the move.
  
  --
  A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
29. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by jedidiah · 2015-08-03 09:00 · Score: 1
  
  The real problem is the human hubris of believing that we have finally correctly figured this nutrition thing out. Based on the last few decades, we clearly have not. The modern West may not even understand it as well as some ancient cultures.
  So the entire premise of a food pill is a bit premature.
  They're probably missing something important less likely to be missed by eating "good food".
  Even veganism is less daft.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
30. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · 2015-08-03 09:03 · Score: 1
  
  Are you interested in sharing your recipe?
  
  --
  Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
31. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by jedidiah · 2015-08-03 09:03 · Score: 1
  
  I'm appalled at the idea that this person can't manage any basic rudimentary cooking even that which includes highly prefab ingredients. It really doesn't take much, despite what people may like to think.
  Self-reliance is a really low bar here, especially in the age of the microwave oven.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
32. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by bill_mcgonigle · 2015-08-03 09:04 · Score: 1
  
  cooking my self I can manage a (I hope) tastier alternative for less,...
  Sorry, but I really don't get why this is interesting at all
  You answered your question in the first word of that quote. Soylent buyers don't want to cook. Many of them don't know how to cook. Few of those are interested in learning. I spoke with a man who literally gets anxiety just walking into a grocery store and seeing all these things he has no idea what to do with.
  I think it's nutritionally foolish ("science" has a moderate but incomplete conception of nutrition), and I think with my stomach, but that doesn't mean there's no use case.
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
33. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by thinkwaitfast · 2015-08-03 09:09 · Score: 1
  
  you can literally live off it and nothing else
  Much like the sweet potato?
34. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:12 · Score: 0
  
  I don't eat much (once a day). I routinely forget to eat. I do not cook (my home's kitchen is pristine). For me, it's been a chore to eat, for as long as I've been alive.
  Sounds more like you have an undiagnosed medical/mental issue.
35. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by jedidiah · 2015-08-03 09:15 · Score: 1
  
  The medical industry already has it's own variant of these just as the exercise industry does.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
36. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Hognoxious · 2015-08-03 09:20 · Score: 1
  
  The military have been using MREs and similar things for over half a century, which all taste awful but not as bad as your allies' ones. Similar items exist for disaster relief agencies & hikers.
  This isn't a solution looking for a problem, it's a solution looking for a problem that's already been solved.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
37. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Hognoxious · 2015-08-03 09:34 · Score: 1
  
  Or as we used to say back in the 80's[1], lunch is for wimps. Still made me giggle.
  
  Flavor is an impediment to Productivity(tm). Concern for presentation is an impediment to Agility(tm).
  
  There's the basis of a rap in there somewhere.
  1] 1980s, before any fixiejockeys chime in.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
38. Re: I don't get it,... five a day? by chill · 2015-08-03 10:32 · Score: 1
  
  care to share your recipe?
  
  --
  Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
39. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2015-08-03 10:33 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  i can buy a pound of hamburger, one tomato, one onion, head of lettuce, loaf of bread, for about 20 bucks, and cook four hamburgers, and feed four people and it will taste a heck of a lot better, thats about 5 bucks each a day, a lot better than a liquid diet too
  But that's not nutritionally complete.
  You need to add bacon and cheddar cheese.
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
40. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by thrig · 2015-08-03 10:43 · Score: 1
  
  Yep. Grains, beans and (white) rice, millet, corn, etc. will keep unrefrigerated for a good year or two, toss in some sun-dried tomatoes for flavour (okay, I will admit to cheating and using store-bought ketchup). Ferment the beans or grains for extra flavour (e.g. some corn meal, water to cover, a bit of salt, wait a day or two, depending on ambient temperature). Dried kale also keeps well, mix it into various things. Or try Moroccan preserved lemons (yep, fermented) with rice or chickpeas (these are best sprouted). I am out of sauerkraut at the moment, but do have some fermented kohlrabi from some weeks ago that I should crack open...
  I guess I should mention that I turned off the refrigerator at home years ago. It does a fine job holding up the sourdough starter.
  > (Also, drinking nine of anything per day sounds horrible.)
  Really? /me goes to check on how the huckleberry mead is doing.
  (Mead, obviously, has a very poor glycemic index and a poor nutrient balance and is in all ways utterly unhealthy and thus unsuitable for consumption. Citizens should instead for their proper health only drink SteriBland(R) NutryDense(TM).)
41. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 10:48 · Score: 0
  
  I get by with ~60€/month (= 66USD) for food and drink.
  I cook, but don't skimk on quality of fancy stuff: I eat lots of meats and fish, buy organic where it makes sense, and drink the excellent tap water available in the Black Forest. But then I am a biologist, so 'organic where it makes sense' basically means very specific products, where I know producers aren't gaming the system to barely get the organic stamp.
42. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by nine-times · 2015-08-03 11:32 · Score: 1
  
  $2.42 per 400-calorie bottle so $12.08 a day,... cooking my self I can manage a (I hope) tastier alternative for less,... What is the gain in using this?
  Well, you don't have to cook a meal yourself, so that's one benefit. Also, if we can assume that it is actually a "balanced meal" it does mean that you don't have to figure out or plan a balanced diet. The fact that it's liquid means that you can just gulp it down-- no need to silverware, no crumbs, no need to chew even. The fact that it is in an individual bottle that doesn't need refrigeration means that you don't have to mix it, and you can just grab a bottle, throw it in a bag, and go.
  In short, it's very convenient. It's not the cheapest option or the tastiest option. But if you're someone who doesn't have the time or inclination to think about meals, and just wants balanced nutrition without spending any time or energy on it, then you're the target audience.
43. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by OrangeTide · 2015-08-03 11:37 · Score: 1
  
  Not worth it. Even if you sunbathed naked most of the day...
  The first part alone already makes it worthwhile.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
44. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Dutch+Gun · 2015-08-03 11:44 · Score: 1
  
  Protein shakes, no. There are plenty of products that offer complete dietary nutrition in a shake, and have done so for a long time, like Metagenics' Ultrameal. These are often labeled as "medical food". There are specific variants for people that have various dietary restrictions, etc.
  
  --
  Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
45. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by TapeCutter · 2015-08-03 12:02 · Score: 1
  
  Why would you deliberately remove a pleasurable experience from your life, are you Catholic?
  
  --
  And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
46. Re: I don't get it,... five a day? by pr0t0 · 2015-08-03 12:28 · Score: 1
  
  Recipe: https://docs.google.com/spread...
  I realize after looking at it again (it's been awhile), that I was unintentionally a bit disingenuous about it being nutritionally complete. It's more so than most DIY...but not totally. I'm still trying to find a good source for Vitamin K and I'm a little short in iron, chloride, and carbs (I forgot about that). I do make that up those deficiencies by a sensible dinner, so please don't rely solely on my recipe for nutrition.
  The bulk of the cost comes from the almond flour. I'm still trying to find a better source for that. The spreadsheet also contains links to information on how I calculated various aspects of the recipe.
  Also, everybody's different so consult your doctor or have your blood work done before and after a trial run. This works well for me, but may not for you. That sounds like a legal disclaimer, but as a good netizen, I don't want anyone to get sick from something I posted on the web.
  
  --
  I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
47. Re: I don't get it,... five a day? by pr0t0 · 2015-08-03 12:38 · Score: 1
  
  Also, I cut those daily amounts in half and put each half in a Blender Bottle. I add water and shake them up; one for breakfast on the morning commute, and one at my desk for lunch. This also serves as my excuse for leaving work an hour early if I feel like it.
  Like all Soylent, DIY or otherwise, they are better cold, but not at all bad room temp. The protein is unflavored Now Foods whey protein isolate and I liked that, but I've been experimenting with the flavored WPI from GNC. The cookies and cream was ok, but too much sugar. I'm recently on the vanilla and I like that much better from a flavor/nutritional standpoint, but I need to update the document to reflect that.
  
  --
  I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
48. Re: I don't get it,... five a day? by chill · 2015-08-03 12:46 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks, I'll try it.
  I add flavor by tossing a handful of blueberries, peaches or other fruit in and blend it. For hot days I throw in a handful of ice and use frozen fruit for a nice, chilled smoothie. I've found the plain soylent takes on the flavor of added fruit nicely.
  
  --
  Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
49. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 13:03 · Score: 0
  
  R U Serious? Welcome back!
50. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by myowntrueself · 2015-08-03 13:28 · Score: 1
  
  I can only think of specific applications when this might be worthwhile, like where one has to remain mobile for some time and carry one's supplies in an area with very little water available, but that's a pretty unusual set of circumstances. You almost have to be a refugee or a forward-deployed soldier to involuntarily enter those conditions, and only militaries would have the supply capability to afford to intermittently replenish stock at that price.
  If this gunk also hydrates you, maybe. Otherwise carrying liquid food around is a fair bit of bulk. MREs can be eaten dry and would weigh a fraction of what this stuff would weigh.
  
  --
  In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
51. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by KGIII · 2015-08-03 16:54 · Score: 1
  
  I am a hell of a cook, I just do not really like food. I eat once or twice (at most) a day. I have a neighbor that I pay to clean my house and she usually cooks a big meal which I eat over a few days. I sometimes cook my own food but, often, after I have cooked it there is something that makes me no longer really want to eat it. I was an opiate abuser for many years and that slows down the digestive system a great deal. When I quit my appetite was huge and I ate a lot but that did not last long. I just really do not like eating. I would most certainly not benefit from this drink, however. I would not consume it. If it were a pill? I might eat that. If it were a pill that got me high as all hell? I'd eat the fuck out of that - I'd shoot that shit.
  I do have a sibling who has gastroperesis (I have no idea how to spell it, basically it means her stomach and intestines do not work - at all) and she lives because she gets her nutrients through a pick line in something called TPN and uses a strange computerized pump. I pay for some of her medical care and it is expensive - like $900/wk for the TPN alone. The tubing, computer, etc... That stuff is very costly. I do not know the exact figure but it probably works out to about $1500/wk with all of her TPN supplies. She is disabled so the government covers the majority of the stuff but the only company that was eligible to take care of her supplies was inept so it was simpler to get a different company, that does not accept government insurance, and does the job better. *sighs* Fortunately, I owned my own company and was able to sell it at a great price and retire. It is still a bit of a burden.
  I could complain about all sorts of things in her area of life but it would do me no good. One prescription she was only allowed so much of (about half of what the doctor recommended) and, if she paid for any additional number of that med they would stop paying for what they were already covering. It is pricey... You do what you can, I suppose. Any insurance policy I could find that would actually cover even as much as is already covered is actually more expensive than what I am already paying. It reminds me that there really are cracks that people can fall through and, once they are there, there is little hope of getting anywhere. I imagine that there are many like her, she indicates that there are, but are unable to really do anything and have nobody to help.
  But, enough digression...
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
52. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 18:11 · Score: 0
  
  Your body was likely getting more out of that than it would from Soylent.
53. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 19:32 · Score: 0
  
  It was always BS from the start. They marketed it as a body hack to make fuel for the body on the cheap to save the world on a budget. But that has never been the case. It gets dearer because of capitalism, the end game for the investors. All while people pay the every increasing prices, you'll see the purchase price rise and the manufacturing costs go do. Once third party money came in, Soylent to help the poor was gone for good.
54. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by DoctorFrog · 2015-08-03 19:52 · Score: 1
  
  What I don't get is why a five-a-day product is sold by the dozen.
55. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Dr_Barnowl · 2015-08-03 20:00 · Score: 1
  
  Presumably you'd tan with chlorophyll instead of melanin. Captain Kirk would have a field day.
56. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 22:55 · Score: 0
  
  I"ve tried a couple of the different versions they sell as Soylent. There are several advantages really. First, most people trying to be extremely budget conscious do NOT eat very healthy, in fact their diet is very harmful. Second, although not as cheap as one might hope, it's still a very cost effective way of controlling your caloric intake. Thrid, and by no means last, what other healthy meal can you eat so quickly? I use it quite a bit at work so I don't have to go find food for lunch. I know precisely how much I've eaten, it fills me up and it takes no more effort than drinking a cup of coffee or a glass of water.
  I generally mix mine with various other things for flavor, like iced coffee mix or Ovaltine, sometimes even with whey powder mix for a little extra kick on days I am working out. It's not as bad as some would make out, and certainly not as good as many would hope, but it definitely has a niche. I would suggest you try it once and see if a 'liquid lunch' might not fit into your diet in some way. It certainly does in mine.
57. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by tehcyder · 2015-08-04 02:11 · Score: 1
  
  "Each bottle is one fifth of a scientifically balanced daily meal plan, " $2.42 per 400-calorie bottle so $12.08 a day,... cooking my self I can manage a (I hope) tastier alternative for less,...
  Sorry, but I really don't get why this is interesting at all, for a short moment I thought: "Okay, may be for long term 'food' storage, then I read '"However, we counter that by the fact that the drink does not require refrigeration and also does not spoil until at least one year."
  => What is the gain in using this?
  I assumed they were going for a secondary market of "preppers"/survival nutjobs.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
58. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by tehcyder · 2015-08-04 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  i can buy a pound of hamburger, one tomato, one onion, head of lettuce, loaf of bread, for about 20 bucks, and cook four hamburgers, and feed four people and it will taste a heck of a lot better, thats about 5 bucks each a day, a lot better than a liquid diet too
  But that's not nutritionally complete.
  You need to add bacon and cheddar cheese.
  And if you're from the US, don't forget a cup of sugar. Somehow.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
59. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by tehcyder · 2015-08-04 02:30 · Score: 1
  
  Why would you deliberately remove a pleasurable experience from your life, are you Catholic?
  Eating is occasionally a pleasure, whereas alcohol is always.
  Also, if you drink regularly, then you get less fussy about what food you can eat, and so a bowl of spicy lentils becomes almost as good a breakfast as a cold kebab.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
60. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by tehcyder · 2015-08-04 02:32 · Score: 1
  
  I am a hell of a cook, I just do not really like food.
  I like either cooking or eating but not both on the same occasion. Unless wine is involved.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
61. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by WallyL · 2015-08-04 05:03 · Score: 1
  
  And if you're from the South, it's 2 cups of sugar!
62. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by coldsalmon · 2015-08-04 06:06 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly: it's saving time on cooking, shopping, and deciding what to eat. I suppose the ideal food would be cheap, tasty, healthy, and fast. Soylent is not the cheapest, tastiest, healthiest, or fastest, but it aims to do very well on all of those metrics. There are many ways to eat cheaper food that tastes better, but these are either less healthy (candy bars) or slower (shopping and cooking). The older I get, the more I get fed up with the time and effort it takes to make and consume a decent meal. I have always seen food as a necessary annoyance, made even more annoying by the fact that the market caters to people who enjoy food. If I could save 1 hour a day on food, I would jump at the chance.
63. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by cbhacking · 2015-08-04 08:18 · Score: 1
  
  Even those who like food are sometimes busy. Soylent makes it possible to, for example, have your breakfast on the bus and your lunch without leaving your desk, and then go home to a leisurely evening with a home-made dinner. Drinking soylent takes almost no time - even mixing it, for those who don't get it pre-mixed, is faster than most meal preparations - and produces minimal dishes. You don't need any more space for it (at work, say) than you need for a water bottle, so you can have lunch without needing to "go to lunch".
  
  --
  There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
64. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Vastad · 2015-08-04 09:49 · Score: 1
  
  I'm interested in what your recipe is. Is it available on diy.soylent.com?
65. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by beathach · 2015-08-04 12:35 · Score: 1
  
  "=> What is the gain in using this?"
  
  Well, put it this way. Consider yourself lucky that you have skill in cooking and enjoy all the work that goes with it (spending time and gas driving back and forth from the grocery store, standing in line, working over the stove, cleaning up afterward, keeping an inventory of ingredients).
  
  Personally I detest all those things, and rather spend my time playing games or musical instruments, or working out, or riding a bike. Or anything else, really. And I think that's perfectly okay, and Soylent fits my lifestyle nicely, and complements well the times when I do decide to eat for pleasure, out with friends and such.
  
  Here is a webcomic.
  http://theoatmeal.com/comics/c...
66. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 14:07 · Score: 0
  
  Eating hamburgers every day sounds horribly unhealthy. There's nothing inherently unhealthy about a liquid diet. If anything it's easier for your body to absorb a liquid diet.
67. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-05 08:14 · Score: 0
  
  The price hike could be due to them changing the recipe every few months. It all depends on which ingredients they're using. Are they better quality / more expensive? Also, if the company is currently losing money, then they would need to try and raise the price (if they can get away with it without killing demand) to stay solvent. They may also not be selling the amounts they were planning on, and hence their plant is running inefficiently, requiring them to raise prices.
  Either way, they won't be able to cut costs unless they continue to expand and make the production run more efficiently. BTW, they've only been selling the stuff for about 1.5 years. I'm sure when they say "over time" they meant over 5-10+ years. I may try a 12 pack as a breakfast replacement. As it is now, I eat a protein bar every morning that only has 150 calories, and costs over $2 per bar.
68. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-05 08:26 · Score: 0
  
  That's $5 per person for one meal per day. You also excluded time and gas money to get to the grocery store, money to refrigerate your produce and meat, time to cook / prepare the food, gas/electrical costs to cook the meat. Plus, you're likely wasting food if you don't eat all of the meat / produce / bread and have to throw some of it if it spoils. Your total cost has gone up a bit from $5.
  This is $2.44 per meal. Albeit, the burger could be one of three meals a day (assuming you don't eat a side), while the Soylent 2.0 is one of five meals per day. Soylent is still a bit cheaper...
  BTW, most people wouldn't completely replace all of their meals with Soylent. It would make for a good replacement once in awhile, such as breakfast on the go if you didn't have time to make something in the morning, or as a post workout meal when the last thing you want to do is cook. You can also add flavoring to it, such as a shot of espresso, chocolate, or fruit, etc....
69. Re:I don't get it,... five a day? by oldmac31310 · 2015-08-05 08:52 · Score: 1
  
  I can buy the same as you listed for a bit over $10. I thought my supermarket was expensive, but maybe not...
  
  --
  http://www.acetonestudio.com
Uh oh by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 06:44 · Score: 0

If this takes off in popularity, they'll probably wish they'd chosen a less sarcastic name.
1. Re:Uh oh by Deadstick · 2015-08-03 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  Since TFA refers to it as "oddly named", perhaps the connotation is fading into old-fart memories...
2. Re:Uh oh by Tyger · 2015-08-03 08:50 · Score: 1
  
  If you go to the original source (Make Room! Make Room!) not the movie adaptation (Soylent Green) it's not sarcastic at all. In the book, soylent is merely just a way to feed the overgrown population.
3. Re:Uh oh by ConceptJunkie · 2015-08-03 10:02 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty sure the movie introduced the other varieties of Soylent (red and yellow), with the green kind being a new version with the surprising secret feature.
  I haven't seen the movie in decades and don't recall if I finished the book, though.
  
  --
  You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Who wants to drink pureed vegans? by xxxJonBoyxxx · 2015-08-03 06:44 · Score: 4, Funny

>> Not only are its ingredients vegan
Who the f*** wants to drink pureed vegans?
If I'm going to get my liquid cannibal on, I want the taste of real hamburger-fed 'muricans!
1. Re:Who wants to drink pureed vegans? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 06:58 · Score: 0
  
  SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!!!!!!
2. Re:Who wants to drink pureed vegans? by Nidi62 · 2015-08-03 07:55 · Score: 2
  
  >> Not only are its ingredients vegan
  Who the f*** wants to drink pureed vegans?
  If I'm going to get my liquid cannibal on, I want the taste of real hamburger-fed 'muricans!
  Too fatty. Besides, vegans are grass-fed. Gives better flavor than grain-fed.
  
  --
  The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
3. Re:Who wants to drink pureed vegans? by HornWumpus · 2015-08-03 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  If that's true than people are different from cattle. Because grain fed beef is much better.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
4. Re:Who wants to drink pureed vegans? by steelfood · 2015-08-03 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  Who the f*** wants to drink pureed vegans?
  Personally, I find them a bit too gamy.
  
  --
  "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
5. Re:Who wants to drink pureed vegans? by mjwx · 2015-08-03 12:47 · Score: 1
  
  >> Not only are its ingredients vegan
  Who the f*** wants to drink pureed vegans?
  If I'm going to get my liquid cannibal on, I want the taste of real hamburger-fed 'muricans!
  Too fatty. Besides, vegans are grass-fed. Gives better flavor than grain-fed.
  Yes but there is very little actual meat on a vegan, most of it has broken down due to lack of protein as well.
  
  OTOH the sedentary lifestyle of the hamburger fed 'murican means that the meat is very tender and the excess fat can be used in the cooking process (for both greasing and cooking fuel).
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
6. Re:Who wants to drink pureed vegans? by Ziacles · 2015-08-04 09:40 · Score: 1
  
  I can't eat a vegan in one sitting, usually I have to split one with a friend.
Not A Slashvert for the Competition...! by Hardness · 2015-08-03 06:47 · Score: 5, Funny

I forgot about Soylent. I read the headline and thought, "Wow, Soylent News' new business model is pretty interesting!"
"...Wait, why is this on Slashdot..?" //reads more carefully:
"Oh."
1. Re:Not A Slashvert for the Competition...! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:49 · Score: 0
  
  I thought it was about soylent news too. Left dissapointed.
flavor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 06:49 · Score: 0

"...signifying a major step towards a future of abundance, a world where optimal nutrition is the new normal...." and flavor is meaningless.
1. Re:flavor by ledow · 2015-08-03 06:55 · Score: 1
  
  Don't know if you noticed but "flavour" is one of those things that, by mass, contributes almost nothing to your meal. As such, it doesn't really matter about the flavour as you can add it later with a tiny "essence" of the original flavour.
  You can complain as much as you like, but flavour is a secondary option to the majority of the world when it comes to food.
2. Re:flavor by ArcadeMan · 2015-08-03 07:22 · Score: 1
  
  Le p'tit paquet d'biscuits sans sel, sans sucre, sans agents et sans goût, c'est 100 piasses! -François Pérusse
  
  --
  Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
3. Re:flavor by Noah+Haders · 2015-08-03 07:26 · Score: 1
  
  -1 disagree. every single person on earth will tell you that flavor is important and that things that taste gross are bad. name one who doesn't.
4. Re:flavor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:28 · Score: 0
  
  and flavor is meaningless.
  I assume you have the same complaint for people who advocate drinking more water instead of other drinks?
5. Re:flavor by Chris+Mattern · 2015-08-03 07:35 · Score: 1
  
  Well, gee, I always wanted live in a game of Shadowrun. It may only be soy, chummer, but at least I got a full set of flavor faucets!
6. Re:flavor by Oligonicella · 2015-08-03 11:06 · Score: 1
  
  You mean, aside from helping you determine if something is edible?
7. Re:flavor by Oligonicella · 2015-08-03 11:08 · Score: 1
  
  I've heard of this movie involving two girls.
8. Re:flavor by myowntrueself · 2015-08-03 13:30 · Score: 1
  
  -1 disagree. every single person on earth will tell you that flavor is important and that things that taste gross are bad. name one who doesn't.
  Also 'The first bite is with the eye and the second with the nose.'
  http://www.brainyquote.com/quo...
  
  --
  In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
9. Re:flavor by myowntrueself · 2015-08-03 13:33 · Score: 1
  
  You can complain as much as you like, but flavour is a secondary option to the majority of the world when it comes to food.
  Mongolians dine on joints of meat thats been boiled for about 5 minutes. Give them the same 'meal' prepared with US meat and their reaction is 'this is tasteless!'.
  
  --
  In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Sustainable? by hondo77 · 2015-08-03 06:53 · Score: 1

...an unprecedented level of environmental sustainability with half of its fat energy coming from farm-free, algae sources.
Because plant sources of fat are not environmentally sustainable?

--
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
1. Re:Sustainable? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:14 · Score: 0
  
  It's not like mushrooms, moss, and algae grows on trees!
2. Re:Sustainable? by drinkypoo · 2015-08-03 07:17 · Score: 2
  
  Because plant sources of fat are not environmentally sustainable?
  Not as modern agriculture is practiced.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
3. Re:Sustainable? by OrangeTide · 2015-08-03 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  Turkey fat is industrial waste, putting it in cars and milkshakes would be more environmentally sustainable than continuing to ignore the reality.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
4. Re:Sustainable? by drinkypoo · 2015-08-03 09:11 · Score: 1
  
  Turkey fat is industrial waste, putting it in cars and milkshakes would be more environmentally sustainable than continuing to ignore the reality.
  Well, I don't know how you got onto turkeys in particular, but Tyson Chicken (the world's largest producer of waste animal fat) has a chicken-fat-to-biodiesel plant...
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Does The Soy by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 06:54 · Score: 0

make you estrogen filled ladies more estrogen filled?
Re:Soylent is made out of cows. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 06:56 · Score: 0

In Soviet Mooistan, the cow is in YOU.
Re:Obligatory by drinkypoo · 2015-08-03 06:57 · Score: 3, Funny

I've heard it tastes like ass.
You're thinking of Soylent Brown.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
"farm-free, algae sources" by Nutria · 2015-08-03 06:57 · Score: 2

What's wrong with farmed algae?

--
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
1. Re:"farm-free, algae sources" by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:03 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  It's easier if you catch it in the wild than try to get it to go through all those turnstiles to be slaughtered.
2. Re:"farm-free, algae sources" by gaudior · 2015-08-03 07:04 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Well, there's not much wrong with free-range, locally-sourced algae, but the real problems come from the container-bred, factory-farmed algae.
3. Re:"farm-free, algae sources" by psyclone · 2015-08-03 07:05 · Score: 1
  
  And how is wild algae more sustainable than farmed?
4. Re:"farm-free, algae sources" by Junta · 2015-08-03 07:06 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  farmed algae is inhumane. Constrained to live in limited vats I eat only free range algae. They get to exercise you see.
  
  --
  XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
5. Re:"farm-free, algae sources" by nytes · 2015-08-03 11:48 · Score: 1
  
  It's more fun to shoot the wild algae as it runs through the forest.
  
  --
  -- I have monkeys in my pants.
At $363/month per person, not sustainable by EmagGeek · 2015-08-03 07:00 · Score: 2

How are urban hipsters supposed to come up with $363/month PER PERSON, in addition to the rent on their industrial loft, $15/day coffee habits, and fixed-gear bicycles?
1. Re:At $363/month per person, not sustainable by gaudior · 2015-08-03 07:08 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Patreon.
2. Re:At $363/month per person, not sustainable by pjt33 · 2015-08-03 08:13 · Score: 1
  
  $15/day coffee habits? They're either drinking seriously overpriced coffee or at high risk of intoxication.
3. Re:At $363/month per person, not sustainable by SuricouRaven · 2015-08-03 08:45 · Score: 1
  
  I believe that's the joke.
4. Re:At $363/month per person, not sustainable by CODiNE · 2015-08-05 00:11 · Score: 1
  
  I've seen worse. Knew a guy who'd hit up Starbucks on the way to work in the morning, then again at morning break, lunch, afternoon and usually one or 2 in the evening. Always with an extra shot or two added. This is EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK.
  I figured out he had to be spending $600-900 a month on his insane coffee habit.
  
  --
  Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
5. Re:At $363/month per person, not sustainable by Blaskowicz · 2015-08-06 19:24 · Score: 1
  
  I saw a supermarket selling a fixed gear bicycle at 100 euros. There are fewer parts, afterall!
Darn by Geste · 2015-08-03 07:00 · Score: 1

" signifying a major step towards a future of abundance"
Too late.
$409 for a month on Amazon for powder by peter303 · 2015-08-03 07:01 · Score: 0

That is one pound, 2000 kcalories per day. $4.86 per thrice day drink.

I notice a 2000 kcalories sixpack of Ensure is $10-$12.
1. Re:$409 for a month on Amazon for powder by Noah+Haders · 2015-08-03 07:29 · Score: 1
  
  wat? explain again, is $4.86 per shake, or $4.86 per day of living only on shakes, or $4.86 on thrice day, is that three times a day or every three days? wat?
2. Re:$409 for a month on Amazon for powder by peter303 · 2015-08-03 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  409 = 28 * 3 * 4.86
3. Re:$409 for a month on Amazon for powder by Noah+Haders · 2015-08-03 09:04 · Score: 1
  
  from what I've seen, the shakes are intended to be supplements and not a whole meal replacement. so you wouldn't eat 2000cal worth of shakes each day. also, no such thing as a kcal, what ever that is. 1 cal = the amount of energy it takes to heat a liter of water by 1 degree Celsius.
4. Re:$409 for a month on Amazon for powder by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:42 · Score: 0
  
  A calorie is the amount of heat it takes to heat a gram of water by 1 kelvin at a rather arbitrary temperature (slight variations exist for 4 C and 20 C). A kcal=kilocalorie=food calorie=Cal=Calorie (capitalization matters) is equal to a thousand calories.
5. Re:$409 for a month on Amazon for powder by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 10:34 · Score: 0
  
  no such thing as a kcal
  1 calorie in a human diet would be statistical error, especially since humans are not bomb calorimeters and we basically assigned numbers to fat, sugar, etc to decide how many calories some guy thinks you get from them, regardless of whatever variants like your gut fauna breaking down "indigestible" fibers into simpler sugars. In Europe, food is measured in either kilocalories or kilojoules. In America, they just made 1000 calories = 1 Calorie with a capital C to confuse people.
6. Re:$409 for a month on Amazon for powder by matfud · 2015-08-03 20:54 · Score: 1
  
  1 Cal = 1 kcal = 1000 cal. And yes kcal does exist
7. Re:$409 for a month on Amazon for powder by Blaskowicz · 2015-08-06 19:27 · Score: 1
  
  I'm tired of the kcal vs kilojoule issue, so I would rather have it counted as kilowatt-hours.
Obligatory Futurama by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:03 · Score: 0

Fry: What if the secret ingredient is... people!?
Leela: Oh, there's already a soda like that. Soylent Cola.
Fry: Oh, how is it?
Leela: It varies from person to person.
1. Re:Obligatory Futurama by kernel_user · 2015-08-03 10:35 · Score: 0
  
  Fry and the Slurm Factory (1999)
A quite unfortunate choice of a brand by Flavianoep · 2015-08-03 07:03 · Score: 0

Is it for real? Does their product go by the distasteful name of SOYLENT, like that gimmick in a movie that was made of people?

--
Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
1. Re:A quite unfortunate choice of a brand by fahrbot-bot · 2015-08-03 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Is it for real? Does their product go by the distasteful name of SOYLENT, like that gimmick in a movie that was made of people?
  As I posted earlier: According to the FAQ Why is it named Soylent?
  
  Our name was inspired by Harry Harrison's 1966 science fiction novel Make Room! Make Room!, which explores the impact massive population growth could have on world resources. In the book, "soylent" is made of soy and lentils and is a new food source used to accommodate overpopulation.
  
  --
  It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:06 · Score: 0

yeah, but *whos* ass?
A world where optimal nutrition is the new normal? by lbmouse · 2015-08-03 07:08 · Score: 2

A world with out medium rare prime rib and good quality cheeses is no world for lbmouse. When does the next rocket leave?
Space Food Sticks v2.0 by smoothnorman · 2015-08-03 07:09 · Score: 2

"let'see everyone who was alive in the 1960s is dead now, right? so it's time again to sucker them into the 'Bachelor Chow' 'Meal in a Pill' scam" : "non-frozen balance energy snack in rod form containing nutritionally balanced amounts of carbohydrate, fat and protein" (yep "rod form", that's exactly missing here)
1. Re:Space Food Sticks v2.0 by Lodlaiden · 2015-08-03 07:53 · Score: 1
  
  ...non-frozen balance energy snack in rod form ...(yep "rod form", that's exactly missing here)
  They couldn't get a cafeteria full of grown adults to start gnawing on their rods for lunch.
  
  --
  Suborbital [spaceflight] is the special olympics of spaceflight. - Rei
2. Re:Space Food Sticks v2.0 by thinkwaitfast · 2015-08-03 09:19 · Score: 1
  
  Hey, I remember those! I always wondered what they were called and where they went. Had them a few times in the 70's.
3. Re:Space Food Sticks v2.0 by Oligonicella · 2015-08-03 10:59 · Score: 1
  
  But they got a cafeteria full of grown adults to mix their formulas and drink them with looks on their faces of people drinking something they must than what they'd rather?
4. Re:Space Food Sticks v2.0 by Muad'Dave · 2015-08-04 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  That product was featured on an episode of Unwrapped that I just happened to watch.
  
  --
  Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Far too expensive by medv4380 · 2015-08-03 07:09 · Score: 1

$2.42 for a single meal that lasts up to a year. Sounds like it's market is survivalist hipsters planning for the end of the world. I'll stick to a pound of split peas or lentils. Heck if I'm going full on Apocalypse survivalist I'll just take the discount and buy in bulk getting them at far less than a dollar per pound. They last 4 to 5 years so much better as a survival meal. With O2 absorbers they're supposed to last forever. I could even stock up on freeze dried veggies and make a better meal.Why would I buy this 'Soylent' in light of better alternatives?
Re:Obligatory by ThatsNotPudding · 2015-08-03 07:10 · Score: 2

I've heard it tastes like ass.
Dunno, but from what I've read, it will *sound* and *smell* as such.
What, no long pig? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:11 · Score: 0

A Soylent blog post reads in part: "Not only are its ingredients vegan, Soylent 2.0 reaches an unprecedented level of environmental sustainability with half of its fat energy coming from farm-free, algae sources.
What, no long pig? Soylent really has gone downhill since the 70s. Call me when you release your flagship Green formula, and please don't limit your long pig to just Vegans. They tend to be stringy and not tender enough.
That's Crazy Expensive by drinkypoo · 2015-08-03 07:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

Ensure is 1/3 of a daily meal plan and costs $1.19/unit. In order to be successful, a new product has to be cheaper and better. If your definition includes sustainability then it might be "better", but at literally twice the price of the entrenched competition, it's got to be twice as good. But it's little more than half the food value... So it's got to taste almost four times as good as Ensure to be compelling. Guess what?

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
1. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:23 · Score: 0
  
  Ensure isn't really designed for long-term, one-food use like Soylent. Ensure is high in simple sugars and low in fibre, and generally leaves you feeling hungry in a few hours. The recent versions of powdered Soylent are a little low in fibre, but overall it fits the nutritional composition of a standard meal a little better, and there are plenty of people on the Soylent forums who eat nothing but Soylent.
2. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by quantaman · 2015-08-03 08:05 · Score: 1
  
  Ensure isn't really designed for long-term, one-food use like Soylent.
  So if you have a long term medical condition that prevents you from eating anything non-liquid what do they give you and why wouldn't they want to make it suitable for long-term one-food use?
  My guess is it's because it's really hard and they don't know how to do that. If Soylent thinks they've done it they're probably just shooting at a lot easier target.
  They may have other advantages over Ensure such as taste or market image, but I'm really dubious it's a medically superior drink.
  
  --
  I stole this Sig
3. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by phantomfive · 2015-08-03 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  So it's got to taste almost four times as good as Ensure to be compelling.
  The nutritional value is better than Ensure. It has less corn syrup, generally favoring complex carbohydrates over simple carbohydrates.
  
  The biggest problem is they keep changing the formula, making it worse. In the latest formula, they doubled the amount of fat from 20% of the total to 40% of the total.
  
  Who wants 40% of their diet to be fat? That's ridiculous.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
4. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:05 · Score: 0
  
  Ensure is designed to meet minimum nutritional requirements at a minimum price. I don't think it's ever been intended for long-term use in the way Soylent is intended to be used.
  Soylent was designed to replicate the nutritional profile of standard meals, and be suitable for long-term use without causing people to be hungry all the time, and with cost as a secondary consideration (though the designer has said he wants to eventually get costs down).
  Different requirements, different prices. Ensure meets its goal with a lot of glucose, fructose, and simple sugars. Soylent meets its requirements with brown rice flour (though they've reduced the amount of BRF in recent versions). Ensure has very little fibre. Soylent has more. You can expect to pay more the closer these products approximate real food. There are some alternatives like Betrand.bio that are made of basically crushed up vegan meals, and they're even further along the price spectrum.
5. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by ExekielS · 2015-08-03 09:08 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  You are kidding, right? If anything, that isn't enough. It has over 230 carbs in the present recipe, when a healthy range is 50-150. Anything higher starts to cause insulin resistance high blood triglycerides, high blood sugar, and numerous problems throughout the body. If anything, more of the carbs need to be removed and replaced with fat. They had more protein initially, but lowered the amount because it was causing very smelly farts because people eat so little protein generally, but it should still be higher to keep up with those who live more active lifestyles. The only reason I'm not already on soylent is because of it's extremely high carb levels. At least they brought it down from over 300 carbs per day, but they still have a long way to go.
  
  --
  ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
6. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:21 · Score: 0
  
  Right, because every product must supplant another existing product to be successful. Like how there's only one kind of car.
7. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by Daetrin · 2015-08-03 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  $2.47 * 5 a day = $12.35 a day.
  
  Alternatively, go to your local supermarket and you will find a shelf full of various kinds of energy bars, most of them for $1 each. The ones i get range from 180 calories to 250 calories. Which means that depending on which you select you could get 2000 calories anywhere from $11.11 to $8. It doesn't sound like an ideal diet to me, but i think eating 8-11 energy bars every day, presumably of a variety of flavors, would beat subsisting entirely on a single liquid formula, regardless of whether it was the slightly more expensive Soylent or the slightly cheaper Ensure.
  
  Also, i find it amusing to be having a discussion about the virtues, or lack thereof, of Ensure and liquid Soylent with someone going by the handle "drinkypoo" :)
  
  --
  This Space Intentionally Left Blank
8. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 10:01 · Score: 0
  
  Ensure isn't really designed for long-term, one-food use like Soylent.
  So if you have a long term medical condition that prevents you from eating anything non-liquid what do they give you and why wouldn't they want to make it suitable for long-term one-food use?
  My guess is it's because it's really hard and they don't know how to do that. If Soylent thinks they've done it they're probably just shooting at a lot easier target.
  They may have other advantages over Ensure such as taste or market image, but I'm really dubious it's a medically superior drink.
  If you can't digest liquids, then you're sure as hell not digesting solids, which means you'll be on TPN via IV.
9. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by Any+Web+Loco · 2015-08-03 18:39 · Score: 1
  
  "In order to be successful, a new product has to be cheaper and better"
  No it doesn't. It just needs to meet a need. Pretty much any luxury good defies this description.
10. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by Dr_Barnowl · 2015-08-03 20:09 · Score: 1
  
  Ensure is designed as a supplement. There are various groups who find it difficult to consume enough calories - as odd as that sounds. Loss of appetite, or recovery from surgery, or mental disorders that mean you dislike food (I strongly suspected the inventor of Soylent to have one of these but I think it's unfounded). It's not a complete nutritional replacement.
  They've even used it for force-feeding hunger strikers at Guantanamo.
11. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by drinkypoo · 2015-08-04 02:40 · Score: 1
  
  "In order to be successful, a new product has to be cheaper and better"
  No it doesn't. It just needs to meet a need.
  No, if it's not cheaper and better than the competition, then there needs to be no competition: it needs to fill an unmet need.
  This product does not fill a significant unmet need, so it needs to be cheaper and better than the competition, which does already fill this need. Remember, there's lots of meal replacements out there.
  Yes, there are a small handful of people who want this product. It's clearly not enough to make a profit on volume, because they're raising their prices.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
12. Re:That's Crazy Expensive by RyoShin · 2015-08-05 07:27 · Score: 1
  
  I was told there wouldn't be a math test today.
What does it taste like? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:16 · Score: 0

It varies from person to person
Screw Soylent! by ArcadeMan · 2015-08-03 07:17 · Score: 3, Funny

It doesn't even have ELECTROLYTES!

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
1. Re:Screw Soylent! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:30 · Score: 0
  
  It doesn't even have ELECTROLYTES!
  Maybe you can mix it with Brawndo?
2. Re:Screw Soylent! by Nutria · 2015-08-03 07:43 · Score: 1
  
  Damn, you beat me to it!
  
  --
  "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Too expensive by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:22 · Score: 1

I'm seeing a lot of people complaining about the price. $12 to feed myself seems pretty dam reasonable TBH, especially if it's zero-prep and stops me ordering pizza if I happen to get in abnormally late.
Either food in America is super cheap, or the typical "IT-pro" posting on /. is at the "front-line telephone support" stage of their career.
1. Re:Too expensive by Nutria · 2015-08-03 07:51 · Score: 1
  
  Either food in America is super cheap
  Must be, since we feed a family of 4 on $900, and that's on the high side...
  
  --
  "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
2. Re:Too expensive by pjt33 · 2015-08-03 08:21 · Score: 2
  
  Maybe you think food in Spain is cheap as well, but I don't know how I'd manage to spend 11€ on food in one day unless I go to a restaurant. And I cook for one, so I don't get much by way of economies of scale.
Maybe it's just me... by Chris+Mattern · 2015-08-03 07:23 · Score: 1

...but I wouldn't name a food "Soylent" and then brag about how green it is...
too expensive right now and too inconvenient by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:26 · Score: 0

The price needs to go down and the availability needs to go up before this can really become mainstream. It needs to be a savings over even the most minimal diets, and it needs to be convenient to get (in stores, in different amounts)
Regarding the ingredients by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:26 · Score: 0

Vegans? Really. Vegans are not people of good taste.
I am disappointed in your choice of ingredients.
Context by jdavidb · 2015-08-03 07:27 · Score: 1

Soylent has announced today their latest product, Soylent 2.0
Some explanation of Soylent 1.0 might be nice for those of us who might not have seen previous reporting on the subject. Otherwise, I might just assume it's people.

--
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
1. Re:Context by Attila+Dimedici · 2015-08-03 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  That is what the person who came up with the idea for this product wanted you to do...and is why I will never purchase it.
  
  --
  The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Re:A world where optimal nutrition is the new norm by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:28 · Score: 0

You are a man/woman/being after my own heart.
Soylent by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:32 · Score: 0

Does it come in lime? :-)
Everything by FreeUser · 2015-08-03 07:37 · Score: 2

What's wrong with farmed algae?
It's not people.

--
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Re:Obligatory by LordSkippy · 2015-08-03 07:43 · Score: 5, Funny

Actually, the taste varies from person to person.

--
My karma is in a nose dive
Water is heavy and expensive to ship by Theovon · 2015-08-03 07:44 · Score: 1

I'm not sure that pre-mixed is the most economical move. Water is very heavy by volume and makes the nutrients takes up a lot more space. This is why dried beans, concentrated fruit juice, and powdered supplements are cheaper. (Powdered milk is dirt cheap, but it tastes spoiled, so there are exceptions.) With the powdered formula, they could keep the costs down. With the liquid formula, shipping is going to wreck the economics of it. I could see having some liquid formula in the fridge for when you're occasionally in a hurry in the morning, but I wouldn't make it a staple.
I'd be eating Soylent now were it not for the oats. I have a genetic sensitivity to gluten. Although pure oats are technically gluten free, it's often contaminated, and some very sensitive people react to a similar gluten-like protein in oats. I'm not taking the risk.
1. Re:Water is heavy and expensive to ship by Attila+Dimedici · 2015-08-03 09:23 · Score: 1
  
  I have a genetic sensitivity to gluten.
  So, you suffer from Celiac's Disease?
  
  --
  The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
2. Re:Water is heavy and expensive to ship by Theovon · 2015-08-03 10:21 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think so. However, I did 23andme and imported the data into Nutrahacker. It reported a homozygous defect that is correlated with gluten sensitivity. Also, I have urticaria, and years ago, an allergist told me to get off of gluten.
  Since I've been off, the itching hasn't changed, but my concentration and energy have been gradually but noticably improving (I have chronic fatigue).
3. Re:Water is heavy and expensive to ship by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 15:01 · Score: 0
  
  have a genetic sensitivity to gluten.
  
  If it's not celiac disease then no you don't.
4. Re:Water is heavy and expensive to ship by Attila+Dimedici · 2015-08-03 21:45 · Score: 1
  
  The scientist who did the original study which "discovered" non-celiac disease gluten sensitivity did a more thorough study which indicated that there was no such thing. In his second study he discovered that all non-celiac disease cases of "gluten sensitivity" were caused by something other than gluten, which he had failed to control for in his original study. You may want to look into that second study to see what other than gluten may be causing your symptoms.
  
  --
  The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
5. Re:Water is heavy and expensive to ship by Theovon · 2015-08-04 13:46 · Score: 1
  
  That wouldn't surprise me. I don't suppose you'd remember the name of the scientist. I've done some googling on this and will continue reading. We're already familiar with FODMAPs and are eating a low-FODMAP diet to see what happens.
  My wife is another interesting case. When she gets gluten, her thyroid goes into a rage, within an hour. Celiacs typically have GI effects from gluten, like immediate vomiting, diarrhea, etc. She doesn't. Instead, she has a massive thyroid rage. We assumed all this time that it was celiac, because it's not that uncommon for celiacs to have these symptoms too. However, gluten doesn't cause the GI problems for her.
  One hypothesis we have is that it's not celiac. Instead it's a combination of leaky gut and some other auto-immune disease. She tests positive for the Hashimoto's antibodies. So the idea is that her immune system recognizes some food protein (possibly gluten) and produces antibodies that also attack the thyroid. It's kinda like celiac, but attacks the thyroid instead of the gut lining.
  Something else could also be stimulating the antibody production, but it's probably a food protein, and wheat contains it. She reacts badly to the tiniest amounts of cross-contamination.
  We've not rules out celiac, however. When she first got off of gluten, she had major nutrient deficiencies. She tested low for a variety of vitamins and minerals and didn't absorb them well. After being off gluten for like a year, there seemed to be a significant improvement in her nutrient absorbtion. Some aspect of her digestive system healed. Did villi grow back? Was her mucosal lining restored? Not sure about any of that.
6. Re:Water is heavy and expensive to ship by Theovon · 2015-08-04 13:48 · Score: 1
  
  Yes. And the genetic markers we're seeing may actually be related to FODMAP sensitivity instead. Either way, my wife and I have to avoid wheat. Interestingly, she does NOT have the genetic markers for gluten sensitivity, so why her throid goes into a rage when she has the tiniest amount of gluten is something we're still trying to figure out. Hashimoto's antibodies are involved.
How about the carbon footprint? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:45 · Score: 0

As in shipping recyclable (and presumably plastic?) bottles vs only shipping the powder. Isn't that a step backwards?
Does it taste by sabbede · 2015-08-03 07:46 · Score: 1

as bad as it sounds? Because it sounds like it will taste horrific.
I thought it was all vegan by future+assassin · 2015-08-03 07:46 · Score: 1

and not made from Donkeys?

--
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Re:Obligatory by Applehu+Akbar · 2015-08-03 07:48 · Score: 4, Funny

Obviously, the vegans it's made from. This is revenge of the best kind - environmentally sensitive vengeance.
Soylent , I would suggest following this up with a solid, sweetened product, in a variety of flavors, called Just Desserts
Actually, an old recipe by PPH · 2015-08-03 07:48 · Score: 3, Funny

Handed down from visiting aliens in a book titled "To Serve Man".

--
Have gnu, will travel.
Re:Soylent is made out of cows. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 07:53 · Score: 0

No way. Cows, even liquified ones, taste way better than Soylent.
Terrible name by Al+Al+Cool+J · 2015-08-03 08:03 · Score: 1

They should have called it "Po Pi Po" - then they'd at least get a catchy theme song :-P
Food for people who think eating is a chore. by denzacar · 2015-08-03 08:08 · Score: 1

Basically the culinary equivalent of body integrity identity disorder.
Why should I cook and eat tasty food when I can just slurp a shake and be done with the whole eating thing?
I would not be surprised if Rob Rhinehart is actually just a guy with an extreme case of a restrictive food intake disorder.

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
1. Re:Food for people who think eating is a chore. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 08:53 · Score: 0
  
  Seriously, anyone who'd rather drink this crud that eat a prepared meal and thinks that they're somehow too busy to enjoy a meal has something seriously wrong with them.
farm-free, algae sources by thinkwaitfast · 2015-08-03 08:22 · Score: 1

That explains why it's green. Or does it?
Nonsense by dlenmn · 2015-08-03 08:25 · Score: 2

Because a vegan diet that is actually complete is unquestionably harder and more expensive than a non-vegan one.
I'm not a vegan (or a vegetarian), but that's total nonsense. Just because some people make it "harder" (whatever that means) or more expensive doesn't mean it inherently is. Back up you claim. WHY is a vegan diet intrinsically "harder" and more expensive?
Rice and beans make a cheap, complete protein. There are all sorts of vegetable oils for fats (no need for extra virgin olive oil), or eat some peanuts (or real nuts if you want to splurge). You get your carbs from grain/bread/etc. If you can't stand veggies for vitamins, then pop a vitamin pill.
Those are some basics; fill in the blanks on your own.

And they also frequently struggle with malnutrition.
And? Poor people are malnourished because they can't afford to eat. News at 11.
1. Re:Nonsense by jedidiah · 2015-08-03 08:48 · Score: 2
  
  Just the necessary clue to eat your greens with some fat puts even the "low fat" non vegan dietary fad into the "too hard to be sustainable" category. Anything that requires the consumer to have any sort of clue is doomed to increase the general malnutrition level of the population.
  It doesn't even have to be a diet for rich political extremists.
  People write entire books about this kind of problem.
  The heuristic "eat a little bit of everything in moderation" is a much more viable approach.
  Viable diets exist within an entire cultural framework that takes the guesswork and research out of not hurting yourself. Anything else is just another variation on fad diets we were told to avoid in our youth.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
2. Re:Nonsense by Cinnamon+Beige · 2015-08-04 08:27 · Score: 1
  
  Because a vegan diet that is actually complete is unquestionably harder and more expensive than a non-vegan one.
  I'm not a vegan (or a vegetarian), but that's total nonsense. Just because some people make it "harder" (whatever that means) or more expensive doesn't mean it inherently is. Back up you claim. WHY is a vegan diet intrinsically "harder" and more expensive?
  As a vegetarian: Because some nutrients simply can't be gotten from plants, and your body can't make 'em. Vegetarians usually get this gap filled via dairy, but vegans usually need nutritional yeast or the like to fill these gaps. A few are mixed bags--you can theoretically get your entire required amounts from plants, but the bioavailability is lousy enough that the sheer volume required is an impracticality. (Some are also weird in that if you're veg* your body is actually going to process it a lot more efficiently, so exactly how much you need to be getting from your diet daily is different.)
  More importantly, the availability of some of the supplements you might need--especially if you're insisting they be vegan and/or have one of the stricter definitions of vegan--can be pretty lousy, and force you to go to stores like Whole Foods (AKA Whole Paycheck).
  
  Rice and beans make a cheap, complete protein. There are all sorts of vegetable oils for fats (no need for extra virgin olive oil), or eat some peanuts (or real nuts if you want to splurge). You get your carbs from grain/bread/etc. If you can't stand veggies for vitamins, then pop a vitamin pill.
  Those are some basics; fill in the blanks on your own.
  Bioavailability order is: made by your body (perfect bioavailability), comes from food (good to lousy), vitamin pill (usually lousy). And on the last, it can be a pain if you need it I helped my Mom go searching for the correct type of iron supplement when she needed to raise her iron quickly after cancer surgery--there is a form with excellent bioavailability, but the only way to get it was to have a pharmacist order it specially for us, and it had to be picked up from the pharmacy.
  That said, it sounds like Soylent is aiming for going nonGMO gluten-free organic [add more buzzwords here] vegan, so yeah, it'll be more expensive because you will be avoiding some of the cheap, common sources of nutrients and what would actually be the ideal solution of an edible algae that does it all 'in house' and possibly could be even grown as a stage in water processing. (Short term, this would be incredibly expensive, but once you've made the algae all you need to do is keep some alive somewhere so you can seed and reseed tanks as needed, making it incredibly cheap.)
1,6-Dichloro-yadayadayada by Chris+Johnson · 2015-08-03 08:25 · Score: 0

Still adds "sucralose", aka 1,6-Dichloro-1,6-dideoxy--D-fructofuranosyl-4-chloro-4-deoxy--D-galactopyranoside.
My MOM won't even eat that stuff as it nukes her digestive system. For me, it nuked my mood regulation. I note also that it's still got trace gluten, but that will depend on where they source their oats. Some oats are very heavily contaminated, others not so much. Bob's Red Mill has good non-contaminated oats. Quaker is heavily contaminated a lot of the time: it'll vary.
It's frustrating. I would absolutely keep this stuff around for your basic 'sillycon valley style liquid lunch' (rather than booze, undistracting nutrient gruel!) but if they are so dumb they continue to use sucralose version after version, I don't know what to tell them, and it even raises questions about their other theories. How am I supposed to trust that they know what they're doing when they do stuff like this?
What's a little 1,6-Dichloro-1,6-dideoxy--D-fructofuranosyl-4-chloro-4-deoxy--D-galactopyranoside between friends, right? ;P
1. Re:1,6-Dichloro-yadayadayada by Dr_Barnowl · 2015-08-03 20:18 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, I bought some of the EU variant, Joylent, and noted that it has that sickly sweet aftertaste I associate with artificial sweeteners. I'd really be entirely happy with them leaving that out.
2. Re:1,6-Dichloro-yadayadayada by Dahan · 2015-08-04 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Using sucralose doesn't imply that they don't know what they're doing. If you can't eat sucralose, OK--it's not supposed to be for everyone. But the sucralose is there for a reason (masking the bitterness of some other ingredients), and it's not a problem for the vast majority of people who can take sucralose.
3. Re:1,6-Dichloro-yadayadayada by metrix007 · 2015-08-05 13:29 · Score: 1
  
  You are a misinformed quack. There is no evidence that Sucralose is harmful to humans. None what so ever. And numerous evidence to the contrary.
  
  --
  If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
Nutri-Matic Drink Synthesizer. by xenotransplant · 2015-08-03 08:28 · Score: 1

Is this product available from my Nutri-Matic system? And if so, how close to the original product will the synthesized version be?
Or, just buy something that isn't awful for less $ by sirwired · 2015-08-03 08:39 · Score: 1

Soylent (which unless things have changed a lot, still doesn't have somebody with actual training in nutrition looking over the formula... the best they claimed before was that they verified the macronutrient ratios with somebody with a clue) is amateurish, nasty, with a horrible texture.
You can get a can of Nestle Nutren 2.0 (500 kcal/can) for $1.75 a can, delivered, from Amazon. It is developed by an actual nutrition company, working with actual doctors who know what they are doing, and it (and related beverages) have been used for literally decades by people with digestive issues and, in many cases, as their sole source of calories for years and years (this is usually with people that have feeding tubes, but it is flavored and can be drunk.)
Or, I suppose you can take this crap...
Errr... no. This isn't more nutritious. by sirwired · 2015-08-03 08:46 · Score: 2

People live off of Ensure, Boost, Nutren, et al., as their sole source of calories for years on end and don't seem to develop nutritional deficiencies. Maybe Soylent is more "natural" (whatever that means), but the established alternatives (which, in addition to being sold by people that know what they are doing, are cheaper) have a proven track record. At best, Soylent meets basic requirements, but frankly I have my doubts, given how they (last time I checked) STILL didn't have an actual nutritionist checking on the micronutrients.
(Nutren, which although drinkable and flavored, is specifically advertised as being feeding-tube compatible... people have lived for decades off the stuff.)
And, as you point out, the Soylent people keep making major changes to the formula, demonstrating that they still don't really have any idea what they are doing. They should have started with an established nutritional drink and worked to develop an "open source" equivalent. Starting from scratch out of utter ignorance was the exact wrong approach.
Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 08:54 · Score: 0

I heard your ass tastes like ass
All u faggots are gay by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:02 · Score: 0

You complain about the price, but don't have any problems buying $5 starbucks coffees and $7 mcdonalds meals Gee I can spend $7 dollars for something that will make me feel like crap and be hungry after a little bit, or I can spend less money for something that is actually good for me. How many of you faggots are really spending less on fudz than you would be spending on soylent?
Fuck all you conservative, communistic child molesting creeps
Re:Obligatory by OakDragon · 2015-08-03 09:05 · Score: 1

It's eat or be eaten... Just the kind of world we live in now!

--
Dark Reflection
Why MRE ? by perpenso · 2015-08-03 09:11 · Score: 1

Soldiers typically need a lot more calories. Where it would interesting is an emergency food source or part of one for disasters ans such. I keep MREs around just because in the winter, it is possible i can get snowed in for two or three days without power or water (well run off electric )
Unless you are hiking out what is the point of MREs? If you are staying put in your home eat stuff from the refrigerator on day 1, stuff from the freezer on day 2, stuff from the pantry there after. So disaster preparedness for a couple of weeks on your own -- yeah the gov says three days but Katrina and Sandy suggest two weeks is a better plan -- is basically not letting your fridge, freezer and pantry go empty. By some particular item when you use half half of your supply rather than all of it.

For water get a couple of cases (30-35L per case usually) of bottled water per person. When one case gets used up through normal usage buy a replacement.

For toilets have a couple of boxes of large plastic trash bags to line empty toilets with. Again, when one of the two boxes is used up buy a replacement.

Bathing ... baby wipes. Hand washing ... bottle of hand sanitizer. Batteries ... have spare in the drawer, replace when spares used.

Getting the idea ... you don't need anything exotic if you are straying in your home. Just some extras of the things you normally have around.

You don't need the MREs until you plan on becoming mobile. Even then you may not need the MREs. If water is plentiful and you have a filter or purification tablets then dehydrated backpacking food may be a better idea. MREs are not dehydrated, they are heavy because they already include "water". Depending on the environment and circumstances it might be a waste to carry that "water". Ounces feel like pounds on a long hike.
1. Re:Why MRE ? by jedidiah · 2015-08-03 09:19 · Score: 1
  
  Much like the new Soylent, an MRE is fuss free. I can just pull a packet out of my pocket and just start eating. This even goes for the dehydrated fruit and the kool-aid powder.
  I don't have to worry about whether or not I have a suitable water source or power source.
  Except even the worst MREs don't taste as bad as Soylent.
  It's almost as if the Army had some idea of what it was doing...
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
2. Re:Why MRE ? by perpenso · 2015-08-03 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  No, its not that the Army knew what it was doing. It was that the Army was designing for an entirely different situation. One where troops were mobile and possibly unable to build a fire.
  
  Not very relevant to backpacking. Not relevant at all to waiting out a storm and its aftermath at home.
  
  I've used MREs on overnight backpacking trips where water supplies were iffy. They make sense for that. They don't make sense for home emergency supplies. A can of chili, a can or foil bag of tunafish, etc -- things probably already around the home -- are just as no-fuss in the home and require no cooking.
  
  Again, unless you are mobile and water is iffy MREs don't make much sense.
3. Re:Why MRE ? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:49 · Score: 0
  
  Except even the worst MREs don't taste as bad as Soylent.
  Strongly disagree, as there are a couple MREs I would not eat unless it was a life or death situation and the only food source with no expectations of later meals. I tried Soylent when a friend got into that, and it is just neutral, with nothing to taste good or bad. I would prefer something else if given the option. It seems a lot like drinking water, as I would plenty of other things, but nothing bad about plain water.
Fried Chicken King by PopeRatzo · 2015-08-03 09:27 · Score: 1

Let me know when they make a Soylent that tastes like Harold's Fried Chicken (One Bite and We Got'Cha).
https://farm6.staticflickr.com...
Seriously, let me know.
[By the way, if you're ever in Chicago and looking for some terrific, delicious chicken or cat fish - and I mean really really good - try Harold's. Stuff is amazing. But be careful the really hot sauce is really hot. There are a bunch of Harold's around town for your late-night post Hawks/White Sox/Bulls game enjoyment.]

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
Recipe for Vegan Pie by Irate+Engineer · 2015-08-03 09:32 · Score: 2

Soylent , I would suggest following this up with a solid, sweetened product, in a variety of flavors, called Just Desserts
This reminds me of the recipe for Vegan Pie. Step 1: Peel, core, and slice one vegan....

--
Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
Vote for Bernie in 2016!
1. Re:Recipe for Vegan Pie by Opportunist · 2015-08-03 10:15 · Score: 1
  
  Is that like being a "Vegan of the second degree", when you eat nothing but vegans?
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
2. Re:Recipe for Vegan Pie by Irate+Engineer · 2015-08-03 11:11 · Score: 1
  
  Eating vegans can be quite pleasant until you take her out to dinner.
  
  --
  Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
  Vote for Bernie in 2016!
3. Re:Recipe for Vegan Pie by KGIII · 2015-08-03 15:58 · Score: 1
  
  Vegan is an old Micmac word meaning, "Piss poor hunter." Anyhow, eating them exclusively will mean you want to take a vitamin supplement. We can't have you being malnourished.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
4. Re:Recipe for Vegan Pie by Opportunist · 2015-08-04 04:17 · Score: 1
  
  Unlikely. Sex with a vegan is never good. No piece of meat may ever satisfy her.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
5. Re:Recipe for Vegan Pie by lucien86 · 2015-08-05 06:29 · Score: 1
  
  Actually vegans are pretty good eating... You've eaten cow haven't you? essentially vegan (eats grass).
  
  --
  Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
6. Re:Recipe for Vegan Pie by KGIII · 2015-08-05 13:31 · Score: 1
  
  Cows eat bugs and other stuff in their feed. They would probably eat hamburger if someone was strange enough to feed it to them mixed in with their food. Cows are not too bright, really. Well, none of the cows I have met were bright. I am kind of glad they are fenced in. Can you imagine them in the road? Moose and deer are bad enough. I have almost hit a cow in the road on a blind corner - I stopped and helped it back into it's yard and the owner took care of it from there.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
Where does the other "half of the fat" come from? by Irate+Engineer · 2015-08-03 09:41 · Score: 1

Soylent 2.0 reaches an unprecedented level of environmental sustainability with half of its fat energy coming from farm-free, algae sources.

The other half comes from dumpster diving in the biohazard bin behind the nip & tuck liposuction office. SOYLENT 2.0 IS PEOPLE!

--
Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
Vote for Bernie in 2016!
Reduce carbon emissions by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 09:58 · Score: 0

Due to the fact that the original Soylent caused so much methane production via digestion, the most effective way to reduce carbon emissions and strain on the environment is for vegans to all commit mass suicide. Less population = less harm to the environment. Also, the rest of us don't have to listen to your preachy bullshit anymore. It's a win-win.
Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 10:04 · Score: 0

I've heard it tastes like ass.
That's because it's made from New Yorkers.
Re:Obligatory by kernel_user · 2015-08-03 10:26 · Score: 0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Not everybody can actually eat this. I personally can't.
Vegan?? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 10:37 · Score: 0

How on Earth can they call it Vegan, everyone knows Soylent Green is people by this time surely?
Farm-free? by Trogre · 2015-08-03 10:39 · Score: 1

Doesn't sound like it will scale very well, in any sustainable manner anyway.

--
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Re:Obligatory by AmazingRuss · 2015-08-03 11:04 · Score: 1

Old ass.
Is it April 1 again already? by mmell · 2015-08-03 11:22 · Score: 1

Just askin'.
I'm getting a kick by Snotnose · 2015-08-03 11:39 · Score: 1

Got 1 lb lamb loin chops marinating with garlic, rosemary, thyme, and salt in my microwave right now (I have a cat, it's either the fridge or the microwave). A potato is in the oven, I gots my mint jelly, butter, and sour cream, and I'll laugh through mouthfulls of tastyness at the Soylent drinking hipsters.
expensive by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 11:41 · Score: 0

Its expensive. It is about $12 a day. Beans and rice would be cheaper.
No fiber at all? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 11:43 · Score: 0

"vitamins, minerals, fats, carbohydrates, and protein ..."
You like your microbiota?
Then you better eat a variety of kinds of fiber -- beans, bran, leafy greens -- to keep the internal constitutency happy and productive.
Otherwise they'll have words with you.
Soy is not good for you by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 13:24 · Score: 0

That much soy is absolutely terrible for you. Soy wrecks havoc on your hormones, cause thyroid problems, mess with your insulin levels, increase in estrogen, and much much more.
It's also one of the worst crops for the environment, is impossible not to have genetically modified anymore, and destroys the soil.
Re:Obligatory by Greyfox · 2015-08-03 13:42 · Score: 1

Leela: Eeh. It varies from person to person.

--
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Farm free algae sources? by GrantRobertson · 2015-08-03 15:07 · Score: 1

How can "farm free" algae have a reduced ecological impact? If they are harvesting algae from the ocean then they are having an ecological impact.
Hell, in the movie, they started using people because they had overharvested algae and plankton from the oceans.
Now with improved gag suppressant! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 15:52 · Score: 0

Simpsons always did it..
Re:Obligatory by Soylent+Beige · 2015-08-03 17:10 · Score: 3, Funny

Hello!

--
Everyone hates me because I'm paranoid.
Pianist_Photographer_Painter! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-03 20:12 · Score: 0

What happens to our intestines? - what happens to bowel movements? poop? I don't want to shit once a fortnight & fart 25 times a day.
Looks like moor's law is going to be applicable for us too... "storage capacity (our intestines & bladders) will decrease exponentially with lesser intake of fiber & whole grains"
Gosh! - we are close to becoming computers! - Fermi's paradox is near :)
Understood that our Jaws are getting shorter by the generation - but I don't want the Jaw to evolve into a small orifice to suck from a straw.
lesser bowel -> less function for the liver -> less bile juices -> lesser functioning of the intestines to move the food -> lesser everything! - which somehow... does not sound right to me.
Perverse? by jandersen · 2015-08-03 21:22 · Score: 1

Isn't there something slightly perverse about this kind of vegetarianism? I mean, not just this, but the whole idea of taking vegetables and somehow try to make it taste almost like some sort of meat? Vegetables taste great as they are - you become vegetarian because of that, not because you think it is sad for the poor animals, I would have thought. Otherwise, you are just another 'holier-than-thou' fool.
Food Ideas by foods+ideas · 2015-08-03 23:39 · Score: 1

Good. Food Ideas - http://foodsideas.com/
Re:Obligatory by ObiWanKenblowme · 2015-08-04 01:08 · Score: 1

It varies from person to person

--
Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.
not complete and not enough by nten · 2015-08-04 03:32 · Score: 1

That hamburger isn't enough calories for a day. Even two wouldn't be. You wouldn't be getting enough choline or fiber and the fat content and types would be a bit off. You can get close to soylent for 3 a day using subsidized products like corn and milk along with a multivitamin. But getting enough choline without getting too much of something else is quite hard without lots of soy lecithen. We can't even define what a natural diet is. It varies from region to region but what doesn't vary is that none of those diets were optimal. They were just what we could get in the area we lived in. I like this project because unlike sugar bomb meal replacements that were already out there it is all about what your body needs long term. We don't know what that is yet but experimentation will get us closer than looking at historical diets due to the aforementioned reasons.

--
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
Re:Obligatory by kmoser · 2015-08-04 04:30 · Score: 1

No, vegans are what they use to make Vegemite.
Re:Obligatory by Bugamn · 2015-08-04 04:38 · Score: 1

You have waited your whole life for this, haven't you?
live vs survive by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 04:48 · Score: 0

You can survive for decades on nutren, but its mostly sugar. You can survive on milk, maseca corn flour, and a multivitamin indefinitely, for less than $2 a day (unless you are lactose intolerant), but you will be missing things that make you feel better and allow you to be more active. Even a "naturally healthy" diet of lots of varied vegetables and a bit of meat is missing many things that could make you feel better and live longer. I don't like the one size fits all soylent recipe, I hope that a cheaper customizeable soylent arrives soon, but in the mean time, lunch and dinner is soylent for me, with some protein powder for breakfast. I tried the diy stuff, its too much measuring and mixing. If I wanted to cook I'd cook, I am pretty good at it.
Re:Obligatory by Applehu+Akbar · 2015-08-04 06:28 · Score: 1

A common misconception, but Australia doesn't have vegans. Vegemite is brewers' yeast that gets its unique flavor from workers who fall into the vats.
Different people are different. by danaris · 2015-08-04 07:52 · Score: 1

No one wants to hear it, but we're healthiest eating raw vegetables, fruits, and nuts/seeds/legumes as well.
It's not that no one wants to hear it, it's that it's crap.
Sure, those things are generally healthy for us to eat, but different people's bodies need different nutrients, based on everything from what their evolutionary heritage is to what their gut flora are like to the kind of work they do all day. Some people need significant amounts of meat in their diets. Others need a lot of rice.
There is no One True Diet that's perfect for everyone and will solve all people's health and weight problems, and the sooner the world realizes this, the better off we'll all be.
Dan Aris

--
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
Direct feed by ebvwfbw · 2015-08-04 14:43 · Score: 1

From Planned parenthood?
Ok, if you didn't see the movie this is probably lost on you.
Tasty Wheat by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-04 18:44 · Score: 0

Are we in The Matrix? https://youtu.be/v1EcrD5IyxM
Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · 2015-08-05 14:19 · Score: 0

I eat vegans for breakfast.
food by foods+ideas · 2015-08-07 22:52 · Score: 1

healthy food ideas - http://foodsideas.com/healthy-... | Quick food ideas - http://foodsideas.com/quick-fo...