Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday May 30 2014, @09:14AM   Printer-friendly
from the needs-a-spoonful-of-sugar? dept.

Some soylentils have an interest in the Soylent food product, which claims to be complete, scientifically-based nutrition. Now Farhad Manjoo at the New York Times has spent a week and a half living off of it, and found it disappointing:

I just spent more than a week experiencing Soylent, the most joyless new technology to hit the world since we first laid eyes on MS-DOS.

Read the rest at the NYT: The Soylent Revolution Will Not Be Pleasurable.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by geb on Friday May 30 2014, @09:58AM

    by geb (529) on Friday May 30 2014, @09:58AM (#49084)

    Ars has a much better article, calling out all the idiocy and anti-Soylent panic from foodies: ogy-of-soylent-and-the-prison-of-first-world-food- choices/ []

    The Ars team did a similar test run last year, eating nothing but Soylent for a week, and came back saying it's not entirely awful. They acknowledge that it's not meant to be used that way though. Just because you can eat nothing but nutrient sludge, doesn't mean you have to.

    Personally I quite like the idea, and will be buying some to try it out if it ever goes on sale in my part of the world.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Interesting=2, Informative=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Saturday May 31 2014, @09:20AM

    by Magic Oddball (3847) on Saturday May 31 2014, @09:20AM (#49508) Journal

    I usually love Ars Tech and enjoyed Lee Hutchinson's trial last summer, but afterward their Soylent articles didn't really fit with the rest of the site. After trying to find a good one to send as an info link to somebody else, I realized that the reason they don't fit in is that they read like paid product placement. The result is that they're as bad as Farhad Manjoo's clusterfuck, just with the opposite slant.

    Lee's rant the other day is a good example. Read straight, it was more disjointed than most amateur blog posts, over-the-top emotional with a side order of aggression, and contained irrational leaps of logic (like the idea that even suggesting a non-disabled fully-employed person could learn even basic cooking means someone has no empathy or experience with mental illness) -- nowhere near "Ars Technica" quality. If Rosa Labs gave Ars/Lee a bullet list of readers' concerns with the paid 'request' to address what they can & convince readers to not keep speaking out otherwise, however, the article's flaws suddenly make sense.