Hacker News Reader

Comment by conceit | Hacker News Reader

Since when is the sun worse than indoor lighting?

It's more about a controlled growing environment. Outdoors there's a 100% higher chance of pollination, which means seeds and spindly buds. Indoors it's much easier to separate male and female plants, and also much more likely to have consistent watering etc which leads to more lush growth

besides the pollination from other farmers, which is probably far from 100%, selection is not any easier indoors, why would it?

I personally find that [high quality] outdoor is akin to a beer after work. It helps you wind down after a stressful day. An hour or two later and there are no lingering effects, it's great for a touch of relaxation. I find that I can carry on being productive even while high.

Conversely, indoor tends to be more like sharing a bottle of wine with someone - you're going to get far a stronger kick out of it and it's going to last longer. It also tastes much nicer.

I'm not disputing what you're saying, growing outdoor is cheap (virtually free) and therefore attractive. Typically there is little pride involved and the quality suffers. However, well-grown outdoor fills a niche just like well-grown indoor does. It merely has a bad reputation.

Since advanced indoor grow operations existed. The Sun is better only in price. Indoors you can control all the variables and have a consistently grown product on a schedule. It's far too expensive for most crops, but marijuana isn't most crops.

The sun comes up and goes down on its own schedule. Indoor lights can be turned on and off as needed to change how and when the plants mature.

It's about quality control. You have more certainty about soil, air, water, light, insects, animals, etc. So the scientific method is more effective.

On a side note: outdoor plants grow much larger, and as such have much larger yields.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com