Mark Zuckerberg's new challenge: Eating only what he kills. | Hacker News Reader

Mark Zuckerberg's new challenge: Eating only what he kills.

postcards.blogs.fortune.cnn.com

This has probably been discussed on HN previously, but to me the most interesting idea here is the meta-issue of Zuck's personal challenges.

I think it's a wonderful practice and while I'm sure most of us take on these kinds of challenges from time to time, but he seems to take an admirable zeal to it.

For example, I've taken on various learning-a-language (natural and otherwise) challenges, but I've never gone so far as to commit to practicing an hour a day, every day, for an entire year. Now, Mark only says he 'blocked out' the time, but if he actually follows through then it's very impressive.

I actually find this pretty interesting. It's certainly weird and surprising to see Zuckerberg do it when it will surely receive a lot of criticism. I say fair play.

At least he is being conscious about his eating. He noted the hypocrisy of people who will eat meat and then say they don't want to think of what was involved in producing it. No support of mass slaughterhouses, hopefully he will keep it up.

Don't care. Not one bit. More concerned about Facebook's privacy policy.

As a vegetarian, I totally support his decision and respect it.

My meat eating friends like to call themselves carnivores, I usually correct them and say they are actually scavengers.

How come, as a vegetarian, you support killing animals?

Still puzzled by his quote: "This year I've basically become a vegetarian since the only meat I'm eating is from animals I've killed myself."

I don't get it.

I assume he still had to pay for what he took home, so how is him going to a farm and killing a chicken, pig and goat any better than someone else doing it and selling it to him? Hell, the people at the farm would probably have done it more humanely anyways.

Yes, he wants to be more thankful by providing himself with a concrete connection between the animal and his food, but what does that really change?

And I think a lot of the pig and goat will go to waste.

It is a different thing to personally perform an act than to simply know, logically, that it is being performed on your behalf. It makes act more real, more personal, more identifiable. Knowing that someone killed a goat at some point is not the same as having to perform the act itself. I have never done something like this, but I can understand how it would make you appreciate your food more, and really understand what you are doing when you are eating.

The article indicates the animal is still taken to a butcher, so one would believe that there is no more waste than any other time.

As to what it changes, I think you are looking at the system and saying one dead goat, one fed human, what's the difference. But it isn't the result that he is trying to change; he is trying to change himself. I can't believe you could do what he is doing and not come away from it with a different outlook.

I don't see anything wrong with the practice, and if it makes him feel a little more grounded, more power to him.

/Only/ what he kills? That would be interesting.

This is not the E! of the tech world, flagged for bullshit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com