What happened to the original HN submission of the vice article?
I doubt that PG is aware of this type of orchestrated manipulation going on. It is quite dangerous for the credibility of HN.
Soylent seems interesting and potentially disruptive. However, it is FOOD and deserves to be put under the microscope. Anyone conniving to make them dodge scrutiny (especially via underhand moves) is not doing them any favours.
You can't reasonably expect impartial and unbiased information to come from this site, can you? They have a vested interest in seeing the success of their children.
No they don't. Unless you can point to something that shows they do?
The company is claiming that it is a dietary supplement and NOT food in order to avoid FDA scrutiny. At least that is what the PandoDaily article that was originally linked to claims.
Soylent is regulated as a supplement, but sold and promoted as a food.
People aren't asking for weird amounts of scrutiny, just for the same amount of regulation as the rest of the food chain.
Seeing the filthy conditions that the beta product was made in was surprising - the founders knowing how bad it was but continuing to ship beta product to paying beta customers is weird.
None of the paying customers orders' have shipped yet. That happens in January, and those orders are being prepared professionally.
The marketing of Soylent is certainly more active these days which isn't really that surprising as the product and company have developed from a concept to a full fledged and funded company. They're affiliating themselves with claims and experiences that may be unfounded, just like the McRib implies it's a delicious BBQ pork sandwich and not processed meat (pork?) shaped to look like rib meat or how car manufactures imply that purchasing a new vehicle will improve your life substantially. Customers will decide if their product matches their claims or if the product serves enough of a function to purchase despite the fact that it may not meet all of the claims it affiliates itself with (like complete food replacement... which is a marketing affiliation, not a legal claim). If you buy Soylent and get sick because all you eat is Soylent and you don't take the necessary precautions when completely changing your diet then you're in that category of consumer that might buy Axe Body Spray and think it's going to be the sole factor that makes you attractive to female models.
Marketing can be over the top and distasteful, but that doesn't relieve consumers from their responsibility to be skeptical of marketing claims and do their own research and basic risk remediation before purchasing a product.
An excellent question. It doesn't, it needs the same scrutiny as those products.
Because they're telling the FDA that it's a supplement they get by with lower levels of regulation and inspection.
I don't doubt it, and I also don't care. He's a business man. He's got money at stake. It's his site. Why shouldn't he use it to help market this stuff? Nobody is being forced to buy it. I see nothing wrong with that.