But is it a business worth purusing for humanity. Have you ever tasted hydroponics lettuce ? It's so inferior in taste and the sensations it gives in your mouth. It may have all nutrients, but if nutrients is the point, then let's eat soylent green.

Here's a major "organic" tomato operation in California.[2] It's indoors. The growing medium is coconut husks with computer controlled drip irrigation. It's more similar to a hydroponic operation than to an outdoor farm.

[1] https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2017/11/02/561462293/hy... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ayKz9-FbhA

But yes, being able to produce fresh food better, faster and in more controlled way is definitely worth pursuing for humanity.

there's earth, rain and sun and millions of years or R&D already done and proven successful. I really wonder what kind of research youo want...

What you may want is : tasty food for everyone on earth. But that's not science, that's much more politics.

A lot of food that we eat today evolved really fast after we started to care about their taste and only select the ones with the properties we want. We're talking about maximum 10k years of fast evolution for human taste, not millions of years.

But it isn't better. And why is making worse food faster worth pursuing for humanity? All the available evidence seems to suggest that a rural agrarian lifestyle provides more happiness and fulfillment. It would seem that we should be pursuing how to move people into the country to grow their own food, not how to support the highest possible population of humans at the expense of those humans and everything else on the planet.

Given the history of agriculture and the tendency to select for large watery produce, it seems like what you've experienced is the result of a profit optimization rather than an anecdotal example of hydroponics limitation in regards to producing quality vegetables.