You're right. I could just watch the static instead. It contains about as much intellectual content, is quite soothing and has a much lower environmental footprint.

I don't understand this metaphor at all. I want do go do something else. Shoot, maybe I want to go cook an elaborate and delicious meal! Why are you forcing me to watch anything?

Repetitive food -> Repetitive Batman

Static -> Unfilling, sour tasting water

But you understand that you don't have to sit there staring at the shake for as long as it would take you to cook a meal, right? You just drink it?

Look, however fast and easy it is to make your fast and easy meals, not having to do that is faster and easier. You've already granted the premise that it makes sense, sometimes, to sacrifice complexity of meals for reduced preparation time. Why shouldn't there be very simple options below "some preparation required", if someone wants them?

And why are you clinging to this metaphor that asserts that such an option is physically impossible?

I've actually been drinking a meal replacement shake (flavoured casein, oats, psyllium, freeze dried fruit/vegetable powder) for lunch most days for the past year and a half. So yes, I understand the mechanics of making them. I would still prefer to cook and eat real food or -- this might surprise you -- pay someone else a small premium to cook for me.

This sub-sub-thread started over a repetitive meal. Replacing it with a bland soup is hardly going to be an improvement.

> And why are you clinging to this metaphor that asserts that such an option is physically impossible?

I don't follow you on this.

I'm just going to quote your metaphor again.

>"After watching Batman Begins every night for 4 months straight, I got a bit bored with it".

> Watch a new movie.

But my problem isn't with Batman Begins. My problem is I don't want to watch a movie every night. I don't want to. Do you get that part? I understand you really like movies, and you enjoy setting up this whole system so you can watch a movie every night and not have it take up your whole day, but I don't like movies as much as you do. Most movies I find pretty dumb. It's boring to sit through the same movie over and over again, and picking out a new movie takes time I'd rather spend doing something I enjoy. I like a good film on the weekend if it's something that really engages me, or if I've got friends over, but otherwise it just seems like a needless time sink.

Why do I need to watch a movie? Why is my only other option to watch static? Why do I need to watch anything?

To dereference, if it is not necessary for my survival[0], why do I need to cook? I know that I can if I want to. And I do, sometimes. Why on earth should I when I don't want to?

[0] Disclaimed because I'm bearish on Soylent-- I don't have that much faith in the USDA. But I think something like it should exist, and I'd jump on it in a heartbeat if it worked.

I know what you're saying. But my metaphor was a response to being sick of cooking the same meal each night. Hence also the metaphor with static (let's say it's 5 seconds of static vs Batman every night, to forestall the next re-re-rehash).

> But my metaphor was a response to being sick of cooking the same meal each night.

If you're willing to grant that "chug a Soylent" is as effective a solution as "learn a new dish", and is vastly preferable if learning to prepare and repeatedly preparing a new dish doesn't intrinsically interest me, I have no problem with that.

The reason I'm arguing is that, clearly, I don't think that soylent is a better choice than learning a new dish.

If that's about the nutritional content of Soylent specifically, I misunderstood and agree with you, pending further evidence, because I want something I can be sure is healthy. Since that's precisely the same thing the G^nP you originally responded to said, I hope you can understand why I thought your critique was intended to engage with the concept of meal replacement in general.

But if that is the case, the reason I'm having trouble with your metaphor is I don't see how it doesn't make it abundantly clear to you that what we're arguing about is just a difference of taste between us.

> Why shouldn't there be very simple options below "some preparation required", if someone wants them?

That's not my problem with Soylent. My problem is that many people talking about this don't appear to have heard about other liquid feeds, and Soylent claim this is safe for everyone, with plenty of evidence of safety. There is no evidence of safety.