If you reduce the oil to a reasonable amount, you are putting the vitamin E deficiency back. If you don't come anywhere close to approaching 100% RDI of half of the known essential nutrients, then you are proposing a poor alternative to something that covers 100% of all of them. Especially when you require 20% more calories to still be massively deficient. The fact that an all twinky diet would be worse does not make your option a "potentially healthier" alternative to soylent.
It is always the worst developers who fixate on arbitrary rules because they never developed the ability to read code. Go practice reading code, that's the only way to get better at it.
I don't understand why you think it isn't helpful. You are suggesting that as an alternative to soylent. It is a very poor alternative, and I explained why. I wouldn't add anything, I'd toss it away and start over. You don't try to build on a base of high calorie, low nutrient food like quinoa and olive oil. You had to max out everything in that recipe, which puts you at 2400 kcal, way over what most people need. And you are still seriously lacking in half a dozen essential nutrients, and are low on omega3s. Those percentages listed are based on someone who needs to consume 2000 kcal, so you want to aim for 100% at 2000 kcal.
Sort of, but not quite. It is quite easy to get situations where code is wrong because of indentation mistakes, copy+paste, etc. All autopep can do is make your wrong code look consistent. Languages with some sort of block delimiter can't get wrong in this manner, so it is safe to munge together random sources with various indenting messes and then just run a tool over them.
There's nothing to address. Your introductory data structures and algorithms class taught you when lists are good and when they are bad. That isn't controversial. The problem is the claim that you should never use lists, which is absurd.
What you described is absolutely not healthier. You are clearly not meeting 100% RDI on many vitamins and minerals. Where is your vitamin E? Why is the quinoa even there? That is only "protein rich" if you are eating 4 eggs, and are very generous with your definition of "protein rich".
Show me a shopping list that provides 100% RDI of all vitamins and minerals (without dangerous excesses of any of them), a reasonable balance of protein, fat and carbs, sufficient omega3s, and 2000 Kcal/day. You don't even need to worry about making actual meals out of this random assortment of ingredients, just the ingredients themselves. I do not believe you can do it for $230/month.
You vastly overestimate the quality control, safety testing, and labelling requirements of pet foods. Pet food does not need to be certified, or pass any tests to be sold. Pet food is labelled according to AAFCO guidelines, which merely specifies how much protein/fat/calcium/phosphorous and a few other things are required. That's it. Those pet foods for fat dogs and old dogs and young dogs and kidney health and shiney coat and furballs and clean teeth are just ordinary pet food. They do not need to be different in any way. The manufacturer can literally put the exact same food into all of those bags, and none of the claims on them need to be verifiable.
>Talk to British people about dog excrement, and there are people of a certain age who remember dog poo being white and furry
That is because they remember dogs eating meat. Now dogs eat corn. There is no patent on dog food that makes white poop.
>Notice, also, that pet food is often a mix of biscuits and meat, or just meat, or just biscuits
This is for the benefit of marketing the product to people, it has nothing to do with nutrition.
>what advantage they'll be able to offer over established meal replacement drinks like Ensure
Ensure isn't remotely close to nutritionally complete. We're not talking about your mythical unknown magic plant powers here, we're talking known vitamins and essential minerals, with established RDIs, that Ensure and similar products do not come anywhere close to providing enough of. If you can show me a product that is actually nutritionally complete (provides 100% of the RDI of all vitamins and minerals with an RDI) then you have an argument.
No, in this context "metabolically disadvantaged" means "fat and don't want to make an effort to fix it". There is no intolerance, it is just "I want to stop being fat, but pretending to half-follow a fad diet didn't work, so I will call it a medical problem".
So does soylent. You realize people already live entirely off of similar products right? You do understand feeding tubes are a thing right? What do you think goes into them?
There is too little lactose in whey protein for it to give any symptoms even to people with the most extreme lactose intolerance (absolutely zero lactase production).
Which is precisely the reason your fear-mongering is nonsense. The FDA isn't going to suddenly disappear because these guys are selling the same thing tons of other companies sell: meal replacement shake mix.
Your claim is not backed by any evidence at all. There is nothing special or magical about "whole foods". And what is wrong with what you just mentioned is that now I need to keep fresh fruits and vegetables and milk on hand, those spoil. Your proposed meal replacement is also incredibly deficient in over half of known vitamins and essential minerals. Take my default challenge for the "oh its so easy to get all your vitamins and minerals" people: put together a recipe for me that gives me 100% of all my vitamins and minerals. When you actually try doing this, you will realize how unreasonable it is.
Your claim is not backed by any evidence at all. There is nothing special or magical about "whole foods". And what is wrong with what you just mentioned is that now I need to keep fresh fruits and vegetables and milk on hand, those spoil. Your proposed meal replacement is also incredibly deficient in over half of known vitamins and essential minerals.
A bag of salad goes bad very quickly, I can't keep it on hand for whenever I need it. Frozen crap meals are clearly less healthy than soylent, and are also more effort to prepare.
He specifically said compared to eating any other food. Every food can be contaminated. In order to sell this, he has to meet the same requirements every other food producer does.
You aren't required to buy it or use it. Cooking and shopping is a horrible chore for lots of people. Those are the people this is marketed for. "I am not the target market for this product" is not a problem with the product.
The big flaw with this line of reasoning is that 90% of people are already eating diets that we know, 100% for certain, are worse than soylent. Yes, it could be missing something. You are almost certainly already missing or short on several things. For the vast majority of people, this is going to be a significant improvement.
They are current rules also. The rules are largely the same as BSD rules, and go rules. Just because they are old, doesn't mean the people who wrote them moved on to doing what the trendy javascript kids do.
As maw points out, that is not a pure win, it is a tradeoff. And it is a tradeoff that I've found to be a really bad one. Being able to run indent over your code and have it automatically formatted is really helpful in large, long term projects where people come and go and weren't effectively forced into using one style.
Yes, but everyone had told them over and over again to change that, they just wanted to maintain control. It certainly wasn't a new invention of diggs, I just used slashdot as the example of reddit being a clone because slashdot was the most well known. kuro5hin was(is?) exactly digg/reddit for example. Social bookmarking sites were around before slashdot too.
>Nowadays everybody takes links you can vote on as a "duh" feature and wonder what the big deal behind Reddit is, but when it came out in 2005, it was very much a "Why has nobody thought of this before?
It had been thought of before, and done before. The late 90s had tons of sites like that. When reddit came out in 2005, it was very much a "what is so special about slashdot clone #437?".