We were promised a panacea for the climate crisis and a way to save our food system. So why is nobody firing up the chicken vats? I went to find out

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You read these random-sounding stories and then you find the most poignant encapsulations of modern life you’ve ever encountered

There is a widespread feeling in the US that everything is a hoax or a Ponzi scheme, and this feeling is only reinforced by the news. The news that self-driving taxis, when they become confused, are actually operated remotely from the Philippines. The news that the mysterious invention that could scan your blood for any number of disorders was an era-defining scam. The news that the crypto entrepreneur who pledged to secure the longtime survival of the human race was actually stealing $8bn of his customers’ money to fund his polycule in the Bahamas. I became paranoid, standing in front of the abandoned car park, that cultivated meat was just another lie, or a semi-lie, or a bluff. That the reason the meat was so difficult to get my hands on was that it did not exist. The possible implosion of Believer was disappointing not just because it represented a setback in the quest to reduce our carbon emissions and fortify our food systems against climate collapse, but because it seemed to confirm that we live in a cheap, mendacious world, where what passes for progress almost always turns out to be a confidence game.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 day ago

    And this one mirrors the current feverish AI build out:

    The VCs on the panel saw Believer as a cautionary tale. Don’t scale too quickly. Lower costs. Make something consumers actually want to eat. All these observations were sensible, even obvious, and yet wasn’t it also the case that the VCs themselves had put pressure on companies like Believer to expand rapidly in order to provide the returns they sought?

  • source
  • parent