[HN Gopher] Photo calorie app Cal AI was built by two teenagers
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Photo calorie app Cal AI was built by two teenagers
        
       Author : PaulHoule
       Score  : 66 points
       Date   : 2025-04-03 01:01 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (techcrunch.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (techcrunch.com)
        
       | moshun wrote:
       | Hot | Not Hot Dog
        
         | PaulHoule wrote:
         | (1) That is the paradigm of classification, don't knock it, and
         | 
         | (2) I did some work on a pre-product startup that wanted to
         | build something like this about 10 years ago, when visual
         | recognition was much less developed.
        
       | viccis wrote:
       | This is the guy who's been whining on X about not getting into
       | elite colleges despite his essay being radioactively bad, right?
        
         | kilpikaarna wrote:
         | "Even if there's a 1% chance I continue my rate of success,
         | wouldn't they want to take the risk of being able to use my
         | name in the future?"
         | 
         | lol
        
           | namaria wrote:
           | "60% of the time it works every time!"
        
         | readthenotes1 wrote:
         | Not enough virtue signaled?
         | 
         | https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/05/us/stanford-application-black...
        
           | owenpalmer wrote:
           | He's given a TEDx talk so I should listen to him, right?
        
           | cocacola1 wrote:
           | Apparently he ended up going to Yale instead.
        
           | jquery wrote:
           | That guy walked the talk. It would be virtue signaling if any
           | of us did it, but not him.
        
         | owenpalmer wrote:
         | Yes, same guy. He wrote a list of all his accomplishments,
         | whining about his college rejections. Painfully pretentious
         | individual.
        
           | jquery wrote:
           | I fed his college essay into ChatGPT and it absolutely
           | roasted him.
        
             | viccis wrote:
             | Given all the em dashes in his essay, that's probably LLM
             | on LLM violence lol
        
         | pseudo0 wrote:
         | He should have just written #BLACKLIVESMATTER 100 times,
         | because that's apparently all it takes to get into Stanford.
         | Honestly though college essays are a bit of a joke, reviewing
         | hundreds of them sounds like torture. The lack of rigor is
         | probably the point though, since it gives the admissions
         | process flexibility to ensure that legacy students get in and
         | they meet their DEI targets.
        
           | djohnston wrote:
           | The Supreme Court said it's illegal so presumably they've
           | knocked that off now.
        
       | acchow wrote:
       | > The concept is simple: Take a picture of the food you are about
       | to consume, and let the app log calories and macros for you.
       | 
       | > The result is an app that the creators say is 90% accurate,
       | which appears to be good enough for many dieters.
       | 
       | It absolutely cannot be "90% accurate". But I'm sure it seems
       | "90% plausible" to its millions of users.
       | 
       | Incredible that a product like this can exist. Do people just
       | will the fiction into reality?
       | 
       | Incredibly, these are the types of app ideas you'd hear from non-
       | tech "entrepreneurs" in 2012 looking for a co-founder. The
       | problem being, the engineers knew it was impossible. You could
       | fake it I guess by asking Google to search for "similar photos"
       | and getting a plausible calorie count half the time. But the
       | users wouldn't believe it.
       | 
       | We're now at the phase where any impossible idea can be fully
       | marketable by slapping "AI" in the name. ChatGPT feels so magical
       | that we now believe unicorns really do exist.
        
         | russellbeattie wrote:
         | _" In CS, it can be hard to explain the difference between the
         | easy and the virtually impossible."_
         | 
         | It seems we're at a point where this obligatory xkcd [1] is no
         | longer true.
         | 
         | 1. https://xkcd.com/1425/
        
           | exe34 wrote:
           | Anything's possible if you're willing to fake it!
        
           | easyThrowaway wrote:
           | It took a bit more than 5 years and a (single) research team,
           | though.
        
           | rsynnott wrote:
           | The bird thing was at least _possible_, though, to a
           | reasonable level of accuracy. What they're claiming to do
           | here is completely impossible; there is simply no way of even
           | vaguely accurately determining the calorie content of food
           | based on a picture of the food.
        
         | underyx wrote:
         | Even the nutritional labels printed on packaging are only
         | around 90% accurate. It's all downhill from there.
        
         | imp0cat wrote:
         | Just read the Google Play reviews, the app still has a long way
         | to go to be usable.
         | 
         | But it's still a great idea.
         | 
         | Also, they should calculate both the calories and power
         | requirements for each meal analyzed. What I mean is, it should
         | says something like: this burger has 800 kcal and the analysis
         | consumed 1kw of datacenter power. ;)
        
           | Incipient wrote:
           | >But it's still a great idea.
           | 
           | Define "great".
           | 
           | It has $2m revenue, so it's clearly a great idea (at this
           | stage?) financially and 'people love it' (30% retention)
           | 
           | Technically it's a garbage idea, and I'd say they could get
           | class-actioned without good T&Cs. It's literally impossible
           | to determine the sugar and fat content of a meal.
           | 
           | I'd never make it for the latter reason, however you clearly
           | need to believe in the former to make it big haha.
        
             | spzb wrote:
             | 30% retention means that 70% of people who have paid for it
             | didn't consider it valuable enough to pay for.
             | 
             | The $2m figure is unverified but, even if it was, turnover
             | is meaningless without knowing their expenses. If they're
             | burning through PS2.1m in LLM compute and marketing then
             | they're losing money.
             | 
             | Plus, the guy seems like a dick so I'm taking his story
             | with an enormous pinch of salt.
        
           | imgabe wrote:
           | kw is an instantaneous measurement. Energy usage would be kWh
           | (kilowatt-hours). Considering it would take a tiny fraction
           | of a server's compute for less than a second this would be
           | very small.
        
             | imp0cat wrote:
             | Right, speed vs distance. Still, I'd love to know the
             | numbers.
        
           | rsynnott wrote:
           | > But it's still a great idea.
           | 
           | No, it isn't, because it can never work. It is, in general,
           | impossible to determine the calorie content of food by
           | looking at a picture of it.
        
         | yard2010 wrote:
         | Truth is so overrated these days.
        
           | EGreg wrote:
           | With AI being weaponized by anyone who wants to make a
           | profit, what do you expect?
        
             | djohnston wrote:
             | It doesn't take AI, just a profit motive. Remember when
             | Russia HACKED THE ELECTION!?!
        
           | megadata wrote:
           | Exactly! The are so many alternatives, why do we have to
           | place THE truth so highly?
        
       | globular-toast wrote:
       | The obvious problem with this is how can it tell how large your
       | meal is or how much butter you put in? I can see it working for
       | fast/junk food, though.
       | 
       | When I learnt machine learning one of the things was continually
       | training the model. Like your spam filter. You show it what is
       | spam and eventually it learns. Is this stuff continually trained
       | on the user's BMI? That's the only way to tell if a diet is
       | working. Or is it just making absolute claims based on universal
       | training data?
        
       | nomilk wrote:
       | Not sure if it made it to hn, but the founder recently got
       | rejected from a number of top universities, despite clear talent:
       | 
       | https://x.com/zach_yadegari/status/1906859987105636667
       | 
       | https://x.com/zach_yadegari/status/1906888487292559531
        
         | throwaway314155 wrote:
         | Surely this sort of thing happens all the time? Not to excuse
         | it, but I really don't think any of those rejections was
         | intended to be the personal attack he thinks it is.
        
         | yapyap wrote:
         | clear talent?
        
         | xnx wrote:
         | > $30M ARR biz
         | 
         | Unlikely
        
           | dividuum wrote:
           | Probably pointed the Biz AI app at himself to get that
           | estimate.
        
         | closetkantian wrote:
         | I'm a college admissions consultant, and this doesn't surprise
         | me at all. People don't realize how competitive the landscape
         | has become. His test scores and GPA are average at the schools
         | he applied to. Really you'd need to know how many APs he took
         | and his AP scores to understand how colleges will treat his
         | academic record.
         | 
         | To me, his college list indicates that he was mostly prestige
         | hunting. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but
         | colleges can tell when a student wants to attend based just on
         | branding. It comes across as if he wants to use college as a
         | resume booster rather than as a place to grow.
         | 
         | The essay reads as a list of accomplishments, with little self-
         | reflection. (Side note: referencing Steve Jobs is way
         | overdone.)
         | 
         | Long story short, college admissions is not a VC pitch. If I
         | had been this guy's advisor, I would have recommended he write
         | an essay about something not related to Cal AI. Colleges will
         | already know about the app from his activities list (and resume
         | and, presumably, recommendation letters). There's a huge missed
         | opportunity for him to write about something else.
         | 
         | The essays that worked for my students this year were often
         | about more mundane topics that gave insight into their
         | character. One of my favorites was from a student who started
         | giving free haircuts to classmates. The essay implicitly shows
         | that he's thoughtful and well-liked--someone you'd definitely
         | want in your college community.
        
           | blitzar wrote:
           | > huge missed opportunity for him to write about something
           | else
           | 
           | When you are locked in and have the grindset there is nothing
           | else.
        
             | closetkantian wrote:
             | If he absolutely insisted on writing about Cal AI, I would
             | have recommended that he write more about why he was
             | inspired to build it and the human impact. Instead, he just
             | rattled off metrics that admissions officers will likely
             | know from other places in his app.
        
               | blitzar wrote:
               | Talking about grindsets, ARR, DAU and getting up at
               | 4:30am may be seen as good content for a twitter thread,
               | but most grown adults cringe when they read copy and
               | pasted fortune cookie wisdom memes.
               | 
               | I would agree, talking about actual human stuff related
               | to an actually interesting topic was a wasted oportunity.
               | Nobody actually cares what the numbers on the app are,
               | least of all admissions officers.
        
           | Jensson wrote:
           | > His test scores and GPA are average at the schools he
           | applied to.
           | 
           | Average is quite a bit above the floor though, so that just
           | makes it sound like he should have been accepted.
        
             | blitzar wrote:
             | For ever 100 applicants 3 seats are available. If you are
             | "average" amongst the pool of applicants there are 46
             | better people than you that won't get in either.
        
               | pizzly wrote:
               | Having elite universities scale up the number of seats
               | available can be done. Grow the pie instead of having the
               | current scarcity mindset. This would actually solve much
               | of the current problems. There is no reason you cannot
               | have the same or better quality of education with more
               | students per university. The only reason this problem
               | exists is that by limiting the number of seats you create
               | artificial scarcity and thus higher value.
        
           | djohnston wrote:
           | Interesting context, thanks for sharing. It sounds like
           | college admissions are broken in the same way SWE interviews
           | are broken.
        
             | Meekro wrote:
             | There was an HN story some years ago about the guy who
             | created homebrew -- a Mac app used by a plurality of Google
             | employees -- being rejected from a job at Google. This
             | seems to follow that pattern: it's not enough that you
             | achieve great things and talk/write about your achievement,
             | you have to stroke the egos of people who could have never
             | accomplished what you did, but still have the power to
             | judge you because the bureaucracy has given them that
             | power.
        
           | Meekro wrote:
           | If the $30M ARR number is true, it's not hard to understand
           | why he wants to talk about it as much as possible. Maybe if
           | you come from family money, you can hear that kind of figure
           | and yawn -- but as someone who came from poverty, I can tell
           | you that this is like if the kid built a rocket out of spare
           | parts in his garage and visited the moon. There's no words
           | for how stunning this is, and everything else in his life
           | must seem trivial by comparison.
           | 
           | I can't understand why the admissions officers would rather
           | read an essay about a kid who volunteered at an animal
           | shelter or something. Anyone can do that.
        
             | stuartjohnson12 wrote:
             | It has been trendy in Silicon Valley recently to use
             | inappropriate accounting methods to measure ARR.
             | 
             | Joe, a regular guy: Makes $120k at his desk job
             | 
             | Joe, the businessman: Made $20k in 32 days, $228k ARR
             | 
             | Joe, who launched 5 months into development and did 60k in
             | the first 2 weeks: $1.5M ARR
             | 
             | In all three of these examples, Joe's financial outcome is
             | the same. This business does not have any longevity, and
             | all of its revenue is from converting paid advertising of
             | various kinds. It's still impressive, but is most likely a
             | >10x exaggeration on even the lifetime revenue he makes
             | from this. Which is of course circular, because the reason
             | he's doing all this is to make a business out of monetising
             | the audience of people who want to make money.
             | 
             | All of this is clever social climbing, but is clever social
             | climbing the thing that should be rewarded by colleges?
        
             | bfeynman wrote:
             | um - I would. Colleges don't want to get panned for hiring
             | a scam artist which is exactly what this is. Unlike VC
             | where that skill is slightly revered.
             | 
             | The app is fake - at best its puffery, and the essay was
             | littered with grammatical errors.
        
           | StefanBatory wrote:
           | American system of admissions to me seems so weird. Is it
           | only there that unis accept mostly on extra things and not
           | grades/test scores itself?
           | 
           | I'm Polish, here the only thing that matters is your final
           | test scores, and nothing else. And I think it's same in the
           | most of Europe and Asia too, right?
           | 
           | My impression is that American unis care way more about
           | social aspect and so on, which I don't understand (but I
           | guess it's a fine way of looking at things, too.)
        
             | tekla wrote:
             | It's because a good majority of these schools have
             | thousands of applicants who might as well be perfect across
             | the board grade and test scores wise, so its either they
             | flip a coin, or choose some other standard.
             | 
             | The tests need to be harder, but people would complain.
             | 
             | I didn't study for the ACT at all (literally went in
             | without knowing anything about it) and got a 35. It's a
             | trivial exam.
        
               | DontchaKnowit wrote:
               | What a douchey thing to say. You know the average score
               | is like 20 right? Its definitely not trivial
        
               | tekla wrote:
               | The average for the SAT is 1050
               | https://satsuite.collegeboard.org/scores/what-scores-
               | mean/wh...
               | 
               | I got a 1040 on the SAT in the 5th grade. The average
               | score is useless for gauging how hard these exams are.
               | 
               | Bragging how you got a 34 on the ACT or 1450+ on the SAT
               | for an elite college is like bragging about clubbing a
               | seal
        
               | punpunia wrote:
               | What you're saying doesn't make any sense, do you just
               | enjoy bragging? Hardness of a task only makes sense in
               | the context of who is doing the task. The fact that you
               | scored highly means it was not a hard test for you
               | compared to the average test taker. I could not determine
               | this without the average score.
        
               | tekla wrote:
               | The fact that the average score for Harvard and similar
               | for other elite colleges for the ACT is 34-35 means that
               | the national average is worthless for the purposes of
               | elite colleges. Majority of people who would even bother
               | to apply for them are basically perfect across the board
               | grades wise, so its worthless to brag about it.
               | 
               | Bar making exams harder, the only other way is subjective
               | methods. I detest subjective methods, but making exams
               | harder is very unpopular
        
               | nilkn wrote:
               | They're not bragging. They're pointing out that the
               | ceiling is dramatically too low, which has caused elite
               | universities to spend decades creating more and more
               | elaborate and more and more detached and meaningless
               | gatekeeping mechanisms. The national average does not
               | matter in the context of the nation's most competitive
               | schools.
        
             | TimorousBestie wrote:
             | Parent already discussed this but at tier-one schools
             | almost everyone (except legacy/athletic of course) has
             | saturated the test score metric. Most applying have a max
             | SAT or ACT. Most have a 4.0+ GPA. A 34 ACT score is in the
             | bottom 40% of MIT applicants as far as I can tell.
             | 
             | The only thing that distinguishes applicants is the soft
             | social stuff.
             | 
             | Japan and South Korea kind of fixed this problem with cram
             | schools and ridiculously overtuned college admission exams.
             | But e.g. KAIST isn't really comparable to MIT.
        
               | StefanBatory wrote:
               | So is this the case of final exams being too easy and
               | unis having to adjust around that?
               | 
               | Or is it that way because of some other factors? I was
               | thinking how much of this is because of historical
               | factors; I assume in times before standarised exams it
               | would be a very convinient way of finding new students.
               | But then, I don't know how it was historically in
               | Europe/Asia.
        
             | Meekro wrote:
             | The problem with the SAT is that too many people can score
             | above 1500. In the 1500-1600 range, you might have only
             | made 1-2 mistakes on the entire test -- it's more luck than
             | skill at that point. You could maybe improve things by
             | having a harder test for the elite schools, but the Asian
             | model is not ideal either. I live in Japan, where many kids
             | will spend their evenings in cram school (after a day of
             | regular school) to prepare for the absurdly competitive
             | college entrance exams. As I recall, South Korea actually
             | restricts air travel on the day of their entrance exams so
             | some kids won't be disadvantaged by being distracted by the
             | noise of the overflight.
             | 
             | It's true that this model is more _fair_ , and that's good,
             | but it still feels _wrong_. There are way too many
             | professions where you 're de-facto locked out if you didn't
             | get the right credentials at the right age, regardless of
             | your practical skills. That results in us putting teenagers
             | through these absurd trials for no real reason.
        
               | blitzar wrote:
               | People are so much more than the single number abstracted
               | from 6 hours of exams.
        
               | pizzly wrote:
               | Each university could provide a custom entry exam to
               | ensure the test is unique and difficult enough to not be
               | gamed as easily
        
           | nilkn wrote:
           | Just because it doesn't surprise you doesn't mean it's okay.
           | You have to acknowledge that as an admissions consultant
           | you're part of a small gatekeeping community bubble. Even
           | though I attended one of these schools, I can recognize that
           | universities have been rapidly losing their credibility, and
           | this is only going to accelerate that trend. And by the way,
           | this person is probably more accomplished than I am, even
           | though I am now quite a bit older and my essay was apparently
           | good enough to tick off the checkboxes.
           | 
           | The question you need to be asking is how the university
           | system made an enemy out of someone who is clearly one of the
           | most talented members of his age cohort in the nation. That's
           | a failure no matter how hard you try to explain or justify
           | the status quo. It's time for some real accountability and
           | soul searching from the system, not excuses. Trying to nit
           | pick the essay and pointing out how he should have done X or
           | Y instead is completely missing the point.
        
         | ksynwa wrote:
         | His new statement:
         | https://x.com/zach_yadegari/status/1907511557149569190
        
           | davidcbc wrote:
           | Ahhh this makes sense, another mediocre guy blaming
           | minorities for his own failures
        
           | skyyler wrote:
           | >The student that runs fake clubs and stacks extracurriculars
           | is admitted over the student that runs a real business.
           | 
           | Yeah. That's how it works. When you do community building and
           | participate in activities in addition to "the grind", people
           | like you more.
           | 
           | This doesn't just apply to academia.
        
         | davidcbc wrote:
         | Clear talent at making bullshit apps that can't possibly work
         | the way he claims maybe
        
         | xnx wrote:
         | Everything about this kid sends strong signals that one would
         | not want him at their school, workplace, or social environment.
        
         | cratermoon wrote:
         | What are his talents?
        
         | enum wrote:
         | I think the average American today, including the average
         | admissions officer, has a negative view of technology. So, an
         | application that is unequivocally optimistic about technology
         | is unlikely to be well received. I think that that is what
         | happened here. We also have no visibility into letters of
         | recommendation, which are likely a big factor.
        
           | bfeynman wrote:
           | This is an incredibly poor take - curious as to how you just
           | completely made up that ridiculous claim? Ironic as well that
           | you think letters of recommendation matter for college
           | admissions when they are perfunctory for probably > 95% of
           | them. Maybe you shouldn't espouse your opinions on this.
        
             | enum wrote:
             | Things like this: https://arstechnica.com/tech-
             | policy/2025/04/survey-americans...
             | 
             | I'm also quite sure letters matter for undergraduate
             | admissions. They certainly do at the graduate level.
        
               | bfeynman wrote:
               | undergrad and graduate school are completely
               | different...?
        
         | actuallyalys wrote:
         | I mean, maybe he deserved to get into more universities, but he
         | did get into solid universities, even if they're not at the
         | very top. The application pool is very competitive at top
         | universities, and I'm not sure business success should be an
         | automatic in.
        
       | nomilk wrote:
       | Seems contradictory that there's a market for this since it
       | requires the same individual to simultaneously be concerned about
       | precisely measuring calories yet willing to pay for a method of
       | doing so that's (probably) wildly inaccurate.
        
       | yapyap wrote:
       | two teenagers and a whole lot of LLMs
        
       | lysecret wrote:
       | I understand the scepticism here. For sure this app isn't 90%
       | accurate in any traditional sense.
       | 
       | One note, as someone who also built a calorie tracking app with
       | ai as well as lost a good amount of weight with it: accuracy for
       | calorie tracking doesn't matter. You can honestly just detect if
       | it's a meal and return 600 cals. For most people the simple fact
       | that they become aware of what they eat and think about their
       | food in an ongoing basis will lead them to loose Weight. Sticking
       | to it is the hard part.
        
         | osener wrote:
         | It matters a lot if you have specific macro goals. If you don't
         | want to lose muscle, it is important to eat high protein
         | especially during a cut. And keeping fat and/or carbs low while
         | doing this is quite difficult without accurate data.
        
           | maccard wrote:
           | This app isn't for those people. Most people don't have macro
           | goals.
        
         | krisoft wrote:
         | > You can honestly just detect if it's a meal and return 600
         | cals.
         | 
         | That's ridiculous. What signal would that provide to the user?
         | Let's say someone who is eating double the portions they should
         | be eating. How will this hypothetical app help them figure that
         | out?
         | 
         | > For most people the simple fact that they become aware of
         | what they eat and think about their food in an ongoing basis
         | will lead them to loose Weight.
         | 
         | And you think people will " become aware of what they eat" by
         | shooting a picture of their food with an app which always say
         | "600 cal"? I don't think you thought this through.
        
       | hhh wrote:
       | The app sucks, there's no reason to use it when myfitnesspal is
       | just leagues better. You can poison it and it will just follow
       | the instructions as well.
        
       | terhechte wrote:
       | A friend of mine build a similar app last year
       | (https://joineat.app) and it didn't go anywhere (even though it
       | is objectively the nicer app). So there's a lot of luck involved
       | here as well (or maybe he was too early).
        
         | vwolf wrote:
         | For your friends app, I had to go into the app store and then
         | expand the description to view the key features, where it is
         | mentioned that it uses AI similarly as Cal AI. Just based off
         | the initial images of Eat compared to Cal AI, then it's much
         | more clear what Cal AI does compared to yours (besides
         | plastering AI everywhere).
         | 
         | Another thing I noticed is that I saw a random guy on instagram
         | with a rather big following being sponsored by Cal AI. Maybe
         | your friend was unsuccessful in getting his app out there?
         | Although I agree that luck will always play a role, but if the
         | public don't understand what your app immediately does and they
         | believe AI to be pure magic, then sprinkling that everywhere
         | will get something like Cal AI flying.
         | 
         | I still think it is shit from a technical perspective in terms
         | of the validity of amount of calories from a single image and
         | nothing else. But it seems like that's not what people want,
         | inherently because they are lazy. Actually counting calories is
         | much harder long term. If regular people now think that this is
         | magically replacing this process by just snapping a picture of
         | their processed meal, then I can see why it's successful.
         | Although quite depressing...
        
           | soulofmischief wrote:
           | The worst thing you can do for a bad product is good
           | advertising.
        
         | Strongbad536 wrote:
         | they did distribution well.
        
       | owenpalmer wrote:
       | My reasoning for evaluating the relevancy of this app:
       | 
       | 1. If the food being scanned has a nutrition label, I don't need
       | this app.
       | 
       | 2. If there's no nutrition label, the app can't possibly
       | extrapolate the nutritional information. It can't estimate
       | portion size or the ingredients in the recipe.
       | 
       | 3. If the app can't extrapolate nutritional information, I don't
       | need this app.
       | 
       | 4. I don't need this app.
        
         | kh_hk wrote:
         | Recently I have started running dish descriptions through
         | deepseek-r1:8b to give a rough estimate on calories and it is
         | sufficient, at least for my cooking. Of course this will
         | hallucinate on complex cases, and arguably simple dishes are
         | easy to count. Still, counting by hand is tedious compared.
         | 
         | I am happy with a rough number on a dish, I do not need
         | precision to know if I am not eating enough calories. Note
         | there are errors on the result and reasoning, but still this
         | dish should be around the ballpark of 500 cal. I figure running
         | this through a larger model might be more accurate. I wondered
         | if maybe I wanted to create an app for that, but I am happy not
         | to.
         | 
         | Yes, simple descriptions could be parsed with NLP, and yes,
         | calories could be inferred with a database.
         | >>> Calorie count of a dish that has: rice, broccoli, two
         | pieces of turkey, and a fri         ... ed egg. Assume this is
         | a normal portion, for instance, there are 80g of rice.. Re
         | ... turn the result in a json structure         <think>
         | Alright, so I need to figure out the calorie count for a dish
         | that includes         rice, broccoli, two pieces of turkey, and
         | a fried egg. The user mentioned it's         a normal portion,
         | like 80g of rice. Hmm, okay, let me break this down step by
         | step.                  First, I should find out how many
         | calories are in each ingredient separately.         Let's start
         | with the rice. Rice is a common staple, so I think 80g of
         | cooked         rice has about 130 calories. I've seen that
         | number before, but I should         double-check to make sure
         | it's accurate.                  Next up is broccoli. Broccoli
         | is pretty low in calories, right? A portion of         around
         | 100g should be about 25-30 calories. Wait, maybe a bit more if
         | it's raw         or cooked differently, but I think for this
         | purpose, 35 calories is reasonable.                  Then there
         | are two pieces of turkey. Turkey can vary based on the cut and
         | whether it's cooked. Let's assume these are regular chicken
         | breast slices, each         around 50g. Each slice would have
         | about 110 calories, so two pieces would be         around 220
         | calories. But I should make sure that I'm not confusing turkey
         | with         another type of meat. Turkey does tend to be a bit
         | higher in calories than         chicken sometimes, but 110 per
         | slice seems right.                  Lastly, the fried egg. A
         | single fried egg is usually about 140-150 calories
         | depending on how it's made. Since there's just one egg, that's
         | around 140         calories. I think that's correct because
         | yolks add a good number of calories         due to fat content.
         | Now, adding all these up: rice (130) + broccoli (35) + turkey
         | (220) + egg         (140). Let me sum them: 130 plus 35 is 165,
         | plus 220 makes 385, and then plus         140 gives 525. So the
         | total would be around 525 calories.                  Wait a
         | second, maybe I should consider if there are any other
         | ingredients or         whether portions were different. For
         | instance, sometimes turkey portions can be         larger or
         | smaller depending on the meal. But since it's specified as two
         | pieces, each at about 50g, that seems okay.
         | Also, considering preparation methods: fried egg might have
         | more calories if         it's done in a certain way, but I
         | think one fried egg is standard. Broccoli's         calorie
         | count could vary slightly, but for simplicity, the 35 seems
         | fine.                  Is there any chance I'm missing
         | something? Maybe adding spices or sauces, but         unless
         | specified, I shouldn't assume that. So the total should be
         | around 525         calories in a normal portion as described.
         | </think>                  ```json         {
         | "calories": {             "rice": 130,             "broccoli":
         | 35,             "turkey": 220,             "fried egg": 140,
         | "total": 525           }         }         ```
        
         | moconnor wrote:
         | I don't see why you believe 2 would be true. I expect a strong
         | correlation between the visual appearance of food and its
         | caloric content etc.
        
           | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
           | > _I expect a strong correlation between the visual
           | appearance of food and its caloric content_
           | 
           | This doesn't pass even simple scrutiny. There are so many
           | caloric ingredients that aren't visible in food. You can't
           | tell just by looking whether a rice dish contains half a
           | stick of butter.
        
             | mr_mitm wrote:
             | Or if it's diet coke or regular coke. Yes, it's drinks, not
             | food, but the same concept applies.
             | 
             | They claim 90% accuracy, whatever that means, but I have my
             | doubts regarding it's usefulness.
        
           | banqjls wrote:
           | This is completely wrong. For example, you can increase the
           | amount of oil or butter in a recipe, doubling or tripling its
           | calorie count, and you would never be able to tell from a
           | picture.
        
             | weird-eye-issue wrote:
             | I imagine it just autofills the information and then you
             | can edit it to make it more accurate
             | 
             | You'd have to be kind of stupid to expect it to actually be
             | 100% accurate for all meals
        
               | anothermoron wrote:
               | Therefore...
               | 
               | 4. I don't need this app.
        
               | arghwhat wrote:
               | The point of the app is to figure out the calories of a
               | meal automatically by taking a photo.
               | 
               | Without knowing the amount of sugar, butter, oil, etc. is
               | used in a dish, one cannot know if a dish is worth 250
               | kilocalories or 750 kilocalories.
               | 
               | If I need to manually fill in details of ingredients and
               | amounts to get to the calories to be have an error margin
               | of less than 100%, then the app is not useful and is at
               | best misleading.
        
               | rsynnott wrote:
               | ... So if you already know the answer you can correct it?
               | I mean, what possible use is that?
        
           | tekla wrote:
           | How does an app know that this piece of chicken cordon bleu
           | is actually filled with more bacon and cheese than chicken?
        
           | djtango wrote:
           | Most restaurants smuggle obscene amounts of butter and sugar
           | into dishes to make them more delicious so you'll come back.
           | It's not unreasonable to assume that every subcomponent of a
           | recipe might have sugar added individually.
           | 
           | In packaged foods, there is a whole science of masking the
           | sugar and fat content to make it more addictive without
           | triggering your inbuilt satiety mechanisms [1]. This is what
           | today's engagement optimisers did for money in the 50/60s.
           | 
           | You could argue that these "innovations" were precisely to
           | subvert the intuition that visual appearance of food (and
           | other natural sensors) can be relied on to assess their
           | nutritional properties.
           | 
           | [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bliss_point_(food)#:~:tex
           | t=T...
        
             | staringback wrote:
             | > Most restaurants smuggle obscene amounts of butter
             | 
             | God I wish that was true. Butter is far too expensive to do
             | that, so restaurants will use the cheapest alternative
             | (usually soybean oil with butter flavoring) instead.
        
           | DontchaKnowit wrote:
           | There is absolutely, unequivocally, 0 chance this can be
           | accurate within any kind of reasonable bounds. I'm guessing
           | you haven't done much calorie tracking if you think this
           | could possibly be true.
           | 
           | I can make two dishes that look identical and have +/- 50%
           | caloric content, easily.
        
           | asdajksah2123 wrote:
           | 1 tbsp of animal fat has about 900 calories.
           | 
           | 1 tbsp of olive oil has 135 calories.
           | 
           | How would the app know which fat the food was cooked in?
        
             | banqjls wrote:
             | That's not true. They have the same amount of calories
             | roughly. It's physically impossible for animal fat to have
             | that many calories. Tallow has 900 calories per 100 grams
             | while olive oil has 884. They are almost pure fat and pure
             | fat has 9 calories per gram.
        
             | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
             | > _1 tbsp of animal fat has about 900 calories._
             | 
             | This is extremely false. Please verify your sources better
             | (and apply a skosh of critical thinking).
             | 
             | > _1 tbsp of olive oil has 135 calories._
             | 
             | This is false too, but at least it's in the right ballpark.
        
               | davidcbc wrote:
               | > This is extremely false. Please verify your sources
               | better
               | 
               | Sorry! I was using Cal AI
        
               | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
               | Ok, that made me laugh.
        
           | xnx wrote:
           | Try telling a picture of diet coke from regular coke apart.
        
         | jwhiles wrote:
         | It's not about being right, it's about appearing to be right
        
           | blitzar wrote:
           | > It's not about being right, it's about appearing to be
           | right
           | 
           | What you need is a LLM.
        
             | fph wrote:
             | Isn't this basically what they used, a multimodal AI?
        
           | briankelly wrote:
           | I think the key insight here is that actually counting
           | calories is not needed by the app's demographic. Possibly
           | just getting them to pay attention to what they are eating is
           | enough for them to see progress or at least feel like they
           | are doing something.
        
       | improbableinf wrote:
       | "You can count calories and sugar content of the meal using just
       | a camera"
       | 
       | "You can have a full self driving car with just a few cameras"
       | 
       | In a way both things are very much similar and the real accuracy
       | is more of a fiction than reality.
        
         | weregiraffe wrote:
         | Self driving car is far more plausible, we drive cars with
         | visual input alone. But a camera can't chemically analyse the
         | insides of your dish.
        
           | improbableinf wrote:
           | That's exactly the point. We drive cars with visual input
           | alone and have so many crashes, injuries and deaths every
           | day.
        
           | 9rx wrote:
           | _> we drive cars with visual input alone._
           | 
           | That's unlikely. Try driving in a snowstorm, where visual
           | inputs become effectively useless, and you quickly realize
           | how much the motion inputs are factored in as well.
        
         | ilikeatari wrote:
         | I legitimately drove full month with near zero interventions in
         | FSD. The second statement is achievable in my opinion. Most
         | people have not experienced hw4 with latest releases.
        
           | financetechbro wrote:
           | FSD with just cameras for input breaks down in times of low
           | visibility (fog, smoke, heavy rain). That's a straightforward
           | fact
        
             | ilikeatari wrote:
             | That's an interesting comment, but I have driven in heavy
             | rain, and it worked just fine. Can you share how you
             | arrived at your conclusion? I mean there is a limit to
             | where the obstruction is so intense that even human cannot
             | drive I get that but its actually performing fine for me in
             | heavy rain that is still drivable for a human.
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | They are very different problems. You can attach every kind of
         | sensor to the phone and get HD images, lidar scan, 3D model,
         | heat signature and whatever other signal you want, but you
         | still won't be able to figure out calories in a piece of food
         | without breaking it apart at a molecular level. There's just
         | too much hidden information. What sensor will tell you how many
         | tablespoons of oil the chef used to fry onions for the sauce?
         | Heck the chef himself probably won't be able to tell you.
        
           | deepnotderp wrote:
           | Hyperspectral camera?
        
       | cedws wrote:
       | >But he looked around. "We were surrounded by people that were in
       | their late 20s or 30s all day. And I realized that if I didn't go
       | to college, this is what life would be like."
       | 
       | Lol, I can relate. I started working in an office when I was 16,
       | now 24, and regretting wasting my youth grinding when I could
       | have been having fun in a period of your life you only get to
       | experience once.
       | 
       | Don't grow up too fast kids. Make stupid decisions and ride out
       | your youth as long as you can afford to.
        
         | vonneumannstan wrote:
         | >>But he looked around. "We were surrounded by people that were
         | in their late 20s or 30s all day. And I realized that if I
         | didn't go to college, this is what life would be like."
         | 
         | Its just a marketing stunt. They complain about not getting
         | into Harvard but he could literally rent a penthouse in
         | Cambridge, hang out on the campus throw big parties and get 90%
         | of the experience while supposedly running a 30M ARR company.
         | Absolutely no benefit to actually enrolling except ego.
        
         | 0_____0 wrote:
         | You're 24? Don't take this the wrong way but you have loads of
         | time to do "youth shit."
         | 
         | As you get older, people expect you to be more competent in
         | life and work. If you leave work for two years to bike around
         | the world, it'll be a fabulous adventure and will in the grand
         | scheme of things have little consequence down the road. Try
         | that when you have a kid!
        
         | sureglymop wrote:
         | You're just defining your own fate here if you think 24 is so
         | much older and different than 16. But also, perhaps your
         | situation now would be different without the grind you went
         | through? Instead of regretting anything I think you could just
         | try to enjoy your youth now.
        
       | nsoonhui wrote:
       | The comments from HNers in this case are interesting.
       | 
       | Usually if a teenage hacker builds something, the HNers would
       | respond with enthusiasm, but then, this is a guy who builds
       | *something* and *actually* makes a good business out of it, at
       | the same time maintains his high school life, and all we have is
       | skepticism and discouragement.
        
         | spzb wrote:
         | It's almost as if people are reading the article and critically
         | evaluating the product.
        
         | rsynnott wrote:
         | It is _not_ a good business; the thing does not, and cannot,
         | work.
        
           | azan_ wrote:
           | It's good business, just bad product.
        
       | jashmatthews wrote:
       | While technologically cool the app is bullshit. 90% accurate
       | isn't accurate enough for the job and it's effectively making
       | shit up.
       | 
       | Are you eating a 10% calorie deficit or a 10% calorie surplus?
       | Cal AI can't tell you.
       | 
       | Not possible to know accurately enough from a picture.
       | Potentially ever.
        
         | bberenberg wrote:
         | My understanding is that even nutrition packaging is often off
         | by up to 30%. Sorry, no source, just what I've heard a number
         | of times. If I want to diet I typically build this in and it
         | works well. If they're actually off by 10% that's not terrible.
         | 
         | But I tried one of these apps years ago and it went a step
         | further than photos. It used the front facing camera on iPhones
         | to build a 3d model of the food and measure its volume as well.
         | Even that was off by more up to 50% not 10%.
         | 
         | The interesting thing I found, and it's obvious when you read
         | it but not when you're trying to diet, is if you don't layer
         | food on top of itself or other food, you (and a camera based
         | calorie counter) will have a much better understanding of how
         | much you're eating. Bowls / mounds of food will deceive you.
        
           | tekla wrote:
           | There is no way its off that much.
           | 
           | Standard for cutting is about 500 calories deficit, for 1lbs
           | lost a week. Lets say 2500 calories daily standard. That's
           | 20%. If food packaging was off by 30%, food nutrition
           | planning would be worthless, but we know it isn't because we
           | see fairly consistent results from weightlifters (assuming
           | they're actually weighing their food and not eyeballing/using
           | a PoS app like this)
        
           | yorwba wrote:
           | NIST says "in general NIST's measurements are accurate to
           | within 2% to 5% for nutrient elements (such as sodium,
           | calcium and potassium), macronutrients (fats, proteins and
           | carbohydrates), amino acids and fatty acids. Its measurements
           | are accurate to within 5% to 10% for water-soluble vitamins
           | (such as vitamin C) and 10% to 15% for fat-soluble vitamins
           | (such as vitamin D)." https://www.nist.gov/how-do-you-
           | measure-it/how-do-you-know-y...
           | 
           | Maybe there's something where they're off by 30%, but how
           | many people even track how much vitamin D they get from food?
        
       | krisoft wrote:
       | Had a friend who came to me with the same idea. In challenge of
       | the idea I sent a picture of some chopped cucumbers and tomatoes,
       | and an other picture with the same chopped vegetables drizzled
       | with a copious amount of olive oil. I asked if they can tell
       | which one is which. The difference was hundreds of calories and
       | you could not tell which one is which (least of all how much oil
       | there is on the one with the oil.)
       | 
       | That of course feels like a "weird" edge case, but it illustrates
       | the general problem that butter/oil/sugars can pack a lot of
       | calories and have no or almost no visual signature.
        
         | robotnixon wrote:
         | That just sounds like the difference between a salad with and
         | without dressing on it. Maybe not so weird.
        
         | everyone wrote:
         | The 1st issue I'd think of would be scale.. eg. identical
         | looking plate of food in EU vs USA. The images might look
         | identical but the USA one would be scaled up and contain much
         | more calories. Everything that could be in the image for scale
         | reference would also be scaled up along with the food.
        
           | tracker1 wrote:
           | This is where something like a fork on the plate/bowl might
           | help.
        
         | heymijo wrote:
         | You're right, but I think the general public is largely
         | ignorant about calories and nutrition. Even basics like 4 cals
         | per gram of protein and carbohydrate, 7 for alcohol, 9 for
         | fats. Or even what a carbohydrate really is versus a "sugar",
         | which people talk about as bad.
         | 
         | There's a sweet spot for an app that is inaccurate with a
         | market that wants it but doesn't understand how inaccurate it
         | is.
         | 
         | Kind of like how I could vibe code an app, get it to "work",
         | think it's great and be ignorant of the many ways it will break
         | or isn't working that a knowledgeable developer could.
        
           | mrguyorama wrote:
           | The general public's understanding of food is still stuck in
           | 1990s "destroy all fats (and completely ignore the sugar we
           | replaced it with)" diet culture.
           | 
           | The fact that people still believe in reducing fat _as it 's
           | own goal_ (instead of being an easy way to reduce calorie
           | content) is a testament to how bad the public is at
           | identifying fact from fiction.
           | 
           | Then you have shit like the influencer foods, "Feastables"
           | and "Hydration beverage" Prime, which is just flat soda. It's
           | pathetic.
           | 
           | Or think of all the dude bros who insist on dry scooping cup
           | fulls of protein+caffeine powder, and going home to gorge
           | themselves on two pounds of chicken breast, and yet doing
           | absurdly normal amounts of weightlifting or exercise that
           | requires no modifications to their already protein overloaded
           | American diet.
           | 
           | Diet culture is what is fucking American health. People read
           | fucking tabloids that bad-faith regurgitate poorly done
           | "science", funded by the council for selling more food, and
           | insist that since "Woman's Health" says that scientists say
           | chocolate both kills and saves you, scientists are dumb and
           | know nothing, even though THE ACTUAL SCIENCE NEVER CONCLUDED
           | ANYTHING, because the scientific paper was just an
           | observational study!
        
             | tracker1 wrote:
             | Related is the fear some have of Saturated Fats and Meat.
             | So many people don't even realize that the body does need
             | some Saturated Fats, or that fats are often a mix of them
             | and vary by the species, breed and how they're fed.
             | 
             | It doesn't help in how far some foods have been bred in the
             | past century and a half in particular. Or how different
             | people with different genetics may react to certain foods.
        
         | hombre_fatal wrote:
         | Everyone keeps using this example, but you have the exact same
         | problem calorie counting any food that might be lathered in
         | fat. It's why people underestimate their calorie intake by
         | 30%+.
         | 
         | You could level the same criticism at Cronometer and
         | MacroFactor when you try to log food you received at a
         | restaurant. Yet those apps are still useful (and I think
         | requisite) for knowing what you're eating. And you should
         | probably 1.5x the calorie estimation when you eat out.
         | 
         | What's interesting is whether this app can accurately estimate
         | food at all. If it can, then that's a huge win and you can add
         | your own buffer zone for oils like you already have to do when
         | you count calories. ...Or chill on the butter and restaurant
         | food when you're supposedly trying to lose weight.
        
           | krisoft wrote:
           | > Everyone keeps using this example, but you have the exact
           | same problem calorie counting any food that might be lathered
           | in fat.
           | 
           | Not really. In practice you need to know the ingredients to
           | estimate the caloric value. Either because you prepared the
           | meal, or because someone who wrote the recipe of it
           | calculated and wrote it on the packaging/menu.
           | 
           | > If it can, then that's a huge win
           | 
           | But that's the point of the example. That it can't. If it
           | could, that would be good. But it can't do it, and not
           | because the app is deficient in some way, but because the
           | necessary information is not available in the image.
           | 
           | > Or chill on the butter and restaurant food when you're
           | supposedly trying to lose weight.
           | 
           | Yes of course. And that is one of the things you learn when
           | you do calorie counting. The practice drives home that
           | message, and many others. But you are not going to learn that
           | if the app hides the signal from you.
        
           | davidcbc wrote:
           | > What's interesting is whether this app can accurately
           | estimate food at all.
           | 
           | Spoiler: It can't. It is physically impossible to determine
           | calories from pictures of food.
        
         | FartyMcFarter wrote:
         | That's not a weird edge case at all. Adding oil to food is one
         | of the most common ways to add calories (intentionally or not).
         | 
         | A salad wouldn't even be the hardest case to detect, since raw
         | vegetables don't soak up as much oil as other kinds of food.
        
         | ralfd wrote:
         | > In challenge of the idea
         | 
         | This was technically correct but missed out on a viral app and
         | millions of revenue?
        
       | Beijinger wrote:
       | I considered another app with a buddy but we never build it. A
       | food diary for people with medical problems.
       | 
       | Take a picture of everything you eat and correlate it with
       | symptoms. Have AI figure out what may be a trigger.
       | 
       | (I have a super rare food disease that took years to figure out
       | and made my life unbearable).
        
       | lurkingllama wrote:
       | Anyone who has participated in calorie-tracking for an extended
       | period of time can tell you that the visual appearance of food
       | can be highly misleading to the number of calories in it.
       | 
       | I'm all for making it easier for people to lose weight but this
       | app may honestly have the reverse effect. If the app estimates
       | calories too low (and therefore the individual eats more), many
       | people will get frustrated with the lack of progress and give up.
       | If the app estimates too high, the individual will lose weight,
       | but diet fatigue and other negative side effects of being at a
       | >500 calorie deficit may make the diet too difficult to maintain.
        
         | mapt wrote:
         | A lot of the testimonial photos for this show the AI literally
         | deciphering the text Nutrition Information label.
         | 
         | Any other interpretive situation based solely on a camera has
         | so many inherent flaws as to render this almost useless.
        
           | staringback wrote:
           | The nutritional information label that lists the calories in
           | the food? What is the point of that?
        
             | mapt wrote:
             | Steelmanning this: You take your phone out and snap a
             | picture and it gets added to a running total without typing
             | into a tiny keyboard or doing any math. You consult your
             | total next time you're thinking of eating.
             | 
             | Critiquing: You still need to figure out serving sizes -
             | it's going to need to ask how many servings. Nutrition
             | labels also aren't available for any number of things.
        
           | ge96 wrote:
           | I think even if you have volume factored in like
           | photogrammetry/lidar, the inside of the food could be
           | something else too like a chunk of meat inside potatoes
        
         | _bin_ wrote:
         | I actually went over this recently with someone who wanted to
         | build something similar. The conclusion was this is a very
         | difficult problem to solve, probably intractable to some
         | extent. You can't see the complete composition of the food with
         | a standard camera. E.g. I make a salad which is maybe 300
         | calories. Then I sprinkle some croutons and bacon on top, which
         | will mostly be in the middle. Then I put dressing on it, which
         | is hard to estimate. That dressing hides the bacon and croutons
         | and, since it contains a lot of oil, could seriously skew the
         | measurement one way or the other. Now I mix it all around and
         | the AI can't tell how much dressing was used at all.
         | 
         | I pick this example because I've seen specifically this cause
         | problems for people trying to lose weight. They think their
         | eating a salad, not realizing they've thrown an extra 500
         | calories on top.
         | 
         | Another case: I sit down to breakfast, having made myself eggs
         | and toast. One of if not the largest contributor to my calorie
         | intake will be the amount of butter on my toast. If I use four
         | pats that will probably exceed my calorie intake from eggs. If
         | I use one, not as much. I sincerely doubt it's realistic to
         | tell the difference with any sort of precision.
        
           | tracker1 wrote:
           | Flashback to "Real Men of Genious" ads ... "Here's to you,
           | Mister Giant Taco Salad Inventor."
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXWq2AVlrsY
        
         | tracker1 wrote:
         | Anecdote of one... about 8 years ago I put a lot of effort into
         | losing weight... when I was eatng a 1500 calorie/day diet, I
         | wasn't losing weight... per a nutritionist friend who looked at
         | what I was eating suggested closer to 2800 (6'1" tall, 370# at
         | the time) and when I did, I started losing weight. Note this
         | was combined with crossfit 3-4 days a week both on the lower
         | and higher calorie intake.
         | 
         | If you have a really dysregulated metabolism, your body can
         | definitely work against you when consuming too little.
        
       | siva7 wrote:
       | Am i right in assuming this is app is just an openai prompt
       | wrapped as a app?
        
         | acc_297 wrote:
         | If so then what a colossal waste of our planetary carbon
         | budget. I don't know what the backend on this app is (maybe it
         | was done properly i really hope so) but surely there is a
         | solution which maintains or surpasses the accuracy of an LLM
         | and uses <1% of the compute resources.
         | 
         | Like a small vision model combined with the size/measurements
         | data from the AR sensors modern phones come with and an open
         | source caloric values database should achieve the 90% accuracy
         | they are claiming.
         | 
         | Ronald Wright writes about "progress traps" in A Short History
         | of Progress. It's been awhile since I read that but I think
         | about it more and more these days with AI products on the rise.
        
           | mrguyorama wrote:
           | No, this is a completely unsolvable problem with just a
           | camera.
           | 
           | You cannot differentiate a high calorie meal from a low
           | calorie meal on sight alone.
           | 
           | The waste is selling a lie, enabled by AI bullshit artists
           | and the public's seeming inability to understand that the US
           | has no legal (or market most of the time) requirements to be
           | truthful, upfront, or honest in marketing.
           | 
           | Like people just take this shit at face value and I don't
           | understand how you can live in the US for more than a few
           | years and not recognize that marketing is just lies, like not
           | even smart or clever lies.
        
       | jake_morrison wrote:
       | I thought about doing this years ago, but without AI, the only
       | way was to have people do the analysis. I thought this was bad
       | karma, as I would end up paying people in Bangladesh to look at
       | the stuff that Americans eat.
        
         | 0_____0 wrote:
         | A lot of what Americans eat is kinda grim? I couldn't eat the
         | sausage at the hotel breakfast in Little Rock this morning
         | because it tasted like new vinyl smells.
         | 
         | Wrt Bangladesh... I imagine the job might be a little harder
         | during Ramadan.
        
       | goodasgold444 wrote:
       | I'll bite - I'm an early adopter, and paying user, I paid for the
       | year, but won't renew. For what it's worth, the app UI is dead
       | simple and it makes it easier to track macros. I'll adjust the
       | inputs to what I know I'm eating, and I rarely depend on the "AI
       | camera" I usually just use the UPC barcode scanner. I'm mainly
       | focused on protein intake and making sure I hit those goals. It
       | does a decent job with simple foods, which is healthier for me to
       | eat. I'll break each ingredient down, combine them into meals,
       | then save them. Rinse and repeat for tracking. It's better than a
       | spreadsheet, and I get to see the photos of what I'm eating.
       | 
       | That being said, I'm not going to renew next year. But there is
       | something to this product that is not the "AI" but the simplicity
       | vs. MyFitnessPal which has a ton of features I don't really need.
       | 
       | The critiques are good, but for me, the simplicity of the app is
       | the most attractive part for me.
        
         | volkk wrote:
         | so why are you not renewing?
        
           | kelvinjps10 wrote:
           | Yeah I didn't get either the reason for not renewing
        
       | tjpnz wrote:
       | Been keeping a food diary for several months now. I did have to
       | spend a bit of time at the beginning working out the calorie
       | content of the food I eat. But after that it's mostly just copy +
       | paste - turned out I was far more of a creature of habit than I
       | thought.
       | 
       | If you want to derive any benefit from doing this you should
       | really be trying to get your numbers correct from the start. I
       | wouldn't leave that to a LLM.
        
       | bilater wrote:
       | Many people will analyze this from a tech perspective. I urge you
       | not to. This isn't about whether the technology is good or bad.
       | The real reason they succeeded is their mastery of marketing,
       | particularly TikTok and influencer marketing. Understanding
       | distribution is far more important than knowing how to build
       | something, and this is truer now than ever before. I know it
       | stings but its the truth.
        
         | balls187 wrote:
         | I didn't analyze this for either: rahter what is what is the
         | typical outcome for young humans who achieve a high degree of
         | success/fame before their prefrontal cortex is fully formed.
         | 
         | As we understand more about brain development in kids, I think
         | and under studied aspect are kids who got access to a lot more
         | money than normal typical kids have, and the results such
         | wealth brings.
        
           | echelon wrote:
           | > I think and under studied aspect are kids who got access to
           | a lot more money than normal typical kids have, and the
           | results such wealth brings.
           | 
           | As opposed to the kids born on planets without atmospheric
           | oxygen, of course. Those kids don't stand a chance.
           | 
           | There's always some advantage others have. Money, good looks,
           | distribution, connections, right place right time.
           | 
           | "Wealth inequality" isn't going to disappear overnight, and
           | lamenting about it won't get us closer to success.
           | 
           | We're all dropped into the Darwinian gradient landscape. Some
           | of us have better starting positions. While we sit and wait
           | for policy decisions to make things easier, our job remains
           | to find gradients that aren't too steep, aren't over-explored
           | by the masses, and that give us some modicum of joy to spend
           | our lives upon.
           | 
           | The minnows and gazelles have it much worse than us. Praying
           | mantises, anglerfish, and the hosts for the parasitoid wasps
           | are practically living in a daily Kafkaesque horror.
           | Meanwhile we're in our own dopamine drip Disneyland with
           | near-infinite degrees of freedom and plenty of years on the
           | clock (for most of us).
           | 
           | Seneca said some good things about this.
        
             | lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote:
             | I think you missed the part about "[achieving] a high
             | degree of success", in particular the achievement. They are
             | referring to young people who make a successful business
             | rather than those who are born to parents who made a
             | successful business.
        
         | gamblor956 wrote:
         | The point of looking at this from a technical perspective
         | though is that the underlying tech doesn't actually work, and
         | it's just a smoke and mirrors game built on marketing.
         | 
         | Like Theranos. And Nikola. And Fyre Festival. Etc.
         | 
         | Age is irrelevant, unless we're trying to tell youngsters that
         | fraud is an acceptable means to get ahead in life. But then
         | again given our current political environment maybe that _is_
         | what we 're trying to tell the next generation.
         | 
         | EDIT: the app now also just reads nutrition labels as a
         | backstop. Nutrition labels _already_ include the calorie data,
         | so the app isn 't doing anything there.
        
           | mrguyorama wrote:
           | > But then again given our current political environment
           | maybe that is what we're trying to tell the next generation.
           | 
           | There's no trying.
           | 
           | The US has played "Just grift your way to money" as a
           | standard means of operating since at least the dotcom boom. A
           | reason so many young and poorly educated people jump at
           | obvious MLM type scams and other scams is because they feel
           | that _everything_ is a scam, so surely they can get in on it
           | too, right?
           | 
           | And everything IS a scam. Coke doubled in price in the past 5
           | years. I promise you their costs did not double. Their costs
           | are Labor (highly automated), water (they almost always have
           | sweetheart deals for dirt cheap water, cheaper than you pay),
           | and one of the most subsidized commodities available, HFCS,
           | or alternatively, a sprinkle of dirt cheap chemicals for
           | their diet sodas.
           | 
           | People feel that, even when they don't understand or even
           | recognize it.
           | 
           | People recognize that the US has been a scammy free for all
           | for decades now. Everyone for themselves, fuck you, got mine.
           | 
           | We are on like the third generation raised this way. The
           | people who took "Greed is good" to heart had kids, and raised
           | them with it as a core principle.
           | 
           | Jordan Belfort, the guy who Wolf Of Wall Street is based on
           | and spent time in prison for scamming his clients in
           | basically the same way modern crypto pump and dumps work, now
           | sells out auditoriums as a _motivational speaker_ for fucks
           | sake.
           | 
           | The kids LOOK UP TO SCAMMERS
        
       | yqiang wrote:
       | I'm working on an app in this area [1], and I've spent a lot of
       | time exploring how to responsibly use AI for food tracking.
       | 
       | My conclusion is that while AI is excellent for augmenting your
       | tracking experience, it's not yet reliable enough to be the sole
       | tracking method. Consistency is key to successful food tracking,
       | and AI can certainly help users avoid the common issue of missing
       | a meal and losing momentum. However, inaccuracies, like
       | consistently being off by 100-200 calories per day, can
       | significantly impact results, especially for those on lower-
       | calorie diets (like 1,200-1,500 calories/day, which is common for
       | many women due to their physical size).
       | 
       | With FitBee I landed on communicating to the user that these are
       | estimates and you probably shouldn't use it as your primary
       | method of tracking calories.
       | 
       | [1] https://apps.apple.com/us/app/fitbee-calorie-macro-
       | counter/i...
        
       | pfannkuchen wrote:
       | I propose a browser plugin to display calories on all social
       | media food selfie posts.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-04-04 23:02 UTC)