Why is it people here seem so unusually sceptical?
It's expensive (but not really, only compared to knives - a $500 GPU isn't expensive). It's probably mostly good in certain niches and using a $10 knife that's sharpened properly is probably 95% as good in almost every application, and using a $10 knife that is only reasonably well sharpened is probably 90% as good. Slicing stuff for hotpot or yakiniku or Korean BBQ is what I thought of when I saw the ad, while for a lot of things it's probably not worth it. But a lot of stuff is like that - good in a niche, OK elsewhere, and there's always a cheaper option that's more flexible and almost as good even in the niche.
I feel like hn is upset by the lack of marketing. This looks like a direct sales ad that you'd get on Facebook, rather than the hype research marketing that mostly targets the b2b types who mostly dwell here? The marketing isn't the kind of marketing they normally get targeted by, so they notice it's marketing?
I notice this on other forums. If marketing isn't slick and well targeted, people get upset and suspicious because it's marketing. But functionally, they're not upset because it's marketing (almost everything is), they're upset because it's not enough marketing, and functionally they want more marketing that targets them better.
I think it's because it seems like a Juicero to anyone who uses knives to make dinner regularly. We're fascinated by tech, and sure, I'd try this, but I bet anyone who has prepped with a knife for hours per week is probably pretty skeptical on the practicality here.
A sharpened piece of metal has been reliable for thousands of years and will continue to remain so. For new tech, I am also a fan of the ceramic knives out there for vegetables, as they hold a razors edge much longer than metal (albeit are far more brittle - I use them for veggies only, no meat).
One can buy a decent steel chef's knife, a ceramic one, lose them both, buy them again, buy a sharpening stone and a strop for the price of one of these. On one hand, the sci-fi emergence of the vibroblade or something in the kitchen would be cool. On the other, it could be a $500 vibrating slapchop[1].
> It's expensive (but not really, only compared to knives - a $500 GPU isn't expensive).
No, it's really expensive. $400 is nearly a week's pay for an hourly worker in much of the US. For many on this site it might be less than a day's labor but that's not the general case.
The lack of trust is probably because knives seem to be a favorite product of shysters. Selling expensive knives that promise the moon and wow the audience with cool knife tricks just reeks of fast talking late-night infomercial salesman trying to get over on grandma. The tech looks cool, but the presentation is off-putting.
You're not thinking like a marketing executive. The people who make $400 a week are not the target audience for this product. It's that simple. Not everything is made for Walmart shoppers.
"Sure, people claim the kitchen knife has been a solved problem
for hundreds of years, but what if there was a kitchen knife that had a battery inside and cost $500?"
And if this version of the knife doesn't connect to the cloud, the next one will.
Everything has pros and cons. You haven't said a single pro. You haven't added any real cons to what I said, and made up hypothetical ones.
It's a sales pitch so you're saying why you wouldn't buy it. I'm not ordering one either, 500 is a bit steep for me. If he just showed off the technology, I suspect people here would be more enthusiastic about it, even if you wouldn't bother to buy it yourself.
I'm not saying you're wrong (at the price point), but that the framing of whether we're going to buy it is a result of the marketing.
> if this version of the knife doesn't connect to the cloud, the next one will.
That's just ugly cynicism. And I'm willing to bet a good amount of money the "next one" from this company won't. But it doesn't matter because this one doesn't and we're talking about this one, not some hypothetical that may never arrive.
If the rechargeable vibrator-knife becomes a fixture of kitchens around the world, it will prove the accusation of 'cynicism'. Until then, whether it's cynicism or sobriety is a matter of opinion.
I wrote in another comment that I think this pitch is a 10/10, but I think I understand the skepticism.
There's something about this sort of product that feels inherently gimmicky. I can't quite explain why, maybe because it's too good to be true, maybe because it's a kitchen appliance, maybe it has something to do with the vibrations.
For instance, my girlfriend has this eye cream applicator(?) that vibrates... for some reason. Is it a gimmick? I don't really know, but there isn't a research paper in the world that would convince me it isn't.
Anyways, this video had me hooked, and I would 100% try this out if I could. But I would never buy it without trying first.
I think it’s a really cool product. I would happily own one. The problem I have with it is that $400 is a LOT for a chef knife. A great knife and an awesome sharpener can be easily had for $150, or $250 if you get a top of the line sharpener. That knife will last you a lifetime. How long will this knife last? What happens when the battery runs out of lifespan. What about when the motor dies? If this was closer to $250, I’d be much more likely to buy it.
> using a $10 knife that is only reasonably well sharpened is probably 90% as good
I think the value proposition is in the idea that you don't have to sharpen this knife as often as with a normal knife, and that the performance is consistent.
The non stickiness is also a huge value proposition, because that is an annoying and time consuming aspect of any cutting.
We are usually skeptical. And I don't know why a weird ad for a smart-knife has gotten to the top-page of HN.
We don't like "buzz" and "hype"... if it's truly a great technology we can buy one a year from now. Not trusting a commercial to be honest isn't undue skepticism.
It's expensive (but not really, only compared to knives - a $500 GPU isn't expensive). It's probably mostly good in certain niches and using a $10 knife that's sharpened properly is probably 95% as good in almost every application, and using a $10 knife that is only reasonably well sharpened is probably 90% as good. Slicing stuff for hotpot or yakiniku or Korean BBQ is what I thought of when I saw the ad, while for a lot of things it's probably not worth it. But a lot of stuff is like that - good in a niche, OK elsewhere, and there's always a cheaper option that's more flexible and almost as good even in the niche.
I feel like hn is upset by the lack of marketing. This looks like a direct sales ad that you'd get on Facebook, rather than the hype research marketing that mostly targets the b2b types who mostly dwell here? The marketing isn't the kind of marketing they normally get targeted by, so they notice it's marketing?
I notice this on other forums. If marketing isn't slick and well targeted, people get upset and suspicious because it's marketing. But functionally, they're not upset because it's marketing (almost everything is), they're upset because it's not enough marketing, and functionally they want more marketing that targets them better.