Wait so they have their conversations with legal listened to and transcribed by random people at Rev? Considering the things one usually talks with lawyers about, it may not be super great to share that with random people outside the company.
This is actually a really bad idea because of attorney-client privilege issues. By having a third party record the call, Uberconference or Gmail or Rev or Zapier itself, and it being sent forward to several other services, Soylent most likely waived any claim of privilege they may have in the event of litigation.<p>If you are a company considering doing this I would be very cautious.<p>I commend the hack, but unfortunately the legal world of ethics isn't moving as fast as technology.
Lawyers typically bill in increments of 6 minutes.<p>So when I had a question for my lawyer, I spent a few minutes polishing it up and sent an email. The response was usually billed for one or two increments.<p>It doesn't require a Rube Goldberg device to turn text into text.<p>And it turns out that good lawyers are good at writing. It's as central to their job as coding is to ours.
Soylent seems like an ecommerce dev firm with a food product on the side. This article is more detailed than anything they've released about their actual Soylent formulation development and testing procedure.
Just curious. Did they let the lawyers know the call is being recorded (it might even be illegal not to do so in some states)? and how did the lawyers react?
This is a great post. I'd love to hear more about multistage zaps people use. I'd also enjoy a post that talked about different zaps that zapier uses in house.
> "That couldn't be further from the truth. We drink Soylent because it gives us the time to do other things that we love."<p>I find this strange that he acts like food is an obstacle (all of the time). What about the joy of enjoying your food?