Comment · Sun, May 10, 2015 · Ceretropic
A Note Regarding Ceretropic's Caffeine/NALT
Original post in this thread
[deleted] · 19 points
There's been a lot of recent activity here regarding Ceretropic's new ionically bonded Caffeine/NALT solution. Specifically, whether the claims made about this solution are, in fact legitimate. I'd like to make a few comments, and requests:
As someone who has dealt with startups in the past and the patents surrounding them, I can assure you that the patent system isn't the most fun experience. However, it's necessary to protect IP and new methodologies so that someone's hard work isn't stolen and reimplemented by someone else in a week (for profit). Without this, there's no incentive to invent anything new -- just wait for someone else to invent something and steal their idea.
As someone who is part of this community and is looking to potentially ingest this product (correction: just ingested, mine came in a couple hours ago) it seems reasonable to request secondary, unbiased verifications of the claims made my /u/MisterYouAreSoDumb. Just as /u/MisterYouAreSoDumb requested (and eventually coordinated) product testings for some of True Life Research's (TLR) products, the community has the right to request product testings for Ceretropic's new products. However, given the above, I…
What they were answering
[deleted] · 2 points
Please read the entire post, along with the rest of the comments. As I've already stated, I bought this product -- got mine in today, used it, tried it, liked it, and have no complaints. I'm working on a startup right now based on some new ideas we have for making certain hardware perform better using algorithms we've developed. I keep that description vague because I, too, am waiting on patents. However, when I do demos I still show people the end result. It verifies that what I've created is legitimate, that it's an improvement, and that the results are sound.
I am not going to be the guy in 10 years giving a sob story about how everything was stolen from him, because he wanted people to be better humans than they actually are.
To an extent I understand, but I feel like the post is over-dramatizing the situation. Actually, I feel like several posts regarding this new product have too much drama. You don't have to explain the whole patent people-are-gonna-steal-my-stuff thing to me; I've been there, I'm there again, I get it.
Here's one of my comments for below:
>Given that he says it took him two years and countless failures to produce this product, doesn't it seem reasonable that people question whether he got it right this time around?
Doesn't this seem like a legitimate request? People want to know that you succeeded this time. For 99% of the people asking questions,…
u/MisterYouAreSoDumb · Ceretropic
I am still confused as to what would constitute a checksum in this case. I can get you the analysis of the Caffeine and NALT powder if you want. As to whether it is a success or not, it being stable in solution, and giving the effects we want, is our measure of that. I agree this situation is overly-dramatized. It's a Caffeine/NALT solution. Its effects were very surprising to us, since we were aiming more for stability than increased efficacy. The measure of whether or not it is right this time, is looking at the solution, and trying it to see if the effects are good. The reports of that are a resounding yes. I am not sure how I can quantify that into a number or test.
It took me two years of work, because I was missing a fundamental piece of the equation. Jason had an idea before he died, and I got it to work. We worked backwards from there, altering and perfecting things, till we got everything stable. The two year comment was more a personal look into the effort we put into it, and the emotion I was feeling having it finally work.
It's not that I don't want to give you a checksum. It's that I have no idea what people mean by that. Can I just put up the analysis of the Caffeine and NALT powder? Short of explaining the whole process, that is about the best thing I can do. I could send a bottle off to a lab, and pay for expensive testing to tell me what I already know is in the solution. That just seems crazy to me, though. This is not a new substance we created. It's just a novel way to put it into solution, which alters the stability and effects. It's obviously in solution, and does what people expect it to. Other than the purity of the ingredients used, I don't know what people want me to prove.