These guys are making a $700 toy with a subscription fee and people are acting like they're designing solar panels for African villages. Buddy they don't deserve any charity or benefit of the doubt.
Exactly. It’s micro-aggressions towards MKBHD. And it makes them money as they are making a controversy out of him after all others had the same feeling for the exact AI clip technology. The double standards.
He's doing the complete opposite of unethical. He's being very ethical by saying that a $700 pre tax product with a $24 pre tax mandatory monthly subscription to not make it even more of a paperweight is a complete and total pos with thorough proof compared to just using the free inbuilt voice assistant on your phone. Seriously everything good is now demonized and everything bad is sanctified. The freaking society we live in now.
not to be that guy but it wasnt so long ago that linus caught a lot of hate for doing a similarly honest review that "killed" a product. I know parts of the video were wrong, but even after knowing the mistakes - I can only say the Monoblock was a piece of shit product who no one should have bought.
@@Jrakula10 definitely a good thing, the less companies there are making shit products the better, and the quicker they go the better. Not the reviewers fault at all in the end tho
Plenty of companies that make or made good products have gone under, it isn't binary. You can have a company with a good product fail because of marketing and you can have a trash product be huge with good marketing. Let's not pretend this is a universal truth k?
Funny how if they scam you with a bad product, they will not respond after they got your sweet sweet money, but if someone calls them out, now that is unethical?
@@donkey7921 More specifically, people who are overly invested in the AI hype train. The same people that told everyone they were dumb about crypto and NFTs if they didn't jump on board IMMEDIATELY. The same people that told everyone they were dumb about the metaverse if they didn't jump on board IMMEDIATELY. These people are just mad that people are saying the truth about AI products at the moment. They're garbage. They don't do what they're promised to do and they all want us to buy into the hype and fork over money on the promise of 'They'll get better!' without giving any plan on HOW or WHEN.
@@hlmc00this sentence is sounds like it’s spoken from an alternate universe Mike Tyson who was never a boxing champion and instead devotes his energy to complaining about Apple on UA-cam.
the only harm marquess ever made to that company is probably its share value dropping, so most of the haters are probably just the investors fuming at mkhd since they were left with holding the bag lol
That’s the main story here. None of these headlines came out defending the product and mentioning anything it’s actually useful for, or actually trying to prove the review was false or wrong. Just full blown attacks on the reviewer and accusing the review of bankrupting a company.
exactly, this is why i DON'T watch marques videos. He is such an apple and tesla fanboy you can't trust him in being objective, or at least trying to be.
@@kerolokerokerolobut he quite literally gave a bad review about the cyber truck and I don’t even think he personally uses Apple. I’ve only ever seen him with Samsung but maybe I just came late to the party
Since when giving your honest opinion as a reviewer is "unethical"? Since when being a corporate shill became the morally good behavior? This is soooooo weird.....
"It's simple, disagreeing with a corporation is equivalent to being an anarchist terrorist, because they are the law and system of order of society, so disagreeing means you are trying to cause chaos and destroy peace and order. Dystopian capitalism controls the world, and trying to fight against that is going against the established order." -How to Reframe Normal Consumer Behavior as Controversial and Control the Narrative, by Dr. Shill.
Depends on how "honest" you are, you can sometimes see reviews about stupidly expensive products and they are like "wow the quality is amazing" and they don't go out to say don't buy it, but then they see another expensive product and they go out of their way to convince people not to buy it. If you give advice do it every time or don't do it and just show the product, otherwise it seems fishy.
Because there is a trend of clueless tech Bros going all in on the latest crazes and fads. They can't afford to be wrong, so If anyone says that they are doing something wrong, those people are the enemy.
@@joeylalonde3458Bad is subjective. Most companies don’t intentionally release bad products. Consumers determine that. Look at Apple products. They make good products overall but look how easy it is for so many people to say how “bad” they are. On the other side of the coin, you can have a company produce new products that are different but because we, as reviewers and consumers, have certain expectations about how something should work or performer, they may come up short, which is the case with this AI pin that Marques reviewed. The best anyone can expect from a product review is that the reviewer will be honest, no matter the outcome. However we take it (agree or disagree) doesn’t necessarily mean the product is actually good or bad.
If something is a shit product, it should fail. Period. Otherwise, it's a scam. If telling the truth is unethical, I don't wanna live on this planet anymore.
@brent19832009That country is an exception. The people there have high suicidal tendencies when hearing something even remotely insulting. Other countries are brazen enough and can handle real criticism.
I recently had a brand who sent me a review unit tell me - if there are things about the product that aren't great, to NOT publish the video but tell them about them personally. The nerve! 😂
@@Goatfer if that was on the NDA, I would not review the product 🤣 (edit: if it were a prototype, that disclaimer goes to the very front of the vid, and a reminder at the end that it’s a prototpe and to stay tuned for the actual review.
I am just an audience member here, but what if it was something they could fix, relatively quickly. I know that is pretty uncommon, but why put out a negative review, especially before release if packaging issues or something can be fixed and then after it is a better product for everyone and everyone can know after.. IDK this the wierd edge case that goes through my head.
@@DallasATrain7 Still many customers would get a product with issues and they wouldn't have the reach to make the company notice, like everyone has said if you don't want a bad review just make sure your product is good before release and that's it
Mrwhosetheboss also did a review with the CEO standing right there next to him and when the pin didn't function correctly the guy just didn't seem bothered.
tha`s it is new models always have bugs and issues but cancel a company not only it hurts the company it self but also the employs and how would they be able to fix anything if a bad review of some that dint just bankrupt it
@@alpine9214 If you have the cash and time to spare then you risk very little by being an early adopter. But generally, it's just not worth it for the average consumer, given how unstable products are at launch these days.
What so we should be forced to spend 100s on every bit of garbage that we do not want that is is overpriced trash just to help companies? Make a good product/service, price it well and give good support. Trying to sell a bad product is far more "unethical" then someone giving an opinion or sometimes stating facts to help others not make bad decisions. The most "unethical" thing is the reviewers who are just shills.
700 dollars is two months' salary in India for most people, he has done nothing wrong by giving his honest opinion, he saved a lot of money for naive people who get fooled by looking at flashy advertisements of such products
I work for a video game publisher. We have lists of media outlets and what kind of games their reviewers tend to like. When we have a game coming up, we 100% focus on sending games to people who like the style of game it is. Like, there isn't a reason for us to send a turn based rpg to a reviewer who clearly hates turn based rpgs.
The Humane AI pin was a finished, version 1.0 product that Marques genuinely tried to use as intended and gave his honest feedback on. The Billet Labs cooler was an unfinished prototype that Linus intentionally used incorrectly and gave dishonest feedback on. They are not the same.
Any marketing team that can't handle someone telling you why your product isn't a top contender is a bad marketing team. Any good company will learn from negative criticism, and make appropriate adjustments.
I saw this tweet, it's crazy how these ai tech bro's are so insanely invested in these E-waste products that I'm almost entirely sure they probably don't even own themselves half the time. And to make matters worse, they know people are to lazy to google something, so they can say and lie about whatever they want to their 400k payed for followers, and get the exact response they want.
This is so stupid. There is a reason why reviews exist. If you have the nerve to sell a product that is 700 usd plus an expensive monthly subscription the least your product can do is work as advertised.....
Silliest question ever. The alternative would be to leave the consumers completely at the mercy of shitty manufacturers. It's already an uneven fight trying to defeat company corruption on Amazon.
Sounds like these tech brands aren't happy that there's a popular reviewer that they can't manipulate so they attacked his character. Standard internet stuff...
Ironically they would go after him with the dmca takedown with a claim that fairy it's not fair use because of the last point you know effect on market and stuff because you're spoiling the whole thing
I’m in marketing and I can tell you that companies are so unbelievably meticulous about their messaging on the paid ad side. They will control every atom of the narrative in the ad to tell their story. This is why honest reviews are so important for the consumer AND the company to hear the truth.
LMG's problem was due to an internal mistake (well, a handful) that got blown out of proportion by a peer in the space who, by my own estimation, did so to primarily cause attention and ultimately gain greater clout in the space. LMG sure made mistakes, but they were rather honest ones, and for some community members, it was simply an opportunity for... well, haters, really, to come out of the woodwork and use the drama to justify whatever weird personal grievances they have with the company for X, Y, or Z reason.
10:30 This argument is completely invalid because your testing methodology was totally wrong. You literally did SO many things wrong with that product. Nothing you said about it should ever be mentioned again.
No hate but Linus talking ethics when doing a review might not be the best idea as it’s the messenger who’s the problem who had complete disregard for ethics when reviewing B Labs
My favorite argument for Marques' review being unethical is if he didn't tell people about the product being bad, then it'd probably sell more. I had to do a double-take when I saw that tweet cause it misses the point of a review *so hard*.
What I think is unethical is Linus taking money to recommend AMD graphics cards even back in the day when they had some many issues they were literally bursting into flames. He didn’t mention that.
Whats funny is that Marques wasn't even super harsh in his video. He just had some negative things to say about it and didn't recommend it for absolutely valid reasons.
What makes those type of shitty companies angry is that the guy has huge amounts of integrity, he is not a sell out and they can't do anything about it, and the guy talks like a consumer and as a consumer the companies are just completely disarmed, the society needs people like him to stop people from buying craps that we don't need!!
10:30 please don’t tell me this is you trying to defend that cooler you used the wrong card on. I thought you apologized for that. (Correct me if I’m wrong)
Linus has moments where he just comes across as extremely petty. Now for all we know he might be referring to a different situation, but it does come across as him being still miffed about that completely botched review being called out for what it was.
@@Henrik0x7F AFAIR it was not because it wasn’t positive enough, but because of the wrong data. It’s like reviewing AI pin after wearing it in a pocket the whole time.
Congrats Luke and the rest of the Floatplane team on the Angular -> React port! Having touched both frameworks before, I know that would have been a _huge_ undertaking. Congrats on getting it into beta, and may your tech debt and dev experience be better for the future 🎉
10:15 The problem with your case is that you are not recommending a product while you haven't properly tested it first. It should have been tested with the proper hardware at hand before handing out a "not recommended" verdict even if it may seem pointless, because that eliminates any form of bias, whether it's real or imagined. Experience make us biased. The only way to remove the perception of bias is to back it up with data.
What does it mean that "Apple explicitly excludes us from any kind of early access or insider information on their products"? They don't send products for review before the launch? They forbid you from even reviewing just after launch?
The thing about companies picking who to send products too is really interesting. It’s kinda obvious when you think about it but I hadn’t thought about it.
Linus just admitted that: It doesn’t matter if the video is good, bad, late or early So long as they have quality clickbait. - LTT just summarized itself
A company primarily focused on youtube can only thrive if they play the algorithm game. LTT wouldn't be where it is if they didn't understand this. That doesn't mean they won't care about the rest, it just means they understand that for the video to be successful in the platform, that's the #1 thing that truly makes a difference.
Seems more unethical to post inaccurate reviews especially when you used the product wrong and then hypothetically auction off said companies vital prototype without permission. Hypothetically of course
The difference between this and the billet labs fiasco (if that's you meant at 10:36 ) and the AI pin is, u gave ur opinion based on wrong data. Even if u disagree with the product, that's fine but present accurate data. The audience weren't mad because of ur take, they were mad because u basically said something was bad whilst using a bad testing method.
I just finally got around to watching the Marquez review just a few minutes ago. It was a wonderful review and I subbed to his channel right away. I hope this doesn't change the way he does videos.
Duh, obviously. The apple soyboy is a good example of an unethical reviewer, basically heard him in one breathe describing something bad apple did, then turning around saying it's a good thing due to X. The guy has no shame.
Well said Linus. These "other" youtubers who are bashing MKBHD, are hypocrites themselves, because they are getting a lot of attention by putting MKBHD's face in their thumbnails. I noticed this because recently, I've been getting new recommendation in my youtube feeds from these unknown youtubers who capitalizes in using MKBHD, branding him as a bad guy, only to find out that there youtubers are just using Marquez as their clickbate. By the way, Linus, I like the graffiti on your laptop.
There are definitely unethical reviews. Like if, say, a reviewer was sent a product (let's say it's a GPU water block) and they "test" it on a GPU that they knew it wasn't designed for. Then, instead of giving it back to the company, they -sell- sorry, "auction" it off. Because, as we all know, selling someone else's property is totally not okay, but it's completely fine if you auction it.
they did not profit nor intend to profit from auctioning off the block. it was because of an email error billet replied in a different email chain so they never got the address. and heres the kicker, billet said they could keep it and always intended on them keeping the block. it was only after the negative review was released that they decided they wanted the block back, and wanted to be reimbursed for the price of the block and acted as if they were too small of a company to function without that return on investment.
@@embismusic Whether or not they profited off of it is irrelevant, because it was Billet's property, not LMG property. And it's perfectly reasonable for Billet to have asked for the review sample back since LMG never actually reviewed it.
@@wta1518 It is relavent because you're spreading misinformation. Many people constantly parrot that LMG sold off Billet's property, meaning they profited off of it. Every onlooker would see that and think LMG are thiefs. And that is mainstream view many people have because of how it's been simplified. That LMG ruined a company with a bad review and sold off their property. But as far as LMG knew, it WAS their property because the original agreement was always that LMG would keep the block after the video. It was then auctioned off for charity, after Billet already told them they could keep it. Due to a screw up on LMG's side, they never saw the shipping address to send the block back. So the block being auctioned off was because an internal email chain error, and not malice.
I like how you said you try to look at things from others' perspectives sometimes, and how independent you are. I'm a person with ADHD, and every time someone says "it could just be an app" about the Rabbit R1 I think that they have never experienced picking up your phone to look at the time, be assaulted with notifications. Do 5 other things and NOT check the time. Purpose built things are important for accessibility
Yeah, this whole clip screams "We need to make sure everyone believes tech-reviewers are honest and never take money or deals to push certain messages! Our livelihoods depend on the masses still believeing that nonsense!"
I tend not to feel bad for large venture capital funds who invested into some BS and now want the consumer to bail them out by spending a fortune on a useless product.
@@HorsesArePeople2 if someone makes false claims about a product it is called product disparagement, something that is illegal. It doesnt matter how good your lawyers are, this is a black n white law suit. Your product does X and they say it did Y = win.
AI is unethical. Overproduction and overconsumption are unethical, using the earth's resources as if they are infinite is unethical, and polluting the environment is unethical. We are yet to find a single good use case for AI and we haven't found one, meanwhile the processing for all this shit is using so much electricity it's in the unbelievable range. We also don't need more tech gadgets that are going to break as soon as the warranty ends, or the company goes out of business (which is also unethical). Maybe focus on the important stuff first.
@@SirNoobWulf maybe i've simplified a bit too much - im talking about the pointless generative AI bullshit. Deep learning science models and stuff are cool and here to stay, just don't do late stage capitalism please.
What does this comment have to do with MKBHD's coverage of the AI pin or Linus and Luke's discussion surrounding that "controversy?" AI in and of itself is not unethical. What is your argument that AI, as a technology in and of itself, is unethical? Argue all you want about how the energy being used to power compute clusters is from coal or whatever. That is a completely different problem and is in fact a problem, yes, but AI in and of itself. How is it unethical?
@@angrygreek1985 My argument is that using so much resources for a text chat or shitty picture generators, that do not benefit the world in a resonable way is unethical when we face a global climate crisis. Also, as said literally by chat gpt creators for example, it is not possible to train such models without stealing other people - artists - works. Further, that thing was trained using almost slave labour. There's a really good PhilosophyTube episode on that. I said in a previous comment that I went to far and not specified what "AI" am I talking about - im all in for training scientific models for example. However, I do not call them AI, since they are not. The "AI" I meant was the mainstream techbro stuff.
Reminds me of that time where LMG destroyed a small business because they improperly tested a product and then proceeded to steal and sell that product
Yeah, Linus comes off a bit tone deaf considering his own very recent sins in the space. Marques did nothing wrong in this case, but LMG definitely has. They’ve promised to do better, but this makes it sound like no self reflection followed by real change has actually taken place.
@@shivorath marques mocked other companies about the galaxy moon photos claiming those were real, it was proved samsung lied and he shut his mouth about it because samsung pays him big money. So not exactly "nothing wrong", hes kind of a bullshitter.
This clip’s thumbnail is a bit scummy imo. I would not be thrilled at it if I was Marques…it suggests he is unethical. I think it would be fine if there was a question mark after the word “UNETHICAL” splashed over his eyes.
@@Henrik0x7F Why are you searching this video's comment section for negative responses just to give banal responses to said comments? Is this out of some sense of misguided loyalty towards Linus, or do you have something else which compels you to defend a man who doesn't care about you?
@@cup_of_joe I just don’t get what’s ironic about it. If you want to say something negative I can’t and won’t stop you. But I don’t see anything with substance. Just low effort shit posts trying to bring up drama. Post low effort comments, receive low effort replies
@3:08 No Linus, that's how it shouldn't work. The sad fact is there are plenty of examples where 'independent media' is not complying with this. The main one I can think of is movie reviewers, you'd see plenty of 'independent media' giving glowing reviews for objectively bad movies (the latest marvel and star wars entries), and whilst they never admitted to being in the pocket of studios, there's not much left to conclude otherwise. I can't accept that there aren't similar players in the tech industry. The fact that LTT take so many steps to demonstrate and prove your independence surely is because you agree there are a lot of bad actors out there.
Tech reviews are unethical when you do as bad of a job as LMG at them. Literally posting known false data and then claiming it would cost too much to re-shoot.
You release something to the public and a large well respected UA-camr not only covers it but gives their genuine opinion and that’s now for some people a step to far? I appreciate what reviewers like MKB and LTT do for the world. They’re not always speaking positively, but with integrity and knowledge that most people cant afford each generation or new shiny. Giving genuine advice and “is it worth it” questions, the idea that MKB and to an extend fucking anyone with a microphone or a keyboard shouldn’t be allowed to criticise is so silicone valley it hurts.
The people who blame Marques dont care about the product to begin with they care about the stocks of the company behind the product. Those people also dont care about the well being of the company unlike the people in the company (as their comments showcase), they care until they make their profit, even if the company goes bankrupt the next day they cash out. Honesty in any way shape or form is not of their interest. UA-cam and youtubers by extention is nothing more than a company that offers a service to further commercialise other companies and youtubers, in their eyes, are nothing but service workers that they should work for their own goals.
These guys are making a $700 toy with a subscription fee and people are acting like they're designing solar panels for African villages. Buddy they don't deserve any charity or benefit of the doubt.
But the name has "humane" in it, so it must be some coming messiah product that's going to save the world! >.>
@@SurgStriker if only Him self comes down
@@SurgStrikerMe after Dune: "That must be the Lisan al Gaib!"
Cook them Akamu 😂😂
Exactly. It’s micro-aggressions towards MKBHD. And it makes them money as they are making a controversy out of him after all others had the same feeling for the exact AI clip technology. The double standards.
He's doing the complete opposite of unethical. He's being very ethical by saying that a $700 pre tax product with a $24 pre tax mandatory monthly subscription to not make it even more of a paperweight is a complete and total pos with thorough proof compared to just using the free inbuilt voice assistant on your phone. Seriously everything good is now demonized and everything bad is sanctified. The freaking society we live in now.
amen
I'm triggered reeeeee
Those last two sentences are a bit much
@@dtemp132 yeah, but that's the truth
not to be that guy but it wasnt so long ago that linus caught a lot of hate for doing a similarly honest review that "killed" a product. I know parts of the video were wrong, but even after knowing the mistakes - I can only say the Monoblock was a piece of shit product who no one should have bought.
Bad reviews don’t kill companies, bad products do.
Nah, there would be Monoblock in every home if it wasn't for villainous Linus.
bad reviews might speed up the inevitable. hard to say if thats a good or bad thing, depends who best interest is in mind.
Facts.
@@Jrakula10 definitely a good thing, the less companies there are making shit products the better, and the quicker they go the better. Not the reviewers fault at all in the end tho
Plenty of companies that make or made good products have gone under, it isn't binary. You can have a company with a good product fail because of marketing and you can have a trash product be huge with good marketing. Let's not pretend this is a universal truth k?
Funny how if they scam you with a bad product, they will not respond after they got your sweet sweet money, but if someone calls them out, now that is unethical?
are you talking about apple rigth
Weirdly the company never started this, they were even fine with it and said it was expected.
Techbros were acting on their own.
@@donkey7921 More specifically, people who are overly invested in the AI hype train. The same people that told everyone they were dumb about crypto and NFTs if they didn't jump on board IMMEDIATELY. The same people that told everyone they were dumb about the metaverse if they didn't jump on board IMMEDIATELY. These people are just mad that people are saying the truth about AI products at the moment. They're garbage. They don't do what they're promised to do and they all want us to buy into the hype and fork over money on the promise of 'They'll get better!' without giving any plan on HOW or WHEN.
@@hlmc00this sentence is sounds like it’s spoken from an alternate universe Mike Tyson who was never a boxing champion and instead devotes his energy to complaining about Apple on UA-cam.
the only harm marquess ever made to that company is probably its share value dropping, so most of the haters are probably just the investors fuming at mkhd since they were left with holding the bag lol
The backlash is mostly coming from a handful of entitled tech bros.
And investors
And Twitter
And good LORD they are the epitome of Entitled, they're all on twitter too
@@MuzikBike Twitter is like 60% entitled tech bros
@@MuzikBike to be fair to twitter for once, the only people i have seen complaining about this review even on there have NFTs as profile pictures.
You know your review is good when critics try to pick apart you instead of the review itself
Picking apart the other person instead of the argument is literally a fallacy too xD . _Ad hominem_ *abusive* is the name.
That’s the main story here. None of these headlines came out defending the product and mentioning anything it’s actually useful for, or actually trying to prove the review was false or wrong. Just full blown attacks on the reviewer and accusing the review of bankrupting a company.
@@TanToRza what people don't mention.. is one of the person that made the main critique of MKBHD had some maybe private interest in the company..
We support reviewers for their honesty and integrity, not to sell out.
the issue is that they do the even get kickback for bad reviews on competitors products
@@hlmc00I’m pretty sure that’s not legal
exactly, this is why i DON'T watch marques videos. He is such an apple and tesla fanboy you can't trust him in being objective, or at least trying to be.
@@tylernoble8137 he doesn't have to disclose it just money under the table
@@kerolokerokerolobut he quite literally gave a bad review about the cyber truck and I don’t even think he personally uses Apple. I’ve only ever seen him with Samsung but maybe I just came late to the party
Since when giving your honest opinion as a reviewer is "unethical"? Since when being a corporate shill became the morally good behavior? This is soooooo weird.....
In a world where capitalism is almost a religion, doing anything that is bad for any company is like attacking the papacy.
"It's simple, disagreeing with a corporation is equivalent to being an anarchist terrorist, because they are the law and system of order of society, so disagreeing means you are trying to cause chaos and destroy peace and order. Dystopian capitalism controls the world, and trying to fight against that is going against the established order." -How to Reframe Normal Consumer Behavior as Controversial and Control the Narrative, by Dr. Shill.
Depends on how "honest" you are, you can sometimes see reviews about stupidly expensive products and they are like "wow the quality is amazing" and they don't go out to say don't buy it, but then they see another expensive product and they go out of their way to convince people not to buy it. If you give advice do it every time or don't do it and just show the product, otherwise it seems fishy.
Welcome to capitalism!
Because there is a trend of clueless tech Bros going all in on the latest crazes and fads. They can't afford to be wrong, so If anyone says that they are doing something wrong, those people are the enemy.
UnEtHiCaL
Don’t release bad products and you won’t get a bad review. lol.
Wrong. He blatantly lies when it comes to samsung products. Remember his galaxy moon shots that turned to be fake?
@@marvinracer88 This has nothing to do with a bad product being bad
@@joeylalonde3458 it those sense its a product
@@joeylalonde3458Bad is subjective. Most companies don’t intentionally release bad products. Consumers determine that. Look at Apple products. They make good products overall but look how easy it is for so many people to say how “bad” they are. On the other side of the coin, you can have a company produce new products that are different but because we, as reviewers and consumers, have certain expectations about how something should work or performer, they may come up short, which is the case with this AI pin that Marques reviewed.
The best anyone can expect from a product review is that the reviewer will be honest, no matter the outcome. However we take it (agree or disagree) doesn’t necessarily mean the product is actually good or bad.
@@hlmc00 try proofreading
If something is a shit product, it should fail. Period. Otherwise, it's a scam. If telling the truth is unethical, I don't wanna live on this planet anymore.
@brent19832009That country is an exception. The people there have high suicidal tendencies when hearing something even remotely insulting. Other countries are brazen enough and can handle real criticism.
@brent19832009thank God America values free speech
This is such a stupid controversy. Why the fuck would I watch a reviewer that isn’t honestly reviewing. They aren’t a reviewer
A good example of this kind of "reviewer" is Unbox Therapy 🤮
so how would you know if the review is real or not?
People still watch LTT
Exactly. Otherwise they are just influencers😂
I recently had a brand who sent me a review unit tell me - if there are things about the product that aren't great, to NOT publish the video but tell them about them personally. The nerve! 😂
That would only be acceptable if it was a prototype and you signed an NDA.
@@Goatfer if that was on the NDA, I would not review the product 🤣 (edit: if it were a prototype, that disclaimer goes to the very front of the vid, and a reminder at the end that it’s a prototpe and to stay tuned for the actual review.
I am just an audience member here, but what if it was something they could fix, relatively quickly. I know that is pretty uncommon, but why put out a negative review, especially before release if packaging issues or something can be fixed and then after it is a better product for everyone and everyone can know after.. IDK this the wierd edge case that goes through my head.
@@DallasATrain7 Still many customers would get a product with issues and they wouldn't have the reach to make the company notice, like everyone has said if you don't want a bad review just make sure your product is good before release and that's it
@@DallasATrain7 that's what the disclaimers are for.
My ex wife UNETHICALLY told everyone that I have a SMALL ONE
You unethically tell everyone that she has loose one
Even 747 looks small when flying through the Grand Canyon. 😂
@@shivins1 💀💀💀
I have a small phone too
Small phone club 🤙
Mrwhosetheboss also did a review with the CEO standing right there next to him and when the pin didn't function correctly the guy just didn't seem bothered.
We're watching a critic criticizing a critic for criticizing a critic for his criticism.
That’s just it. We watch everyone’s opinion on any video on the internet.
one of the main guy that called out mkbhd initially had private interest in the company..
The Hippocratic oath? “First do no harm”? Did I miss something? When did reviewers become equivalent to doctors?
The moment tech bros thought not falling for a scam is an insult to the holy AI blockchain NFT crypto god
"First do no harm!"
first tell the truth, sometimes the truth hurts
Truth only hurts if it should....
Hurt Harm
That truth could also kill a company.
Linus' advice that stuck to my head: don't be an early adopter.
tha`s it is new models always have bugs and issues but cancel a company not only it hurts the company it self but also the employs and how would they be able to fix anything if a bad review of some that dint just bankrupt it
Honestly, I would love to be an early adopter if I have extra cash to spare. Maybe that is what he meant?
@@hlmc00you have to make sure your very expensive product should be thoroughly tested before hand, if it’s worth that ridiculous price.
@@alpine9214i believe it not just cost money, but also time...
@@alpine9214 If you have the cash and time to spare then you risk very little by being an early adopter. But generally, it's just not worth it for the average consumer, given how unstable products are at launch these days.
Did people forget that the whole point of a review is that if a product is shit, to say that it’s shit…
If it's poop say it's good if it's excellent say it's great it's like getting an f it's higher than 50 but it's still failing
Its so insane that the company itself isn't upset but random entitled twitter users are getting upset for them
I thought the company was suing him or something
… We could use more destruction in the IEM/Headphone space. Seriously there’s a space for *everything*
We could shit on Raycon more. Those things are abominable, especially considering the price.
@@shazarakk is there not? Pretty sure I hear ad talkpoint more than reviews.
@@shazarakk Have you ever wanted $50 of bass?
What, treble? mids? Kids don't listen to that stuff, they just want BASS
-Raycon, probably
If a reviewer never gave bad reviews, I would not trust their opinion on good reviews.
If everyone is good then good has no meaning or then nobody knows what good means
What so we should be forced to spend 100s on every bit of garbage that we do not want that is is overpriced trash just to help companies?
Make a good product/service, price it well and give good support.
Trying to sell a bad product is far more "unethical" then someone giving an opinion or sometimes stating facts to help others not make bad decisions.
The most "unethical" thing is the reviewers who are just shills.
I mean, that's what they want. They want your money in exchange for the least amount of effort, accountability and work on their part.
700 dollars is two months' salary in India for most people, he has done nothing wrong by giving his honest opinion, he saved a lot of money for naive people who get fooled by looking at flashy advertisements of such products
I work for a video game publisher. We have lists of media outlets and what kind of games their reviewers tend to like. When we have a game coming up, we 100% focus on sending games to people who like the style of game it is.
Like, there isn't a reason for us to send a turn based rpg to a reviewer who clearly hates turn based rpgs.
The Humane AI pin was a finished, version 1.0 product that Marques genuinely tried to use as intended and gave his honest feedback on. The Billet Labs cooler was an unfinished prototype that Linus intentionally used incorrectly and gave dishonest feedback on. They are not the same.
Someone at Humane AI suggested sending one to Linus but someone stood up and said "F@&k NO!!"
Any marketing team that can't handle someone telling you why your product isn't a top contender is a bad marketing team. Any good company will learn from negative criticism, and make appropriate adjustments.
I saw this tweet, it's crazy how these ai tech bro's are so insanely invested in these E-waste products that I'm almost entirely sure they probably don't even own themselves half the time.
And to make matters worse, they know people are to lazy to google something, so they can say and lie about whatever they want to their 400k payed for followers, and get the exact response they want.
"you don't owe a brand that sends a product to review anything"
except a review, right?
This is so stupid. There is a reason why reviews exist. If you have the nerve to sell a product that is 700 usd plus an expensive monthly subscription the least your product can do is work as advertised.....
Silliest question ever. The alternative would be to leave the consumers completely at the mercy of shitty manufacturers. It's already an uneven fight trying to defeat company corruption on Amazon.
Sounds like these tech brands aren't happy that there's a popular reviewer that they can't manipulate so they attacked his character. Standard internet stuff...
The only thing a reviewer owes a company is a fair and honest review.
Ironically they would go after him with the dmca takedown with a claim that fairy it's not fair use because of the last point you know effect on market and stuff because you're spoiling the whole thing
Yeah, this was the stupidest tweet I saw and that’s crazy coming from twitter
I’m in marketing and I can tell you that companies are so unbelievably meticulous about their messaging on the paid ad side. They will control every atom of the narrative in the ad to tell their story. This is why honest reviews are so important for the consumer AND the company to hear the truth.
"you know who hasn't tried to stop us? our sponsors" 🤣🤣🤣🤣
So ridiculous, they're basically saying a reviewer isn't allowed to be honest if they're too big
LMG should be able to relate to this situation.
LMG's problem was due to an internal mistake (well, a handful) that got blown out of proportion by a peer in the space who, by my own estimation, did so to primarily cause attention and ultimately gain greater clout in the space. LMG sure made mistakes, but they were rather honest ones, and for some community members, it was simply an opportunity for... well, haters, really, to come out of the woodwork and use the drama to justify whatever weird personal grievances they have with the company for X, Y, or Z reason.
@@LoganChristianson Wah Wah Wah
@@LoganChristianson pretty sure they already had a mass release product sent to many reviewers... a product that took a better of 2 years to go Gold
Ha 😂
@@Man-of-Steel674 Exhibit A.
It's only unethical if you sell the stuff you were sent for a review and promiced to return on your auction...
Some Investors who bet big probably lost a lot of money that’s why there is so much backlash.
Not Goood = Unethical. Got it... 🤦
10:30 This argument is completely invalid because your testing methodology was totally wrong. You literally did SO many things wrong with that product. Nothing you said about it should ever be mentioned again.
No hate but Linus talking ethics when doing a review might not be the best idea as it’s the messenger who’s the problem who had complete disregard for ethics when reviewing B Labs
I would have liked the thumbnail to be Mark lasering ai humane out of existance
Pretty funny of LTT to talk about what’s ethical and not 😂 did we all forget they auctioned off a product they were given to review
My favorite argument for Marques' review being unethical is if he didn't tell people about the product being bad, then it'd probably sell more. I had to do a double-take when I saw that tweet cause it misses the point of a review *so hard*.
You know, Amazon should remove the ability to review their products with a 1 star, 2 star review minimum should increase sales
What I think is unethical is Linus taking money to recommend AMD graphics cards even back in the day when they had some many issues they were literally bursting into flames. He didn’t mention that.
Remember how Linus did a really bad review in bad faith of an exclusive prototype that he then sold without permission? That's unethical.
His review was wildly fair. It was exceptionally thorough and actually got me interested in the product as a second edition.
Too many companies are acting like Disney, and you see how Disney is doing right now. They should be willing to "play ball," not the reviewer.
Too many companies are acting like Disney without billions in yearly profit. Disney can weather hella storms, these small companies cannot.
"Are tech reviews UNETHICAL?"
Linuses are.
$700 + $24 per month for Google Assistant is ironically "unethical"
Whats funny is that Marques wasn't even super harsh in his video. He just had some negative things to say about it and didn't recommend it for absolutely valid reasons.
"I have to interject with something off topic before I forget" made me chuckle, you're sat in front of a laptop my guy, take a note :')
What makes those type of shitty companies angry is that the guy has huge amounts of integrity, he is not a sell out and they can't do anything about it, and the guy talks like a consumer and as a consumer the companies are just completely disarmed, the society needs people like him to stop people from buying craps that we don't need!!
10:30 please don’t tell me this is you trying to defend that cooler you used the wrong card on. I thought you apologized for that. (Correct me if I’m wrong)
Linus has moments where he just comes across as extremely petty. Now for all we know he might be referring to a different situation, but it does come across as him being still miffed about that completely botched review being called out for what it was.
I mean it’s pretty much the same thing where people argued he destroyed a company because their review wasn’t positive enough
@@Henrik0x7F AFAIR it was not because it wasn’t positive enough, but because of the wrong data. It’s like reviewing AI pin after wearing it in a pocket the whole time.
@@Atedos😂😂
Congrats Luke and the rest of the Floatplane team on the Angular -> React port! Having touched both frameworks before, I know that would have been a _huge_ undertaking. Congrats on getting it into beta, and may your tech debt and dev experience be better for the future 🎉
I don't get why you'd jump ship to a dying framework in 2024.
Make a bad product expect a bad review
by your anotación apple has many bad products
Won't anybody think about those poor investors that voluntarily took a risk? They didn't know what that word meant.
10:15 The problem with your case is that you are not recommending a product while you haven't properly tested it first. It should have been tested with the proper hardware at hand before handing out a "not recommended" verdict even if it may seem pointless, because that eliminates any form of bias, whether it's real or imagined.
Experience make us biased. The only way to remove the perception of bias is to back it up with data.
What does it mean that "Apple explicitly excludes us from any kind of early access or insider information on their products"? They don't send products for review before the launch? They forbid you from even reviewing just after launch?
Turn. The. Ego. Dial. DOWN.
The thing about companies picking who to send products too is really interesting. It’s kinda obvious when you think about it but I hadn’t thought about it.
TIL Apple is scared of Linus.
Integrity based on empirical reviews are key. That's what gives you a loyal subscriber base, not payed promotions.
Linus just admitted that:
It doesn’t matter if the video is good, bad, late or early
So long as they have quality clickbait.
- LTT just summarized itself
Welcome to UA-cam. If you want your videos to actually get seen by the general public, you have to appeal to their basest, clickbait urges.
A company primarily focused on youtube can only thrive if they play the algorithm game. LTT wouldn't be where it is if they didn't understand this. That doesn't mean they won't care about the rest, it just means they understand that for the video to be successful in the platform, that's the #1 thing that truly makes a difference.
Unbox Therapy is already a sellout, we dont want that for MKBHD
just dont fuck up a gpu monoblock cooler review
lol that was unethical for sure
Seems more unethical to post inaccurate reviews especially when you used the product wrong and then hypothetically auction off said companies vital prototype without permission. Hypothetically of course
The difference between this and the billet labs fiasco (if that's you meant at 10:36 ) and the AI pin is, u gave ur opinion based on wrong data.
Even if u disagree with the product, that's fine but present accurate data.
The audience weren't mad because of ur take, they were mad because u basically said something was bad whilst using a bad testing method.
I just finally got around to watching the Marquez review just a few minutes ago. It was a wonderful review and I subbed to his channel right away. I hope this doesn't change the way he does videos.
Duh, obviously. The apple soyboy is a good example of an unethical reviewer, basically heard him in one breathe describing something bad apple did, then turning around saying it's a good thing due to X. The guy has no shame.
Well said Linus. These "other" youtubers who are bashing MKBHD, are hypocrites themselves, because they are getting a lot of attention by putting MKBHD's face in their thumbnails. I noticed this because recently, I've been getting new recommendation in my youtube feeds from these unknown youtubers who capitalizes in using MKBHD, branding him as a bad guy, only to find out that there youtubers are just using Marquez as their clickbate. By the way, Linus, I like the graffiti on your laptop.
Humane didn’t send him the thing so that whole tangent was useless lol
It’s crazy this is something we even have to argue about in 2024, what has this world come to
There are definitely unethical reviews. Like if, say, a reviewer was sent a product (let's say it's a GPU water block) and they "test" it on a GPU that they knew it wasn't designed for. Then, instead of giving it back to the company, they -sell- sorry, "auction" it off. Because, as we all know, selling someone else's property is totally not okay, but it's completely fine if you auction it.
This billet labs comment is brilliant! I still can't believe how awfully LMG handled that situation lol.
Is this you Steve? 😂
they did not profit nor intend to profit from auctioning off the block. it was because of an email error billet replied in a different email chain so they never got the address. and heres the kicker, billet said they could keep it and always intended on them keeping the block. it was only after the negative review was released that they decided they wanted the block back, and wanted to be reimbursed for the price of the block and acted as if they were too small of a company to function without that return on investment.
@@embismusic Whether or not they profited off of it is irrelevant, because it was Billet's property, not LMG property. And it's perfectly reasonable for Billet to have asked for the review sample back since LMG never actually reviewed it.
@@wta1518 It is relavent because you're spreading misinformation. Many people constantly parrot that LMG sold off Billet's property, meaning they profited off of it. Every onlooker would see that and think LMG are thiefs. And that is mainstream view many people have because of how it's been simplified. That LMG ruined a company with a bad review and sold off their property.
But as far as LMG knew, it WAS their property because the original agreement was always that LMG would keep the block after the video. It was then auctioned off for charity, after Billet already told them they could keep it. Due to a screw up on LMG's side, they never saw the shipping address to send the block back. So the block being auctioned off was because an internal email chain error, and not malice.
I thought the backlash started because the review was too soft on the scammer. Oh boy was I wrong
10:48, "I don't want anyone to buy it, btw here is an affiliate link where you can buy it"
LTT talking about unethical reviews. Funny.
lol
I like how you said you try to look at things from others' perspectives sometimes, and how independent you are. I'm a person with ADHD, and every time someone says "it could just be an app" about the Rabbit R1 I think that they have never experienced picking up your phone to look at the time, be assaulted with notifications. Do 5 other things and NOT check the time.
Purpose built things are important for accessibility
"You dont owe a brand who sent you a product to review anything"...... I mean, it takes b@!!s for Linus to say that after the cooler fiasco
did you just censor balls like it's a swear?
Yeah, this whole clip screams "We need to make sure everyone believes tech-reviewers are honest and never take money or deals to push certain messages! Our livelihoods depend on the masses still believeing that nonsense!"
@@PixyEm talk to youtube about it. Not me
I tend not to feel bad for large venture capital funds who invested into some BS and now want the consumer to bail them out by spending a fortune on a useless product.
10:17 Linus the kind of guy to review a product improperly and months later still shift blame on others for perceiving him as biased.
I mean not really
This feels like when tv show makers blamed viewers for not liking the show.
Like wtf?!
well if the tech review is wrong then they can sue...
You don't think Marques has better lawyers than this small business?
@@HorsesArePeople2 if someone makes false claims about a product it is called product disparagement, something that is illegal. It doesnt matter how good your lawyers are, this is a black n white law suit. Your product does X and they say it did Y = win.
@@av1204 I envy your ignorance about the legal system
@@HorsesArePeople2 im a corporate lawyer....
You could argue holding a 700 dollar device hostage with a 24 dollar subscription is unethical…
AI is unethical. Overproduction and overconsumption are unethical, using the earth's resources as if they are infinite is unethical, and polluting the environment is unethical. We are yet to find a single good use case for AI and we haven't found one, meanwhile the processing for all this shit is using so much electricity it's in the unbelievable range. We also don't need more tech gadgets that are going to break as soon as the warranty ends, or the company goes out of business (which is also unethical).
Maybe focus on the important stuff first.
My guy there are tons of usage of AI. AI has been around long before it became a buzzword. Generative AI isn't the only use of AI y'know
@@SirNoobWulf maybe i've simplified a bit too much - im talking about the pointless generative AI bullshit. Deep learning science models and stuff are cool and here to stay, just don't do late stage capitalism please.
What does this comment have to do with MKBHD's coverage of the AI pin or Linus and Luke's discussion surrounding that "controversy?"
AI in and of itself is not unethical. What is your argument that AI, as a technology in and of itself, is unethical? Argue all you want about how the energy being used to power compute clusters is from coal or whatever. That is a completely different problem and is in fact a problem, yes, but AI in and of itself. How is it unethical?
@@angrygreek1985 My argument is that using so much resources for a text chat or shitty picture generators, that do not benefit the world in a resonable way is unethical when we face a global climate crisis. Also, as said literally by chat gpt creators for example, it is not possible to train such models without stealing other people - artists - works. Further, that thing was trained using almost slave labour. There's a really good PhilosophyTube episode on that.
I said in a previous comment that I went to far and not specified what "AI" am I talking about - im all in for training scientific models for example. However, I do not call them AI, since they are not. The "AI" I meant was the mainstream techbro stuff.
You said all that and didn't end it with "There is no ethical consumption under capitalism"
SMH, I thought you were going somewhere
Linus needs a MKBHD Clickbait?
Reminds me of that time where LMG destroyed a small business because they improperly tested a product and then proceeded to steal and sell that product
LOL Linux man strikes again
wut
Yeah, Linus comes off a bit tone deaf considering his own very recent sins in the space. Marques did nothing wrong in this case, but LMG definitely has. They’ve promised to do better, but this makes it sound like no self reflection followed by real change has actually taken place.
@@shivorath"tone depth" lol
@@shivorath marques mocked other companies about the galaxy moon photos claiming those were real, it was proved samsung lied and he shut his mouth about it because samsung pays him big money. So not exactly "nothing wrong", hes kind of a bullshitter.
This clip’s thumbnail is a bit scummy imo. I would not be thrilled at it if I was Marques…it suggests he is unethical. I think it would be fine if there was a question mark after the word “UNETHICAL” splashed over his eyes.
Please change this thumbnail, WAY too clickbait and marks Marques as being unethical…
Most definitely
That's probably intentional since that's what they're talking about
Linus, did you change the battery and/or the charging port on the note 9? I m rocking the s20 fe and i think they re up for replacement
So uh, does Linus not see the irony in him talking about this?
Is that irony in the room with us right now?
@@Henrik0x7F Why are you searching this video's comment section for negative responses just to give banal responses to said comments? Is this out of some sense of misguided loyalty towards Linus, or do you have something else which compels you to defend a man who doesn't care about you?
@@cup_of_joe I just don’t get what’s ironic about it. If you want to say something negative I can’t and won’t stop you. But I don’t see anything with substance. Just low effort shit posts trying to bring up drama. Post low effort comments, receive low effort replies
@3:08 No Linus, that's how it shouldn't work. The sad fact is there are plenty of examples where 'independent media' is not complying with this. The main one I can think of is movie reviewers, you'd see plenty of 'independent media' giving glowing reviews for objectively bad movies (the latest marvel and star wars entries), and whilst they never admitted to being in the pocket of studios, there's not much left to conclude otherwise. I can't accept that there aren't similar players in the tech industry. The fact that LTT take so many steps to demonstrate and prove your independence surely is because you agree there are a lot of bad actors out there.
Tech reviews are unethical when you do as bad of a job as LMG at them. Literally posting known false data and then claiming it would cost too much to re-shoot.
You release something to the public and a large well respected UA-camr not only covers it but gives their genuine opinion and that’s now for some people a step to far?
I appreciate what reviewers like MKB and LTT do for the world. They’re not always speaking positively, but with integrity and knowledge that most people cant afford each generation or new shiny. Giving genuine advice and “is it worth it” questions, the idea that MKB and to an extend fucking anyone with a microphone or a keyboard shouldn’t be allowed to criticise is so silicone valley it hurts.
No views, 0 comments, 0 likes, Uploaded 20 seconds ago
pathetic numbers
14 years 49 subscribers
Linus fell off.
Wow it's like a video has no engagement right after it's published
Stop this meme, it's already stale
The people who blame Marques dont care about the product to begin with they care about the stocks of the company behind the product.
Those people also dont care about the well being of the company unlike the people in the company (as their comments showcase), they care until they make their profit, even if the company goes bankrupt the next day they cash out.
Honesty in any way shape or form is not of their interest. UA-cam and youtubers by extention is nothing more than a company that offers a service to further commercialise other companies and youtubers, in their eyes, are nothing but service workers that they should work for their own goals.
The click bait video image, is, clearly sarcasm, because we know your history.... But still you should have done better to emphasize that... :(