And don't expect someone like Marques to fluff the review just because you sent him free shit. He has a huge following because he's honest and knowledgeable.
I watched his Cybertruck review, had never heard of him prior. Unless he's a full blown Muskrat I refuse to believe he wasn't paid for that review. Aesthetic opinions aside, there is so much wrong with that car. He somehow managed to review a truck without discussing towing capability or bed storage space.
For sure. You know most people that *review* a truck would at least pretend to act like those are relevant things, I respect him for dropping the pretense. Sure you’re never going to use the reason you can’t see out the back of the thing, but that’s part of the charm. Now I’m getting it.
I drive a truck and I do a goodly amount of product reviews. If Ford asked me to review my truck I would review it how I know and interact and open the review with "in a dad, a desk jockey and I drive this truck like a minivan so that's the perspective I'm going to give you"
Then it's a bit useless as a review. If I look for a review I want to know the relevant things, not how you use it. You may review a phone which you only use as a paperweight, that will have a significant difference to someone who actually tells me how long a phone's battery lasts (for example). It would be a thing that doesn't matter to you, since a paperweight doesn't need to be on.
any review that is not from the perspective of how you would use the product is useless. it was useless for me to see reviews of the truck i bought from people using it as a work machine. The ones i found of people using it as a minivan were extremely useful. And someone who doesn't use it as a work truck reviewing it as one is completely useless. If someone only wants to buy an iPhone for a paperweight, they will never care about its battery capacity, its just that VERY few people would EVER buy an iPhone as a paperweight. LOTS of people use pickup trucks as minivans (probably close to 30-50% of private owners of new pickups) so it is not a useless review.
You're missing the point here. There is a reason that for example car reviews go through things like "usability of the backseat" or "how easily can I put 3 child seats in the back" that is standard stuff that people want to know. If you review it as "I'm the only person in the car and I've never even opened the rear doors" then it's a completely useless review.
Same if you review a work vehicle or off-road vehicle but then don't talk about the off road abilities of the vehicle. What's the point?
Most people getting it are never going to tow anything or take it off road, and you don't need the specs in a review as you can look those up. If all you want are the numbers then you can do that in a much shorter amount of time by simply looking at the specs
It's not useless as a review. It's just limited in its utility as a review. It'll be very useful for the type of people who use it in the same fashion.
Face it, the vast majority of people who buy trucks *don't actually need trucks*. Most consumers would find a review like that useful.
> honest and knowledgeable
I seriously doubt that. Dude has a massive boner for Tesla and Apple. The recent cyber truck video almost felt like a sponsored ad. He has good presentation skills and maybe knowledge from experience. I give him that, but I don't think he's an honest reviewer.
His bias is really showing these days. And don't even get me started on his stupid takes on mobiles from the Asian market. He's so ignorant and refuses to put even a little bit of effort in researching them. It's like he starts with an opinion and dances around trying to justify it.
Sorry for the rant. Used to watch him religiously since 2011. I can tell he's changed.
No need to apologise. It's your opinion. I only based mine on how he was when I followed him early on and learned of him through a mobile reviewer. Of course, I wasn't considering how he could have/has changed since.
He also crushed Zucks Meta Quest 3 on his podcast and never even did a real review of it. Right then and there I knew he was biased. The Quest 3 tech is absolutely astonishing for its price point but he never gave it a chance. But when the Apple Pro came out, he was gushing.
He even has a video about the so called "killing": https://youtu.be/QztFpzKsdeA?si=VLIe6VzJOWvdFYy7
The tl;dr is that shit products kill themselves and dishonest reviews kill reviewers.
Right? If you implement that to the letter of the law you’d never draw blood labs to detect illnesses because breaching the skin would do minor harm. Obviously it’s more of a balance than that.
I don’t know who this guy is but considering that he has a paid custom badge on Twitter I assume he must be a VC / Startup-adjacent guy. If you buy into the whole mythos that these are “founders” and “visionaries” his statement kinda makes sense. But the reality is that it’s just people (usually fresh grads) trying to find a niche and get rich off it, and rich people funding them and betting their success. The optimism is kinda something you need to buy into as a member of a start up because otherwise you realize that you’re being underpaid for something that may never come to fruition and have no job security.
I watched the review when it came out, and it was very honest. The impression I got was the device is not ready to release to the public; he said the hardware was impressive but the software and lack of integration with phones was holding the device back.
As someone in product development, the video title made me cry a little on the inside for the developers. It was very fair though and praised a lot of what the they did - I’m sure it wasn’t the devs who decided to go ahead and launch it half baked.
I don't even think the dough is ready in this one. Half baked is one thing, but all of the output that did work gave incorrect information.
Which is the main reason I will not trust AI.
It is so confident in giving misinformation.
I asked the Meta AI "How do I disable Meta AI?" and it gives options that do not exist in the Facebook Settings, then gaslights you into thinking you're just on the wrong platform.
I've uninstalled the app on my phone until they can give a toggle off for that useless feature. I do not need a search that will consistently provide me with the wrong information more often than a google search - and PRESENT IT AS REAL.
Spotify has their AI DJ on beta right now and it just makes up what my listening history. It’s been 100% in picking artists I don’t listen to but claiming that they are one of my favorites.
Reminds me of Pandora initially (or maybe still is) where the same 5-6 super catch folk songs and mgmt songs would get mixed in on basically any playlist.
My favorite is when it told me what I've been listening to lately is "Kangaroo Poo" by Mr Poo.
I mean damn DJ I know my taste in music isn't popular but it's not that shit
I listen to a lot of folk/bluegrass/indie/punk and yesterday it did a whole block of reggaeton and then started playing Taylor Swift.
It also played a block of noise pop, which I had never heard of, but really dug, so that was pretty cool. But yeah, when it’s off, it’s real off.
Haha my husband gets shitty recs sometimes from Spotify, but he says he fell asleep listening and "maybe I did play that song a lot without knowing it". But it sounds like, nope, Spotify just likes to tell you you listen to this stuff, without you actually having heard it before. Wow.
"Here's a band that was a big part of your rotation, but has kind of fallen off your radar."
Really? Cuz I've never heard of this band before in my life and all I listen to is my shuffled playlist of liked songs.
Good luck avoiding AI in the near future 🤣. It’ll get better and absolutely ubiquitous (though usefulness I still question from a user standpoint; this is from a capitalist pig standpoint). Donkey balls.
Why would I have trouble avoiding it? If a service has an LLM integrated I just... wouldn't use it. Windows has Copilot, and I just ignore it. Google has Bard, and I ignore it.
If a service only has an LLM to interact with it, then I just wouldn't use that service. It wouldn't have anything to offer me
Maybe one day LLMs or methods to replace them will be useful, and I'll reevaluate my opinion when it happens
My assumption is that it will begin to be incorporated in a lot of places and services, rendering it unavoidable at some point unless you want to stop using a ton of stuff. It’s already beginning to show up in phone center conversations, drive-thru windows, customer service portals in general.
The capitalist sees a cheaper piece of software and an expensive human - which do you think they’ll choose? That’s the basis of my assumption; I’d rather be wrong.
I think you're going to get a bit of whipsnaking happening with the current push (and that's even beyond a "bias error" like we see with Gemini) towards integration of AI tech.
Investors see the marketing term "AI" and want everybody all-in. But businesses are realizing that it's not so simple, and ignoring the fact that it's a _marketing term_. I know a handful of orgs that have tried to and gone back after it's clear that the marketing outshines the actual capabilities; it still requires people to manage, it's just _different_ people than before (say bye-bye, institutional knowledge). Don't get me wrong, there's room for massive improvement in the AI space, but it's not quite as simple as "less $ on labour = better".
There is a sweet spot with automation, C-suites have forgotten that it seems. Walmart is removing self-checkout lanes in some stores. This isn't directly AI related, but just automation in general. Then there's Amazon getting rid of their unstaffed "AI" stores because it turned out that it paying Sanjay in India to be "AI" and tag purchases to train the models isn't working well enough to deal with shrink. Also with automation in general, it only makes sense at a certain scale. If everybody could put a single 5-DoF industrial arm in their factory, they would. But it's more than the several hundreds of thousands of dollars of cost. You gotta pay someone to program it, you gotta pay someone to maintain it. Most importantly, you have to have a task that _makes sense_ for the automation. Car factories and large-scale assembly lines make sense, you can task that robot for the single job, and when the job changes, you alter the programming slightly. It makes sense for an automaker to have in-house staff to deal with those bots. It doesn't make sense for Gammy's Homestyle Pierogi shop, or Bob's Bespoke Widget Manufacturing Inc. AI is no different, it has a lot of good potential uses, but the current marketing oversells that in a big way.
Yeah, I’m not even really talking about the big buzz word AI of today, but the more fully / intelligently integrated kind of 1-5 years from now.
Give it twenty years, and it will be part of everyday life for everyone. Hopefully, if we’re lucky, it’ll be the sub-surface / more invisible kind and not the dystopian flavor.
I don't care how useful it is, if it collects data about me and gives it to someone else, I won't use it.
Somehow the dystopia we're getting is shittier than the one in old cyberpunk stories.
That is going to be like saying you don't use an interstate so you don't interact with it.
AI isn't going to take over everything overnight, but the infrastructure is being built now. Even if you aren't giving it direct inputs AI will be a part of life now, IMO.
I watched it last week after the hullabaloo started.
You're spot on - he was honest and upfront, and that thing is definitely not a fully finished product. Some cool ideas, and somebody has to be the first to market something like this, but it'll be some years before this concept takes root.
The things it does dont even work without the phone. For example, the device has its own phone number. So, it can send texts...but it doesnt send with the number everyone already has in their contact list as yours, which is the one assigned to your phone. So, they randomly start getting texts from you from an unknown number.
He wasn’t even hating the product either. He praised the parts of the product that work and emphasized that currently the product just isn’t for public consumption.
Unfortunately most of the review is about the very lacking parts of the product that need work.
These people are so weird wanting to really hate him for this review. The company was given really good feedback for them to use and further develop the product should they decide to improve it. Anyone with common sense would see that.
They rushing it. If they took another 2 years to develop, I can see this being huge.
They need to get the AI close to what meta has for the raybans before release Imo
Both Marques and Mrwhosetheboss had similar takes on the product. The fact that it literally becomes a paperweight unless you pay a $24/mo service fee *and* that service is only available through the manufacturer means that even buying one of these is a huge risk. If they go under, or if they raise rates, you don't get a choice; you're stuck with a useless device.
I can't see how being honest about that is a problem. They're reviewers. It's literally their job to tell us if something is bad.
After a google smart tv became near useless after they stopped supporting and updating the apps I decided not to buy more products that count on a single company supporting them. My computer can watch streaming services, hdmi to a big tv, and I don’t have to worry specialized apps don’t get updates
> If they go under, or if they raise rates, you don't get a choice; you're stuck with a useless device.
This is becoming far too commonplace. Holding their customers hostage.
The biggest drawback to me (besides price) is that it's a weighty box pinned on the front of your shirt all the time. I would be afraid to lose thus $1000 matchbox.
It's a hands free, voice activated search engine. It...kinda works but it's buggy as hell and expensive. It can also do half of what your phone can do but less impressive
I wanted to form my own opinion so I watched the review.
It was a fair review.
It gave credit for the concept, design and manufacturing quality, but his base conclusion is valid: it has issues in execution and no benefits over existing tech (smartphone).
As a consumer it has persuaded me that this would be a fun toy... That would end up in a drawer after a week.
As a tech reviewer, his responsibility is to the consumer, not the organizations pushing their products.
Harm would have been done had he lied to his 18 million subscribers.
Also... and this should go without saying but: Youtubers didn't take the hippocratic oath.
I watched the review and not only was it FAIR, but Marques seemed to go out of his way to find good things to say about it. Even when it was difficult. The reality of the Humane AI device is that it's half-baked at best. And it seems like a lot of the issues won't be fixed with simple firmware/OTA updates.
Haha just proves how many "influencers" are just shills. This dude is actually good, I like him. If you send it out for review....you better be prepared for someone's opinion.
Marques is a solid reviewer I think. I watch his videos whenever I'm in the market for a new phone. I guess they want him to take their personal biases into account but that's not how that works. Welcome to the real world, baby.
If a single bad review can tank a multi million dollar company, then I think that company should not be in business. Are there dozens of "rave reviews" for this product, because I've seen nothing but bad ones.
"Do no harm" is in regards to Physicians and their responsibility to their patients whom they care for. It in no way applies to Tech companies who violate the privacy rights of every human being and make stupid garbage products that they sell at exorbitant prices.
“First, do no harm?”
What in the fuck does this guy think running a YouTube channel is? The guy reviews products, he’s not a goddamn doctor.
I swear the internet really has made people completely unaware of themselves. That has got to be one of the most cringey things I have ever seen written.
First do no harm? Bitch, your product sucks.
On the one hand, I think it's great for this youtuber to offer an honest review of a mediocre product. On the other, I don't think he would dare to do the same with an Apple or Tesla product.
The epitome of reacting to a headline without actually watching the video.
Linus talked about this on his WAN show and stated that it's his job as media to review and let the public know if it is worth spending their money on.
I think clickbait, overdramatic criticisms deserve to be called out because they are unfair, but the same applies to over the top praise for a product. In the end, just have to hope the business knows how to market properly.
As others have pointed out, it was in no way a defamatory review and his responsibility is to his viewers, that's it.
He's from the era where "influencer" actually meant someone who is knowledgeable in their respective field and can provide an honest opinion on a product. These clowns are just upset he isn't like some of the newer "influencers" who are quite literally just bought and paid for promotional plants. This is what actual influencers and reviewers should do and not simply "go with the trend" or promote pointless or damaging businesses and products.
I actually think the real misuse of power is actively trying to get people to pay a lot of money for a garbage product just because that will make you rich.
There's a reason Marques Brownlee has so many subscribers. He doesn't just plug tech to make a buck. I remember watching him review the Tesla truck. He was neither kind nor harsh. He just said what he thought was good and bad about it.
I forget. The people are pushing for this is the people pushing for both sidesm. They are toxic and gotta understand that their opinions are garbage and they should stop whining when getting called out for it.
This is a problem with the guitar pedal community - too many people claiming a shit pedal is great when the reality is that pedal PLUS the guitar, and amp, and speaker, and microphone and post-production allllll effect the recorded tone of a guitar.
The result is often not exactly what one expected.
There is a push for pedal demo people to be more honest or simply don’t review something they can’t say anything nice aboot.
I don't mind honest reviews, I mind click-baity titles. And in the review, he talks about how long the response time is, making a big deal out of it, and when testing it, a response comes within a few seconds. Maybe not instant, but that critique was way out of proportion. The rest, I don't have much to say about.
Dude almost got it while discussing his reach and then went the other way.
You can have influence with that many followers and he's being honest instead of taking bribes from the company. As opposed to what I'm assuming a lot of so called "influencers" do and just heap praise on a shitty product because they were paid.
If I remember correctly the owner of the company has gone after multiple people on socials for public bad reviews some post from accounts with like 1k followers
There's a fine line between "honest review" and "click-bait title"
This is a click-bait title even if the review is honest and fair.
It's the title that causes harm, not the review
A lack of corporate accountability, especially those "too big to fail" companies, are why we're getting such a downslope of quality when it comes to products and services (looking at you Microsoft).
Watched the review and thought it was fair, the only thing that bugged me is he never mentions the entire ethos of humane is to create an alternative to smart phones focused on not taking people out of their environment. It's not a phone replacement it's supposed to be something completely different to change our dependence on screens. But having said that it still wasn't ready for release.
I'm completely perplexed at the backlash. When did everyone start mixing up ads with reviews? It seems like the last \~5 years of so the infestation of paid reviews has tainted the perspective of many, and the understanding of what a review is meant to accomplish.
["Critique and review are protected by American Fair Use doctrine, and rightfully so. The idea that you could use copyright law to attack those who are criticizing you is an affront to free speech and freedom of the press. It is horrendously anti-consumer. It is unquestionably censorship." - John "TotalBiscuit" Bain, October 20, 2013.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfgoDDh4kE0)
Marques was extremely fair with his review. It is obvious to me that he genuinely wanted to see the good in the product but a bad product will always be just that, no matter how you twist and turn it. This gadget costs 700$ and a further 24$ a month just for it to be beaten by every half decent smartphone at the very thing it specifically is built to do.
Siri works a lot better than that shit and Siri genuinely isn’t a good virtual assistant if you aren’t looking for the next Starbucks.
The company won’t go bust because some YouTuber with a lot of reach was testing out their new device and left a negative review, but because they try to sell you something that barely works with the promise that at some point it will get better. That’s just not how any of this works. I won’t buy some overpriced crap in the hopes that 2 or 3 generations down the line the product will be a success.
If Marques wanted to, he could have been a lot more confrontational because this gadget really is just a waste of both money and time. It is an insult to the people to even market this thing as anything but a shameful cash grab. And the worst thing is despite the clear judgement of multiple reviewers (not just Marques) there will still be a lot of idiots who will buy this piece of junk because of Buzzwords like AI.
Make a shit product and you’ll get a bad review. Simple as that. If you don’t want your product to be “killed“ by one bad review, then make it better.
And don't expect someone like Marques to fluff the review just because you sent him free shit. He has a huge following because he's honest and knowledgeable.
yeah, No. Marques skips a lot of shit in his reviews, you can see it specially in his Cybertruck review.
I watched his Cybertruck review, had never heard of him prior. Unless he's a full blown Muskrat I refuse to believe he wasn't paid for that review. Aesthetic opinions aside, there is so much wrong with that car. He somehow managed to review a truck without discussing towing capability or bed storage space.
He is a Musk Rat, but I think he’s starting to wake up to how far he’s fallen.
He kinda pissed me off with the dbrand shit while fondling musks balls
Ah, well then that makes sense.
> without discussing towing capability or bed storage space. Because he uses a truck the way most people use a truck -- like it's a car.
For sure. You know most people that *review* a truck would at least pretend to act like those are relevant things, I respect him for dropping the pretense. Sure you’re never going to use the reason you can’t see out the back of the thing, but that’s part of the charm. Now I’m getting it.
I drive a truck and I do a goodly amount of product reviews. If Ford asked me to review my truck I would review it how I know and interact and open the review with "in a dad, a desk jockey and I drive this truck like a minivan so that's the perspective I'm going to give you"
Then it's a bit useless as a review. If I look for a review I want to know the relevant things, not how you use it. You may review a phone which you only use as a paperweight, that will have a significant difference to someone who actually tells me how long a phone's battery lasts (for example). It would be a thing that doesn't matter to you, since a paperweight doesn't need to be on.
any review that is not from the perspective of how you would use the product is useless. it was useless for me to see reviews of the truck i bought from people using it as a work machine. The ones i found of people using it as a minivan were extremely useful. And someone who doesn't use it as a work truck reviewing it as one is completely useless. If someone only wants to buy an iPhone for a paperweight, they will never care about its battery capacity, its just that VERY few people would EVER buy an iPhone as a paperweight. LOTS of people use pickup trucks as minivans (probably close to 30-50% of private owners of new pickups) so it is not a useless review.
You're missing the point here. There is a reason that for example car reviews go through things like "usability of the backseat" or "how easily can I put 3 child seats in the back" that is standard stuff that people want to know. If you review it as "I'm the only person in the car and I've never even opened the rear doors" then it's a completely useless review. Same if you review a work vehicle or off-road vehicle but then don't talk about the off road abilities of the vehicle. What's the point?
Most people getting it are never going to tow anything or take it off road, and you don't need the specs in a review as you can look those up. If all you want are the numbers then you can do that in a much shorter amount of time by simply looking at the specs
It's not useless as a review. It's just limited in its utility as a review. It'll be very useful for the type of people who use it in the same fashion. Face it, the vast majority of people who buy trucks *don't actually need trucks*. Most consumers would find a review like that useful.
> honest and knowledgeable I seriously doubt that. Dude has a massive boner for Tesla and Apple. The recent cyber truck video almost felt like a sponsored ad. He has good presentation skills and maybe knowledge from experience. I give him that, but I don't think he's an honest reviewer. His bias is really showing these days. And don't even get me started on his stupid takes on mobiles from the Asian market. He's so ignorant and refuses to put even a little bit of effort in researching them. It's like he starts with an opinion and dances around trying to justify it. Sorry for the rant. Used to watch him religiously since 2011. I can tell he's changed.
Yeah he's deep in the pockets of Tesla and it makes it hard to watch his videos now.
No need to apologise. It's your opinion. I only based mine on how he was when I followed him early on and learned of him through a mobile reviewer. Of course, I wasn't considering how he could have/has changed since.
He also crushed Zucks Meta Quest 3 on his podcast and never even did a real review of it. Right then and there I knew he was biased. The Quest 3 tech is absolutely astonishing for its price point but he never gave it a chance. But when the Apple Pro came out, he was gushing.
He can’t review cars well. Compare his review of the BMW iX to the one by CarWow
Why not? We’re literally talking about “just buy it” Marques Brownlee.
Or do what other companies do and just pay for good reviews and swamp youtube with those videos. (I think this is sarcasm?)
He even has a video about the so called "killing": https://youtu.be/QztFpzKsdeA?si=VLIe6VzJOWvdFYy7 The tl;dr is that shit products kill themselves and dishonest reviews kill reviewers.
"first do no harm" Are product reviewers suddenly DOCTORS??? When did they take the Hippocratic Oath?!
Makes perfect sense from within the rat king of maladaptive metaphor this guy views life through, I assume.
According to the medicine subreddit, it's not even really something they have to abide by 100% of the time either because it can be so subjective.
IIRC the real rule is closer to "As far as you can, make sure you make the patient's situation better not worse"
Right? If you implement that to the letter of the law you’d never draw blood labs to detect illnesses because breaching the skin would do minor harm. Obviously it’s more of a balance than that.
Also why doesn't "do no harm" not apply to the consumers who would be ripped off by the janky piece of shit
That's why it's "Hard to explain why." Because there is no reason that doesn't involve misinformed consumers wasting their money.
"Do no harm ^^^^tomybottomline ."
I don’t know who this guy is but considering that he has a paid custom badge on Twitter I assume he must be a VC / Startup-adjacent guy. If you buy into the whole mythos that these are “founders” and “visionaries” his statement kinda makes sense. But the reality is that it’s just people (usually fresh grads) trying to find a niche and get rich off it, and rich people funding them and betting their success. The optimism is kinda something you need to buy into as a member of a start up because otherwise you realize that you’re being underpaid for something that may never come to fruition and have no job security.
"with great reach,comes great responsibility" bitch you ain't Spiderman.
“I’m gonna need you to take 200mg of oxy and fix this broken ass product”
Corporations are people my friend
I watched the review when it came out, and it was very honest. The impression I got was the device is not ready to release to the public; he said the hardware was impressive but the software and lack of integration with phones was holding the device back.
As someone in product development, the video title made me cry a little on the inside for the developers. It was very fair though and praised a lot of what the they did - I’m sure it wasn’t the devs who decided to go ahead and launch it half baked.
I don't even think the dough is ready in this one. Half baked is one thing, but all of the output that did work gave incorrect information. Which is the main reason I will not trust AI. It is so confident in giving misinformation. I asked the Meta AI "How do I disable Meta AI?" and it gives options that do not exist in the Facebook Settings, then gaslights you into thinking you're just on the wrong platform. I've uninstalled the app on my phone until they can give a toggle off for that useless feature. I do not need a search that will consistently provide me with the wrong information more often than a google search - and PRESENT IT AS REAL.
Spotify has their AI DJ on beta right now and it just makes up what my listening history. It’s been 100% in picking artists I don’t listen to but claiming that they are one of my favorites.
80% of the time my Spotify DJ works great, but that other 20% it goes off the fucking rails. Yesterday was one of those time and man was it awful.
I’m pretty sure it purposely plays a pack of of songs that are popular at the moment or just something they want to push every once in awhile.
Reminds me of Pandora initially (or maybe still is) where the same 5-6 super catch folk songs and mgmt songs would get mixed in on basically any playlist.
I mean, they gotta get you to use up those skips somehow.
My favorite is when it told me what I've been listening to lately is "Kangaroo Poo" by Mr Poo. I mean damn DJ I know my taste in music isn't popular but it's not that shit
I listen to a lot of folk/bluegrass/indie/punk and yesterday it did a whole block of reggaeton and then started playing Taylor Swift. It also played a block of noise pop, which I had never heard of, but really dug, so that was pretty cool. But yeah, when it’s off, it’s real off.
Haha my husband gets shitty recs sometimes from Spotify, but he says he fell asleep listening and "maybe I did play that song a lot without knowing it". But it sounds like, nope, Spotify just likes to tell you you listen to this stuff, without you actually having heard it before. Wow.
"Here's a band that was a big part of your rotation, but has kind of fallen off your radar." Really? Cuz I've never heard of this band before in my life and all I listen to is my shuffled playlist of liked songs.
Reason 1,243 I don't use Spotify
What do you use?
Amazon Music works very well for quality and pays artists more than Spotify (though that's a low bar)
they are. you just don't know it yet...
Mine is pretty spot on, and it makes it clear when it'll be putting on songs that it thinks I'll like.
Hahah Boomer AI?! Say it isn't so!
Yeah, Meta basically added AI nonsense to their site.
Good luck avoiding AI in the near future 🤣. It’ll get better and absolutely ubiquitous (though usefulness I still question from a user standpoint; this is from a capitalist pig standpoint). Donkey balls.
Why would I have trouble avoiding it? If a service has an LLM integrated I just... wouldn't use it. Windows has Copilot, and I just ignore it. Google has Bard, and I ignore it. If a service only has an LLM to interact with it, then I just wouldn't use that service. It wouldn't have anything to offer me Maybe one day LLMs or methods to replace them will be useful, and I'll reevaluate my opinion when it happens
My assumption is that it will begin to be incorporated in a lot of places and services, rendering it unavoidable at some point unless you want to stop using a ton of stuff. It’s already beginning to show up in phone center conversations, drive-thru windows, customer service portals in general. The capitalist sees a cheaper piece of software and an expensive human - which do you think they’ll choose? That’s the basis of my assumption; I’d rather be wrong.
I think you're going to get a bit of whipsnaking happening with the current push (and that's even beyond a "bias error" like we see with Gemini) towards integration of AI tech. Investors see the marketing term "AI" and want everybody all-in. But businesses are realizing that it's not so simple, and ignoring the fact that it's a _marketing term_. I know a handful of orgs that have tried to and gone back after it's clear that the marketing outshines the actual capabilities; it still requires people to manage, it's just _different_ people than before (say bye-bye, institutional knowledge). Don't get me wrong, there's room for massive improvement in the AI space, but it's not quite as simple as "less $ on labour = better". There is a sweet spot with automation, C-suites have forgotten that it seems. Walmart is removing self-checkout lanes in some stores. This isn't directly AI related, but just automation in general. Then there's Amazon getting rid of their unstaffed "AI" stores because it turned out that it paying Sanjay in India to be "AI" and tag purchases to train the models isn't working well enough to deal with shrink. Also with automation in general, it only makes sense at a certain scale. If everybody could put a single 5-DoF industrial arm in their factory, they would. But it's more than the several hundreds of thousands of dollars of cost. You gotta pay someone to program it, you gotta pay someone to maintain it. Most importantly, you have to have a task that _makes sense_ for the automation. Car factories and large-scale assembly lines make sense, you can task that robot for the single job, and when the job changes, you alter the programming slightly. It makes sense for an automaker to have in-house staff to deal with those bots. It doesn't make sense for Gammy's Homestyle Pierogi shop, or Bob's Bespoke Widget Manufacturing Inc. AI is no different, it has a lot of good potential uses, but the current marketing oversells that in a big way.
Yeah, I’m not even really talking about the big buzz word AI of today, but the more fully / intelligently integrated kind of 1-5 years from now. Give it twenty years, and it will be part of everyday life for everyone. Hopefully, if we’re lucky, it’ll be the sub-surface / more invisible kind and not the dystopian flavor.
I don't care how useful it is, if it collects data about me and gives it to someone else, I won't use it. Somehow the dystopia we're getting is shittier than the one in old cyberpunk stories.
Certain things need to be codified into the constitution: strict privacy regs, and body autonomy.
That is going to be like saying you don't use an interstate so you don't interact with it. AI isn't going to take over everything overnight, but the infrastructure is being built now. Even if you aren't giving it direct inputs AI will be a part of life now, IMO.
It’s never the devs. It’s almost always some high-ranking douche bag in marketing or project management.
I watched it last week after the hullabaloo started. You're spot on - he was honest and upfront, and that thing is definitely not a fully finished product. Some cool ideas, and somebody has to be the first to market something like this, but it'll be some years before this concept takes root.
I think the company doesn't *want* to integrate with phones, because they think their device will *replace* phones.
Not only that, but i suspect this is how they see themselves capturing the most revenue.
And that’s mentioned in the YouTube review. But the issue is that phones are more appealing than a voice assistant for most needs.
The things it does dont even work without the phone. For example, the device has its own phone number. So, it can send texts...but it doesnt send with the number everyone already has in their contact list as yours, which is the one assigned to your phone. So, they randomly start getting texts from you from an unknown number.
He wasn’t even hating the product either. He praised the parts of the product that work and emphasized that currently the product just isn’t for public consumption. Unfortunately most of the review is about the very lacking parts of the product that need work. These people are so weird wanting to really hate him for this review. The company was given really good feedback for them to use and further develop the product should they decide to improve it. Anyone with common sense would see that.
The company even said the review was fair and the feedback was helpful.
They rushing it. If they took another 2 years to develop, I can see this being huge. They need to get the AI close to what meta has for the raybans before release Imo
Snowflakes outside of winter.
Both Marques and Mrwhosetheboss had similar takes on the product. The fact that it literally becomes a paperweight unless you pay a $24/mo service fee *and* that service is only available through the manufacturer means that even buying one of these is a huge risk. If they go under, or if they raise rates, you don't get a choice; you're stuck with a useless device. I can't see how being honest about that is a problem. They're reviewers. It's literally their job to tell us if something is bad.
I mean you're right of course, but have you considered how it'll impact their profits?
[удалено]
I mean....you should possibly consider the consistency of your own farts if you want to avoid shitting your pants but maybe that's just me.
fuck them
After a google smart tv became near useless after they stopped supporting and updating the apps I decided not to buy more products that count on a single company supporting them. My computer can watch streaming services, hdmi to a big tv, and I don’t have to worry specialized apps don’t get updates
> If they go under, or if they raise rates, you don't get a choice; you're stuck with a useless device. This is becoming far too commonplace. Holding their customers hostage.
Something something free market something
The biggest drawback to me (besides price) is that it's a weighty box pinned on the front of your shirt all the time. I would be afraid to lose thus $1000 matchbox.
Do no harm? The guy is NOT a doctor FFS
Won't someone think of the corporations!
I like your profile pic, is that a flag of something?
Favorite soccer team.
Does he not have a “great responsibility” to his viewers to not endorse a terrible product?
Conservatives don't like "The free market" when a black man voices an opinion
This right here. Marques failed the (lack of) melanin check and thus pearls were clutched.
THEY SHOOOOORE DON'T.
“First, do no harm” applies to doctors, not product reviews.
What is this product?
It's a hands free, voice activated search engine. It...kinda works but it's buggy as hell and expensive. It can also do half of what your phone can do but less impressive
So it’s less capable and less convenient than a phone but it costs the same? Where can I get one?
You forget there's also a monthly subscription!
And you still need a phone
If you have a phone and still need one to use the product... why not just use the phone?
Seriously...how are we just supposed to know when the name of it isn't in the title, thumbnail, or description?
I wanted to form my own opinion so I watched the review. It was a fair review. It gave credit for the concept, design and manufacturing quality, but his base conclusion is valid: it has issues in execution and no benefits over existing tech (smartphone). As a consumer it has persuaded me that this would be a fun toy... That would end up in a drawer after a week.
I watched the review. It's a terrible product when cell phones already exist. I would never expect Marques to softball a review for a product.
Do no harm. That is literally what he is doing to his viewer. By stopping them from buying a bad product.
As a tech reviewer, his responsibility is to the consumer, not the organizations pushing their products. Harm would have been done had he lied to his 18 million subscribers. Also... and this should go without saying but: Youtubers didn't take the hippocratic oath.
"First do no harm" When did Marques become a doctor?
Stfu Daniel
"first, do no harm"???? Do fucking TikTok review people take the hypocratic oath now or something? 😂🤣🤣🤣
I watched the review and not only was it FAIR, but Marques seemed to go out of his way to find good things to say about it. Even when it was difficult. The reality of the Humane AI device is that it's half-baked at best. And it seems like a lot of the issues won't be fixed with simple firmware/OTA updates.
Haha just proves how many "influencers" are just shills. This dude is actually good, I like him. If you send it out for review....you better be prepared for someone's opinion.
I watched the video and the product truly seems shitty and worthless.
If you don’t want your nascent business ruined, then come up with a better product.
Agreed: if the nascent business is ruined because of one honest review, the business is not ready to be public imho
Have they tried, uhhh, making a better product?
>Hard to explain why Your feelings. He told the truth and hurt your feelings.
Marques is a solid reviewer I think. I watch his videos whenever I'm in the market for a new phone. I guess they want him to take their personal biases into account but that's not how that works. Welcome to the real world, baby.
If a single bad review can tank a multi million dollar company, then I think that company should not be in business. Are there dozens of "rave reviews" for this product, because I've seen nothing but bad ones.
"Do no harm" Bruh he's a youtuber, not a doctor
"Do no harm" is in regards to Physicians and their responsibility to their patients whom they care for. It in no way applies to Tech companies who violate the privacy rights of every human being and make stupid garbage products that they sell at exorbitant prices.
“First, do no harm?” What in the fuck does this guy think running a YouTube channel is? The guy reviews products, he’s not a goddamn doctor. I swear the internet really has made people completely unaware of themselves. That has got to be one of the most cringey things I have ever seen written. First do no harm? Bitch, your product sucks.
for me its the title, the content was fine, Tech Youtubers really need to re-think their video titles
lol, he thinks Marques took the Hippocratic oath.
"First, do no harm" applies to medical providers, not YouTube tech reviewers.
Ah yes, the first tenet of Influencing. “First, do no harm.” 
The reason he has 18 million subscribers is because he gives honest, thorough, reviews of products. Stfu and make a better product.
Umm… that’s why they call it a review. Is his responsibility to lie? Is Daniel part owner of this company or something.
I'm sorry, I thought he was a YouTube review channel, didn't realize review channels now fall under the hypocritic oath....
I generally like his reviews. He’s not a blatant shill with zero integrity like iJustine who I’m convinced is just AI created by Apple.
> He’s not a blatant shill with zero integrity Maybe not blatant, but his reviews on tesla and apple products feel less than genuine.
“First do no harm” He’s not a doctor. Marques didn’t take the social media Hippocratic oath.
If you don't want reviewers to bash your products, don't make shitty products. It's not hard.
First, do no harm? Marques is not the product's doctor.
On the one hand, I think it's great for this youtuber to offer an honest review of a mediocre product. On the other, I don't think he would dare to do the same with an Apple or Tesla product.
The epitome of reacting to a headline without actually watching the video. Linus talked about this on his WAN show and stated that it's his job as media to review and let the public know if it is worth spending their money on.
First, do no harm? I'm sorry, but when did YouTuber start requiring a hippocratic oath?
“Buyer beware” but company’s need kid gloves 🙄
I think clickbait, overdramatic criticisms deserve to be called out because they are unfair, but the same applies to over the top praise for a product. In the end, just have to hope the business knows how to market properly.
As others have pointed out, it was in no way a defamatory review and his responsibility is to his viewers, that's it. He's from the era where "influencer" actually meant someone who is knowledgeable in their respective field and can provide an honest opinion on a product. These clowns are just upset he isn't like some of the newer "influencers" who are quite literally just bought and paid for promotional plants. This is what actual influencers and reviewers should do and not simply "go with the trend" or promote pointless or damaging businesses and products.
>First, do no harm What a fucking dork
Make good products to combat bad reviews
>First, do no harm ...product reviews are not medical care
I want honest reviews!
I actually think the real misuse of power is actively trying to get people to pay a lot of money for a garbage product just because that will make you rich.
he showed why its useless in the video, did baldie not pay attention?
If you don’t want your product poorly reviewed then make a better product. Seems pretty simple
There's a reason Marques Brownlee has so many subscribers. He doesn't just plug tech to make a buck. I remember watching him review the Tesla truck. He was neither kind nor harsh. He just said what he thought was good and bad about it.
That’s capitalism 🤷♂️
Honest review ish, he dickrides the hell out of Elon and Apple.
How?
I forget. The people are pushing for this is the people pushing for both sidesm. They are toxic and gotta understand that their opinions are garbage and they should stop whining when getting called out for it.
"Hard to explain why..." -- really?
Dammit Dan, he's a reviewer, not a doctor!
“Hard to explain why” lol maybe because it’s unhinged irrational nonsense???
So, is that thing a ripoff of the Rabbit R1?
Make a better product then Gosh common sense is just gone these days
This is a problem with the guitar pedal community - too many people claiming a shit pedal is great when the reality is that pedal PLUS the guitar, and amp, and speaker, and microphone and post-production allllll effect the recorded tone of a guitar. The result is often not exactly what one expected. There is a push for pedal demo people to be more honest or simply don’t review something they can’t say anything nice aboot.
I'm pretty sure review videos don't have to follow the corporate hippocratic oath.
I don't mind honest reviews, I mind click-baity titles. And in the review, he talks about how long the response time is, making a big deal out of it, and when testing it, a response comes within a few seconds. Maybe not instant, but that critique was way out of proportion. The rest, I don't have much to say about.
Does this mfr have stake in the company? It seems like some unnecessary tech bullshit.
Dude almost got it while discussing his reach and then went the other way. You can have influence with that many followers and he's being honest instead of taking bribes from the company. As opposed to what I'm assuming a lot of so called "influencers" do and just heap praise on a shitty product because they were paid.
>reviews a product honestly Hahah yeah ok. If you think he gives honest reviews then you haven’t been paying attention.
Do no harm? Was the dude a doctor?!
If I remember correctly the owner of the company has gone after multiple people on socials for public bad reviews some post from accounts with like 1k followers
Local sentient cue ball doesn’t understand the concept behind reviews
"first do no harm" like he's a fucking doctor? 🙄
https://preview.redd.it/rbbtxyx0nbwc1.png?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3239c4b012ea65b93bbf0a1ac07035036b6aa6c9
Oh no, someone didnt like something you made. Get in line with all of the creatives, we're all standing here.
Going by that pfp, that dude absolutely knows what human flesh tastes like.
The hippocratic oath for marketers?
There's a fine line between "honest review" and "click-bait title" This is a click-bait title even if the review is honest and fair. It's the title that causes harm, not the review
Tell me you’ve made shitty products and had bad reviews without telling me you’ve made shitty products and had bad reviews.
A lack of corporate accountability, especially those "too big to fail" companies, are why we're getting such a downslope of quality when it comes to products and services (looking at you Microsoft).
Watched the review and thought it was fair, the only thing that bugged me is he never mentions the entire ethos of humane is to create an alternative to smart phones focused on not taking people out of their environment. It's not a phone replacement it's supposed to be something completely different to change our dependence on screens. But having said that it still wasn't ready for release.
Maybe don't make a shitty product.
First do no harm? He's not a fucking doctor
I'm completely perplexed at the backlash. When did everyone start mixing up ads with reviews? It seems like the last \~5 years of so the infestation of paid reviews has tainted the perspective of many, and the understanding of what a review is meant to accomplish.
If they had at least a good product, that review was deserved
FFS dude thinks the Hippocratic oath covers YouTubers 😂
If it sucks, it sucks. Whether it be indies or Inc$.
he linked the video undoubtably leading more people to watch it 
What's the point of reviews if you can't say bad things about it ? In this case it's nothing more than long ad
["Critique and review are protected by American Fair Use doctrine, and rightfully so. The idea that you could use copyright law to attack those who are criticizing you is an affront to free speech and freedom of the press. It is horrendously anti-consumer. It is unquestionably censorship." - John "TotalBiscuit" Bain, October 20, 2013.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfgoDDh4kE0)
“STOP DOING CAPITALISM WRONG!!”
abundant spotted include slim cows fact exultant dog fear detail *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
That's what you want. If a nascent company is crap then so be it.
Marques was extremely fair with his review. It is obvious to me that he genuinely wanted to see the good in the product but a bad product will always be just that, no matter how you twist and turn it. This gadget costs 700$ and a further 24$ a month just for it to be beaten by every half decent smartphone at the very thing it specifically is built to do. Siri works a lot better than that shit and Siri genuinely isn’t a good virtual assistant if you aren’t looking for the next Starbucks. The company won’t go bust because some YouTuber with a lot of reach was testing out their new device and left a negative review, but because they try to sell you something that barely works with the promise that at some point it will get better. That’s just not how any of this works. I won’t buy some overpriced crap in the hopes that 2 or 3 generations down the line the product will be a success. If Marques wanted to, he could have been a lot more confrontational because this gadget really is just a waste of both money and time. It is an insult to the people to even market this thing as anything but a shameful cash grab. And the worst thing is despite the clear judgement of multiple reviewers (not just Marques) there will still be a lot of idiots who will buy this piece of junk because of Buzzwords like AI.
"I have a strong opinion" and also "hard to explain why, trust me bro"
If there's one person that doesn't review products honestly in favour of brands, it's Marques Brownlee
I’ve seen clips of this thing too, and 90% of its “features” aren’t yet implemented
How many subs did Linus Tech Tips have during the Billet Labs scandal, where he *actually* killed a company (and then sold off their prototype)?