this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2025
889 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

60328 readers
4994 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"The biggest scam in YouTube history"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] simple@lemm.ee 275 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Hell yeah. Huge respect to him and the other youtuber that exposed this, it's crazy that Honey just pocketing most of the referral money has been undiscovered for so many years.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 80 points 1 week ago (4 children)

There is a YouTube video that literaly said they were scamming from 2020.

Linus tech tips figure it out a year back and stop shilling it once they figured it out but for some reason didn't make a video about it?

[–] Kushan@lemmy.world 20 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I don't know why LTT are somehow the bad guys in this, they weren't the only ones to realise that the extension messed with their affiliate links and it's not like it's a thing to publicly shout about every dropped sponsor.

I bet LTT has dropped plenty of sponsors without making a big public deal about it.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Why not name and shame? It's not like burning that bridge would matter if you're unwilling to do business with them anymore.

If you quietly move on, that doesn't help anyone.

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I don't think anyone is saying they're the bad guy. At least I didn't read it that way.

[–] MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

There's a few threads over on Reddit and the LTT forum about how Linus has apparently handled this all wrong, they should have made a video years ago, Linus being dismissive of if on WAN show is him being detached from reality, you know, the usual bullshit

Edit: ITT https://lemmy.world/comment/14273487

In fairness to me (and maybe you) Sync didn't load the comment initially so only after I kept reading I found it

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

but for some reason didn't make a video about it?

Neither did every other creator who stopped doing paid promotion for Honey years ago.

They're not scambusters, they're a computer/tech review channel.

Would be nice if they did a bit of tech scam busting like GN does.

[–] Hello@reddthat.com 1 points 6 days ago

What video are you referring to?

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 67 points 1 week ago (8 children)

They didn't make a video about it because they thought it was a problem for creators, not a problem for consumers. They may have communicated to creators separately to drop honey. They talked about it publicly once they found out honey was also lying to consumers about what they did.

[–] DasAlbatross@lemmy.world 62 points 1 week ago (8 children)

They didn't say anything because they're not pro consumer, they're pro linus media group. They didn't want to appear to be unfriendly to advertisers. There's a reason tech jesus was able to do a big expose on how crap their videos are. They want to churn out content and make money. Being seen as a problematic channel for advertisers doesn't help that.

[–] runjun@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

lol certain criticisms of LTT are quite funny to me. They literally were “unfriendly to advertisers” with Anker. They’ve done it several times in the past. The “tech Jesus” video you’re referring to caused them to pause production and they haven’t ever returned to a video every day since that came out. 🤷‍♂️ you can just not like their videos, it’s ok.

[–] misk@sopuli.xyz 17 points 1 week ago

There’s probably some overlap between people calling for more social responsibility and people who thought some earlier behaviour from LTT was not ok.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 61 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It was Megalag and his channel is amazing. The colorblind scam glasses investigation was amazing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc4yL3YTwWk

[–] echodot 21 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I don't get how anyone thought they would work. If your color blind they obviously don't magically alter the receptors in your eyes.

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 21 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Colourblindness knows many types, most can still see color. Some types even see more or shifted colors.

At least on paper it seems plausible to measure the colour detection cones per iris and then build a filter to strengthen color per eye for which detection is lacking.

The moment i realized they sold them without detailed personal eye scanning involved i knew they were a scam. Gimmick at best. Worst part is they seem catered to people as gifts for colorblind friends, thats just a way to obstruct people from analyzing them to much. What are they going to say? “I dont for a sec believe this overly saturated view is realistic and your gift sucks”? No, they will say “wauw thank you” and shove it in a drawer somewhere next day, never to mention them again.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 8 points 6 days ago

If selling false hope wasn't profitable, there would be a lot of companies (and religions) go out of business.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

If they had worked they might have done so by some sort of contrast enhancement or edge detection, but I don't think either are possible with just optics

[–] echodot 3 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Yes you could absolutely do it with a camera and a computer screen and some software but I can't see how glass or plastic lenses could possibly be expected to do it

[–] psud@aussie.zone 3 points 6 days ago

I just watched the megalag videos on the glasses — the first episode of three — and the claim is they cut out confusing areas of colour that abnormal chromats see.

So if it worked, it only works for people with abnormal versions of one of the three normal colour vision sensors, and only if their deficiency is in green, and then only if it's the correct degree of deficient

But it doesn't work anyway.

The glasses help people see the number in some sheets in the colourblindness test, but hide the number in others. Their colour blindness would appear slightly worse than reality.

You could do AR glasses. And with just optics, you could probably adjust some color spectrums a bit, provided you knew the exact deficiency and which way to adjust colors.

But yeah, no one size fits most situation here.

[–] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 days ago

You mean these X-Ray specs don't actually let me see thru anything?!

[–] bizarroland@fedia.io 55 points 1 week ago (5 children)

I can see how it happens though.

No one was doing any oversight on their practices. If you were running a referral affiliate link system, it must have seemed like honey was doing a really good job bringing customers to you.

I'm just kind of disappointed that nobody inside the company ever spoke up or blew any whistles and said "Hey, this is at best unethical if not entirely illegal and either way exposes us to the risk of a massive lawsuit, maybe we should just actually do our jobs instead of stealing the work of other people."

[–] VerPoilu@sopuli.xyz 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Did you think Amazon didn't know how Honey operates?

[–] bizarroland@fedia.io 3 points 6 days ago

I think Amazon didn't care, so even if someone inside the company figured it out Amazon was just like, it's not our problem to deal with.

[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 66 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I dunno man, whistleblowers aren't getting good treatment from what I see. Two got "suicided" last year from Boeing and OpenAI. The two Theranos whistleblowers were treated really poorly. I felt so bad for them. They're doing talks on ethics and stuff and I only wish them the best. They stood their ground on what they believed in.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 44 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Whistleblowers are always treated poorly because the people in charge never like being called out for their crimes. That's why you've got to have an exit strategy, like Snowden.

[–] echodot 11 points 6 days ago

Snowdon was treated appallingly. He didn't exactly get away with it simply because he left the country.

[–] Gloria@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I can see how nobody blew the whistle, leave his cushy job, prepare for 3-5 years of juristical drama exposing your name and image only to spend the rest of your live living in check notes… Russia.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Obligatory reminder that Snowden intended to go to Ecuador and only got stuck in Russia because that's where he was when the US revoked his passport.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 6 points 6 days ago

I knew a guy--Ola Bini--that fled the US, and emigrated to Ecuador, because he was afraid that he was going to be targeted by the US gov't. I think he made it less than two years in Ecuador before he was arrested for 'hacking' Ecuador gov't computers; he was jailed during the entire judicial process, almost a decade, before all the charges were dropped, and he was released and deported to Sweden. Best guess is that despite not having a extradition treaty with the US, the US still put a ton of pressure on Ecuador to detain him. (Maybe he actually committed crimes? IDK, it's possible, but all charges being dropped after all that time in jail without a trial seems iffy. )

Point is, there aren't a lot of places you can go if the US wants to fuck your life. Russia and China are the best options, and both are not great.

[–] Aqarius@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago

Another reminder that France, Spain, and Italy forced the Bolivian president's plane to land in Austria because they thought Snowden was on it.

[–] jrs100000@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

DIdnt work out so great for Snowden either.

[–] dukeofdummies@lemmy.world 35 points 1 week ago (14 children)

I'm not. What do you get as a reward for blowing the whistle? Genuinely?

  1. There's no bounty, even if there was you wouldn't get it for at least a year after you blow the whistle.

  2. Once it's discovered it's you, you're fired. There goes your paycheck, your health insurance. Now your home is in jeopardy and you have no decent income verification to get a new one.

  3. Good luck working in any job even remotely related to what you know. You now have a stigma in any background check and while a privately owned mom & pop might look at you favorably, there ain't a single corporation who will take pride in hiring you. You're risky.

The most ethical person, is one with no debt, who owns their home, and has 8 months expenses saved up. That's not most Americans right now.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 6 days ago

This is also why there was such coordinated effort to shut down wikileaks, or to at least stall out the cultural movement that was building behind it.

If you give people a methodology to whistleblow that at least on paper allows them to stay anonymous and avoid putting their life/livelyhood/survival in jeapordy, that removes one of the biggest disincentives.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)