this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
361 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

37712 readers
187 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
Los@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
remington@beehaw.org
361
The Problem with LMG (www.youtube.com)
submitted 1 year ago by Scary_le_Poo@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
101 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

My personal thoughts

At first it came off a bit whiney, but I watched the entire thing and I'm glad I did. It shows a pattern of carelessness and in some cases complete douchebaggery of LMG.

What they did to Billet Labs is absolutely un-fucking excusable. LMG and Linus, in particular, needs to be mercilessly shamed for that until Billet Labs gets a clear and unequivocal apology and paid restitution for damages. Fucking shameful. What a bunch of pricks.

Video Description

This video is not monetized. This video covers our serious concerns regarding the data accuracy of Linus Media Group, including Linus Tech Tips, ShortCircuit, and TechQuickie, particularly as it relates to rushing content out the door to favor -- by staff's own admission -- quantity over quality. As the company continues to expand into its LTT Labs direction, the importance of accurate data increases; however, even as 'only' entertainment, there are still certain responsibilities to the consumer and the manufacturers to report fairly (and to have defined corrections processes in place). We tried to approach this as objectively as possible and hope that viewers are able to listen to the evidence we present, particularly as it relates to significant and frequent data errors that now present in nearly every technical review video.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TopHat@compuverse.uk 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

His comment didn't address two key issues for me:

  • The "crunch"/tight scheduling of projects which led to sloppiness to begin with
  • The constant need to correct, ranging from simple mistakes to very problematic methods.

I've been enjoying solely the WAN Show, but hearing about constant mistakes in benchmarks while praising "We want to show factual information on benchmarks for once.", is rubbing me in the wrong way. You can't rush benchmarking without QA and publish those results as fact. You get to choose for accuracy, or fast to churn content.

And Linus not mentioning something concrete on the first issue is worrying to me, not showing a clear intent to ease on rushing those benchmarks.

Not to mention, it's worth taking down a video if benchmarka are wrong even if the conclusion is "most likely to remain the same", which one cannot conclude with certainty without redoing it. It would be better transparency wise to either not knowingly publish wrong information, or put a more clear notice on said videos besides the description and a pinned comment.