OuterMarker

get push video wallpaper. download their samples or stream a video off youtube
 
https://www.push-entertainment.com/video-wallpaper/

For me, I want it to be easy to quit games. Sometimes I will play right up until I have to until I have to do something else and then I want to exit the game quickly. I really hate it when games make me go through various menus to quit and close the game. As it stands now, I resort to task manager. I shouldn't have to quit the match, exit the multiplayer menu, go back another step to the main menu, hit close, hit confirm, and THEN close the game launcher too.
 
The worst offender is World of Warships which has a dark pattern when you try to quite. After you press ESC, the "continue" button is twice the size of the "quit button." 

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

Cool. Someone makes allegations about a toxic work environment and a fanboy says we should ignore her because she is too ugly to be on an internet tech channel.
 
LTT has some trash fans.

With regards to "journalism" and ethics... Steve was not required to talk to Linus ahead of time before posting the video. In journalism, you only contact the subject if the evidence you have is from third parties or if you think the subject of your piece might give you a good quote. The bulk of Steve's criticism was directly from LTT videos, so there was no need for Linus to comment on videos his team approved or direct quotes from Linus on the WAN show.
 
Now for those who think that he had a social responsibility to talk to Linus directly because they are friends: I'm glad he didn't. Do we really want to live in a world where issues are handled behind the scenes to leave the audience in the dark? Steve wants Linus to do better and calling him out publically is the only thing that will get his attention (kind of like the video Linus did about Intel in the rain). I'm sure plenty of the LMG staff have expressed concerns about the quality of the videos, but he has obviously ignored them because he thinks upload schedules are more important than accuracy. Also, if Linus gets a crappy CPU from Intel, does he spend weeks emailing them about the poor test results and give them time to ramp up their PR machine? No, he publishes the video because it's more important to inform the general public of the poor product before a large company can spin the negative review in their favor.

With regards to "journalism" and ethics... Steve was not required to talk to Linus ahead of time before posting the video. In journalism, you only contact the subject if the evidence you have is from third parties or if you think the subject of your piece might give you a good quote. The bulk of Steve's criticism was directly from LTT videos, so there was no need for Linus to comment on videos his team approved or direct quotes from Linus on the WAN show.
 
Now for those who think that he had a social responsibility to talk to Linus directly because they are friends: I'm glad he didn't. Do we really want to live in a world where issues are handled behind the scenes to leave the audience in the dark? Steve wants Linus to do better and calling him out publically is the only thing that will get his attention (kind of like the video Linus did about Intel in the rain). I'm sure plenty of the LMG staff have expressed concerns about the quality of the videos, but he has obviously ignored them because he thinks upload schedules are more important than accuracy. Also, if Linus gets a crappy CPU from Intel, does he spend weeks emailing them about the poor test results and give them time to ramp up their PR machine? No, he publishes the video because it's more important to inform the general public of the poor product before a large company can spin the negative review in their favor.

With regards to "journalism" and ethics... Steve was not required to talk to Linus ahead of time before posting the video. In journalism, you only contact the subject if the evidence you have is from third parties or if you think the subject of your piece might give you a good quote. The bulk of Steve's criticism was directly from LTT videos, so there was no need for Linus to comment on videos his team approved or direct quotes from Linus on the WAN show.
 
Now for those who think that he had a social responsibility to talk to Linus directly because they are friends: I'm glad he didn't. Do we really want to live in a world where issues are handled behind the scenes to leave the audience in the dark? Steve wants Linus to do better and calling him out publically is the only thing that will get his attention (kind of like the video Linus did about Intel in the rain). I'm sure plenty of the LMG staff have expressed concerns about the quality of the videos, but he has obviously ignored them because he thinks upload schedules are more important than accuracy. Also, if Linus gets a crappy CPU from Intel, does he spend weeks emailing them about the poor test results and give them time to ramp up their PR machine? No, he publishes the video because it's more important to inform the general public of the poor product before a large company can spin the negative review in their favor.

The Billet Labs situation has distracted many from the most important part of Steve's criticism... the quality of LTT videos. 
 
I am way more concerned about the poor quality of the testing, the many mistakes that are allowed in videos, and the overall rushed and unprepared nature of some of the shoots (the Billet Labs video itself).
 
Steve hit the nail on the head when he said the root cause is the self-imposed deadlines and upload schedule. Linus has to decide what the purpose of each video is. Is it a review? Is it showing off an ambitious tech project? Or is it mindless tech entertainment? Right now, I don't think they are doing any of those videos well.
 
If the goal is to be a review video, accuracy needs to be the number one priority. If that means you delay a video or pull a video down, so be it. An asterisk is not good enough. Sometimes the corrections are on the screen so briefly that I have to go back and pause the video. Who knows how many I missed when I wasn't looking at the screen.  And how can I expect to trust your conclusion if so many facts are corrected days or weeks after you recorded the video?
 
If it's an ambitious tech project (like showing off an expensive water block that looks cool). Put the product in its best light. Most of us are never going to play with those halo projects. You are our chance to see what they can actually do. And I really don't want to hear, "We aren't going to treat this product with respect because we don't think you should buy it." If that was the case, we would all be gaming on a 5-year-old CPU and last gen card. Sometimes we like to splurge on our hobby rather than only buy stuff with the best performance-to-dollar ratio. Wouldn't that suck if you couldn't find a serious review of a Porsche Taycan because the only youtube review of it said, "A Honda Civic will get you to work just as fast and is cheaper, so rather than taking this Taycan to a track, we are going to see how many bags of groceries it can carry."
 
But my biggest issue is Linus's refusal to do anything that will hurt his channel's performance when he knows there is a mistake. I get it, youtube crushes your video if you delete it and re-upload a similar one a few hours later, but that's the price you pay for your current level of quality control and workflow. If you don't want to delete videos, give your writers and production crew more time. You would call out a tech company that knowingly shipped a defective product, so why shouldn't your viewers treat you the same? It is completely unacceptable to build a media company that can't afford to remove a video or miss an upload if the video is full of errors

The Billet Labs situation has distracted many from the most important part of Steve's criticism... the quality of LTT videos. 
 
I am way more concerned about the poor quality of the testing, the many mistakes that are allowed in videos, and the overall rushed and unprepared nature of some of the shoots (the Billet Labs video itself).
 
Steve hit the nail on the head when he said the root cause is the self-imposed deadlines and upload schedule. Linus has to decide what the purpose of each video is. Is it a review? Is it showing off an ambitious tech project? Or is it mindless tech entertainment? Right now, I don't think they are doing any of those videos well.
 
If the goal is to be a review video, accuracy needs to be the number one priority. If that means you delay a video or pull a video down, so be it. An asterisk is not good enough. Sometimes the corrections are on the screen so briefly that I have to go back and pause the video. Who knows how many I missed when I wasn't looking at the screen.  And how can I expect to trust your conclusion if so many facts are corrected days or weeks after you recorded the video?
 
If it's an ambitious tech project (like showing off an expensive water block that looks cool). Put the product in its best light. Most of us are never going to play with those halo projects. You are our chance to see what they can actually do. And I really don't want to hear, "We aren't going to treat this product with respect because we don't think you should buy it." If that was the case, we would all be gaming on a 5-year-old CPU and last gen card. Sometimes we like to splurge on our hobby rather than only buy stuff with the best performance-to-dollar ratio. Wouldn't that suck if you couldn't find a serious review of a Porsche Taycan because the only youtube review of it said, "A Honda Civic will get you to work just as fast and is cheaper, so rather than taking this Taycan to a track, we are going to see how many bags of groceries it can carry."
 
But my biggest issue is Linus's refusal to do anything that will hurt his channel's performance when he knows there is a mistake. I get it, youtube crushes your video if you delete it and re-upload a similar one a few hours later, but that's the price you pay for your current level of quality control and workflow. If you don't want to delete videos, give your writers and production crew more time. You would call out a tech company that knowingly shipped a defective product, so why shouldn't your viewers treat you the same? It is completely unacceptable to build a media company that can't afford to remove a video or miss an upload if the video is full of errors

The Billet Labs situation has distracted many from the most important part of Steve's criticism... the quality of LTT videos. 
 
I am way more concerned about the poor quality of the testing, the many mistakes that are allowed in videos, and the overall rushed and unprepared nature of some of the shoots (the Billet Labs video itself).
 
Steve hit the nail on the head when he said the root cause is the self-imposed deadlines and upload schedule. Linus has to decide what the purpose of each video is. Is it a review? Is it showing off an ambitious tech project? Or is it mindless tech entertainment? Right now, I don't think they are doing any of those videos well.
 
If the goal is to be a review video, accuracy needs to be the number one priority. If that means you delay a video or pull a video down, so be it. An asterisk is not good enough. Sometimes the corrections are on the screen so briefly that I have to go back and pause the video. Who knows how many I missed when I wasn't looking at the screen.  And how can I expect to trust your conclusion if so many facts are corrected days or weeks after you recorded the video?
 
If it's an ambitious tech project (like showing off an expensive water block that looks cool). Put the product in its best light. Most of us are never going to play with those halo projects. You are our chance to see what they can actually do. And I really don't want to hear, "We aren't going to treat this product with respect because we don't think you should buy it." If that was the case, we would all be gaming on a 5-year-old CPU and last gen card. Sometimes we like to splurge on our hobby rather than only buy stuff with the best performance-to-dollar ratio. Wouldn't that suck if you couldn't find a serious review of a Porsche Taycan because the only youtube review of it said, "A Honda Civic will get you to work just as fast and is cheaper, so rather than taking this Taycan to a track, we are going to see how many bags of groceries it can carry."
 
But my biggest issue is Linus's refusal to do anything that will hurt his channel's performance when he knows there is a mistake. I get it, youtube crushes your video if you delete it and re-upload a similar one a few hours later, but that's the price you pay for your current level of quality control and workflow. If you don't want to delete videos, give your writers and production crew more time. You would call out a tech company that knowingly shipped a defective product, so why shouldn't your viewers treat you the same? It is completely unacceptable to build a media company that can't afford to remove a video or miss an upload if the video is full of errors

The Billet Labs situation has distracted many from the most important part of Steve's criticism... the quality of LTT videos. 
 
I am way more concerned about the poor quality of the testing, the many mistakes that are allowed in videos, and the overall rushed and unprepared nature of some of the shoots (the Billet Labs video itself).
 
Steve hit the nail on the head when he said the root cause is the self-imposed deadlines and upload schedule. Linus has to decide what the purpose of each video is. Is it a review? Is it showing off an ambitious tech project? Or is it mindless tech entertainment? Right now, I don't think they are doing any of those videos well.
 
If the goal is to be a review video, accuracy needs to be the number one priority. If that means you delay a video or pull a video down, so be it. An asterisk is not good enough. Sometimes the corrections are on the screen so briefly that I have to go back and pause the video. Who knows how many I missed when I wasn't looking at the screen.  And how can I expect to trust your conclusion if so many facts are corrected days or weeks after you recorded the video?
 
If it's an ambitious tech project (like showing off an expensive water block that looks cool). Put the product in its best light. Most of us are never going to play with those halo projects. You are our chance to see what they can actually do. And I really don't want to hear, "We aren't going to treat this product with respect because we don't think you should buy it." If that was the case, we would all be gaming on a 5-year-old CPU and last gen card. Sometimes we like to splurge on our hobby rather than only buy stuff with the best performance-to-dollar ratio. Wouldn't that suck if you couldn't find a serious review of a Porsche Taycan because the only youtube review of it said, "A Honda Civic will get you to work just as fast and is cheaper, so rather than taking this Taycan to a track, we are going to see how many bags of groceries it can carry."
 
But my biggest issue is Linus's refusal to do anything that will hurt his channel's performance when he knows there is a mistake. I get it, youtube crushes your video if you delete it and re-upload a similar one a few hours later, but that's the price you pay for your current level of quality control and workflow. If you don't want to delete videos, give your writers and production crew more time. You would call out a tech company that knowingly shipped a defective product, so why shouldn't your viewers treat you the same? It is completely unacceptable to build a media company that can't afford to remove a video or miss an upload if the video is full of errors

The Billet Labs situation has distracted many from the most important part of Steve's criticism... the quality of LTT videos. 
 
I am way more concerned about the poor quality of the testing, the many mistakes that are allowed in videos, and the overall rushed and unprepared nature of some of the shoots (the Billet Labs video itself).
 
Steve hit the nail on the head when he said the root cause is the self-imposed deadlines and upload schedule. Linus has to decide what the purpose of each video is. Is it a review? Is it showing off an ambitious tech project? Or is it mindless tech entertainment? Right now, I don't think they are doing any of those videos well.
 
If the goal is to be a review video, accuracy needs to be the number one priority. If that means you delay a video or pull a video down, so be it. An asterisk is not good enough. Sometimes the corrections are on the screen so briefly that I have to go back and pause the video. Who knows how many I missed when I wasn't looking at the screen.  And how can I expect to trust your conclusion if so many facts are corrected days or weeks after you recorded the video?
 
If it's an ambitious tech project (like showing off an expensive water block that looks cool). Put the product in its best light. Most of us are never going to play with those halo projects. You are our chance to see what they can actually do. And I really don't want to hear, "We aren't going to treat this product with respect because we don't think you should buy it." If that was the case, we would all be gaming on a 5-year-old CPU and last gen card. Sometimes we like to splurge on our hobby rather than only buy stuff with the best performance-to-dollar ratio. Wouldn't that suck if you couldn't find a serious review of a Porsche Taycan because the only youtube review of it said, "A Honda Civic will get you to work just as fast and is cheaper, so rather than taking this Taycan to a track, we are going to see how many bags of groceries it can carry."
 
But my biggest issue is Linus's refusal to do anything that will hurt his channel's performance when he knows there is a mistake. I get it, youtube crushes your video if you delete it and re-upload a similar one a few hours later, but that's the price you pay for your current level of quality control and workflow. If you don't want to delete videos, give your writers and production crew more time. You would call out a tech company that knowingly shipped a defective product, so why shouldn't your viewers treat you the same? It is completely unacceptable to build a media company that can't afford to remove a video or miss an upload if the video is full of errors

The Billet Labs situation has distracted many from the most important part of Steve's criticism... the quality of LTT videos. 
 
I am way more concerned about the poor quality of the testing, the many mistakes that are allowed in videos, and the overall rushed and unprepared nature of some of the shoots (the Billet Labs video itself).
 
Steve hit the nail on the head when he said the root cause is the self-imposed deadlines and upload schedule. Linus has to decide what the purpose of each video is. Is it a review? Is it showing off an ambitious tech project? Or is it mindless tech entertainment? Right now, I don't think they are doing any of those videos well.
 
If the goal is to be a review video, accuracy needs to be the number one priority. If that means you delay a video or pull a video down, so be it. An asterisk is not good enough. Sometimes the corrections are on the screen so briefly that I have to go back and pause the video. Who knows how many I missed when I wasn't looking at the screen.  And how can I expect to trust your conclusion if so many facts are corrected days or weeks after you recorded the video?
 
If it's an ambitious tech project (like showing off an expensive water block that looks cool). Put the product in its best light. Most of us are never going to play with those halo projects. You are our chance to see what they can actually do. And I really don't want to hear, "We aren't going to treat this product with respect because we don't think you should buy it." If that was the case, we would all be gaming on a 5-year-old CPU and last gen card. Sometimes we like to splurge on our hobby rather than only buy stuff with the best performance-to-dollar ratio. Wouldn't that suck if you couldn't find a serious review of a Porsche Taycan because the only youtube review of it said, "A Honda Civic will get you to work just as fast and is cheaper, so rather than taking this Taycan to a track, we are going to see how many bags of groceries it can carry."
 
But my biggest issue is Linus's refusal to do anything that will hurt his channel's performance when he knows there is a mistake. I get it, youtube crushes your video if you delete it and re-upload a similar one a few hours later, but that's the price you pay for your current level of quality control and workflow. If you don't want to delete videos, give your writers and production crew more time. You would call out a tech company that knowingly shipped a defective product, so why shouldn't your viewers treat you the same? It is completely unacceptable to build a media company that can't afford to remove a video or miss an upload if the video is full of errors

The Billet Labs situation has distracted many from the most important part of Steve's criticism... the quality of LTT videos. 
 
I am way more concerned about the poor quality of the testing, the many mistakes that are allowed in videos, and the overall rushed and unprepared nature of some of the shoots (the Billet Labs video itself).
 
Steve hit the nail on the head when he said the root cause is the self-imposed deadlines and upload schedule. Linus has to decide what the purpose of each video is. Is it a review? Is it showing off an ambitious tech project? Or is it mindless tech entertainment? Right now, I don't think they are doing any of those videos well.
 
If the goal is to be a review video, accuracy needs to be the number one priority. If that means you delay a video or pull a video down, so be it. An asterisk is not good enough. Sometimes the corrections are on the screen so briefly that I have to go back and pause the video. Who knows how many I missed when I wasn't looking at the screen.  And how can I expect to trust your conclusion if so many facts are corrected days or weeks after you recorded the video?
 
If it's an ambitious tech project (like showing off an expensive water block that looks cool). Put the product in its best light. Most of us are never going to play with those halo projects. You are our chance to see what they can actually do. And I really don't want to hear, "We aren't going to treat this product with respect because we don't think you should buy it." If that was the case, we would all be gaming on a 5-year-old CPU and last gen card. Sometimes we like to splurge on our hobby rather than only buy stuff with the best performance-to-dollar ratio. Wouldn't that suck if you couldn't find a serious review of a Porsche Taycan because the only youtube review of it said, "A Honda Civic will get you to work just as fast and is cheaper, so rather than taking this Taycan to a track, we are going to see how many bags of groceries it can carry."
 
But my biggest issue is Linus's refusal to do anything that will hurt his channel's performance when he knows there is a mistake. I get it, youtube crushes your video if you delete it and re-upload a similar one a few hours later, but that's the price you pay for your current level of quality control and workflow. If you don't want to delete videos, give your writers and production crew more time. You would call out a tech company that knowingly shipped a defective product, so why shouldn't your viewers treat you the same? It is completely unacceptable to build a media company that can't afford to remove a video or miss an upload if the video is full of errors