tarsius

Here comes another explanation of how I was wrong without watching what I said
 
I never said it was a crime to use AdBlock on YouTube (or in general). I agreed the choice of the word piracy was poor. 
 
I said people need to be aware of the consequences of their actions. That's it. 
 
Not paying for shit has consequences. 
 
I'm not positioning myself as a moral or ethical authority, but I'm at least trying to do better every day. I'm sure as hell doing better than the people arguing with me about this. 
 
Me: sorry my bad. Here's payment for your work. 
 
Others: reeeee it's not technically illegal lolololol bad take lololol

Why do people keep arguing with me about things I clearly don't disagree with.
 
In *my* post I said we (inadvertently, which is no excuse) engaged in software piracy and I apologized and bought a license. Why are you trying to convince me that we did?
 
HOWEVER, the norm (acknowledged by the developer... ) in the industry is to seed copies of many kinds of software to media outlets for the purposes of showcasing or reviewing them. Those media outlets are NOT the target market, but they have occasional uses for it and a captive audience of potential customers.
 
You can be upset by that, but unless the target market for the software IS creatives (like Adobe would never seed us a license, for example because we are their target customer) then creatives will just use something else for their video and you'll miss out on sales to people who actually NEED your software.
 
I don't make the rules here, and I've already taken steps to ensure that we seek permission rather than forgiveness going forward. Not much else I can do at this point.

The amount of hilariously bad takes on this already has me excited for the next WAN show.

I was talking to my girlfriend about this and she mentioned something similar. She thinks it almost certainly doesn't qualify as personal/non-commercial use (especially because the EULA specifically mentions use in a "professional environment" ). In the video showing the software it's never even explained what it is or where to get it, for example, so it being for educational purposes is probably a bridge too far (and doesn't exclude it from being for commercial use anyhow). Furthermore, the court would likely consider the fact that LTT is a large tech company and thus can be held to a higher standard than an average person. 
 
Nevertheless, the software has already been made freely available by the developer, and you don't have to explicitly accept any agreement before downloading it either. It would be very hard to make a case for any *legal* wrongdoing in front of a court. Doubly so after the tweet by the dev.
 
By the way, the software does have a pop-up that mentions the license agreement, but you only see that after already having downloaded and installed the software which makes it somewhat useless in terms of legality. 
 
All of this is purely hypothetical speculation of course. 

Yes and no. Sometimes individuals and companies make mistakes through ignorance, but usually in the first instance there is such a thing as a warning / request to comply / cease and desist / etc, unless you've blatantly done something illegal (e.g. speeding, because your licence was issued based on the fact you knew how to drive). In this instance, a communication - email or letter, should've been enough to settle the matter. The software itself should also include a splash screen denoting terms of use (e.g. "Not for commercial use") because software can change, and it can also be distributed by third parties. Without this notice that alone would be grounds for dismissal if it went to something like a court, unless every version of the product was paid and direct through the supplier (as this would prove liability).

It is perfectly fine to join the forums and want to converse on these types of topics. It's just annoying to see people who joined knowing their opinion would not change no matter what just come to spread hate instead of trying to give people the benefit of the doubt. The world isnt always doom and gloom and actions arent always just pure malice.

From the vibe I got from the OCCT dev in his reddit post, he seems like he's in way over his head with really limited experience in making software other than the coding. Cut the guy some slack.

OCCT site is poorly laid out if they're trying to sell commercial licenses. They even try to use permissive licensing model as a marketing point.
"Available for free...
...with a few limitations. Yes, we are shooting ourselves in the foot. Badly. And it hurts ! But we count on you to support our work !"
 
and then proceed to explain the limitations halfway down the page, or buried in their support site under "FAQ".
 
I think that LMG should license it properly, 100% and it is good to see they have. 
 
If the dev is concerned about unlicensed commercial use, they should do some self-reflection and consider how many other commercial users might simply be unaware of the licensing model due to OCCT's own choices. If a firm like LMG that is well-funded and generally appears to try and do the right thing was able to miss this aspect of the OCCT licensing model, there are probably countless others that simply haven't published their violation on youtube.
 

Your wife is right. I wrote up a response that was more like what she said, then I decided I don't really care and pointed out how obviously stupid this whole situation is. 
 
We are a sizeable company at this point, but I'm still me so for better or worse we're gonna have a bit of that fire sometimes lol 😂

From a PR standpoint that's probably the better idea.
On the other hand, I like how "personal" LTT can feel sometimes. The combination of chats on the WAN show and actual human responses like this. I personally prefer this over the often overly correct messages most companies put out that just feel disingenuous.

A - show me the reprimand. I'll wait. I stated a fact and said 'be aware of the impact'.
 
B - you are ignoring the common sense aspect of this. We make money by producing content and being paid through ads
He makes money through businesses validating their hardware. We never actually used the software for its 'commercial use'. All we did was demonstrate how to use it. We fired it up once and havent touched it since. It's very clearly a flawed parallel you're drawing. 

I didn't even realize OCCT had a website before this. 

You also can't just upload software to Techspot. Takes emails to do it. From the DEV. Who has the license listed as freeware.

When license terms aren't present during install then what? That's my main question, at no point during the install process then or now are there license terms presented to agree to. There is now a support pop-up upon running a benchmark with mention of commercial use BUT back in the v5 days (when this occurred) there was only a popup asking for support for a $1 but that's it, there was no mention anywhere in the software about free vs commercial use or any license terms. How can you agree to something you don't know exists and doesn't present itself? Nobody knows or can prove either way if OCCT was downloaded from the official site or not even because there are plenty of places and mirrors to download from without going to the official site and if you download from a mirror you could easily never know commercial terms existed without doing more digging.
 
The version 5 software:

Wait… you arent the "dev" or are you?
You should definitely change the OP to reflect that, or if you are the "dev" then you should make *that* clearer, just saying because as of now its terribly constructed, and in no way helps to make your case - maybe a honest mistake, but pretty misleading nontheless if i see this right…
 
 
I agree, many will jump to LTT defense here, but thats kinda expected on the "LTT" forum… 
Theres still frequent discussion about LTTs mishaps, something you wouldnt see on many similar forums… and Im sure its one reason people generally respect linus and LTT…
 
Anyways, the post you quoted was right pointing out the discrepancies… i used occt a couple of times (cant say im a fan, it seems rather pointless and unnecessarily convoluted  to me) but i dont remember reading anything about licenses etc, only that they ask for money to "unlock" the complete thing, exactly the way *not* to go about something like this imo - but the point is, its not clear at all that there are different licenses, and if its on the website, well, as mentioned, most people will never see this because  they dont download from the website… this is 100% on the dev, there should be a clear disclaimer when opening the software about the conditions, which to my knowledge there is not.
 
Not saying if you have a point or not, but the missing / unclear information in the app itself doesnt help an awful lot at all…
 
#notashilllmfao… ok

And he's also explained at great length how that was a poor choice of words but people will get outraged and angry at whatever is in the moment and ignore anything else that corrects a mistake because logic dictates it? 🙂 
 
Does LTT need to be on top of their licenses? Hell yes
Did LTT screw up by not buying a license for commercial use? Yes
Is/was LTT acting with malice in this instance? No, and until people can show otherwise or someone at LTT comes out and clearly shows otherwise, don't just hop on the easy bandwagon.
 
I also have no reason to believe the developer reached out to LTT either in any meaningful manner either. I mean this is a person who, at least on reddit, said they gave PC Building Simulator a (permanent?) license to use OCCT in the game with the only payment being a single key of PC Building Simulator.....
 
Again, I will NOT argue they aren't owed at minimum a purchase of the license from LTT but just note I'm not going to throw any of my energy to the developers defense either when they seem to be so quick to "get paid in exposure" in essence. Both parties are idiots for different reasons.
 
I chatted with someone about this and they mentioned, which I missed, you can also download this software from third party sites and upon launching it on a non-AD connected machine you are prompted with ZERO license information upon or following the install. Techspot for example lets you download OCCT directly but makes no mention of these licensing terms, if someone downloaded from there they would have never even seen the pro version exists without going to the site directly. Is that an excuse? No but it IS something else to consider. Hell the software itself doesn't even mention there is a paid version or any license terms inside:
 

 
Edit: I see a prompt now for support and terms upon launching a benchmark but it's been mentioned in the original post that this wasn't always a thing so I'm curious what version was used and if I missed that please correct me 🙂

First, I'll say that I really like and appreciate OCCT and did purchase a license. Good software deserves to be paid for.
 
That said, there's a few things I want to point out. First, the blocking ads is piracy thing has gotten to the point of ridiculousness. Linus was just making a point. Content is not free. It costs YouTube to host and stream the video, let alone the costs of maintaining the platform in general. The creator, too, has time and money invested. If you don't want to pay for YouTube Premium, then you're agreeing to pay with ad views. If you do neither, you pirated the content, simple as that.
 
Now, to your point, Linus was actually not complaining about not receiving revenue from missed ad views. To the contrary, he pointed out that it's a relatively small portion of the revenue for LMG. He just wanted people to be aware what they're doing. He also passed no judgment, and clearly said that he is not above forms of piracy himself. Again, the point was to be aware, not to say it's necessarily wrong or right.
 
Now to your specific complaints. LMG is a large, multi-headed beast, as far as creators go. It is not uncommon for Linus to not be aware of everything that goes on there, and that has honestly already bit them a few times. This seems to have been Linus using OCCT, but he may be totally unaware of the licensing situation or whether or not a license was purchased. Emails often go missed, get sidetracked, etc. and Linus may be and probably is completely unaware you ever contacted them. Not everything gets instantly put on his desk.
 
Does that make the situation right? No. However, there's an implied maliciousness here that I don't think is actually present. Maybe this post will get some traction and help improve that, maybe not. However, one usage of OCCT and one missed email don't amount to massive conspiracy to steal your software or hypocrisy, especially given that Linus never actually said piracy was wrong, despite and wails and gnashing of teeth to the contrary.

Oh lord, please please do not harass the customer service staff about this. They did nothing wrong and you're just going to slow down CS for every other person with a real problem because you'll be clogging up the internet pipes and wasting their time when they're supposed to be trying to resolve real customer issues.

Don’t think it warrants a new thread, but…
 
Newegg customer service will offer their $25 in-store credits if you bring up the Gamers Nexus controversy during any support ticket issues. I’m not inclined to go for it because I can easily commit to a year-long boycott. However, it might be another avenue for the tech community to collectively impose some negative financial consequences upon them over this?
 
 
 
 

It's got to be a widespread systemic issue for this to happen to a tech journalist like this. The probabilities otherwise are just too remote. 

Newegg refused to RMA my monitor with 3 dead pixels in the same quadrant. The reason? I was over 30 days from purchase date. The kicker? It took them 22 days to ship my monitor.

Glad this happened to GN and glad that Newegg didn't give him special treatment (or rather didn't recognize him) until it went public
 
The only reason I'm glad though is that it really brings to light how terrible Newegg can be.  Feel sorry for GN, but still glad it happened the way it did because I think that just shows how impactful and how robotic their customer service can be (without even needing to do a "secret shopper").  The fact this happened to him, with his own product, without even trying to bait the company at all just brings extra credence to it
 
I know a secret shopper would still have been the "same" but I think it hits home more when there wasn't even any intent to craft a scenario where the customer service would need to be involved.

This is genuinely why I love GamersNexus. Even in situations as viscerally egregious as this, the focus never shies away from the fact that this could have (and is in fact evidence supporting reports that it has already) happened to consumers that don't have a platform.
 
Screw Newegg, seriously. I'm genuinely unsure if there will indeed be a market correction like one Steve talks about in the future wherein companies that push crap just because it sells deal with a reckoning, but I really do hope there is because the fact that Newegg can reasonably get away with this type of behavior because the market keeps them afloat is atrocious to me.

While I would disagree as 240hz vs 360hz was significant noticeable to me so I imagine 240hz vs 500 is pretty jarring to anyone who sees it in person. Also even if you can't make total use of the higher refreshrate it won't change that whatever you do see will be more up to date vs someone with a lower refreshrate monitor making it a competitive advantage regardless. 

Cool to see. I wonder what panel it is, really how much will they push LCD though. In the end it still can't be as good due to it's slow nature. But yeah QD-OLED in time.
Obviously it's for esport fast paced games, don't get how some people are upset. Or really straight up posting false, inaccurate or without a context info. Like just posting straight up numbers with limited understand or context behind it. Why be so vocal about something you don't care, use or have interest? I don't get it. Just to add, our eyes don't see like a camera, as some think.
Current monitors are still slower than CRTs though. Maybe some never used those but yes, motion clarity is better on them. For slow LCD tech to come to such clarity you need much higher refresh rate. Still it's and LCD and not as fast as modern OLED for example. This monitor will still have blur for that reason. But yeah it will be fun to see it, I'd expect BFI option too, we'll see.
 
Really there's more to it than many think, for those who want to learn more for start you can check this:
https://blurbusters.com/blur-busters-law-amazing-journey-to-future-1000hz-displays-with-blurfree-sample-and-hold/

What is unclear is response time based on screen brightness. On phones with OLED screen, this is an issue, dimmer the screen, the slower the response time. Granted a desktop/laptop display brightness won't go as dim as a phone OLED screen to probably notice, and probably doesn't have aggressive power saving system due to being wall powered or be used with a large battery, but is something to note, worth looking into.
 
That aside, OLED does have a faster response time than LCD panel. LCD response time issue comes down to: how fast the liquid can spin from 1 state to another.
 
CRT response time is limited to how much the phosphor layer can let go of the colored light it last retained over another one (or on to off), and how fast the cathode can go drawing the screen. (Phosphor layer also can't react too fast, else the display will flicker, despite the high refresh rate).
 
OLED comes down to the "warm" up or "cool" down time of the OLED subpixel from one state to another (dark red to bright red, for example), which in reality, is in the micro second range, if not faster.
 
OLED biggest issue right now, beside costs, is its life span and brightness. Brightness improves over time with new OLED manufacturing processes and sometimes tricks (example: White subpixel added to RGB one). But aside from this, brighter the image, the more you wear out the OLED panel, which results in the OLED sub pixels to dim more and more over time.
 
The results: you have the "burn-in" effect. I hate the term of "burn-in", I think we should all stop using it, as it suggest that, like plasma panel which had this term used, it can be fixed. It cannot be fixed. You are not burning in anything, you are WEARING OUT the subpixel. All you can do, is wear the rest of the display sub pixels to try and match the more wared out sub pixels, to even things out. Think of it as each sub pixel is a block of wood, and every time you use them, you use a sand paper on them. So if you have a red image, you sand the wood block representing the color red. Brighter the red, the faster you sand. Not a perfect analogy by any means, but it can be seen this way. You are literary waring out each individual sub pixel (red, green and blue) as you use each of them.
 
This is how OLED looks over time (picture from the web)
 
The phone, in this case, was set to have a uniform gray full screen image. We can see that the navigation button bar is lighter than the rest, because this is normally black, making that part of the area have little to no wear, showing you the gray color how it should be. The rest is dimmer and can even have an  offset in the color as those sub pixels have been warn more. Being gray, it is using the same value of red, green and blue, so if the screen displayed more red and green on the upper area, for example, the gray in that used area would tilt more in the blue's making the gray look more blue'ish than what is is supposed to be. The reason why you see the Android navigation buttons above so dark, is because those are normally white, and remain on screen all or most of the time, making those show the darkest, as all 3 subpixel in that area have the been worn out evenly (white uses red, green and blue, of course) and the most as the button are always there (beside when you watch a video or game full screen).

Another example of sub pixel being worn out more than the rest:

 
Because the red sub pixel was used the most where the CNN banner is (which is in red), the pink color appears purple on those areas, as the red sub pixel is notably dimmer than the green and blue subpixels of each pixel that showed the red banner.
 
There is no fix to this, all one can do, is build an exact inverse an image of what typically appears on the screen, making what used to be black's white, and so on, basically, and display it for hours on end, days in and days out, to wear out the less used parts, all to match better the rest and hope for the best... or have a display feature like what Linus showed with his LG display, which keeps track of the wear of each subpixels, and has a special mode which overdrives the OLED sub pixels to wear the less worn out one to somewhat even level with the most used ones, permanently dimming the screen at the expense of having everything match things closer together, hiding the "burn- in"
 
Now, OLED have evolved a lot since it's appearance to the consumer market, they do last a VERY long time compared to several years ago. The Switch OLED display, for example, is showing to be very promising to last many years without visible wear. Also, we can see on premium phones also their displays, last longer. Same for OLED TVs. We are doing progress on that front (not to mention, we are also making them faster and also brighter).
 
That said, the problem isn't solved. It's last long enough that for most people using a premium phone with an OLED screen, they will typically not see wear of the OLED like the phone image above after 3 years of usage, or just starting to (visible if you seek for it, but nothing that will actually bug you while using the phone)... but typically, most premium phone buyer replace their phone by then. So, you see less people complaining about this issue. That said, typically, in the PC space, especially desktop space, people don't tend to buy a new monitor every 3 years. Same for TV's. It doesn't help the fact that OLED displays are expensive, really expensive.
 
Like the CNN banner on the TV, desktop has a lot of static content. We have the task bar, start button, pinned task bar icons, running programs showing on the task bar, tend to have our window at the center as this is our focus point when working with windows. Clock, system tray icons, desktop icons, and so on. Plus you have games with static content like health bars, and other stats, and so on. Things will be visible real fast. It's one thing being able to replace a monitor every 3 years due its low cost (ignoring environmental impact), and another spending the current price on them, for the same 
 
There is a lot more work that needs to be done, that is for sure. But we are getting there. Perhaps a few more years, this will be much less an issue.