Jawa_Juice

Hi Team,
 
Right now products get deleted from the website after being sold out, plenty of people like to keep the products on the store. 
they don't have to be under the actual products, you can have a seperate archive page for it. 
 
websites like Limited Run Games and Super Rare Games run on shopify and have separate pages for old products, archives.
so it is not listed with the products that are still in stock, and links to the products remain intact. 
 
It is really annoying when you order a product and see the product page being deleted even though the product itself has not even shiped yet. 
Also any links on the internet to the product do not work anymore which just looks unprofessional tbh.
 
if you do choose to archive instead of delete it would be great if old products pages could be restored.
 
Thanks. 
 

thnx

Internally this is a living document, and may change as we move forward, but as part of our push for further transparency, we are publishing it in its current form to help our community better-understand how we classify errors and what action we will be taking to rectify them.
 
Types of errors
Flubs: the host simply misspoke
Incongruencies: information within the video is not in agreement (e.g. host says “$45” while the product page shows “$47”
Bad spec: a table or MOGRT contains incorrect information (e.g. “48MB” instead of “96MB”
Bad data: a graph or visualization contains data (generated by us) that is erroneous, misplaced, or spurious. 
Bad info: a statement or representation in the video that is misleading or factually inaccurate
Types of error correction
Proactive (before the video is posted)
Video pickup: the segment is re-shot with both audio and video
Human audio pickup: new audio is recorded for the segment (visuals have coverage)
AI audio pickup: new voiceover is generated. In the best case this uses a voice model that sounds like the host. However, using a robot voice  can still work.
Text on screen: the editor overlays clarifying or correcting text
This will not be received by viewers who are not (or cannot) watching the screen
Reactive (after the video is posted)
Video Replace: replacing the video with a new version without re-uploading
This relies on YouTube and takes some time. There are fairly strict guidelines around the use of this tool and strong justification must be provided for all changes. This is preferred to a re-upload, but there is likely a soft-limit on how often we can use this resource.
Re-upload the video: Set the original, erroneous video to Private and upload a new version. This will have algorithmic effects, but must be done if replacement is not an option
Pinned comment: add a comment describing the correction. 
This will not be received by viewers who do not check the comments (common, especially for those watching on a Smart TV) and should only be used for low-severity errors.
 
Assessing & Responding to Errors
If any of the following types of errors are discovered prior to filming (e.g. during script review) , fix them before the shoot.
 
1. Very Low Severity
- The statement could possibly be misunderstood, but it’s generally true and most people would be fine with how it’s currently presented.
- eg. The host says, “One of DisplayPort’s main advantages over HDMI is its higher bandwidth,” but this is only true when comparing certain generations of the standards. HDMI 2.1, for example, has much higher bandwidth than DP 1.1.
 
Action: no action
 
2. Low Severity
- The statement is incorrect, and we should try to clarify it better in the future, but we can leave it for now because it doesn’t meaningfully impact a viewer’s purchase decision or general knowledge.
- eg. The host says, “This monitor features moderate pixel response times and contrast because it uses an IPS panel”, but the panel manufacturer is actually AUO, rather than LG, so it’s not an IPS panel - a term which is trademarked by LG - but rather an IPS-type or IPS-like panel.
 
Action: Pinned comment
Note: Pinned comment text must be approved by the Community Coordinator before being posted.
 
3. Medium Severity
- The statement is incorrect, and a minority of the audience could be upset or misled, even if it doesn’t really affect the outcome of the product evaluation for the majority.
- eg. The host says, “This GPU has AMD’s AMF video encoder, which is basically the same as NVIDIA’s NVENC,” but while the stated functionality is the same, NVENC offers better image quality, which could be important to a small minority of buyers.
 
Action: Video replaced if possible according to YouTube policy, otherwise pinned comment and above fold mention of the issue in the video description
If doing a video replace, a pinned comment should communicate this is coming and note the expected changes. This comment should be un-pinned when the video replace is complete. 
Note: Pinned comment text must be approved by the Community Coordinator before being posted.
 
4. High Severity
- The statement is incorrect, and a significant portion of the audience could be misled or make a poorly-informed purchase decision.
- eg. The host says, “This is a great gaming monitor,” when in fact, the monitor is a 60Hz VA display that, while ‘fine’ for playing games, lacks important gaming-centric features that could be easily had for the same price, making it a poor choice. 
 
Action: Video replaced if possible according to YouTube policy. Otherwise, set unlisted and disable monetization until corrective action can be taken. 
If doing a video replace, a pinned comment should communicate this is coming and note the expected changes. This comment should be un-pinned when the video replace is complete. 
Note: Pinned comment text must be approved by the Community Coordinator before being posted.
 
5. Very High Severity
- The statement is VERY incorrect—basically the opposite of correct. There is no charitable interpretation that could make this anything but completely irresponsible.
- ex. The host says, “Most games require only one high-performance core to perform their best,” when that hasn’t been true for over a decade.
 
Action: Video removed or remade

If you're new to the channel, I understand why you might not know this, but we are extremely committed to improving our accuracy to the point where we are building out a $10M+ facility jam-packed full of equipment and engineering know-how. It's taking time, and this kind of aggressive expansion has been a learning curve for us, but to frame our recent actions as "sacrificing accuracy" is misleading at best. 

We need to make a lot of process changes to get to the point where everything is water-tight. That's a big part of why we added our new CEO Terren to our leadership team, but once again... things take time. He's been full time on the job for less than a single quarter and he's getting up to speed on all the things we are doing right... and yes... all the things we are doing wrong.
 
Trust me, we know. But we are making major investments in improving all of this and we won't stop.

We talk constantly about how we intend to move forward and make better content. It's just taking longer than any of us would like. If everything had gone according to plan, we'd have our camera range, theater room, and acoustic chamber done like 6 months ago. Instead our warehouse is torn apart right now because they had to reinforce our roof in order to support the heat pumps that we've been trying to get procured since last summer.

The real world is messy, and the more cooks you have in the kitchen, the more room there is for error.
 
With that said, if all you want is a non-ambiguous statement that we're going to keep trying to get better, then here it is. We're going to keep trying to get better. Gary did a wonderful 'state-of-the-union' update for the company this morning about recent milestones and what we have in store. Those investments will keep flowing, and I promise that they will be a win for consumers and the tech industry.

For now, it's hard to do because I'm frustrated by the timelines too, but all I can do is say, "Stay tuned. it's upward from here and we're really excited."

Getting all the details before publication is *NOT* the opposite of journalistic integrity.

This isn't about being on a side... There's no war. You don't need to fight. You need to slow down and think.... 

Billet sent us a quote. I don't know or care how they arrived at the value. If they're good, I'm good.

As for what steps we're taking, you're talking about an outlier issue that has happened once in 10+ years of operation. There won't be a new SOP to ensure we don't accidentally auction stuff. We just need to tighten up some documentation.

There won't be a big WAN Show segment about this or anything. Most of what I have to say, I've already said, and I've done so privately.

To Steve, I expressed my disappointment that he didn't go through proper journalistic practices in creating this piece. He has my email and number (along with numerous other members of our team) and could have asked me for context that may have proven to be valuable (like the fact that we didn't 'sell' the monoblock, but rather auctioned it for charity due to a miscommunication... AND the fact that while we haven't sent payment yet, we have already agreed to compensate Billet Labs for the cost of their prototype). There are other issues, but I've told him that I won't be drawn into a public sniping match over this and that I'll be continuing to move forward in good faith as part of 'Team Media'. When/if he's ready to do so again I'll be ready.

To my team (and my CEO's team, but realistically I was at the helm for all of these errors, so I need to own it), I stressed the importance of diligence in our work because there are so many eyes on us. We are going through some growing pains - we've been very public about them in the interest of transparency - and it's clear we have some work to do on internal processes and communication. We have already been doing a lot of work internally to clean up our processes, but these things take time. Rome wasn't built in a day, but that's no excuse for sloppiness.

Now, for my community, all I can say is the same things I always say. We know that we're not perfect. We wear our imperfection on our sleeves in the interest of ensuring that we stay accountable to you. But it's sad and unfortunate when this transparency gets warped into a bad thing. The Labs team is hard at work hard creating processes and tools to generate data that will benefit all consumers - a work in progress that is very much not done and that we've communicated needs to be treated as such. Do we have notes under some videos? Yes. Is it because we are striving for transparency/improvement? Yeah... What we're doing hasn't been in many years, if ever.. and we would make a much larger correction if the circumstances merited it. Listing the wrong amount of cache on a table for a CPU review is sloppy, but given that our conclusions are drawn based on our testing, not the spec sheet, it doesn't materially change the recommendation. That doesn't mean these things don't matter. We've set KPIs for our writing/labs team around accuracy, and we are continually installing new checks and balances to ensure that things continue to get better. If you haven't seen the improvement, frankly I wonder if you're really looking for it... The thoroughness that we managed on our last handful of GPU videos is getting really incredible given the limited time we have for these embargoes. I'm REALLY excited about what the future will hold.
 
With all of that said, I still disagree that the Billet Labs video (not the situation with the return, which I've already addressed above) is an 'accuracy' issue. It's more like I just read the room wrong. We COULD have re-tested it with perfect accuracy, but to do so PROPERLY - accounting for which cases it could be installed in (none) and which radiators it would be plumbed with (again... mystery) would have been impossible... and also didn't affect the conclusion of the video... OR SO I THOUGHT...
 
I wanted to evaluate it as a product, and as a product, IF it could manage to compete with the temperatures of the highest end blocks on the planet, it still wouldn't make sense to buy... so from my point of view, re-testing it and finding out that yes, it did in fact run cooler made no difference to the conclusion, so it didn't really make a difference.
 
Adam and I were talking about this today. He advocated for re-testing it regardless of how non-viable it was as a product at the time and I think he expressed really well today why it mattered. It was like making a video about a supercar. It doesn't mater if no one watching will buy it. They just wanna see it rip.  I missed that, but it wasn't because I didn't care about the consumer.. it was because I was so focused on how this product impacted a potential buyer. Either way, clearly my bad, but my intention was never to harm Billet Labs. I specifically called out their incredible machining skills because I wanted to see them create something with a viable market for it and was hoping others would appreciate the fineness of the craftsmanship even if the product was impractical. I still hope they move forward building something else because they obviously have talent and I've watched countless niche water cooling vendors come and go. It's an astonishingly unforgiving market.
 
Either way, I'm sorry I got the community's priorities mixed-up on this one, and that we didn't show the Billet in the best light. Our intention wasn't to hurt anyone. We wanted no one to buy it (because it's an egregious waste of money no matter what temps it runs at) and we wanted Billet to make something marketable (so they can, y'know, eat).
 
With all of this in mind, it saddens me how quickly the pitchforks were raised over this. It also comes across a touch hypocritical when some basic due diligence could have helped clarify much of it. I have a LONG history of meeting issues head on and I've never been afraid to answer questions, which lands me in hot water regularly, but helps keep me in tune with my peers and with the community. The only reason I can think of not to ask me is because my honest response might be inconvenient. 
 
We can test that... with this post. Will the "It was a mistake (a bad one, but a mistake) and they're taking care of it" reality manage to have the same reach? Let's see if anyone actually wants to know what happened. I hope so, but it's been disheartening seeing how many people were willing to jump on us here. Believe it or not, I'm a real person and so is the rest of my team. We are trying our best, and if what we were doing was easy, everyone would do it. Today sucks.
 
Thanks for reading this.

CEO shenanigans aside, Herman Miller and Steelcase both make some of the most expensive but also comfortable, ergonomic, long-lasting all-day-use office chairs on the market, and I'm not just saying that - the company I work for has fleets of Mirra 2 chairs across multiple hot-desk offices.
 
I don't know how residential home-office users would be able to justify $1500 CAD on a single chair, but you can save around 30-50% off the new retail price if you can find a refurbished or second-hand Herman Miller in good condition. Overall, I would recommend compared to Staples chairs.

Was hoping this feature would remain in limbo indefinitely... but alas.
Should now be blocked -- appreciate the suggestion. For future reference, most of the Discord team has open DMs.

The LTT Forum is now 10 years old! What started out as an experiment hosted in Linus's garage has now become a thriving community of tech enthusiasts, with some pretty impressive numbers, thanks in no small part to all of you!
 
The forum has come a long way from the incredibly unstable VBulletin 5 beta that we started out with in 2013, and I hope you will agree that it looks far better today than it did back then:

 
The forum exists because of its awesome community. As a small way of giving back, we're going to give away some 1 year Gold Contributor memberships, which give you Floatplane access, based on recent activity on the forum. The giveaway criteria are:
5 will be randomly assigned to the authors of posts made in the past 3 months (so your chance of winning is proportional to the number of posts you have made in the past 3 months), to give something back to everyone that makes this community awesome. Posts removed by a moderator, and posts in Test Posts, do not qualify. 10 will be randomly assigned to members who joined the forum in or before 2015 and have made at least one post on the forum in the past 3 months, to thank our most loyal members. 5 will be given to the members with the most posts that were marked as the best answer in the past 3 months, to say thanks to the members that give the most back to the community. Posts where a member marked their own post as best answer are excluded. Winners will be drawn later this week, and notified via PM by me. The full list of winners will be published here once all winners have accepted their prize.
 
All winners have now been contacted and received their prize
 
Ts&Cs:
Max one prize per user If a winner already has a Gold Contributor subscription, they will get 1 year free starting from their next billing period Current moderators and administrators, and employees of LMG or its subsidiaries, are not eligible The giveaways will be drawn in the order listed. If an ineligible user is drawn (per points 1 and 3 above), an additional winner will be drawn. Winners will have 7 days from being notified via PM to accept the prize (by replying to the PM), otherwise their prize will be redrawn under the same rules. No cash value, non-transferrable, run at our own discretion, etc. Please don't get mad if you don't win. "Past 3 months" means between 00:00 on 01 October 2022 and 23:59 on 31 December 2022 inclusive, all UTC (so it's too late to try and game the system now). "In or before 2015" means the "Joined" field on the account is before 00:00 UTC on 01 January 2016.

The best thing for you to do is wait for more reviews on the store to make up your mind. 
 
Like any enthusiast, your friend probably has emotional connections to brands that they like and trust. It's pretty normal.
 
The backpack might be flawed from their perspective, but it wasn't build for backpack nerds, it was built for tech nerds. 
 
I've also seen the argument that we have no idea what we are doing because we've never built a backpack before from members of that community, but *obviously* we partnered with an experienced backpack manufacturer. Unlike the screwdriver we haven't felt it necessary to disclose our partner, but we'd be morons to just yolo it and sew them ourselves. 
 
Imo real independent reviews from people who actually have it on their hands is the way to go. 
 
Of course I come into this with my own set of biases 🙂

I have good news everyone, after what has been a hard year for many financially and with the surge in energy prices in many parts of the world we have decided to make all prizes available to all ranks. 
 
This means that as long as you meet the minimum requirements you will be able to win any of the prizes on offer. This is unprecedented for a folding month! The prizes will be raffled with the highest value items going first. As always, you can only win one prize. 

I thought they would be aiming to compete with the likes of Bose 700 and Sony XM3 ANC headphones, but both are those are in the $350 range. Maybe they're trying to position them as ANC headphones but that don't have as many acoustic issues? Or just high end ANC headphones? (since the competitors are largely just plastic)
 
The pricing is kind of similar to Master & Dynamic MW65 ($499), which have ANC (not great), but high build quality and pretty decent sound. 
 
 Until there's a review, gonna be weird to figure out the angle. 
 

Where did I say that Amazon or Humble Store weren't trustworthy? But yeah, to some degree, there's no guarantee that either of those companies would properly evaluate apps, and I'm sure Apple would get flak if someone ever downloaded something bad from those stores.
Even the Google Play Store is a mess of trash apps with gross privacy issues (like a calculator app requiring full access), which do not occur on iOS, so it doesn't seem like it's an easy thing to do if even Google fails spectacularly at it. 
Also, idk if trying to painting Amazon as a pillar of trust and morality is really a good argument point  
 
XcodeGhost was a scam? I feel like if you can only bring up one example of something that's not even a scam, they're doing a pretty good job. 
I don't think a single person in the tech industry would say that any system is impervious to security vulnerabilities, but hey, a centrally managed App Store does give a pretty straight forward resolution process in this specific instance. Imagine the shit show that would occur trying to solve this on Windows.  
 
Why must R&D cost come from hardware sales alone? Why should a company pass all of the cost on to user's buying their hardware, and not make other companies that are trying to profit off their platform also contribute? Those companies benefit from both the hardware and software that Apple builds, so why should they only benefit from both, but only contribute to one? 
 
People buy their devices for a variety of different reasons--them "just [working]" being one of them--and I honestly don't think you can deny that the App Store is definitively one of those things. Why else did Apple's platform grow so large, if one of the things that's existed from the start was so bad? If it's so bad, why do developers even want access to it, when supposedly there are better platforms out there anyway? Apple lets competitors on their platform because in some ways it is mutually beneficial for them, even if it's for a competing product. 
 
If the argument is that Apple's control limits progress, why is there no "free market" alternative that's so good and enticing that everyone's moved to it?
I'll refer to the above about the R&D costs. I definitely agree that they can be, but I don't agree that they have to.  True, but I feel like Apple not charging for free apps is probably a good thing regardless? Devs already have to  Ehh, there's stuff from Jetbrains that you can use, but I think it still require Xcode, since that's the only way to get the closed-source stuff required to actually build/run the apps. I don't think there's particularly anything illegal/anti-competitive about not being OSS. Is that not exactly what the App Store is? Approval from Apple of apps made from other companies that Apple gets paid to certify? Plus Apple throws in distribution too etc? Those non-malicious apps would still have a set of rules that they would have to follow, so I don't see how it would be any different?  Heh, it's interesting because they released the whole "Sign in with Apple" stuff recently, I wonder if it's to combat this a bit. I think ultimately though, Apple doesn't particularly care if the off-platform experience is inhomogeneous--nor do I think they particularly should have to.  That's true, I think the fact that Apple offers competing services does muddy the water a bit. I think that's why they say the whole "We apply our rules equality to all apps," so that other companies can't claim Apple unduly targets them since they're a competitor.  Heh, I said this earlier but, retail markup on software is an insane 50%. Even Steam takes 25% (for what, a CDN and DRM?). Google takes 30% too, same as Apple. I agree though, maybe the times have changed and Google/Apple should look at cutting their take down a bit.

Apple's argument is its both a safety and security thing--them being the central party to all transaction builds trust and encourage spending. They handle the payment security & privacy too, removing any user concerns about those things, and also can easily prevent scam apps that seek to abuse users.
 
Part of it too is that Apple spends all the R&D building devices, OS, all the tools that developers need to develop for the platform, provides training, advise on best practices, etc. Apple's argument is that them controlling/curating their platform is a benefit to their platform, which is why it's such an attractive place for people to offer their software, and why so many people buy their products. 
Why should app devs get a free ride to make money off Apple's hard work in both building the user base, and spending on R&D to create it? 

It's funny because historically software sales had like 50% cuts from the stores selling it, when Apple came out and only asked for 30% it was revolutionary. 
 
But at the same time it's a little odd that no one complains that Steam takes 25% for offering what? DRM and a CDN? Apple is at least giving developers a real platform to develop, with all the accompanying tools and services (training etc too).
 
Ahh, hmm, I think there is a way to turn those off still, not sure off the top of my head though.

Apparently they pushed it out through a server-side update, which is also a no-no. 
Already is a lawsuit, and TBH I doubt it matters. There's already a lot of legal precedent for the App Store, and I doubt this will have any real impact on the ongoing investigations, especially as there's nothing substantially novel here (if anything, Epic blatantly circumventing multiple rules probably is harmful to their quest. 

Even cookies need their exercise.

Ayyy, someone understands my username.

Ayyy, someone understands my username.

Ayyy, someone understands my username.

Ayyy, someone understands my username.

@Jawa_Juice
 

@Jawa_Juice thank you for the donation