Disappointing spread of misinformation on WAN show regarding the S23's system utilization

[moatmote]

41 minutes ago, Lurking said:

I only can go by memory since I don't have my old Samsung anymore and don't play with my wife's S22Ulrra to know the details. But if I recall what was redundant and no way yo eliminate. They may have fixed some on the S23:

- 2 contact apps and there also was issues with the Samsung app for some reason not syncing my Google contacts 

- Samsung browser in addition to what browser I actually used 

- Their store in addition to play store 

- their note taking app  and other apps I used alternatives 

- some other apps, phone apps etc. I couldn't deinstall or hide. Not only does it take resources and somtimes they crash the phone. It also clutters everything up 

- no natter the setting, Bixby always came back 

- darn crashes and resets and cache clearing I always had to do. All the above would be half bad if they could at least make the phone work all the time. On my Pixel I don't even know how to reset it or clear the cache since it never crashes. On my Samsung I knew the procedure by heart because it was needed a lot.

What was the last device your had? Honestly, I've had very little to complain about since about One UI 3 or so. The S/Note 8/9 era was a little rough around the edges for sure, but I loved my Note 10+ and 20 Ultra.

 

Sure, it'd be nice to get the option to actually uninstall some things, but it's really not much more aggressive than Google requiring all their apps to come preinstalled either.

 

I guess I don't share as many of the same issues you had, since I tend to make more use of the native apps and the integrations they provide (dragging links in Samsung Internet to open them in new windows for instance, though Chrome support for that feature was added later). Almost all my phones had S Pens too, so I made heavy use of Samsung Notes and screen off memos.

 

Even Bixby, I use quite a bit, and I'm sad more people didn't give it a chance in the early days (since every tech media outlet would rather lazily pile on the omg Bixby so bad bandwagon rather than taking any time to see what it could do. Early Bixby could recognize on screen elements within apps and you could chain together multiple intricate commands. I kid you not, the way I would get all the apps I want installed on my Note 8 was to sit at my computer with the list of apps I wanted pulled up. Then just tell Bixby to go to the play store, search for "app x" and install it, and it would do everything without me touching the phone. Ultimately Samsung ended up cutting back quite a bit on stuff it could do inside apps like that, probably due to low usage, but at least we have Bixby Routines and Modes now, which are crazy powerful.

 

[moatmote]

It's stuff like this that keeps me coming back to One UI (nonsense routine I made just for demonstrative purposes):

[moatmote]

On 2/14/2023 at 6:32 PM, moatmote said:

Not to mention, LMG Clips re-uploaded that segment TODAY—after even more discussion around this debacle has happened—with zero context or corrections noted in the video (understandable), description (not), or comments (again, not), spreading the same misinformation yet again. It even has a title that supports the bullshit claims that ArsTechnica was making. 

Extremely disappointing that nothing has been done to address this yet.

[moatmote]

Some more information about this from someone who knows much more about Android than I:

Full text: 

Spoiler

An S23 Ultra setup without wifi, Google account, or any data has a system storage size of 55GB. Given the 34 GB to GiB added to it, Samsung's actual system is 21GB.

 

4GB more than the Pixel 7 Pro. 

 

Stop with this Samsung's system is big BS, it's pretty normal when you understand why. 

 

Samsung needs a bunch of different apps for a bunch of different features that aren't built into Android system. Things like Ultra wideband and qualcomms testing suite and Bluetooth and Samsung SmartThings and Samsung Wi-Fi calling and Bixby all have three to four different applications that make the services work. Google builds all of that into Google apps or Android system and is not part of the pixel. Samsung phones just have more features built into more places to make updating them easier. To improve something like Ultra wideband on the pixel, Google would need to update the entire system. Samsung just needs to push an app update through the Galaxy store. This comes at the cost of 4 extra gigabytes of available space. Realistically, not a big deal.

 

Stop complaining about it.

 

As he notes, I overestimated One UI 5 to be 25 GB. He puts it at 21 GB, with Pixel at 17 GB, driving the difference down to 4 GB. (Will be editing OP to reflect this.)

 

@Lurking, you might find some of this interesting.

[Just that Mario]

What the hell am I missing here? Gibibyte to gigabyte difference isn't so big that 55-60 <units> turns to 20. If it reports it as 60 gibibytes right now, then converted to gigabytes it would be even more. Reasoning it is three times larger because of 1000 bytes vs 1024 bytes is nonsensical.

 

Quote

Given the 34 GB to GiB added to it, Samsung's actual system is 21GB

What is that supposed to mean? The numbers are pretty off no matter which way you look at it. I've seen OPs answer that they mean 512 GB is 476.8 GiB, but it still doesn't make sense why he would subtract this difference from the system storage number.

[Just that Mario]

On 2/15/2023 at 1:02 AM, moatmote said:

So some vendors (including Samsung) just add the number "35" (well more like 35.163(...)) to System. The number is meaningless. That storage doesn't exist. So it can't be "used" either. It's just added to make the device add up to 512 GB visually. It just gives them an easy way to explain to non-technical consumers why their capacity "isn't what's advertised".

Sorry for my phrasing, but that's the most r****ded thing someone could come up with. It is so wrong on so many levels, it is baffling me some engineer at Samsung could come up with some mental gymnastics like this.

They report roughly 11% of total capacity. Which, if true that it really is 21GB (roughtly 4%), is flat out false whichever unit of measurement you look at.

___________________________________________________________________________

Adding my own explanation of what I have understood to hopefully explain to others who are as confused as I was.

Samsung advertises phone as 512 gigabytes of storage. Normally it wouldn't really matter if it used 1024 bytes or 1000 bytes as the base, as long as it was used consistently. Now because Android or whatever system logic uses power of two logic (1024 as base "multiplier"), 512 became 477. Now instead of going with logical solution and simply converting the units by simple multiplication, Samsung decided they would just stick to gibibytes, but to show total storage as 512, they added the difference to whatever amount the system takes up. This is the most confusing and incorrect thing you could ever do, especially when they use percentiles to display how much storage is used up. Either whoever wrote that logic was lazy or they were simply stupid and did not know where the difference came from and couldn't be arsed, so they added the difference to system.

What Samsung did:
 

storageInGigabytes = 512;
storageInGibibytes = 477;
systemInGibibytes = 20;

// What Samsung did
systemInGigabytes = systemInGibiBytes + storageInGigabytes - storageInGibibytes; // 55

// What they should've done
systemInGigabytes = systemInGibiBytes * (storageInGigabytes / storageInGibibytes); // 21.47

 

[mononymous]

I do wonder how Samsung is reporting "System" Data. For example on my Galaxy Tab S6.

 

System Data

Samsung: 26.85GB

DiskUsage: 12.9GiB

 

Apps

Samsung: 56.21GB

DiskUsage: 55.7GiB

 

Aside from the GB/GiB conversion, that is still a 2x difference for system data.

 

Screenshot of tablet. Using default Samsung Storage details on top and on the bottom I am using the app DiskUsage.

Spoiler

 

[Just that Mario]

16 minutes ago, mononymous said:

I do wonder how Samsung is reporting "System" Data. For example on my Galaxy Tab S6.

 

System Data

Samsung: 26.85GB

DiskUsage: 12.9GiB

 

Apps

Samsung: 56.21GB

DiskUsage: 55.7GiB

 

Aside from the GB/GiB conversion, that is still a 2x difference for system data.

 

Screenshot of tablet. Using default Samsung Storage details on top and on the bottom I am using the app DiskUsage.

  Hide contents

 

That diskUsage app leaves out 9 GiB from total capacity, which Samsung probably adds to "system". Then there could be something else, etc. Your numbers aren't crazy off. All comes down to what the app sees, what system sees and how each treat different files.

[moatmote]

1 hour ago, Just that Mario said:

What the hell am I missing here? Gibibyte to gigabyte difference isn't so big that 55-60 <units> turns to 20. If it reports it as 60 gibibytes right now, then converted to gigabytes it would be even more. Reasoning it is three times larger because of 1000 bytes vs 1024 bytes is nonsensical.

 

What is that supposed to mean? The numbers are pretty off no matter which way you look at it. I've seen OPs answer that they mean 512 GB is 476.8 GiB, but it still doesn't make sense why he would subtract this difference from the system storage number.

38 minutes ago, Just that Mario said:

Sorry for my phrasing, but that's the most r****ded thing someone could come up with. It is so wrong on so many levels, it is baffling me some engineer at Samsung could come up with some mental gymnastics like this.

They report roughly 11% of total capacity. Which, if true that it really is 21GB (roughtly 4%), is flat out false whichever unit of measurement you look at.

___________________________________________________________________________

Adding my own explanation of what I have understood to hopefully explain to others who are as confused as I was.

Samsung advertises phone as 512 gigabytes of storage. Normally it wouldn't really matter if it used 1024 bytes or 1000 bytes as the base, as long as it was used consistently. Now because Android or whatever system logic uses power of two logic (1024 as base "multiplier"), 512 became 477. Now instead of going with logical solution and simply converting the units by simple multiplication, Samsung decided they would just stick to gibibytes, but to show total storage as 512, they added the difference to whatever amount the system takes up. This is the most confusing and incorrect thing you could ever do, especially when they use percentiles to display how much storage is used up. Either whoever wrote that logic was lazy or they were simply stupid and did not know where the difference came from and couldn't be arsed, so they added the difference to system.

What Samsung did:
 

storageInGigabytes = 512;
storageInGibibytes = 477;
systemInGibibytes = 20;

// What Samsung did
systemInGigabytes = systemInGibiBytes + storageInGigabytes - storageInGibibytes; // 55

// What they should've done
systemInGigabytes = systemInGibiBytes * (storageInGigabytes / storageInGibibytes); // 21.47

 

Maybe learn to read first. You're like the 100000th person on the internet to read "gibibyte" and immediately start ranting about how that conversion factor doesn't make sense when applying it to the reported system utilization when it was said at every opportunity that that wasn't the case because of course it fucking isn't.

 

To quote myself:

On 2/13/2023 at 4:41 PM, moatmote said:

When something doesn't add up, try trying to understand why your understanding isn't adding up, instead of assuming the other person is spewing complete nonsense.

 

1 hour ago, Just that Mario said:

What is that supposed to mean? The numbers are pretty off no matter which way you look at it. I've seen OPs answer that they mean 512 GB is 476.8 GiB, but it still doesn't make sense why he would subtract this difference from the system storage number.

You say this, and then you immediately go off to offer "your own explanation" in the form of the exact same damn thing.

 

45 minutes ago, Just that Mario said:

Either whoever wrote that logic was lazy or they were simply stupid and did not know where the difference came from and couldn't be arsed, so they added the difference to system.

What Samsung did:

Oh look. It's your signature move of assuming everyone else is incompetent. And yet you take 3 lines and an entire code block to state the equivalent of saying storage should just be reported in gigabytes.

 

I'm fairly certain the Android/Samsung software engineers knew how binary units work, and, considering that the entire OS is coded to report things in gibibytes, were fully aware of where the difference came from, and (maybe mistakenly—though that's really not the point here) choose to report that difference somewhere so that consumers wouldn't ask why their devices didn't meet advertised specs. 

 

But I'm sure it's much more fun for you to assume you're just that much smarter than everyone. 

[moatmote]

On 2/11/2023 at 5:07 PM, moatmote said:

^{Many vendors quickly got fed up with users complaining that their X GB phones were only Y GB, so they started adding the numerical difference between the capacity measured in decimal GB (gigabytes) and the capacity measured in binary "GB" (actually GiB/gibibytes) to System, so that the measured total capacity adds up to the advertised decimal capacity. The difference for each capacity tier is as follows and needs to be subtracted from the reported System utilization on affected phones:}

• ^{68.677 GB for 1 TB phones}
• ^{35.163 GB for 512 GB phones}
• ^{17.581 GB for 256 GB phones}
• ^{8.791 GB for 128 GB phones}
• ^{4.395 GB for 64 GB phones}
• ^{etc . . .}

Oh look it's the explanation you came up with all on your own a week before you came up with it

[moatmote]

21 minutes ago, mononymous said:

I do wonder how Samsung is reporting "System" Data. For example on my Galaxy Tab S6.

 

System Data

Samsung: 26.85GB

DiskUsage: 12.9GiB

 

Apps

Samsung: 56.21GB

DiskUsage: 55.7GiB

 

Aside from the GB/GiB conversion, that is still a 2x difference for system data.

 

Screenshot of tablet. Using default Samsung Storage details on top and on the bottom I am using the app DiskUsage.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

My first comment literally explains this. 

[moatmote]

On 2/14/2023 at 3:20 PM, moatmote said:

@LinusTech please review and address this. The LMG clips channel just posted the bit from the WAN Show AGAIN, even though the information in it had been debunked since before the WAN Show even aired. This is irresponsible reporting. 

@LinusTech @Slick just tagging both now since my attempts to capture your attention both on Twitter and here have so far failed.

 

I'm genuinely starting to feel like you just don't care that there's not one, but two videos just sitting on your channels making a claim—that you've admitted is wrong—with no correction offered in the description or comments, and that's just incredibly disappointing, especially considering your source was debunked before even last week's show aired, and that the second video's clickbait title ("Our phone are full of shit") makes a strong implication that the "developing story" was definitely true. 

 

Also in the "correction" you did offer on this week's show wrongly explained the issue, and you attributed the 35 GB discrepancy in reported utilization to the conversion factor applied to the reported utilization, rather than the correct explanation (offered here and by many other sources online) which is that the extra utilization being reported is a "dummy number" added as a compensation for the apparent (but non-existent) storage loss that occurs when converting the phone's total capacity to gibibytes from gigabytes. You also say that Samsung was using the wrong symbol for that units, implying this is a Samsung thing, and ignoring that 1) Windows does the exact same thing and 2) this is a JEDEC standard. Finally, near the end you claimed that the OS is "still large compared to competitors like the Pixel" while failing to address two things: 1) that Pixels don't carry 2 whole copies of the OS as you claimed last week, as they have used Virtual A/B since Android 11 and 2) it's been shown that (depending on regional variants of course) Samsung's OS is only about 2.6 GB larger, and while this is larger, calling this "large" in comparison without context stretches the truth.

 

Unfortunately, you've taken what could have been a good learning opportunity about the differences between decimal and binary units, and how operating systems measure capacity; and turned it into a huge pile of misinformation.

 

Considering the size of your company, the influence it has from the sheer volume of people who watch your content, and the direction it appears you want to move in (with projects like LTT Labs), it's irresponsible to not actively call out and correct any bad information you put out. Yes, you're allowed to make mistakes, but ShortCircuit can't brush off every incorrect thing they say with a tiny disclaimer every now and then that they do "unboxings, not reviews" (especially when looking down at a spec sheet just once could have eliminated the need for guesswork), and LMG Clips shouldn't just be blindly reposting blatantly wrong claims made on the WAN Show when correct information has been available for this long.

 

There are a few content creators out there who I heavily respect, and something that they do is regularly address any mistakes or misinformation they had in their previous content. I've seen you address mistakes here and there, but often it's small passing remarks in the middle of other videos, or it's regarding something that got a ton of attention/drama/controversy. I can't begin to count how many smaller things never get addressed and it's nearly impossible to call out the issue or get your attention as a lone commenter on YouTube (especially considering YouTube's ridiculously aggressive comment deleting that doesn't allow 99% of URLs).

 

Have you considered making a section of this forum that is heavily and regularly monitored where mistakes/misinformaton found in recent videos can be reported? You could then make a regular update video (maybe weekly or monthly) dedicated to quickly recapping and updating viewers on corrections and new information that's been reported (and verified). (Consider something in a similar spirit to this: https://youtu.be/aYQTq_ldTEA) Unlike the current strategy (in which only some things that get lots of attention are ever addressed, and only if someone happens to tune into another video that just happens to include that correction), this has the distinct advantage of being a one-stop shop for any recently discovered mistakes/updates that interested viewers could specifically look for. If not a video, at least a regular forum post summarizing that week's corrections.

[xAcid9]

So Samsung decided to confuse user about GiB/GB thingy and now Linus spreading misinformation about the confusion? I don't get it. 

[moatmote]

13 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

So Samsung decided to confuse user about GiB/GB thingy and now Linus spreading misinformation about the confusion? I don't get it. 

Yeah I'm no longer putting effort into responses unless it's direct questions asking for details or clarification on specific things I said or honest efforts to have a discussion, as anyone responding in good faith who read what I posted would either understand and not say something this wrong, or not understand and point out specifically what they're confused about. It's not my responsibility to guess what you don't understand and reiterate everything I've already said half a dozen times over, or to deal with these kinds of blatant exaggerations or misrepresentations of what I said. Take the sealioning elsewhere.

[starsmine]

2 minutes ago, moatmote said:

Yeah I'm no longer putting effort into responses unless it's direct questions asking for details or clarification on specific things I said or honest efforts to have a discussion, as anyone responding in good faith who read what I posted would either understand and not say something this wrong, or not understand and point out specifically what they're confused about. It's not my responsibility to guess what you don't understand and reiterate everything I've already said half a dozen times over, or to deal with these kinds of blatant exaggerations or misrepresentations of what I said. Take the sealioning elsewhere.

People are not sealioning, its that Samsungs solution is so dumb it baffles comprehension and leads people into thinking, "no that can not be right"

If Samsung was so upset about people complaining about not getting all their GB, they could have just.... reported everything in GB, GiB would NEVER be shown to the normal user.

Displaying the storage in GiB, but as GB and lying about system size to make up the difference is the dumbest of all solutions. 

Power users could have a choice to display the unit in GiB. 

Its not a blatent exaggeration of misrepresentation, the only one misrepresenting anything here is Samsung and the android ecosystem.

[moatmote]

37 minutes ago, starsmine said:

People are not sealioning, its that Samsungs solution is so dumb it baffles comprehension and leads people into thinking, "no that can not be right"

If Samsung was so upset about people complaining about not getting all their GB, they could have just.... reported everything in GB, GiB would NEVER be shown to the normal user.

Displaying the storage in GiB, but as GB and lying about system size to make up the difference is the dumbest of all solutions. 

Power users could have a choice to display the unit in GiB. 

Its not a blatent exaggeration of misrepresentation, the only one misrepresenting anything here is Samsung and the android ecosystem.

And as has been stated numerous times now, the point of this discussion isn't "What Samsung did is bad" or "There's a better way to represent storage in Android", and as far as I can tell, no one has ever argued against those points.

 

The point of this discussion is that:

1. ArsTechnica's writer published an article about a subject he clearly doesn't understand, and has been shown to be heavily biased on
2. that article was heavily debunked by the many people who knew exactly what was happening, since this behavior had been known for years
3. days after it had already been debunked, the WAN Show went and parroted many things in the article (including other things that were blatantly wrong like claiming that Pixel devices carried two whole copies of their OS)

And in more recent developments, that:

1. Days after that WAN Show aired, LMG uploaded a clip to their LMG Clips channel, with a clickbait title that suggests that what they discussed was true ("Our phone are full of shit") despite numerous efforts to reach out to them since the original WAN Show episode aired
2. That clip was posted with no corrections issued in the description or comments
3. They admitted on WAN Show a week later that the information originally given was wrong, but then gave an explanation again filled with misinformation when describing how it was wrong
4. And finally, despite the above, that clip still exists in the same state today with no corrections in the description or comments

I really don't understand why I have to explain how this entire progression of events is problematic, but for anyone still confused:  "Samsung is doing X and it has been known." ≠ "I support Samsung doing X"

 

I will never not be critical of anyone, especially media/content creators, who does not hold themselves accountable for their mistakes (regardless of intention) and address it clearly and transparently within a reasonable time frame, especially when they have the resources to do so. I've even suggested a simple way they could do this moving forward in my comment above.

[moatmote]

52 minutes ago, starsmine said:

Its not a blatent exaggeration of misrepresentation, the only one misrepresenting anything here is Samsung and the android ecosystem.

"So Samsung decided to confuse user about GiB/GB thingy and now Linus spreading misinformation about the confusion?" is a blatant misrepresentation of my words (to which this comment is a response). Plus the implication is being made that I am transferring blame that rightfully belongs to Samsung onto Linus instead, conflating the two different issues at play here into one. Samsung/Android making a choice to do something (no matter how questionable or unwise) does not excuse WAN Show from parroting a misinterpretation of that choice by a different source well after what was going on had already been explained by other sources. Blame is not being transferred from one (rightful) target to a different (wrongful) target. The issues are distinct and any blame attributed is also distinct. Plus, there's still the matter of other blatantly wrong claims (such as claiming that Pixel devices carry two whole copies of their OS) which have nothing to do with Samsung/Android's choices, and have also not yet been addressed or corrected.

[LAwLz]

Weekly reminder that Linus actually knows very little about computers, and can't be bothered to do even basic research about subjects he talks about.

If you think LTT videos are entertaining, go ahead and watch them. But don't, under no circumstances, think that they actually educational or contain correct information that can be trusted. They are not. They are in many ways like ChatGPT. Just made up bullshit that sounds plausible to someone with a surface level understanding of the subject, but since the statements are told in a very confident and authoritative way a lot of people blindly trust them.

 

You are wasting your time trying to inform Linus about how things actually are. He does not care. His job is to get as many clicks and ad impressions on his videos as possible, not to inform and explain things to his viewers. Most of his viewers doesn't care either. As I am sure you have already found out already, people don't have willingness or in some cases the attention span required to actually look into situations in a nuanced way. In fact, a large portion of people WANT Samsung phones to be bloated because it confirms their belief that their favorite brand is better and therefore they are correct in being a fanboy of said brand. They want this story to be true, so they will resist being told it is false.

 

People are also very resistive to relearn something. Once they have gotten an idea into their head, it is very hard to make them realize they are wrong and chance their perspective. In this case, people have gotten imprinted with the idea that Samsung phones uses a massive amount of storage because of bloat, and that's the idea they will stick to regardless of how much evidence is thrown at them.

 

 

This is not the first time something like this happens, and it won't be the last. You are only doing yourself a disservice trying to inform people who don't want to be informed.

 

 

You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

[xAcid9]

8 hours ago, moatmote said:

And in more recent developments, that:

1. Days after that WAN Show aired, LMG uploaded a clip to their LMG Clips channel, with a clickbait title that suggests that what they discussed was true ("Our phone are full of shit") despite numerous efforts to reach out to them since the original WAN Show episode aired
2. That clip was posted with no corrections issued in the description or comments
3. They admitted on WAN Show a week later that the information originally given was wrong, but then gave an explanation again filled with misinformation when describing how it was wrong
4. And finally, despite the above, that clip still exists in the same state today with no corrections in the description or comments

So Linus already stand corrected but you want them to remove one of the clip or make correction in the description/comment section?

 

None of these information is in your tl;dr wall of text 1st page. What's the point of tl;dr if you didn't include these?

[moatmote]

3 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

None of these information is in your tl;dr wall of text 1st page.

8 hours ago, moatmote said:

And in more recent developments, that:

Have you considered that at the time that I wrote the first post (to which the tl;dr pertains), I was unaware of the events that would take place 4 days later, due to this phenomenon called "time"?

 

4 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

What's the point of tl;dr if you didn't include these

Besides seemingly not understanding how the linear flow of time works, what's the point of a tl;dr if it includes every single piece of information in the full topic?

 

5 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

So Linus already stand corrected but you want them to remove one of the clip or make correction in the description/comment section?

While Linus admitted to some of the incorrect information he stated on the first WAN Show, he gave a very poor (and factually inconsistent/incorrect) explanation for why that information was wrong.

 

Additionally, he has now shown that he is aware that the information originally stated is wrong, and yet has continued to allow two different videos to present that (wrong) information as fact, such that a viewer who comes across those videos without further context would have no reason to question the information given. He has the tools to mitigate this (by adding a note to the video description or pinned comment) but has failed to yet do so.

[Blue4130]

40 minutes ago, moatmote said:

Have you considered that at the time that I wrote the first post (to which the tl;dr pertains), I was unaware of the events that would take place 4 days later, due to this phenomenon called "time"?

 

Besides seemingly not understanding how the linear flow of time works, what's the point of a tl;dr if it includes every single piece of information in the full topic?

 

While Linus admitted to some of the incorrect information he stated on the first WAN Show, he gave a very poor (and factually inconsistent/incorrect) explanation for why that information was wrong.

 

Additionally, he has now shown that he is aware that the information originally stated is wrong, and yet has continued to allow two different videos to present that (wrong) information as fact, such that a viewer who comes across those videos without further context would have no reason to question the information given. He has the tools to mitigate this (by adding a note to the video description or pinned comment) but has failed to yet do so.

Your passive aggressivness is very high. The same way how you want linus to edit his video/add comments AFTER the fact, you could do the same thing with your first post. The linear flow of time can be adjusted on this board. The edit button DOES exist for this reason exactly.

[ik1nky]

Have you considered that you might get better responses and that someone at LTT might be interested in answering your concerns if you didn't start with an overly aggressive attitude and respond like a dickhead to everyone who has questions/comments?

[moatmote]

3 minutes ago, ik1nky said:

respond like a dickhead to everyone who has questions/comments?

Check the discussion. Not my job to entertain bad faith responses from those who haven't bothered to read or make an attempt to understand what's happening. On the other hand, my responses to those actually responding to what I wrote have been fine.

[moatmote]

10 minutes ago, ik1nky said:

Have you considered that you might get better responses and that someone at LTT might be interested in answering your concerns if you didn't start with an overly aggressive attitude and respond like a dickhead to everyone who has questions/comments?

Though looking back I see you liked the first nonsensical response on this thread that completely ignored my points and tried to claim that I used math in a way I never did to refute my post, and you're probably looking at my response to that, so I'm not surprised you're saying this at all. 

 

[Erioch]

You people fight and waste your energy getting angry about the dumbest things.