The world would be missing something if we didn't have creative geniuses off in the corner making art for art's sake, accessible for the masses to keep at home.
Thinking about the circumstances of the time compared to today helped me to find relevance. We’re using GNU/Linux differently now than he was when that message was written. Symbolically, the ability to ”operate” the machine is provisional, and able to be taken away at any point by the true owner.
The guy was specifically talking about the video's headline, which was written to be clickbait like everything else on YouTube because that's how MKBHD pays his bills.
It’s the opposite of clickbait. The title saves the viewer from having to watch the video at all, as it says everything someone really needs to know in that single line. It’s a bad product.
I find it silly that people are pointing at MKBHD for the downfall of a company, instead of the people who ran the company and decided to launch when the experience wasn’t good and the value proposition was poor. Releasing early to ride the AI hype train was a risk, and this time it didn’t pay off.
People are also still free to try it for themselves if they were excited for the product and think MKBHD is wrong. While Marques doesn’t call the iPhone a bad product, he is very clear that he prefers Android, yet the iPhone is still outselling Android in the US, his prime market. That’s at least some proof that the market doesn’t blindly follow him and appreciates the perspective, without taking it as gospel.
It’d say the thing that pushes it (“The Worst Product I've Ever Reviewed... For Now”) over the clickbait line is that it doesn’t mention what is being reviewed, so you still have to open the video to learn what that the product in question actually is. Otherwise, yes, it would merely be reasonably hyperbolic.
Fair enough. Although I will say that titles seem to work in concert with thumbnails these days (for better or worse). Based on the thumbnail, I knew what it was about before I started watching. Of course, this assumes the viewer was previously aware of what the thing is; anyone who wasn’t wouldn’t be helped by a name either.
I personally have never once seen evidence that he "prefers" Android in any capacity. He has voiced opinions on things Android does well, and he has done the same for iOS. Anyone who thinks he has a personal preference one way or the other is very likely projecting.
He carries both, because he needs to stay familiar with both, and there are some things that the iPhone does better (in his opinion), like video, and of course there is iMessage.
He has said countless times that his main phone, and primary number, is on whatever Android phone he is currently carrying.
I’m an iPhone user, so I’m not projecting, trying say he prefers my preferred platform.
Here he is talking about using 2 phones, with his main number and 75% of usage being on the Android. That seems like a preference to me. That doesn’t mean he thinks the iPhone is bad, but it’s his special purpose phone, not the ‘default for everything else’ phone.
My work happens to require my primary computer to be a Windows machine, and there are many functions Windows provides that the Mac equivalent cannot compete with, when it comes to the work I need to do. Does that mean I "prefer" Windows? I don't think so.
He still has to provide a service to his "customers", and must do what it takes to accomplish that. Obviously, he could not choose to not make videos and still have a job, even if that was 'what he wants'.
To that end, if the Android operating system is better suited for the business needs he has as a video creator, he would be incentivized to choose that platform even if it isn't what he "prefers" all else being equal.
Not that I particularly care about this topic... good day.
At one point he tried making an iPhone his main phone and gave up after 2 weeks because he couldn’t figure out how to use shortcuts. He made a whole video about it.
I hate iOS shortcuts as well, I think they're one of the worst designed features on the phone and they have put some idiot PM's definition of "safety" as a direct obstacle to every user experience with them imaginable. I could see how if my job required them I might use android. But I don't think we could take that data point and extrapolate out that I "prefer" android.
It seems every time Apple tries to makes some kind of automation tool for the every-man it’s difficult to figure out for people who know how to write actual code, because none of the normal conventions are there. I ran into this with Automator as well as Shortcuts.
I don’t care enough about Shortcuts to get good at it, but would probably use it more if the learning curve wasn’t so steep. It seems odd to me that I need to put more effort into learning Shortcuts than a programming language.
It's not that it's difficult to set up, it's that they actively put restrictions in place to completely hamstring the usability. The only shortcut I have is a geofence to automatically text my GF when I am near her house so I don't need to use my phone when I'm driving and I don't need to wait out front for an excessive amount of time. But get this: you can't actually make a shortcut that runs on a geofence, the best you can do is get notified when you're in the target area, at which point you must manually unlock your phone and trigger the event.
It has to be some boneheaded attempt at "Privacy", to that end they also force you to accept a notification saying that there are N shortcuts running on the phone Every. Single. Time. you restart your phone.
They destroy everyone's UX (and force a non-0 number of folks to unnecessarily use their phone when driving) in order to kinda-sorta-maybe prevent some corner case where a stalker had access to your phone and wants to notify themselves whenever you're around a specific location? Except they could just enable the always-on location sharing feature to get precise location data at every moment?
but to be fair the ability to schedule texts and messages in other apps is fantastic and much better than android which still doesn't have a native orchestration tool that apps can build against.
I'll also add that Shortcuts can do a lot of really cool stuff, but one major problem I've found is that sometimes it just... doesn't work. Sometimes there's no rhyme or reason for why the same shortcut fails one time, but works another (Nothing complicated either, just launching an app). No explanation other than the failed error message.
This was a bigger problem in earlier versions of iOS, I've found them to be a lot more reliable lately, I have a shortcut that takes a sms reminder and converts it into a calendar event, (bec that healthcare provider EMS doesn't support sending calendar invite emails) back on iOS15 it would work intermittently, but ever since iOS17 it's been rock solid.
It is clickbait. And people who think the product is shitty seem numb to that point because they're like "yeah it is shitty, just like I thought!"
The actual video is way more balanced. Why not call it "Humane AI Pin: Pretty Bad" or something? But the worst...? There are waaay shittier products he's reviewed.
MKBHD is a millionaire... why clickbait?
People are like "Honest reviews are important"... yeah, exactly and we're saying the same thing. the concern is about dishonesty for clicks.
All sides in this argument have a kernel of truth that is being exaggerated somewhat.
That being said I trust him, just think he was off on the clickbait-iness.
> How many frames a second does this webcam do? What's the quality like? Shit.
A product isn't bad just because it's old and has obsolete specs.
That webcam review is 14 years old and has to be interpreted in the context from that time, just like the Humane Pin will inevitably be compared to current smartphones and obviously looks inferior in almost every way.
The video title is "the worst product I've ever reviewed" and the thumbnail is the product with its $700 price tag. What exactly is the "clickbait" here?
regardless of your original point, which I happen to agree with, that title is as clickbait as it gets. it is a title designed to make you click to find out what product he's talking about. pretending it's not clickbait is disingenuous.
I don't even care that it is clickbait. that's the game every YouTuber is playing. but, it is unashamed, by the book, clickbait.
We have different views of what clickbait is. Clickbait, in my view, is writing checks that your content can’t cash. MKBHD didn’t do that. He plainly said this was the worst product and then calmly explained why it was the worst product. The content completely fulfilled the promise of the title. No hyperbole, no exaggeration, just an honest review based on his weeks worth of use.
He clearly says in the review that it’s the worst product he’s reviewed. So what other possible title could he have chosen?
If your objection is that it’s an interesting title that many people will click on … there’s nothing wrong with that. This is a guy with 15 years experience reviewing products, of course I want to know what he thinks is the worst. That isn’t clickbait though!
Do you have an issue with the fact that he didn't put "AI Pin" in the title or that he called it the worst product he has reviewed? Because the "outrage" is very clearly about the latter.
Heck if anything not putting the company and product name in the title actually helps them in this case.
I think there are two different definitions of clickbait that people are operating with.
One definition (maybe close to what your definition might be) is "a title written with the intent of getting people to click on it".
I think the other definition that many people hold would be something like: "a *misleading* title with the intent of getting people to click on it".
So, if someone thinks of clickbait as requiring some element of deception, misdirection, or other very mild fraud, then this wouldn't fit that category. I think that's why people are talking past each other a bit.
"A title written with the intent of getting people to click on it" describes every title ever. What professional whose livelihood is dependent on people interacting with their work would possibly ever title their work in a way that dissuades people from interacting with it? Clickbait needs to be something more than simply "an interesting title" for the term to have any meaning at all.
Clickbait describes the replacement of traditional news headlines (a summary of what happened, e.g. "Tulsa high school student defeats chess grandmaster at tournament") with mystery lead-ins designed to leave you wanting to know what thing happened (e.g. "What this high school student did will SHOCK you", or "This high school student just changed EVERYTHING about chess").
For the YouTube video in question, I guess it hinges on whether you recognize the device in the thumbnail you're looking at. If you do, then the title is giving away the lede and letting you have the takeaway if that's all you're looking for. If not, then you could argue that leaving out the product's name is clickbait-y.
What's interesting is that that's basically the opposite of Vassallo's argument. He argues on X that it's not the video that's the problem; it's the meanness of the title that might effectively kill the product. He even says that the same video posted on X has a different title, and he has no problem with that.
So he's claiming that the title is in effect anti-clickbait. That by itself, regardless of the video content or whether or not people watch the video even, it could potentially cause harm to the product. I mean, he's not entirely wrong. It wouldn't be unsurprising if more people saw the title, and said to themselves, "Well, that sounds like a shit product, no need to even waste time watching the video," than actually watched the video.
That seems like a poor definition of "clickbait" in the context of YouTube, as that definition would effectively apply to every video being put on the platform these days and as such makes the label meaningless.
It would be a comment on the state of YouTube. Also Clickbait is a spectrum. On one end there are disingenuous titles (1) on the other are academic titles (0). A typical book of fiction title would be somewhere in the middle of the scale. But we do judge fiction and other artistic efforts differently.
There are Channels I subscribe to, that do not use titles like those too much. You can find examples from those channels that are clickbait from my perspective, but that is a general feeling I have.
I would also say that for complex stuff covered by a video you can't give a simple purely descriptive title and then my Clickbait detector allows some leeway. Just don't rely on terms, that almost automatically put a question in minds. Like: weird (weird, how?), the worst/best product (which product? - is it something I know of?).
You are really reaching. I wasn't expecting a MKBHD review of the Humane Pin just yet, but it showed up in my feed. I saw the title, and I knew exactly what he was reviewing without watching it (I watched anyway and found the content to be in line with the title 100%). On a side note: I knew these things (Humane Pin, Rabbit R1, etc.) were going to be borderline useless, but definitely redundant as mobile phones will very soon make them obsolete.
The YT title was 'The worst product I've ever reviewed...for now.'
It doesn't mention Humane or the AI Pin, there's also no brand logo in the thumbnail. Just a pic of the device itself. If you had no foreknowledge of the video or device itself, or what he was talking about, you'd have to watch at least 1 minute into the video itself to know the company and device name. The YT video title on its own can't possibly 'kill someone's nascent project' or 'cause harm' on its own.
It's not clickbait. It is the worse product ever reviewed at that price point because it solves nothing. For now.
You cannot just slap together a bunch of tech for no reason and then price it like Apple and pretend you're Apple. The fact that they received $240 million funding needs to be investigated in itself. Such terrible VCs need to be publicly humiliated.
I genuinely wonder whether such a thing is possible without a single centralized political party and severely limited avenues to disagree with the plan.
They opened up access to EU users in December[0] and presumably started running install banners inside Instagram in that region alongside the launch. How much of the growth is from EU vs. rest of world?
I wonder how they should comply with the law in your eyes. What is a fair way for Apple to recoup the investment they make into their developer programs?
- They sell hardware and licensed software to consumers. Within the law they may ask for money for feature updates.
- They also charge developers for access to their tools and access to their store front and payment handling.
That's all legit and if they want to hike prices or put parts of that information behind paywalls, the market will sort it out.
But if a consumer and a third party developer want to do business without all that, then it's my (and the DMAs) stance that apple has no right to a share of that. They EU is increasingly of the opinion that, in general, a device has to serve its owner and not the original manufacturer.
When they want to protect consumers by scanning for known malware that's fine but "Apple loses revenue" is not a threat at all.
I expected it to go in reverse. "Charge your car at the supermarket. If you spend $X with your loyalty-club card, we'll deduct $Y from the charging bill."
The customer is captive for 15 minutes somewhere, but you can certainly give him reasons to choose to be captive for 15 minutes at your store.
EV infrastructure is probably easier to deploy than gas, so I'd expect to see a lot of new and smaller-scale charging sites. Instead of four gas stations at the corner with 8-12 pumps each, every store in every strip mall on that corner will have 1 or 2 charging stands each.
Part of me suspects this is why we're seeing an industry-wide attempt to make convenience marts less terrible (i. e. food you'd willingly buy). If you can no longer guarantee traffic from people fueling their vehicles, you have to raise the bar.
