Linus' reponse to the Gamer's Nexus Video
Linus' reponse to the Gamer's Nexus Video
This is quoted from Linus on the LTT forums:
"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."
You're viewing a single thread.
I don't personally feel this is the correct response, but what do you think?
It absolutely is not the correct response. LTT and GN are very public and the suggestion to take the conversation private is bad. There is no backroom conversation that can "fix" shitty data.
I agree with Linus taking accountability for publishing bad test results. That is a good thing. Talking shit about GN and refusing to walk back on that is bad. That is unprofessional.
I've never watched a video or paid attention to these guys but it certainly didn't sound like he was taking accountability for bad test results. He spent quite a while explaining why accuracy wasn't important.
What part about that was talking shit about GN? I haven't seen the video, but the vibe I'm getting is GN was talking shit about LTT, and LTT didn't want to start a shit flinging contest?
Edit: Watched the video. That was brutal. The GN response was disproportionate to the quips, but at the same time justified.
Also, after watching all that, I feel the need to say Linus is super arrogant on the wan show and I never watch it.
... Watch maybe just the first three or four minutes of the GN video. Hell, probably the first two is sufficient.
I remember feeling like it was an odd quip/comparison from LMG, but I think GN's response is intense (as it always is). Hopefully Linus addresses those things, but I don't think he needs to make a pissing contest out of it
Linus's stupidity on the WAN show where he alluded to them as being unprofessional for calling him out over his anti-consumer bullshit is a "quip". Based on Linus's response, I would assume he and GN have had talks behind the scenes (and GN reached out to LMG when they did their videos). One can argue that is insulting the professionalism of GN's brand but... MSI does that every other week it seems. Mostly that just leads to a laugh on the news show.
Dumbfuck during that Lab tour was straight up attacking GN and HUB. And his argument for why LMG was so much better was some complete nonsense about how they "always test new hardware". Which can either be interpreted as him not understanding that the teardowns happen AFTER Patrick et al have collected the data or a claim that they rerun every single test every time they make a new graph (which GN quickly demonstrated it is wrong). And Linus said he stood by the sentiment, if not the verbiage (paraphrasing to be charitable).
One of my long time mentors taught me: if someone attacks you personally? Kill them with kindness. If someone attacks you professionally? Murder that mother fucker and their entire family with citations.
Jfc though what they did to billet labs was pretty awful
Well, based on what your mentor said, GN did the right thing lol. I did feel like it was rude when Linus was saying that in the lab tour, it seemed un-scripted and rude. I think the response above is also reasonable. Linus has quite the ego these days and maybe he's starting to realize it
Why not watch the video then?
It would have been kind to linus to do it directly, but honesty to the audience is what matters the most. The criticism has to go both ways if you are going be honest and reliable journalists. Would Telling him in private really change things for something that is a core issue with the business? I don't think so. The audience will tell you if your work is good enough or you fall from your failure to comply.
The way I interpreted it LTT wasn't asking for it to be kept in private but simply allowed to give their point of view. And he is right, journalist usually do that. If they accuse someone of something they usually ask for a statement. Often it's just met by "Company refused to give a statement" but at least they tried.
And GN is kinda doing the same he is accusing LTT of, not doing their due diligence by not reaching out. This isn't about keeping it private.
I guess we will find out for sure soon. Something like this isn't going to go silently.
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
That’s kinda not better or a defense. Or even a clarification.
The prototype is still gone, regardless of who received the money for it. That's still a massive liability for Billet Labs to have floating out in the wild.
Agree. It’s ridiculous.
Also, I don't know why he felt the need to put 'sell' in quotes, as if auctioning isn't a form of selling. Plus GN mentioned it was auctioned, many times.
Agree. Interesting point made at 33m 25s.
Billet is telling GN that they asked for the product back but was ignored. When they asked a second time Billet was told it was gone (aka they auctioned it) and finally, that they are now stalled developing the system because they loaned out their best prototype to Linus and he sold it.