Why do you guys hate him so much /g/?
Well I don't like him on account of the fact that he's black.
>>53582996
Kek
Why does he have a mound on his head
>>53583015
To hide the tumor
>tfw he's literally cancer
Because he took his passion for tech and turned it into a successful career, rather than shitposting on a Botswanian juggling forum.
>>53583070
>his passion for consumerism
Fixed.
>>53583070
a passion for consumer technology has nothing to do with technology
Successful black people make me feel insecure
>>53582996
lmao
Because the color of his skin is darker than that of my own.
>>53583092
Hi there!
You seem to have made a bit of a mistake in your post. Luckily, the users of 4chan are always willing to help you clear this problem right up! You appear to have used a tripcode when posting, but your identity has nothing at all to do with the conversation! Whoops! You should always remember to stop using your tripcode when the thread it was used for is gone, unless another one is started! Posting with a tripcode when it isn't necessary is poor form. You should always try to post anonymously, unless your identity is absolutely vital to the post that you're making!
Now, there's no need to thank me - I'm just doing my bit to help you get used to the anonymous image-board culture!
>>53583152
Don't derail the thread, you fucking faggot.
>>53583036
Damn you. You heartless loli
>>53583116
/thread
4chan is sometimes full of pasty white kids who feel insecure. That said, OP, your question is a loaded one. I'm pretty sure most people don't have a problem with him.
>>53583180
shit thread anyway. doesnt even discuss tech
>>53583194
then report the thread and move on. shitposting in a thread is still shitposting.
>>53583203
Man fuck you shot posting is the ony thing that holding /g/ together
>>53583228
shit posting is the only thing you can offer /g/
that's very different from "the ony thing that holding /g/ together"
>>53583015
It's his ushnisha
>>53582974
I'm not saying it's because he's black I'm just saying because he's black
>>53583203
>report the thread
there are no fucking mods anymore.
half this board is bait and "16GiB RAM" threads reign
Give it all back Tyrone.
He steals all of the phones he reviews
I hate him because /g/ mods hate the word nigger
>>53583738
Yes there is
KFCHD is a shill that does it for free, no joke, he used to be fair and shit but when that "hey this is autism" moved to his hood, he started going the wrong path, i mean, look at him now his skin is lighter.
>>53584322
what?
some of us don't actually pay enough attention to understand all the lolrandum references you youtube faggots make.
Hate? I didn't get that impression at all.
Technigger's phone reviews are actually fairly decent.
Nigger doesn't mean hate on 4chan.
If you want hate, try linus or that bearded AMD shill.
>>53584322
check em´
>>53582974
self-centered and shills too much
>>53584322
hahaha wow i get it!! KFC because he's BLACK!!! LMAO!!!! Nice one, fellow anon :-)
His videos are well made, look nice and are informative enough for an average consumer. This being said, unless something has changed, he always uses stock and doesn't seem like a power user at all. While I appreciate his views on the size /screen/camera of the phone, he never touches the subjects of rom flashing, the community, state of xposed etc. So to me he's basically one of the best guys at playing with a phone and getting money and views for it.
he doesn't know what he is talking about
dumbs down his reviews
consumerism slut
>>53582996
/pol/ is that way
Because all he does is advertising phones.
>>53582996
Honesty is key
I vaguely recall some video posted here where he shits on audiophile graphs or something of that nature and decided to swear him off forever, not that I give a shit about any e-celebs. He's also younger than me so I feel I have no reason to trust his knowledge more than my own. Also, fuck him because here I am busting my ass in college to get ahead.
>>53586064
>He's also younger than me so I feel I have no reason to trust his knowledge more than my own
you understand that everyone has different experiences, right?
he's not even giving general life advice.
jesus are you guys all this stupid?
Because he supports consumer bullshit.
>>53586087
in what way?
>>53586093
All he does is advertising phones. That's consumerism.
>>53586101
i've seen reviews of phones - is that what you mean?
lots of people on youtube review shit. are you complaining that he only does phones (which seems like a good thing, since he can theoretically focus on one topic), or that he reviews stuff at all (which sounds like an indictment against like... every tech youtube channel)?
>>53582974
because other people get advice from him, meaning, because we are teh underground, that his advice is automatically shit
>>53586107
No, reviewing commercial products in general to me is very banal and inane.
>>53586135
>No, reviewing commercial products in general to me is very banal and inane.
are you saying you don't look at product reviews before buying something?
do you just take companies at their word for stuff?
>>53586151
No, I do my own 'research' because for commercial electronics it's very trivial to me.
>>53582996
This might be it. Can't say for sure though, I just can't put my finger on it when I watch his videos. Well when I watched his videos, I actively try to avoid them nowadays.
>>53586208
can you describe this research process that doesn't involve any first-hand reports? do you buy everything and return all but the thing you eventually decide to keep? doesn't that get costly?
>>53586670
I don't have a flow chart lying around, you know. It also differs per product or implementation I'm interested in. But I mainly look at the technical documents the vendor releases for specs/features. In the case of a phone, just to name some things that come to mind, I also browse the interwebz for ease of rooting, reputation of known exploits, bloat and spyware/telemetry in the stock firmware, general support of the manufacturer. Suffices to say that this process is different when buying a washing machine (which may change when it becomes some sort of IoT monstrosity).
Because I'm extremely racist.
>>53586758
but most smartphones and other consumer electronics don't provide credible estimates of things like battery life. You can infer things from the specs, but empirically that's not completely reliable either.
you also mention that you "browse the interwebz for... reputation of [a bunch of stuff", and this is exactly what i was afraid of. you're reading reviews, but you're placing more value on reviews written by people who have no frame of reference with other devices. it sounds like you're reading this stuff written by everyday owners of these devices, so in reality you're just psyching yourself into purchasing the thing you buy (because it's generally uncommon that people have other data points to reference when talking about their purchase, to say nothing of the psychological motivation to justify their decision).
I'm not saying that reading "layman" reviews is bad, but rejecting professional reviews is logically faulty. Just put the reviews in context - are they being compensated by the company for the review? did they receive a review unit for free (e.g. as part of a preferential relationship)? does the review group skew up or down on android devices vs ios devices? etc...
buying a washing machine is an apt example of something you should be reading proper reviews for. the only people who will have experience with more than 5 modern washing machines are the people who make a living out of writing reviews. looking at the experiences of each slice of customers (those who have bought washing machine A, those that bought machine B, those that bought C, etc...) will give you a decidedly incomplete sense of how they stack up against each other.
I would buy criticism against this guy for being too preferential toward android or ios or whatever his bias is, but shrugging him off because he makes a business out of reviewing devices is grossly naive.
>>53582974
i have nothing against him, i just find him boring.
>>53586845
>but most smartphones and other consumer electronics don't provide credible estimates of things like battery life. You can infer things from the specs, but empirically that's not completely reliable either.
Sure, everybody lies, especially the manufacturer. But the same could apply to the biased reviewer.
>you also mention that you "browse the interwebz for... reputation of [a bunch of stuff", and this is exactly what i was afraid of. you're reading reviews, but you're placing more value on reviews written by people who have no frame of reference with other devices. it sounds like you're reading this stuff written by everyday owners of these devices, so in reality you're just psyching yourself into purchasing the thing you buy (because it's generally uncommon that people have other data points to reference when talking about their purchase, to say nothing of the psychological motivation to justify their decision).
This may have some merit, but it's not like the manufacturer will post these details about rooting, bloat and telemetry about their own products in the first place, now would they? Therefore you're left with whatever the interwebz tells you, which you compare to what multiple sources say to make up your own mind about something.
So, yes, I would lull myself into a somewhat false sense of security to only go by layman's reviews, but news articles and scientific papers will go a long way. And I'm not too fond of your 'professional reviews' notion. I prefer the independent reviews over the professional (commercialism implied) ones.
The washing machine example was ment to differentiate between exploits, bloat, telemetry on one side, and a 'dumb' washing machine on the other side (hence the IoT remark). :-)
>but shrugging him off because he makes a business out of reviewing devices is grossly naive.
It's not naive, it's more like stating the obvious. It would be naive to think of him being the only one that does so, which I didn't imply, mind you.
>>53587042
>Sure, everybody lies, especially the manufacturer. But the same could apply to the biased reviewer.
what you're saying is that you'd rather take the definite lie than the possible lie. i don't understand how you decided that this was the smart choice, but hopefully framing it this way helps you see how dumb that is.
the point about how companies won't tell you about rootability is beside the point. the point is that an external reviewer can give you a perspective on the device that's (in theory) not manufactured by the same people who designed and manufactured the device. it's not just rootability you're interested in, but durability, feeling in the hand, responsiveness, etc... and none of these is ever trustworthily reported by the device manufacturers.
i don't know if you're incredibly naive, thinking that you can ask the manufacturers this stuff and get a credible response, or if you've warped your cynicism in such a bizarre way that you won't trust anyone's descriptions and you're paradoxically left only trusting the manufacturer - the least trustworthy of all the sources.
as for the implication about him being the only one that does this, i'll grant that we got down this rabbit hole, but the question in this thread is why /g/ hates that guy in the picture so much. you've led me on a wild goose chase trying to understand what is frankly a stupid worldview of yours, when you just admitted that your perspective is totally unrelated to the thread's stated topic. you have nothing against marques brownlee, so you're not the person or category of person i was asking in the first place.
His stupid haircut and freakish large hands makes me think he's one of Dwight Howard's numerous children
>>53587098
I'm getting the feeling there's some sort of miscommunication. I was arguing that it was better to trust multiple sources.
Here's what I would most likely do, I would go through the technical documents the manufacturer publishes, and then comparing them to what other independant sources (news articles, papers, you name it) say about this particular device, but also what they day about the vendor in general. For instance, many, if not all, vendors bloat the firmware with all sorts of stuff I have no interest in. So therefore I would like the option to root the phone and put CyanogenMod on it. The vendors would, of course, not give you clear instructions on how to do this. That's not me being naive; that's me not expecting them to and I'm just pointing out they don't do so, which means I have to look elsewhere.
You're right about me not having anything against this guy personally, though. But then, I never said I did. This guy >>53586087 was someone else. I just hijacked the discussion here >>53586101 :-)
>>53587486
The only reason he is popular with the youths is because his master thought him how to properly speak English and left him a fortune when he died.
His camera costs more than I make in a year
>>53586064
Didn't he go to college as well?
He's a normal dude giving his honest opinion on phones, they're not even controversial opinions.
The battery is bad, the camera is good, this Android skin is bloated. Bla bla bla. There is nothing hard to digest, it's not like he's technologically illiterate either.
>>53588095
Yeah he goes to Stevens. I guess he's in his last year because he has been in school forever but still talks about playing Ultimate for the school team all the time.
>>53588111
It feels weird even discussing this because his personality doesn't really matter in his videos. It's more just about showing off tech. Anyone who continues this thread is a faggot.
>>53588141
>his personality doesn't really matter in his videos
To be honest a large part of his videos is his personality. If he were boring, obnoxious, or annoying, he probably wouldn't have made it to where he is today.
At least he is less annoying than the dude in unbox therapy. That guy really annoys me.
>>53582974
I don't
>genuinely informative videos and first looks at upcoming tech
>not horrendously annoying like literally every single other youtube faggot
sure, he's not super knowledgeable about pc stuff, but I like him for his phone reviews
>>53584338
Autism Evans, one of his best friends.
>>53584347
It's never a good idea to light your farts in the car, not even as a goof. You can burn your eyebrows like that.
>>53582974
He was a macfag the last time I saw his videos.
>>53588603
bump
>>53588603
What the fuck did you expect? All their mods are from leddit now.
>>53582974
he's pretty cool, but starting to get really pissed at youtubers sense of entitlement.
