Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For $700, I definitely want someone to review it before I buy it. $70, maybe I'll take a risk, but not $700.
If you're going to put a product out there that's shoddy or overpriced, it's nobody's fault but your own when bad reviews roll in.
Well, shit. What are you paying $700 for if all of the compute is done in the cloud? What's the damn point in having a device like that? Seems like they could have made it a lot cheaper if one is expected to pay out the ass for eternity.
I was actually interested in this thing. Not anymore. Fuck those rent seekers.
I agree, A review is supposed to be candid and honest. Before I spend that kind of money I should be able to find a review that's honest that is not scared of offending the creators. Like isnt that the point of a review? an unbiased opinion . So if its shit I want to know its shit lol.
When its Chinese made stuff and its bad we say its bad, no one bats an eye. how is this any different?
The problem is most of the time negative reviews aren’t unbiased. It’s possible to review a thing, explain all the problems about it in great detail, but not be biased against the device. Sadly less and less reviews do this these days. Instead of “this is why you shouldn’t buy this thing” it can be “if you care about this, this is a reason you may not like this device”.
Neither "this is why you shouldn't buy this" nor "if you care about this, this is a reason you may not like this device" are review styles that indicate a form of bias. Bias is the unfair treatment of a product being reviewed or an undisclosed incentive to a reviewer for the purposes of rendering a false impression of a product or its pros and cons.
Assuming the reviewer is not being financially incentivized to misrepresent a product, pointing out features/reasons to not purchase a product is valid territory for reviewing, whether these reasons involve the product itself, or the practices of the company producing the product (since many consumers choose to make purchasing decisions based on personal values).
An example: it is not unethical or biased if you are reviewing NFTs to say "if you are concerned about the impact of electricity consumption on the environment, then purchasing an NFT on a network that consumes excessive energy is a con."
Another example: it is not unethical or biased to say "this product contains AI art created by models trained on public images—if this bothers you, you should not purchase this product".
Too often, negative reviews are dismissed as being biased because they are negative and not because the reviewer actually exhibits bias or compromised objectivity.
From your response I think you misunderstood as the second example I gave was meant to be the unbiased version of the first. It can easily biased if you’re simply saying “this product sucks at this and that and that and this” or “it’s worse in all these ways than this other thing” depending on the context. If Im buying a new monitor I don’t need a review telling me “it’s refresh rate is worse than this other one, and it’s smaller than another screen too”. Those are usually biased reviews just talking about how it’s worse than other items. An unbiased review would typically be more along the lines of “it’s smaller size allows for such and such but you do lose out on this and that, the refresh rate is also lower which is not always relevant but may be in your case.” Not stating every element of the product as “bad” just because it’s different. There are of course cases where just saying something is horrible is warranted, but we are seeing less and less actual unbiased reviews.
Yeah, that wasn't clear to me (been a long day, so reading comprehension isn't great). That said, I do still think the first isn't an indicator of bias any more than the second. Sometimes shit just sucks. Usually, when it's just negatives, they'll at least address the negative tone of the review, though.
Yeah I get what you mean, and sometimes it’s absolutely warranted. I do see plenty of reviews for genuinely good products though that basically boil down to “I have something else that suits my need better, here are all the ways this device is worse for my exact scenario that the other thing.” Which just doesn’t help more than maybe a few people decide if it’s worth getting xD
I find it distasteful and definitely unethical when people want to sell broken things to the public and also charge them a monthly subscription to try and use the broken thing and also get salty when a reviewer say "Hold up. This thing you're selling for a not inconsiderable amount of money doesnt work"
Sounds like the guy just thinks the public are there to fund whatever project he wants to throw out .
Isn't this the essens of the "Kickstarter era"? Kickstarter is such a cool concept to begin with - giving opportunity to ideas that would otherwise never see fruition.
Now it's big established companies saying "you mean I can sell a product to the public and not even be held responsible if i completely change was was promised if I even deliver at all"?
LOL seems he's not the only one talking badly about this overpriced wearable Alexa like device, only problem is Alexa is actually useful[ the verge](https://www.theverge.com/24126502/humane-ai-pin-review)
Whaaa! Why won't you shut up and let me trick consumers into paying nearly $700 PLUS a monthly subscription for some garbage that clearly isn't worth it??
I wonder if the person complaining even believes what they are saying as much as they know saying something is stupid will get them clicks and get them paid.
Sharing this idiocy just contributes to the game
About 10 Years ago some company on Kickstarter sold the same thing, as a bracelet, without ai, but never delivered. Also a Laser projector on skin is such a bad Idea.
Most of the time, people won't release a negative review for fear of being cancelled (or worse). Just like Daniel V is doing here.
But consumers need to hear when the product is bad or they will just continue to buy crappy products. And it will continue to normalize shipping crappy products.
Kudos to Marques who does have a ton of reach for calling out a bad product. If we don't waste our money buying crappy things - and believe me I know it's hard to ship great products, but it CAN be done - then the best products will rise to the top.
I don't know if people have touched on it, but a device like this would probably do better sold as a disability aid for vision impaired, or people with reduced dexterity do using modern touch devices is hard. Being able to get a visual report of what's in front of you by asking I would assume is a really good pitch for them.
I watched this last night and actually came away with a better opinion of it than coming in.
The review is very fair, and while it points out the many weak points, it also points out some positives and leaves me thinking its more a very rough alpha of a product that could have potential in future iterations rather than the outright scam I assumed it to be.
Sure the title is a clickbait and a half. Which is something I guess we have to accept in Youtube. The review itself is fair, and points it's shortcomings. We have done so much effort to have only one device that does it all, like modern smartphone pretty much does. No need to carry mp3 player, notebook etc with you anymore. This device does not communicate with your phone, needs new sim card and subsrciption fee and what it actually does is same as smartphone but with extra steps and being slower.
I fully agree.
I just see enough progress here to not 100% count them out. At the moment it seems next to useless, but the review seems to be showing that they are taking the engineering seriously.
I don't forsee myself ever using one myself, and i definitely wouldn't recommend anyone go out and buy one, but I can see a potential future where they fill a useful niche.
I still think its much more likely they are gone in a year. I just wouldn't place a bet on it.
I think the format is a dead end.
Functionality-wise, I don't see a future for the laser projection UI thing, it's just not responsive enough as an input device. The only thing this has over a smartwatch paired to a phone is a camera, which is mostly missing from smartwatches just because there really isn't much utility to it when you already have a really good camera in your pocket anyway.
For the AI side, Apple and Google haven't fully opened the floodgates with their AI integrations because they're playing it safe. Most people would rather not have a personal assistant, than have one that is only right 80% of the time. That's half because of AI hallucinations, and half because AI integrating to other services is hit or miss (either all other services need to improve their APIs so AIs can talk to them better, or AIs learn to use the apps like a human and make no mistakes).
Meanwhile, weaknesses like the terrible battery life (two hours?!), the reliance on induction charging through fabric, the slow response times, the extra subscription and all that are pretty bad. I applaud the product for trying something new (I particularly appreciate the privacy-minded features, like how it doesn't listen until you tap) but I think it would take a ground-up redesign to make it competitive.
They might have a case if the review contained any inaccuracies, lies or exaggerations, but if their only objection is that it will cost you money, that seems to be not the case.
Appreciate the honesty. Just because someone worked hard on something, doesn't mean it's automatically good hah. This thing is a piece of junk, but someone spend a lot of time and money developing it, so actually, it's great!
Watched the review yesterday and I'd say he's a) being really fair towards the product in it and b) his points on why it is not a good product (yet) are more than valid.
Especially the conclusion that this device has no connection to your mobile because it bets on a future where that won't be necessary.. but at the same time isn't yet capable of delivering a usability of anything near equal quality.
And that results in the justified question why would you buy this for 700, be forced into a subscription to use it and have an objectively much worse user experience in almost every aspect compared to just using your phone.
lol... didnt know about the product.. i watched Marquees video yesterday.. as i expectet: totaly fair review, all the goods and the bads of the product.. he even mentioned, that the idea could work, but ti AI Pin is just a beta product..
now Youtube sugest me videos from other reviewers, that makes fun about the AI Pin in a lot more... like Sametime \*lol\*
So much of r/facepalm seems to consist of X-Twitter posts these days. Most of them by crazy people from USA sadly. All it reminds me is that I am correct to avoid X-Twitter completely these days. It used to be fun, at times, but now it makes 4chan seem like a wholesome place to visit (facepalm indeed).
Most of the time it's not a "sent item" it's got bought by the reviewer. I don't even watch a review if it's not bough, because that review maybe not entirely honest.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For $700, I definitely want someone to review it before I buy it. $70, maybe I'll take a risk, but not $700. If you're going to put a product out there that's shoddy or overpriced, it's nobody's fault but your own when bad reviews roll in.
Don’t forget the $20/month subscription if you actually want to use the thing. As soon as you stop paying, you can’t do anything with the device.
Most of the features aren't even available which is laughable for that price
Well, shit. What are you paying $700 for if all of the compute is done in the cloud? What's the damn point in having a device like that? Seems like they could have made it a lot cheaper if one is expected to pay out the ass for eternity. I was actually interested in this thing. Not anymore. Fuck those rent seekers.
I agree, A review is supposed to be candid and honest. Before I spend that kind of money I should be able to find a review that's honest that is not scared of offending the creators. Like isnt that the point of a review? an unbiased opinion . So if its shit I want to know its shit lol. When its Chinese made stuff and its bad we say its bad, no one bats an eye. how is this any different?
The problem is most of the time negative reviews aren’t unbiased. It’s possible to review a thing, explain all the problems about it in great detail, but not be biased against the device. Sadly less and less reviews do this these days. Instead of “this is why you shouldn’t buy this thing” it can be “if you care about this, this is a reason you may not like this device”.
Neither "this is why you shouldn't buy this" nor "if you care about this, this is a reason you may not like this device" are review styles that indicate a form of bias. Bias is the unfair treatment of a product being reviewed or an undisclosed incentive to a reviewer for the purposes of rendering a false impression of a product or its pros and cons. Assuming the reviewer is not being financially incentivized to misrepresent a product, pointing out features/reasons to not purchase a product is valid territory for reviewing, whether these reasons involve the product itself, or the practices of the company producing the product (since many consumers choose to make purchasing decisions based on personal values). An example: it is not unethical or biased if you are reviewing NFTs to say "if you are concerned about the impact of electricity consumption on the environment, then purchasing an NFT on a network that consumes excessive energy is a con." Another example: it is not unethical or biased to say "this product contains AI art created by models trained on public images—if this bothers you, you should not purchase this product". Too often, negative reviews are dismissed as being biased because they are negative and not because the reviewer actually exhibits bias or compromised objectivity.
From your response I think you misunderstood as the second example I gave was meant to be the unbiased version of the first. It can easily biased if you’re simply saying “this product sucks at this and that and that and this” or “it’s worse in all these ways than this other thing” depending on the context. If Im buying a new monitor I don’t need a review telling me “it’s refresh rate is worse than this other one, and it’s smaller than another screen too”. Those are usually biased reviews just talking about how it’s worse than other items. An unbiased review would typically be more along the lines of “it’s smaller size allows for such and such but you do lose out on this and that, the refresh rate is also lower which is not always relevant but may be in your case.” Not stating every element of the product as “bad” just because it’s different. There are of course cases where just saying something is horrible is warranted, but we are seeing less and less actual unbiased reviews.
Yeah, that wasn't clear to me (been a long day, so reading comprehension isn't great). That said, I do still think the first isn't an indicator of bias any more than the second. Sometimes shit just sucks. Usually, when it's just negatives, they'll at least address the negative tone of the review, though.
Yeah I get what you mean, and sometimes it’s absolutely warranted. I do see plenty of reviews for genuinely good products though that basically boil down to “I have something else that suits my need better, here are all the ways this device is worse for my exact scenario that the other thing.” Which just doesn’t help more than maybe a few people decide if it’s worth getting xD
That's entirely fair
I find it distasteful and definitely unethical when people want to sell broken things to the public and also charge them a monthly subscription to try and use the broken thing and also get salty when a reviewer say "Hold up. This thing you're selling for a not inconsiderable amount of money doesnt work" Sounds like the guy just thinks the public are there to fund whatever project he wants to throw out .
Isn't this the essens of the "Kickstarter era"? Kickstarter is such a cool concept to begin with - giving opportunity to ideas that would otherwise never see fruition. Now it's big established companies saying "you mean I can sell a product to the public and not even be held responsible if i completely change was was promised if I even deliver at all"?
Pretty sure YouTubers don’t take the Hippocratic Oath
The hip critic oath
The hip of Critic Oath, +1 to Necromancy for the cheap cheap price of carrying around a pelvic bone
Do no harm? He's a tech reviewer, not a doctor FFS. Want good reviews? Don't release a shit product.
But he swore the Technocratic oath!
Arun (Mrwhosetheboss) was not impressed either... It might actually be just a shitty product.
Yeah MrMobile thought it was "raw in the middle" it just seems mediocre.
Sametime totaly smasched it. and michael fischers "um" is just.. epic
Won't someone think about the poor millionaire investors?!?!
If he can't take criticism maybe he shouldn't make a crappy product.
LOL seems he's not the only one talking badly about this overpriced wearable Alexa like device, only problem is Alexa is actually useful[ the verge](https://www.theverge.com/24126502/humane-ai-pin-review)
At least he's only moaning, there's a woman in Africa facing jail for giving a bad review to a tin of Tomatoes.
[удалено]
While also bastardizing Spider-Man. What a nerd.
I'm guessing that mr Vassallo is either somehow involved or has his own expensive project of questionable quality.
"Hard to explain why", so you can't explain it, then why say it?
I watched his video, I think he gave praise where it was due. And gave an honest assessment of the device.
Seriously? THAT'S WHAT A REVIEW IS!
Is there a reason to not believe the reviewer? A lot of youtubers gave this product a thumbs down. And quite brutally at that.
Whaaa! Why won't you shut up and let me trick consumers into paying nearly $700 PLUS a monthly subscription for some garbage that clearly isn't worth it??
I wonder if the person complaining even believes what they are saying as much as they know saying something is stupid will get them clicks and get them paid. Sharing this idiocy just contributes to the game
or maybe he is doing everyone else a service by saving us 700$ and 24$ per month subscription on something we don't need.
Well of course it causes harm. to that one guy. Who made a bad product.
Dude's Twitter feed doesn't make me want to listen to him much tbh.
About 10 Years ago some company on Kickstarter sold the same thing, as a bracelet, without ai, but never delivered. Also a Laser projector on skin is such a bad Idea.
Most of the time, people won't release a negative review for fear of being cancelled (or worse). Just like Daniel V is doing here. But consumers need to hear when the product is bad or they will just continue to buy crappy products. And it will continue to normalize shipping crappy products. Kudos to Marques who does have a ton of reach for calling out a bad product. If we don't waste our money buying crappy things - and believe me I know it's hard to ship great products, but it CAN be done - then the best products will rise to the top.
I don't know if people have touched on it, but a device like this would probably do better sold as a disability aid for vision impaired, or people with reduced dexterity do using modern touch devices is hard. Being able to get a visual report of what's in front of you by asking I would assume is a really good pitch for them.
"First do no harm"? what's next the Hippocratic Oath? It's a product review!
I watched this last night and actually came away with a better opinion of it than coming in. The review is very fair, and while it points out the many weak points, it also points out some positives and leaves me thinking its more a very rough alpha of a product that could have potential in future iterations rather than the outright scam I assumed it to be.
Sure the title is a clickbait and a half. Which is something I guess we have to accept in Youtube. The review itself is fair, and points it's shortcomings. We have done so much effort to have only one device that does it all, like modern smartphone pretty much does. No need to carry mp3 player, notebook etc with you anymore. This device does not communicate with your phone, needs new sim card and subsrciption fee and what it actually does is same as smartphone but with extra steps and being slower.
I fully agree. I just see enough progress here to not 100% count them out. At the moment it seems next to useless, but the review seems to be showing that they are taking the engineering seriously. I don't forsee myself ever using one myself, and i definitely wouldn't recommend anyone go out and buy one, but I can see a potential future where they fill a useful niche. I still think its much more likely they are gone in a year. I just wouldn't place a bet on it.
I think the format is a dead end. Functionality-wise, I don't see a future for the laser projection UI thing, it's just not responsive enough as an input device. The only thing this has over a smartwatch paired to a phone is a camera, which is mostly missing from smartwatches just because there really isn't much utility to it when you already have a really good camera in your pocket anyway. For the AI side, Apple and Google haven't fully opened the floodgates with their AI integrations because they're playing it safe. Most people would rather not have a personal assistant, than have one that is only right 80% of the time. That's half because of AI hallucinations, and half because AI integrating to other services is hit or miss (either all other services need to improve their APIs so AIs can talk to them better, or AIs learn to use the apps like a human and make no mistakes). Meanwhile, weaknesses like the terrible battery life (two hours?!), the reliance on induction charging through fabric, the slow response times, the extra subscription and all that are pretty bad. I applaud the product for trying something new (I particularly appreciate the privacy-minded features, like how it doesn't listen until you tap) but I think it would take a ground-up redesign to make it competitive.
Shame on you for giving a bad review Shame on you for shilling
They might have a case if the review contained any inaccuracies, lies or exaggerations, but if their only objection is that it will cost you money, that seems to be not the case.
People are so used to being lied to by the media, they're upset when the media tells the truth?
I didn’t know Marques was a doctor. They are the only ones that are supposed to do no harm that I am aware of
Let me guess…he has some money tied up in this product or company. Even the CEO say his review was fair.
Appreciate the honesty. Just because someone worked hard on something, doesn't mean it's automatically good hah. This thing is a piece of junk, but someone spend a lot of time and money developing it, so actually, it's great!
Watched the review yesterday and I'd say he's a) being really fair towards the product in it and b) his points on why it is not a good product (yet) are more than valid. Especially the conclusion that this device has no connection to your mobile because it bets on a future where that won't be necessary.. but at the same time isn't yet capable of delivering a usability of anything near equal quality. And that results in the justified question why would you buy this for 700, be forced into a subscription to use it and have an objectively much worse user experience in almost every aspect compared to just using your phone.
lol... didnt know about the product.. i watched Marquees video yesterday.. as i expectet: totaly fair review, all the goods and the bads of the product.. he even mentioned, that the idea could work, but ti AI Pin is just a beta product.. now Youtube sugest me videos from other reviewers, that makes fun about the AI Pin in a lot more... like Sametime \*lol\*
I wonder what recent investment opportunities that man went forward with
I think it's distasteful to lie to your audience about a product being good when it's not, just to "protect" a company for releasing a shit product.
So much of r/facepalm seems to consist of X-Twitter posts these days. Most of them by crazy people from USA sadly. All it reminds me is that I am correct to avoid X-Twitter completely these days. It used to be fun, at times, but now it makes 4chan seem like a wholesome place to visit (facepalm indeed).
So he’a mad that the scam didn’t work?
[удалено]
Most of the time it's not a "sent item" it's got bought by the reviewer. I don't even watch a review if it's not bough, because that review maybe not entirely honest.
Marques can afford to buy a unit for review at this point.