Steve vs Linus, round 2

[mrk]

Imagine hating on the only guy in tech outlets that actually stands up for the consumer and does what's right at holding companies to task just because you don't like his screen presence.

"We want techies with a big platform to stand up for us!"

"Oh but not you, I don't like how you look/speak"

Lol go brush your teeth.

GN's Steve and more recently HWUB are the only ones that seem to be consistent in pointing out corporate BS so the wider majority are aware, meanwhile the rest of these tubers are licking holes left and right.

 

[alexakasloth]

I mean it is YouTube, if you're presenting on a channel then it's kind of required to be likable to your audience.

 

[jp7152]

Way way too many adverts on Linus videos for my liking. When it comes to reviews, I think Hardware unboxed is a good balance between the ultra serious gamersnexus and LTT

 

[MartinPrince]

Well I'd say neither of those are "scams" - dishonest to the creators who use affiliate links, but no harm to us as consumers.

Then you are displaying your obvious ignorance as to what "scam" means.

scam:

a dishonest plan for making money or getting an advantage, especially one that involves tricking people

So the creators are the primary ones being scammed but one of the other "features" of the Honey scam did potentially deceive and harm consumers, though if you'd watched the video you would have known that; so your assessment is false. Not surprising as I seem to remember you calling a real, bonafide lawyer "faux".

 

[Deleted User 298457]

Then you are displaying your obvious ignorance as to what "scam" means.

scam:


So the creators are the primary ones being scammed but one of the other "features" of the Honey scam did potentially deceive and harm consumers, though if you'd watched the video you would have known that; so your assessment is false. Not surprising as I seem to remember you calling a real, bonafide lawyer "faux".

Start of post: you don't understand the word scam
Middle of post: a fair explanation of why you believe the definition fits
End of post: wAtCh tHe ViDeO

Part 1 and 2 I can appreciate your pov. Also the lawyer comment was because he screamed better call Saul vibes.

Imagine hating on the only guy in tech outlets that actually stands up for the consumer and does what's right at holding companies to task just because you don't like his screen presence.

"We want techies with a big platform to stand up for us!"

"Oh but not you, I don't like how you look/speak"

Lol go brush your teeth.

GN's Steve and more recently HWUB are the only ones that seem to be consistent in pointing out corporate BS so the wider majority are aware, meanwhile the rest of these tubers are licking holes left and right.

What does attacking LTT have to do with standing up for us?

And yes how someone delivers a message is pretty critical to whether they are enjoyable to watch.

 

[mrk]

LTT dropped the ball once again, given this isn't the first or 2nd or 3rd time it's fair game to "attack" (lol) them. Unless you have been under a rock, this should all be standard knowledge. If you did not know, then you are airing an opinion on something you are uninformed about.

 

[StriderX]

Ultimately they're businesses and not really human beings which means they'll sidestep accountability as much as possible through the Three D's/DARVO, so I don't much care for either of them.

I do enjoy the drama though, mucho appreciate.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

LTT dropped the ball once again, given this isn't the first or 2nd or 3rd time it's fair game to "attack" (lol) them. Unless you have been under a rock, this should all be standard knowledge. If you did not know, then you are airing an opinion on something you are uninformed about.

What did they drop the ball on? No need to resort to the lowest denomination of argument - just be clear why you are so outraged at ltt? Maybe you are uninformed of context?

 

[Cob]

What did they drop the ball on? No need to resort to the lowest denomination of argument - just be clear why you are so outraged at ltt? Maybe you are uninformed of context?

Can I ask what your agenda is? You have twice the number of posts as anyone else in his thread.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

Can I ask what your agenda is? You have twice the number of posts as anyone else in his thread.

Probably because it’s full of half truths and people expressing a vague opinion without stating why they hold it.

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

If you clicked the find me a code button they re-wrote the affiliate code regardless of whether they found you one or not. If you didn’t click it, nothing changed.

Sorry to be pedantic here but skip to the 12 min mark of the video

They will take the affiliate revenue when honey says we found nothing and give you a “got it” button. The button should only dismiss the message but they take the commission as well. The fact that is takes the commission is an indication of the intent of the operation of the company.

As for the definition of a scam, it really depends on if people believe that the way they make money is inherently dishonest.

I believe with the full context of the operation of honey I would say it is a scam as they are dishonest at every turn. But with only the knowledge that LTT had at the time it would be too early for them to call it.

 

[Cob]

Probably because it’s full of half truths and people expressing a vague opinion without stating why they hold it.

Oh look it’s his side-kick. Just a couple more posts and you’ll tie me for 2nd.

I’m attacking Linus because I believe he’s only in it for the money now, and he doesn’t care how he gets it.

 

[Diddums x]

Can I ask what your agenda is? You have twice the number of posts as anyone else in his thread.

His agenda, just like the one in the Honey thread, is to create as much engagement as possible whilst deliberately ignoring the evidence that is being presented straight in to his eyeballs and then arguing with everyone about the topic he knows nothing about.

And of course me being me, I absolutely love this kind of drama. I live for people who make **** of themselves

 

[b0rn2sk8]

Sorry to be pedantic here but skip to the 12 min mark of the video

They will take the affiliate revenue when honey says we found nothing and give you a “got it” button. The button should only dismiss the message but they take the commission as well. The fact that is takes the commission is an indication of the intent of the operation of the company.

In that scenario you still have to click the ‘got it’ button in the honey extension for that to happen. If you ignore it nothing happens.

It’s last click wins, even if they do nothing, as I said.

Oh look it’s his side-kick. Just a couple more posts and you’ll tie me for 2nd.

I’m attacking Linus because I believe he’s only in it for the money now, and he doesn’t care how he gets it.

Oh look more unsubstantiated opinions that’s backed up by nothing.

This isn’t Twitter, expect views to be challenged, hopefully constructively as I have done.

 

[Cob]

In that scenario you still have to click the ‘got it’ button in the honey extension for that to happen. If you ignore it nothing happens.

It’s last click wins, even if they do nothing, as I said.


Oh look more unsubstantiated opinions that’s backed up by nothing.

This isn’t Twitter, expect views to be challenged, hopefully constructively as I have done.

Gaslighting folks into believing that your trolling is constructive? How many Musk tattoos do you have?

 

[Diddums x]

In that scenario you still have to click the ‘got it’ button in the honey extension for that to happen. If you ignore it nothing happens.

If you think that isn't deliberately misleading, I have a bridge you might be interested in.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

Gaslighting folks into believing that your trolling is constructive? How many Musk tattoos do you have?

Trolling? Seriously? Calling out unsubstantiated ad hominem is not trolling, it’s healthy debate.

If you think that isn't deliberately misleading, I have a bridge you might be interested in.

I never said it isn’t misleading, don’t put words in my posts that are simply not there.

The only point I have pushed back on is whether this specific issue (the rewriting of an affiliate cookie) is a ‘scam’.

People love to throw the ‘scam’ word around but it has a specific meaning in the English language which functionally is the same as ‘fraud’. The definition rarely fits how this word is thrown around in 2025.

I agree in principle the extension is misleading, I’ve literally used that word in this thread, particularly in relation to the voucher code search element.

 

[Cob]

Trolling? Seriously? Calling out unsubstantiated ad hominem is not trolling, it’s healthy debate.


I never said it isn’t misleading, don’t put words in my posts that are simply not there.

The only point I have pushed back on is whether this specific issue (the rewriting of an affiliate cookie) is a ‘scam’.

People love to throw the ‘scam’ word around but it has a specific meaning in the English language which functionally is the same as ‘fraud’. The definition rarely fits how this word is thrown around in 2025.

I agree in principle the extension is misleading, I’ve literally used that word in this thread, particularly in relation to the voucher code search element.

I’m not sure you know what your point is.

 

[Diddums x]

I never said it isn’t misleading, don’t put words in my posts that are simply not there.

The only point I have pushed back on is whether this specific issue (the rewriting of an affiliate cookie) is a ‘scam’.

People love to throw the ‘scam’ word around but it has a specific meaning in the English language which functionally is the same as ‘fraud’. The definition rarely fits how this word is thrown around in 2025.

I agree in principle the extension is misleading, I’ve literally used that word in this thread, particularly in relation to the voucher code search element.

We can get all pedantic about the definitions of words until the cows come home, but the simple fact is that the extension deliberately misled people for the sole benefit of filling the creator's pockets. Some would call that a scam, some would call it misleading, I'm not sure it makes much difference in this context tbh.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

We can get all pedantic about the definitions of words until the cows come home, but the simple fact is that the extension deliberately misled people for the sole benefit of filling the creator's pockets. Some would call that a scam, some would call it misleading, I'm not sure it makes much difference in this context tbh.

Well last time I checked words having specific meanings is quite important for clear communication.

The irony is not lost on me given I had to call out your last post for being misleading in an attempt to score internet points.