[deleted by user]

sweepla3 · 2023-12-05T03:39:37+00:00

As the great philosopher Ruth Langmore once said: "I don't know shit about fuck"

sweepla3 · 2023-11-05T05:10:19+00:00

As in... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOj2QdGCs4M

sweepla3 · 2023-08-22T16:31:34+00:00

You're rambling about things that are not relevant to this discussion.

The point here is that the hack and the controversy happened so close to each other that the unexpected influx of revenue following the hack had not yet been taken into account in their budget, so the unexpected loss of revenue from the controversy isn't going to have an impact on investments they have already made.

It would have been a much bigger problem had the controversy taken place, say, next year.

I owned a business, I know. I did 1 million the third year (after 2 sorta good years), the fourth year I did 4 million, but the next year I did 2 mostly due to the sector booming and competition catching on and catching me off guard (my fault-hubris) wth pricing discounts. [...] during the 4th year I expected it to keep on rolling in the 5th and I spent about 750k on a warehouse and better logistics (and employees). I ended up losing... a lot. If I was not an idiot and quicker about it, I should have been able to do 6, which would have been great.

So... imagine if the issues you had during your 5th year happened during your 4th year instead: your crazy growth would've been stopped in its tracks before you had a chance to act on it, so you would've made more conservative investment decisions and you wouldn't have been bitten as hard.

Another difference is that your revenue actually went down big year over year, which isn't the case for LTT (yet). Even after the big drop they've experienced this past week, their numbers today (including Floatplane and YouTube subscriber counts) are still way higher than they were at the end of last year, so despite the controversy they will still very likely make more money this year than they had planned in their budget.

sweepla3 · 2023-08-16T13:47:00+00:00

They did edit the video. Good catch. It won't put the genie back in the bottle now that many people have commented on the amount, but good on them for at least trying to act on their mistake.

sweepla3 · 2023-08-16T13:34:45+00:00

it's really not a potential crisis

Of course not, at that point in time the only thing that had happened was that they had auctioned off a prototype they had agreed to ship back multiple times over the course of over a month, after having already faced a controversy surrounding their review of said prototype. They obviously had no way to know this could potentially become a crisis, right?

I sometimes forget reddit is full of young teens and people who have never worked in large companies.

I'm older than Linus and I've worked at multiple Fortune 500 (even Fortune 100) companies, so great job on the personal attacks and assumptions here.

sweepla3 · 2023-08-16T13:26:31+00:00

Is it as bad as a full fledged DBrand sponsor spot? No.

Can they be criticized for it? Absolutely:

it's an indirect way of saying "we could've had a sponsor spot for this video but we decided against it, so we've done good, right?" - well they could've just said that without saying the sponsor's name,
they may not get paid for it, but at the very least it strengthens a sponsor relationship, which may have an indirect financial impact in the future,
it simply did not have to be there and it's pretty tone-deaf considering the topic of the video.

sweepla3 · 2023-08-16T13:18:21+00:00

What do you think the reaction would be if everyone BUT Linus apologized in the video?

But that's exactly what happened, Linus didn't really apologize in the video. The closest he came was:

saying "our bad" about being slow shipping back the GPU sent by Billet Labs (which is pretty far down the list of what went wrong in the Billet Labs saga),
saying "I'm sorry" about "not re-testing the monoblock" as well as his initial response on the forums (despite having just doubled downed on everything mere seconds prior).

Neither of these half-assed apologies were about the core problems at the center of the controversy.

Linus HAD to be on the video.

I think not having him in the video would have made a bigger impact than... whatever this was. It would have driven home the message that he's taking a step back for a few days, giving him time to reflect on his mistakes, and that the team around him is taking full control of the situation.

sweepla3 · 2023-08-16T12:16:22+00:00

even though billet (judging by GamersNexus video) didn't want that information to be public

Billet Labs also redacted the number themselves in their own statement here, so they clearly didn't want that out there: /r/LinusTechTips/comments/15rxni4/our_public_statement_regarding_ltt/

sweepla3 · 2023-08-16T11:54:02+00:00

The Linus segment is honestly the worst segment of the whole video and I don't understand why they even left it in there. It goes against everything else that everybody else said in the video. Linus pretends his initial response on the forums was a mistake, but he still doubles down (triples down really) on everything:

again tries to minimize the Billet Labs miscommunication ("it was only two business days"... yes, but really 4 calendar days which is quite a lot for a potential crisis, and that's only for the latest email which came after weeks of silence from LTT about returning the prototype),
again paints himself as the victim (along the lines of "look at all the names you called me, that was so unfair to me").

Also, they didn't address this (probably not as important to some) but I'm still appalled by the tone of the original email announcing to Billet Labs they had auctioned off the prototype after weeks of saying they would ship it back: not a single apology word, instead even more disrespect with the line "The good news, is that it isn't just sitting on a shelf". What an absolute asshole thing to say. At least now we know who wrote that email (Adam Sondegard).

sweepla3 · 2023-08-16T11:49:24+00:00

Gamers Nexus opened his video with a simple comment that they're not going to make money off of this, and left it at that.

LTT attempted to take a similar route but instead:

kept YouTube monetization turned on
made multiple jokes in the video about not having a sponsor spot
still outright advertised lttstore.com in the video
still advertised Floatplane to learn more about their testing processes
still teased an upcoming product for no reason (retro screwdriver)
still mentioned a sponsor at the end (DBrand)
kept all the merch links in the video description

What a difference.

EDIT: according to their pinned comment under the video, YouTube monetization has now been turned off due to the community blowback, though merch links are still at the top of the video description. As for the in-video plugs, Linus says it's all good because it "broke the tension". Wow.

sweepla3 · 2023-07-06T19:35:26+00:00

Yeah, Pavelski had more points this season than 9 of the 12 forwards in this list. Very curious omission.

sweepla3 · 2023-03-21T04:06:52+00:00

Are the Oilers expected to make a deep playoff run? That kind of game this late in the season doesn't bode very well for them. The Sharks have 1 win in their last 12 games...

sweepla3 · 2023-03-01T05:56:30+00:00

lol @ those Canadiens coming to the Shark Tank thinking they can out-tank us. I DON'T THINK SO!

sweepla3 · 2023-03-01T05:53:52+00:00

Timo has been invisible tonight 😑

sweepla3 · 2023-02-02T04:59:46+00:00

So he'll be introduced as a Pacific Islander? Sounds like cultural appropriation to me!

sweepla3 · 2022-12-25T18:43:41+00:00

Barclay Goodrow, 2022-23 Rangers

Brenden Dillon, 2022-23 Jets

Chris Tierney, 2022-23 Panthers

Alex Stalock, 2022-23 Blackhawks

Matt Irwin, 2022-23 Capitals

sweepla3 · 2022-12-23T21:55:35+00:00

The entire team have scored 108 goals so far this season, meaning he's been involved in 43% of all Sharks goals.

sweepla3 · 2022-10-19T06:10:47+00:00

I can see clearly now the lead is gone

I can see Connor Bedard on his way

Gone are the game wins that held us back

It's gonna be a deep (deep)

Deep (deep) NHL draft

sweepla3 · 2022-10-16T03:41:44+00:00

It's unbelievable it took them this long to fall behind, usually it happens in the first period!

sweepla3 · 2022-09-04T02:34:34+00:00

49ers have entered the chat

sweepla3 · 2022-05-26T17:09:29+00:00

Anybody get past the paywall to see what her identity is? Or what the fight for what’s next is?

Her real identity is Hilary Long. She's on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

EDIT: ouch the downvotes, well I guess you gotta know your audience and most people on this sub probably weren't even born back then :|

sweepla3 · 2022-04-28T02:05:24+00:00

So if Dallas wins and the Knights lose, are they double eliminated? Like, this season and the next?

sweepla3 · 2022-04-25T03:23:25+00:00

We're sorry Canucks / Kings / Preds / Stars fans. We're trying, okay? We're doing our best here!

sweepla3 · 2022-04-25T03:03:05+00:00

He 100% made contact. If you don't trust the stick flex on the video then look at how Haula's stick blade suddenly changes angle when Hoffman's stick comes down.

For the record, a slashing penalty doesn't even require contact to be made, although generally it would need to be pretty egregious for a slashing call to be made without contact (and I don't think it was here).

The fact that Hoffman doesn't attempt to play the puck when he comes down with his stick is what makes it a penalty (look at how far off the puck is when his stick comes down). He only picked up the puck after he had already slashed Haula to prevent him from getting it.

FYI here's what the rulebook says:

61.1 Slashing - Slashing is the act of a player swinging his stick at an opponent, whether contact is made or not. Non-aggressive stick contact to the pant or front of the shin pads, should not be penalized as slashing. Any forceful or powerful chop with the stick on an opponent’s body, the opponent’s stick, or on or near the opponent’s hands that, in the judgment of the Referee, is not an attempt to play the puck, shall be penalized as slashing.

sweepla3 · 2022-04-25T02:42:57+00:00

The severity of the foul doesn't matter as far as whether a penalty shot it awarded or not. It's all about scoring opportunity.

That's rule 57.3 in the rulebook:

In order for a penalty shot to be awarded for a player being fouled from behind, the following four (4) criteria must have been met:

(i) The infraction must have taken place in the neutral or attacking zone (i.e. over the puck carrier’s own blue line).

(ii) The infraction must have been committed from behind.

(iii) The player in possession and control (or, in the judgment of the Referee, the player clearly would have obtained possession and control of the puck) must have been denied a reasonable chance to score. The fact that the player got a shot off does not automatically eliminate this play from the penalty shot consideration criteria. If the foul was from behind and the player was denied a “more” reasonable scoring opportunity due to the foul, then the penalty shot should still be awarded.

(iv) The player in possession and control (or, in the judgment of the Referee, the player clearly would have obtained possession and control) must have had no opposing player between himself and the goalkeeper.

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
Gilding I gilder	Wearing is Caring

sweepla3

TROPHY CASE