YouTube star Marques Brownlee's scathing Humane Ai Pin review leads to argument over ethics and influence

midian182

Posts: 9,748   +121
Staff member
A hot potato: Humane's Ai Pin recently became available to buy after the company raised a lot of money and publicity for its wearable device. The reviews have been pretty bad, especially from YouTube tech reviewer Marques Brownlee, who called it the worst product he's ever reviewed. His scathing words have led to an online debate over whether his video was fair or even ethical, given that, with 18.6 million subscribers, Brownlee could have killed the company.

iPhone alumni Imran Chaudhri and Bethany Bongiorno made some big promises about the Ai Pin, a screenless, square device that can be attached to clothing. It features a camera, microphone, a touch pad, and a laser projector that displays the GUI on a user's hand. The Ai Pin can also make calls and send and receive text messages. Then there's the price: $700 plus a $24 per month subscription.

The Ai Pin arrived this month to mostly bad reviews. The biggest complaints are that it simply doesn't work half the time, is slow, runs hot, and has a short battery life.

YouTube tech reviewer Marques Brownlee made his feelings clear in the title of his Ai Pin video review: "The Worst Product I've Ever Reviewed... For Now."

Brownlee's complaints echo those of other reviewers, that the Ai Pin is usually wrong, incredibly slow, and has a terrible battery life. There are plenty of other justifiable criticisms in the video, such as the lack of any apps and the projector being almost unreadable outdoors in brighter conditions.

Brownlee's video has been criticized by some social media users, with one calling it "distasteful, almost unethical, to say this when you have 18 million subscribers." The poster later added that Brownlee "significantly" influences the market, and that the reviewer just wanted to show he can crush companies. Brownlee himself responded to the post, saying, "We disagree on what my job is."

Business Insider reports that the author of the post later told the publication it was the title of the video that he had issues with, not the review itself.

Others agreed that an influencer such as Brownlee really does have the power to crush companies and that his review will probably kill Humane.

Somewhat surprisingly, one person who supported Brownlee's review was Sam Sheffer, Humane's head of new media. He said the review was honest, solid, and fair.

Brownlee does have some good things to say about the Ai Pin: it can be very useful on those occasions it works normally, and the lack of display is great for those desiring more time away from screens.

While Brownlee's review will doubtlessly have had a big impact, the Ai Pin was always going to be a hard sell. The $700 price and $24 monthly subscription are a lot of money for anything, never mind a product that leaves most people asking, "but what does it actually do?" It's not as if plenty of other reviewers haven't laid into it, either.

Humane, founded in 2018, had raised $230 million from investors by the end of 2023. The Ai Pin is its first product. Given that the company laid off 4% of its staff in January, it might also be its last, or maybe not.

Update: A day later after reviewing the Ai Pin and that controversy ensued, Marques felt compelled to upload a new video with his take on the matter, not specific to Humane's device only but reviews in general, watch below:

Permalink to story:

 
Seriously? Is the world of these scammers so far gone that they think they can ask such questions as ''Is Journalism even ethical? Should consumer advocacy get in the way of our snake oil sales?"

The reason this is even 'news' is the only reason why 'AI' has any traction: If a society can both produce and even encourage this mindset, there's no saving said society: everybody will be too busy trying to walk over each other to do anything effectively as a group.
 
If the product is crap, it should be called out as so. A single reviewer, regardless how big they are, cannot kill a company, why? Because there's thousands of other reviewers also doing the same thing.

If you were interested in the product, a single bad review won't deter you, even a few bad ones might still keep you interested, but if all the reviews are generally "don't waste your money on this garbage" well... that might kill your company...
 
I think people simply take feedbacks too negatively. If a product is bad, it’s bad. Why sugar coat the fact? So the reviewer have to give up his rights to share his honest opinion just because he has 18 million subscribers on YouTube?
 
Some companies think they are entitled to consumers money, regardless of the quality and usefulness of their products. So any form of criticism, is regarded as an obstacle.
 
"distasteful, almost unethical, to say this when you have 18 million subscribers." LOL. Do you know what else is distateful and unethical? Using other peoples money to create a garbage, overpriced piece of telemetry that doesn't even work right and being upset when someone says it sucks. Perhaps don't send your trash to the biggest tech influencer on the platform lol. Thankfully he showed he's not bought and paid for...hopefully it stays that way.
 
What a refreshing twist on the "mega corporation twists the arms of reviewers by withholding review copies of their product from critical reviewers" story!

As a society we have corpo dong so far down our throats that this is what the gagging sputtering sounds like.
 
Why do the two top comments talk about this guy's feedback being illegal? No one said anything about legality. Are we only allowed to criticize people for illegal behavior?

The video review seemed fair and accurate, regardless.
 
They should've made it gamer focused, it would still be a terrible piece of tech but dopey gamers will buy anything, ez money.
 
I suspect he has 18m subscribers because his reviews are honest. What's far worse is those youtubers (or other reviewers) who say something is great when it quite clearly isn't. This usually happens because the reviewer is being given the product for free or makes a commission on it's sales or has been flown to some exotic location to do the review or the reviewer just want to remain on best terms with a company.
 
If a single person's opinion and review of a product could "potentially kill the company", then that company has bigger issues than the reviewer's opinion.

Back to the drawing board. As I said on a previous post about this device, this is a worse version of a smart watch, with a much heftier price tag as a cherry on top.
 
Anyone whining over the ethics of this is clearly biased against the unfavorable reviews, of which they have no talking points against them (beyond hurt feelings). I don't know why anyone is taking them seriously.
 
The day honest reviews are unethical or illegal is the day businesses have an unconditional right to trick you out of your money or worse.
 
As always shoot the messenger. Sorry folks Marques wasn't setting out to dump on the AI Pin, but if a product fails miserably to do what it supposed to it needs to be called out. Trash is trash no matter how you slice it. Thank god I avoid the brain dead masses on social media. This is how scumbags and crap proliferate.
 
Far from defending those "influencers" and the brainless horde who follow every of their words, if a product is sh1t, it's sh1t...
 
Back