this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2025
304 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
77795 readers
2243 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Did he ignore flicker problems again like last year? Because flicker ruins lights for a lot of us
I actually ran my outside lights on rectified DC power last year because the flicker kills me
Say more about this. I also don't like flicker
Short answer, cut an extension cord in the middle and solder in a FULL BRIDGE RECTIFIER.
This gives you DC power. Now your lights will not flicker. They are also like 50% brighter.
But wait! The catch is that a lot of the strings are reversed in the middle so only half of it works on dc. You then have to cut the lights in the middle, swap the wires, and reconnect them.
Its a lot of farting around but looks nice.
I dunno. I just bought the Sylvannia led traditional white lights. Flicker free. Finally.
That's what's so stupid about the whole problem - the solution is known and easy but it costs a tiny bit more to make so lots of manufacturers don't do it. It just needs to run off DC instead of AC. Simple.
I wonder if you could use four of the LEDs themselves to form a full bridge rectifier?
Electroboom needs a lemmy
Did you read "full bridge rectifier" in his voice, too?
Of course!
I typed it in his voice.
Would still need a capacitor or something or it would flicker at 120Hz (in the US) but that's not much more cost I would hope.
Also those 4 would flicker more than the rest of the string.
I just looked it up and I'm fairly certain it wouldn't work. Every time the output waveform gets too low then the led would turn off, which is what creates the flicker. An led needs a constant current to stay on constantly.
His obsession over color quality while ignoring the flicker is very annoying.
He mentions flicker several times in the video.
I meant ignore in the context that he said it doesn't personally bother him.
But he mentions that there is stuff coming for flicker-sensitive folks.
I may never understand why people get pissed at creators focusing on an issue they are passionate about - because that viewers specific issue wasn't mentioned or focused on. Surely there is content that aligns with what you are seeking without forcing every other creator to monologe out every possible edge case like a US drug advert reading out side effects.
Yeah, none of you guys are the main character, I'M the main character.
Something to that effect, yeah. I genuinely get people pointing out or raising the issue in the comments... If for no other reason than to perhaps inform the creator / community of something. But that has a far different energy than this. It almost always feels hostile.
I mean it's his video so he's the main character. People who care about the flicker can make their own video.
Careful reviewers cover all factors independent of their personal bias.
It's not a review though?
He is promoting a product. That product possibly has what many perceive as a severe defect (flicker). He could say it doesn't personally bother him but still compare it to other lights in the same way he compared colors in detail. Is the flicker large or small?
I love his channel and watch every video. But that doesn't mean I have to ignore when he misses a detail.
Its a talking head show. He's not a reviewer. Remember Venn diagrams? Go watch a Chris Maher video where hes looking at lumens, voltage, build quality... And then look at this. Its almost as if its completely different content for a different purpose. Within that content they CAN talk about similar things or even the same product while producing a completely different video.
His dish washing detergent video went to great lengths to create experimental comparisons to show his brand of detergent is better than pods. He has done experiments with other products too like dehumidifiers.
His dish washing video went to great lenghts to explain how something works and why hot water matters with an additional comment on different products and cost not being everything. Like any continuing series he did dive deeper into various subjects... and he did suggest some things which he used or liked. That doesn't make it a review. Venn diagram. Its an opinion not a review.
Point in case: was he reviewing kettles in his recent water boiling video? No. But... but he ran a timer!
That's a different video. He recently did another video of detergent and why his brand of detergent that he is selling for charity is better than pods.
Both did the job of explaining different functions of the dishwasher and demonstrating, as I mentioned, that expensive stuff did not "clean more better." To that end he literally had things independantly tested (for the sake of highlighting powders being just as-good.) I'll go on to point out that he made several comments about pods not using the pre wash.
Again, as mentioned, even with him recommending a product... That does not make him a reviewer. If anything it was a mild advertisement ... On a talking head show.
To go back to what spawned this discussion - I wasn't arguing with you. I simply thought you couldn't understand what the show was... Or perhaps could not differentiate. The comments (initially) sought to teach.
But, exasperatingly, here we are.
At this point you are nitpicking and being pedantic to attempt to "win" an agurment not being had. Were not even discussing the original video in question. If I wanted to approach this with the same (pedantic) energy: I'd simply focus on it being obvious that anyone with a bit of sense would have noticed that the review seemed to lack... Price, length of stands, lumens... The list goes on. If it were a review it would contain an awful lot more numbers and an awful lot less personal opinion.
Square peg: round hole. I genuinely hope we leave it there.
You wrote 3 paragraphs to avoid admitting that despite my writing about his detergent video, you responded with his dishwasher video because you haven't watched all his content!
Comparing samples with an independent lab isn't a review? Come on. As I already said just because most of his content is "talking head", doesn't mean he can't recommend products. Which he clearly has done.
Look. The last paragraph said what needed to be said. Its apparent its not a review and if you can't see that... You're either beyond help or a troll that is succeeding only in making themself look like those inmates from idiocracy. If you feel you need to overanalyze my reaponses to protect your ego... Do what you need to friend; it doesn't change reality. If you can't address the obvious flaws in your logic on the original topic you are simply running from the truth.
You don't watch all of his videos which is why you have the wrong idea. It's the 2024 video where he reviewed Tru Tone.
If products are compared in detail and a suggestion to buy is given, it's a review.
It doesn't matter what you think the channel is supposed to be. What matters is the content.
While irrelevant, you'd be incorrect. Again. But let's add some finality here using your own words.
Welcome to this thread and, consequently, what everyone was pointing out to you.
Review, v.
examine or assess (something) formally with the possibility or intention of instituting change if necessary.
Dare I ask if such a formal thing might include numbers, data, and other specific metrics outside of opinions? Perish the thought.
Recommend, v.
to put forward (something) as one's choice for a wise or proper course of action
It seems between your slip of the tongue and ... Actual logic that you'd be definitively... Incorrect.
I'll extend the olive branch in saying, as mentioned prior (Venn): there are some overlaps so you'd be forgiven for not fully grasping the difference... However the things that define those differences leave no question as to which they are - and ignoring that simply makes you ... well... ignorant.
I mentioned before this wasn't an argument. It still isnt. Its a dunce making a spectacle of his own foolishness. If you wish to continue making such a display I invite you to do so alone. I won't be party to embarrassing you further.
He did a comparison of products ending with a recommendation. That's a review.
I don't know why you can't accept that.