Bluce Ree
11-17-2002, 02:40 PM
Greetings to all interested:
Some people apparently think Computer Hardware Reviewing is a science--and their right, it is.
But what happens when a science research project is funded from an outside source? Ask any college professor who gets his funding from a pharmeceutcal company about his testing.
All of a sudden new jargon comes into english--phrases like: "Data Massaging" come into use all around the lab.
Tobacco companies in the US tried to bury research about the addictiveness (if that's a word) of nicotine in the '70s.
How safe do you feel when power distribution companies fund studies to see if high voltage lines cause cancer to people living near them?
How safe do you feel when food companies are funding research to see if a chemcial compound causes cancer?
I know I will never eat any irridated food--reguardless of what a food company claims--especially if it is owned by phillip morris (nabisco-kraft, and many others.)
I take this same skeptical attitude towards computer hardware review sites and computer software/security review sites.
LOOK AT THE BANNERS--WHO IS FUNDING THE SITE? Remember Aberdeen's comment about "junk science?" look at their claims about security on Linux now.
I've been an [H] fan since mid 1998--when I first got my Dual Celeron system together. I also frequented Overclockers.com alot and continue to poke at Ed when I think he deserves it.
Since late 1999, [H] has included more and more banners to their advertisers. Would you trust a review about a CPU from a site who advertises for that manufacturer?
Perhaps we should have a Congressman do an investigation to see if lobbyists should be outlawed because of their heavy corruption.
Bottom line:
Just like in politics & business & computer hardware reviewing-- The reviewer will write according to what his constituants want:
If a company is funding him, he will send the article to the company for editing. If the ONLY constituants are readers who want honest answers, then the reviewer will post the truth.
Come on Kyle, it's not 1984--there is no boot stomping on the face of humanity forever. If i wanted to read bullschmitt, I'd go to Herr Tom's HardwareStuken site and be overwhelmed with marginal truths and *little white lies.*
--reguards,
Bluce Ree
p.s. Ever wonder why some news just doesn't make it to the TV? Write down the companies that sponsor the news programs that you watch--that'll give you and idea as to who is editing the stories.
Some people apparently think Computer Hardware Reviewing is a science--and their right, it is.
But what happens when a science research project is funded from an outside source? Ask any college professor who gets his funding from a pharmeceutcal company about his testing.
All of a sudden new jargon comes into english--phrases like: "Data Massaging" come into use all around the lab.
Tobacco companies in the US tried to bury research about the addictiveness (if that's a word) of nicotine in the '70s.
How safe do you feel when power distribution companies fund studies to see if high voltage lines cause cancer to people living near them?
How safe do you feel when food companies are funding research to see if a chemcial compound causes cancer?
I know I will never eat any irridated food--reguardless of what a food company claims--especially if it is owned by phillip morris (nabisco-kraft, and many others.)
I take this same skeptical attitude towards computer hardware review sites and computer software/security review sites.
LOOK AT THE BANNERS--WHO IS FUNDING THE SITE? Remember Aberdeen's comment about "junk science?" look at their claims about security on Linux now.
I've been an [H] fan since mid 1998--when I first got my Dual Celeron system together. I also frequented Overclockers.com alot and continue to poke at Ed when I think he deserves it.
Since late 1999, [H] has included more and more banners to their advertisers. Would you trust a review about a CPU from a site who advertises for that manufacturer?
Perhaps we should have a Congressman do an investigation to see if lobbyists should be outlawed because of their heavy corruption.
Bottom line:
Just like in politics & business & computer hardware reviewing-- The reviewer will write according to what his constituants want:
If a company is funding him, he will send the article to the company for editing. If the ONLY constituants are readers who want honest answers, then the reviewer will post the truth.
Come on Kyle, it's not 1984--there is no boot stomping on the face of humanity forever. If i wanted to read bullschmitt, I'd go to Herr Tom's HardwareStuken site and be overwhelmed with marginal truths and *little white lies.*
--reguards,
Bluce Ree
p.s. Ever wonder why some news just doesn't make it to the TV? Write down the companies that sponsor the news programs that you watch--that'll give you and idea as to who is editing the stories.