Introducing the Humane AI Pin, a revolutionary wearable device designed to function as your personal AI assistant. Priced at $699, this cutting-edge gadget features a touchpad, laser projector, and camera, and is worn high on your chest. The creators believe that interacting with an AI assistant allows for a greater connection to one’s surroundings, rather than constantly fixating on a phone screen. However, it is important to note that the Humane AI Pin is not intended to replace your phone.
Controversy recently erupted when popular YouTuber Marques Brownlee, known as MKBHD, released his review of the device, branding it as “the worst product” he had ever encountered. With over 18 million followers, MKBHD holds considerable influence in the tech community, and his detailed video review thoroughly examines the product’s intended functionality and real-life performance.
Can a single tech review spell doom for a new product? Brownlee’s review sparked heated debate within the tech community, with many criticizing his negative assessment of the Humane AI Pin. However, it is worth noting that other prominent tech publications had already published their own less-than-favorable reviews of the device. Cherlynn Low of Engadget, for instance, argued that the Humane AI Pin fails to address any of technology’s existing problems, and found herself struggling to explain the device’s flaws to her friends.
On the same day, Chris Velazco shared his own less-than-positive experience with the Humane AI Pin in The Washington Post, highlighting frustrations with the device’s gesture modes and its tendency to overheat with prolonged use.
So, what sets MKBHD’s review apart when there were already numerous critical assessments of the Humane AI Pin? If you have come across any of these reviews, you may believe that they were critical, but trust us, you haven’t seen anything yet. Watch Brownlee’s review. It’s mind-blowing!
In his review, MKBHD declares the Humane AI Pin as “the worst product I’ve ever reviewed.” Many criticized him for the clickbait nature of his review title. However, in an interview on Colin and Samir’s YouTube show, Brownlee explained that his followers tend to accuse him of being excessively positive in his reviews, and that negative reviews are received differently. He stated:
“Can we allow the creators of the Humane AI Pin to escape responsibility for a flawed product?”
Brownlee believes that when he reviews a product, regardless of its nature, he acknowledges that there are numerous talented individuals who have contributed to its development. He firmly believes that these creators should be aware that if their product falls short, they cannot expect sugar-coated feedback. Deep down, they likely know their product’s flaws as well.
Here’s another aspect to consider: many companies market expensive products by creating hype around their performance, even when these products are still a work in progress. In essence, these companies view their customers as part of their research and market analysis. From a customer’s perspective, this is far from fair. Therefore, posts like MKBHD’s review can be seen as beneficial.
The Humane AI Pin is priced at $700, and when spending such a substantial amount of money, one expects a product that shows promise, not something finicky or glitchy. In this context, MKBHD’s review serves his followers well, as they rely on his evaluations to make informed purchasing decisions. Expecting a soft review would be unethical.
So, what exactly is wrong with the Humane AI Pin? This wearable square device comes with a battery pack that tends to overheat and disconnect after prolonged use. Additionally, its camera struggles to capture clear images in darker environments, and its projector is virtually unreadable in bright daylight. Furthermore, the device’s gesture recognition modes often lead to frustration. Who is to blame here? The company or the reviewer? Yes, we understand that in this digital age, an individual armed with a camera can have a significant impact on a brand, especially a startup. However, typically it is the product itself that is underdeveloped.
