Linus回應(yīng)以及原文：

不會(huì)有一個(gè)大的WAN秀片段關(guān)于這個(gè)或任何東西。我要說(shuō)的大部分話，我已經(jīng)說(shuō)過(guò)了，而且是私下說(shuō)的。

對(duì)史蒂夫，我表達(dá)了我的失望，因?yàn)樗趧?chuàng)作這篇文章時(shí)沒(méi)有經(jīng)過(guò)適當(dāng)?shù)男侣剬?shí)踐。他有我的電子郵件和電話號(hào)碼(以及我們團(tuán)隊(duì)的許多其他成員)，可以問(wèn)我一些可能被證明是有價(jià)值的背景(比如我們沒(méi)有“出售”單體，而是因?yàn)闇贤ú欢硕鴮⑵渑馁u給慈善機(jī)構(gòu)……事實(shí)上，雖然我們還沒(méi)有付款，但我們已經(jīng)同意賠償Billet實(shí)驗(yàn)室的原型成本)。還有其他問(wèn)題，但我已經(jīng)告訴他，我不會(huì)因?yàn)檫@件事被卷入公開(kāi)的攻擊戰(zhàn)，我將繼續(xù)真誠(chéng)地作為“媒體團(tuán)隊(duì)”的一員向前邁進(jìn)。如果他愿意再這樣做，我會(huì)做好準(zhǔn)備的。

對(duì)于我的團(tuán)隊(duì)(以及我的首席執(zhí)行官團(tuán)隊(duì)，但實(shí)際上所有這些錯(cuò)誤都是由我掌舵的，所以我需要承擔(dān)責(zé)任)，我強(qiáng)調(diào)了勤奮在我們工作中的重要性，因?yàn)橛泻芏嗳嗽陉P(guān)注我們。我們正在經(jīng)歷一些成長(zhǎng)的煩惱——為了提高透明度，我們一直非常公開(kāi)——很明顯，我們?cè)趦?nèi)部流程和溝通方面還有一些工作要做。我們已經(jīng)在內(nèi)部做了很多工作來(lái)清理我們的流程，但這些事情需要時(shí)間。冰凍三尺，非一日之寒，但這不是馬虎的借口。

現(xiàn)在，對(duì)于我的社區(qū)，我所能說(shuō)的就是我一直說(shuō)的話。我們知道我們并不完美。為了確保我們對(duì)您負(fù)責(zé)，我們把我們的不完美暴露在我們的袖子上。但當(dāng)這種透明度被扭曲成一件壞事時(shí)，這是可悲和不幸的。實(shí)驗(yàn)室團(tuán)隊(duì)正在努力創(chuàng)建流程和工具來(lái)生成將使所有消費(fèi)者受益的數(shù)據(jù)——這是一項(xiàng)尚未完成的工作，我們已經(jīng)溝通過(guò)，需要這樣對(duì)待。我們?cè)谝恍┮曨l下面有筆記嗎?是的。是因?yàn)槲覀冊(cè)谂μ岣咄该鞫葐?是的…我們現(xiàn)在所做的是多年來(lái)從未有過(guò)的。如果情況需要，我們還會(huì)進(jìn)行更大幅度的調(diào)整。列出表上錯(cuò)誤的緩存數(shù)量以進(jìn)行CPU檢查是草率的，但是考慮到我們的結(jié)論是基于我們的測(cè)試得出的，而不是基于規(guī)范表，因此它不會(huì)實(shí)質(zhì)性地改變建議。這并不意味著這些事情不重要。我們已經(jīng)為我們的寫(xiě)作/實(shí)驗(yàn)室團(tuán)隊(duì)設(shè)置了準(zhǔn)確性的kpi，并且我們正在不斷地安裝新的檢查和平衡，以確保事情繼續(xù)變得更好。坦率地說(shuō)，如果你沒(méi)有看到改善，我懷疑你是否真的在尋找它……考慮到我們對(duì)這些禁令的時(shí)間有限，我們?cè)谧詈髱讉€(gè)GPU視頻上的管理的徹底性真的令人難以置信。我對(duì)未來(lái)感到非常興奮。

說(shuō)了這么多，我仍然不同意Billet Labs的視頻(不是退貨的情況，我已經(jīng)在上面解決了)是一個(gè)“準(zhǔn)確性”問(wèn)題。更像是我看錯(cuò)了房間。我們本可以精確地重新測(cè)試它，但要做得恰當(dāng)——考慮到它可以安裝在哪些情況下(沒(méi)有)，以及它將與哪些散熱器相連(再次……神秘)是不可能的……也沒(méi)有影響視頻的結(jié)尾…或者我是這么想的……

我想把它作為一種產(chǎn)品來(lái)評(píng)估，作為一種產(chǎn)品，如果它能與地球上最高端的街區(qū)的溫度競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，它仍然沒(méi)有意義……所以從我的角度來(lái)看，重新測(cè)試它并發(fā)現(xiàn)是的，它確實(shí)運(yùn)行得更冷對(duì)結(jié)論沒(méi)有影響，所以它并沒(méi)有真正產(chǎn)生影響。

亞當(dāng)和我今天討論了這個(gè)問(wèn)題。他主張重新測(cè)試它，不管它在當(dāng)時(shí)作為一個(gè)產(chǎn)品是多么不可行，我認(rèn)為他今天很好地表達(dá)了為什么它很重要。這就像在做一個(gè)關(guān)于超級(jí)跑車的視頻。看的人不買(mǎi)也沒(méi)關(guān)系。他們只是想看它被撕碎。我錯(cuò)過(guò)了這一點(diǎn)，但這并不是因?yàn)槲也魂P(guān)心消費(fèi)者……而是因?yàn)槲姨珜Ｗ⒂谶@個(gè)產(chǎn)品如何影響潛在的買(mǎi)家。不管怎樣，顯然是我的錯(cuò)，但我的本意絕不是傷害比爾特實(shí)驗(yàn)室。我特別提到了他們令人難以置信的機(jī)械加工技能，因?yàn)槲蚁肟吹剿麄儎?chuàng)造出具有可行市場(chǎng)的東西，并希望其他人能夠欣賞精湛的工藝，即使產(chǎn)品不切實(shí)際。我仍然希望他們能繼續(xù)開(kāi)發(fā)其他產(chǎn)品，因?yàn)樗麄冿@然很有才華，我也看到過(guò)無(wú)數(shù)小眾水冷卻供應(yīng)商來(lái)來(lái)去去。這是一個(gè)極其無(wú)情的市場(chǎng)。

不管怎樣，我很抱歉我把社區(qū)的優(yōu)先級(jí)搞混了，我們沒(méi)有以最好的方式展示Billet。我們的目的不是傷害任何人。我們不想讓任何人買(mǎi)它(因?yàn)檫@是對(duì)金錢(qián)的極度浪費(fèi))

There won't be a big WAN Show segment about this or anything. Most of what I have to say, I've already said, and I've done so privately.

To Steve, I expressed my disappointment that he didn't go through proper journalistic practices in creating this piece. He has my email and number (along with numerous other members of our team) and could have asked me for context that may have proven to be valuable (like the fact that we didn't 'sell' the monoblock, but rather auctioned it for charity due to a miscommunication... AND the fact that while we haven't sent payment yet, we have already agreed to compensate Billet Labs for the cost of their prototype). There are other issues, but I've told him that I won't be drawn into a public sniping match over this and that I'll be continuing to move forward in good faith as part of 'Team Media'. When/if he's ready to do so again I'll be ready.

To my team (and my CEO's team, but realistically I was at the helm for all of these errors, so I need to own it), I stressed the importance of diligence in our work because there are so many eyes on us. We are going through some growing pains - we've been very public about them in the interest of transparency - and it's clear we have some work to do on internal processes and communication. We have already been doing a lot of work internally to clean up our processes, but these things take time. Rome wasn't built in a day, but that's no excuse for sloppiness.

Now, for my community, all I can say is the same things I always say. We know that we're not perfect. We wear our imperfection on our sleeves in the interest of ensuring that we stay accountable to you. But it's sad and unfortunate when this transparency gets warped into a bad thing. The Labs team is hard at work hard creating processes and tools to generate data that will benefit all consumers - a work in progress that is very much not done and that we've communicated needs to be treated as such. Do we have notes under some videos? Yes. Is it because we are striving for transparency/improvement? Yeah... What we're doing hasn't been in many years, if ever.. and we would make a much larger correction if the circumstances merited it. Listing the wrong amount of cache on a table for a CPU review is sloppy, but given that our conclusions are drawn based on our testing, not the spec sheet, it doesn't materially change the recommendation. That doesn't mean these things don't matter. We've set KPIs for our writing/labs team around accuracy, and we are continually installing new checks and balances to ensure that things continue to get better. If you haven't seen the improvement, frankly I wonder if you're really looking for it... The thoroughness that we managed on our last handful of GPU videos is getting really incredible given the limited time we have for these embargoes. I'm REALLY excited about what the future will hold.

 

With all of that said, I still disagree that the Billet Labs video (not the situation with the return, which I've already addressed above) is an 'accuracy' issue. It's more like I just read the room wrong. We COULD have re-tested it with perfect accuracy, but to do so PROPERLY - accounting for which cases it could be installed in (none) and which radiators it would be plumbed with (again... mystery) would have been impossible... and also didn't affect the conclusion of the video... OR SO I THOUGHT...

 

I wanted to evaluate it as a product, and as a product, IF it could manage to compete with the temperatures of the highest end blocks on the planet, it still wouldn't make sense to buy... so from my point of view, re-testing it and finding out that yes, it did in fact run cooler made no difference to the conclusion, so it didn't really make a difference.

 

Adam and I were talking about this today. He advocated for re-testing it regardless of how non-viable it was as a product at the time and I think he expressed really well today why it mattered. It was like making a video about a supercar. It doesn't mater if no one watching will buy it. They just wanna see it rip.  I missed that, but it wasn't because I didn't care about the consumer.. it was because I was so focused on how this product impacted a potential buyer. Either way, clearly my bad, but my intention was never to harm Billet Labs. I specifically called out their incredible machining skills because I wanted to see them create something with a viable market for it and was hoping others would appreciate the fineness of the craftsmanship even if the product was impractical. I still hope they move forward building something else because they obviously have talent and I've watched countless niche water cooling vendors come and go. It's an astonishingly unforgiving market.

 

Either way, I'm sorry I got the community's priorities mixed-up on this one, and that we didn't show the Billet in the best light. Our intention wasn't to hurt anyone. We wanted no one to buy it (because it's an egregious waste of money no matter what temps it runs at) and we wanted Billet to make something marketable (so they can, y'know, eat).

 

With all of this in mind, it saddens me how quickly the pitchforks were raised over this. It also comes across a touch hypocritical when some basic due diligence could have helped clarify much of it. I have a LONG history of meeting issues head on and I've never been afraid to answer questions, which lands me in hot water regularly, but helps keep me in tune with my peers and with the community. The only reason I can think of not to ask me is because my honest response might be inconvenient. 

 

We can test that... with this post. Will the "It was a mistake (a bad one, but a mistake) and they're taking care of it" reality manage to have the same reach? Let's see if anyone actually wants to know what happened. I hope so, but it's been disheartening seeing how many people were willing to jump on us here. Believe it or not, I'm a real person and so is the rest of my team. We are trying our best, and if what we were doing was easy, everyone would do it. Today sucks.

 

Thanks for reading this.