Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Andy Ful" data-source="post: 968138" data-attributes="member: 32260">Any proof, except for conspiracy theory?It is probable that sometimes the test can be biased by sponsors. But, we have democracy. If one AV vendor could pay to bias the results, others can do (and will do) the same. So, over a longer time, you still have unbiased (on average) results. Furthermore, such things usually cannot be kept hidden for a long time. So far, all Labs mentioned by me have a very good reputation.Furthermore, there is no proof that in some cases the video tests are biased by sponsoring. We know for sure that the interpretation of these tests made by authors can be biased too (for many reasons).Yes, the AMTSO requirements were made by AV companies and not by video makers. Also, crash car tests were made by engineers, hired by car companies, and were not made by amateurs. Thank God for that. Are AMTSO requirements perfect? Probably no, but they are sensible, on the contrary to the testing methodology (or rather mythology) of video tests.Are you moving in the circle?The Defender is not good ---&gt; so it cannot get good results (despite the AV Lab tests) ---&gt; AV Lab tests are biased ----&gt; The video tests are not biased (why???) ---&gt; Some video tests show that Defender is not good ---&gt; The Defender is not good.You even reject any test result that is good for Defender (like some of Leo&#039;s tests).That is what I said many times, but I have no idea why you put this comment here.<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite132" alt=":unsure:" title="Unsure&nbsp; &nbsp; :unsure:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":unsure:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Andy Ful, post: 968138, member: 32260"] Any proof, except for conspiracy theory? It is probable that sometimes the test can be biased by sponsors. But, we have democracy. If one AV vendor could pay to bias the results, others can do (and will do) the same. So, over a longer time, you still have unbiased (on average) results. Furthermore, such things usually cannot be kept hidden for a long time. So far, all Labs mentioned by me have a very good reputation. Furthermore, there is no proof that in some cases the video tests are biased by sponsoring. We know for sure that the interpretation of these tests made by authors can be biased too (for many reasons). Yes, the AMTSO requirements were made by AV companies and not by video makers. Also, crash car tests were made by engineers, hired by car companies, and were not made by amateurs. Thank God for that. Are AMTSO requirements perfect? Probably no, but they are sensible, on the contrary to the testing methodology (or rather mythology) of video tests. Are you moving in the circle? The Defender is not good ---> so it cannot get good results (despite the AV Lab tests) ---> AV Lab tests are biased ----> The video tests are not biased (why???) ---> Some video tests show that Defender is not good ---> The Defender is not good. You even reject any test result that is good for Defender (like some of Leo's tests). That is what I said many times, but I have no idea why you put this comment here.:unsure: [/QUOTE]

Verification