[lowtolerance]

Just like everyone should trust that someone on the internet is sincere in their claim to have surveyed 75 people in his social network(which magically contains a random distribution of the population) about their opinions on the Amazon Echo, with unanimously negative results.

[p4wnc6]

I'm not asking anyone to trust my network survey. I am saying, "Hey, I surveyed my network and it really disagrees, to a frankly unbelievable degree, from what the popular presentation is -- can someone point me to some sales, etc., data to understand this disparity?"

Linking to Amazon reviews does imply a certain belief that it's a credible source of information, but I have never found that to be true. Many products I've purchased with 4-5 star average reviews and many thousands of reviews overall have nonetheless been defective, broken easily after opening, or fallen short of the descriptions in other ways.

Additionally, there's also the problem of sources of review bias, like people who frequently review new tech and thus overlook certain rough edges or pitfalls because, to them, those aren't a big deal with bleeding edge tech and can be forgiven (but to regular consumers, it's often not true), or like people who have devoted many hours to climbing high in the rankings of Amazon reviewers, and are implicitly affected by thinking of how their review might affect the way they are perceived in the Amazon reviewer rankings.

Of course, my sample of 75 from my network could also be biased, but I'm not asking anyone else to believe the result of that sample, or even to believe that I actually conducted that sample. You could even treat my comment as though it started out with "Imagine if the following was true:" and go from there if you wanted, and just treat it as a thought experiment in terms of how to actually prove the hype over Echo derives from actual sales success and consumer traction.

It's very telling to me that my comment is downvoted and attacked on weak grounds rather than addressed.

If it's any comfort, I really, actually have asked around 75 of the people in my network, which includes extended family of a variety of age ranges and tech propensity across the midwestern US. But I have also asked friends across Europe and southeast Asia over gchat and Skype too, as well as former colleagues in most of the large urban areas along both coasts of the US, and one in Mexico City.

It's actually really, really, really easy for a person to get a pretty diversified sample of people just asking questions to their social network. There surely are dimensions along which it is not well diversified, such as people living below international poverty standards -- because the very nature of considering purchasing an Echo or having an internet connection and Skype account to talk to me overseas is correlated with not being below some international poverty line. And it's perfectly fine for people to suggest this invalidates the usefulness of my ad hoc social connection survey.

It's disappointing to me that people are focusing on criticizing some ad hoc survey with a small N. No one, certainly not me, is claiming that survey to be statistically rigorous. But, if you assume the survey I describe did actually occur with the results I explained, then it's at least an anomalous outcome that might prompt someone to say, "Hey, what are the numbers that make people think Echo is actually successful?"

If you don't want to assume anything about the survey, because it's an internet comment and you don't care, then fine. Don't. But in what possible way could it be valuable to divert attention away from the question at hand ("Why is Echo hyped?") and waste time arguing about an experience I claim to have had (asking for and receiving opinions on Echo) that you cannot verify.

Amazon doesn't release sales numbers, and all the growth stats for Echo that appear in puff pieces are just described as sales growth, but relative to some baseline that we don't know. An article that says "sales up 300%" is junk unless you can actually see the sales data to understand what that 300% means.

And don't get me wrong. This is not Amazon hate. I'm not Amazon's biggest fan for reasons of how they treat workers, but I am still an Amazon customer and I even wrote a whole thing on another post the other day talking about the usefulness and value I get from Amazon Prime Music.

It just seems kind of nuts that someone can't say, "Hey, my experience when I've gone out of my way to ask about Echo to lots of people is that literally no one is interested in it -- what data is there to help me understand why Echo is still so hyped?" without being downvoted out of some HN group-think / Amazon tribalism.

It really, really was an earnest question. I'm just asking for what data sources there are to suggest Echo's hype is justified. Linking to Amazon's own reviews for it is clearly not a reasonable answer. So, what else?

[lowtolerance]

Frankly, it is unbelievable that 100% of the people you asked had even heard of the Amazon Echo(it's hardly a household name), let alone that every single one of them had the same opinion on the product. Accusing people of engaging in group-think or tribalism over being downvoted for making a very dubious claim speaks volumes about the brand of pseudo-rationality you are engaging in, regardless of how truthful you are or aren't being with your claim.

It's one to thing to earnestly ask "what data is there help me understand why Echo is still so hyped". I don't think anyone downvoting you takes issue with you asking for information.

But when you're asking this question immediately after claiming to have surveyed a large group of people in your personal network - supposedly taking into account age, tech literacy, physical location, etc. - and received not only negative responses across the board, but a specific, unanimous emotional response that the device in question is "obnoxious", you should expect that people will receive such an absurd claim with extreme skepticism.

If you didn't want to divert from getting genuine responses to your earnest question, then you should have asked yourself if including information about this survey you supposedly conducted really added anything to the discussion, rather than blame the community for letting it serve as a distraction.

[p4wnc6]

Many people have used Amazon within the past year, and therefore it would be unlikely for them to have not heard of Echo. It's very much a household name, yet doesn't seem to justify being so. That is puzzling.

Including the information about the overwhelming response I've encountered (an actual aversion to the idea of the device) is relevant. It is not a distraction. It's more likely that it is downvoted because it is viewed as a negative comment about Amazon and about overhyped tech -- such comments are frequently downvoted here.

It's very easy to have a network that randomizes over age, tech literacy, and physical location. I'm frankly baffled you would think that's hard to obtain. I grew up in a poor part of the rural Midwest, met lots of international people while in college, and worked in southeast Asia and western Europe for brief periods. Even without those working experiences, I would have a very globally diverse set of connections, and while it may not be true for everyone, it's not as outrageously rare as you seem to portray.

I maintain that including my experience of hearing no reaction other than aversion is useful as a starting point to further ask why it is so hyped. I don't mind if others don't like it, but I don't agree with your characterization as a "brand of pseudo-rationality you are engaging in" -- that part is ridiculous.