> https://seclists.org/politech/2000/Mar/73 https://seclists.org/politech/2000/Mar/73 The link is a random Internet person's post from 2000 about a single 1995

> https://seclists.org/politech/2000/Mar/73 https://seclists.org/politech/2000/Mar/73 The link is a random Internet person's post from 2000 about a single 1995 Consumer Reports review. > You have to understand their methodology because they may be ascribing “points” to things you don’t care about at all - especially if you’re looking for longevity. Every review everywhere, unless I hire the reviewer personally, will examine factors I am more and factors I am less interested in. They can't simultaneously, precisely serve everyone's varied interests (ok, I guess they could try some social media feed-type algorithm). > the “scientific method” has nothing to do with actually using the toilet to eliminate human waste. That's confusing. The scientific method is to actually do it and report what happens, not talk theoretically or speculatively about it from our basements like the rest of the Internet. CR generally does that (the scientific method) in extensive labs, staffed with experienced scientists and engineers. If you read their toilet reviews, that's what they do - put something in and flush. CR's core product is science, applied to consumer products. > especially if you’re looking for longevity. CR looks at longevity for many products, including extensive surveys of product owners.