...home?
Most people will put more effort into something that will be public (both out of positive motivation and the negative motivation of shaming.)
Open Source will always, in general, be better than closed source. Again - in general. There are people who will engineer things properly irrespective of whether or not someone will be browsing your github account or checking it out of the company's private server... Too bad there's not more of them
Actually the correct fix...
Instead of applying revisionist views that have no Constitutional basis.
Oh, the irony...
*that people can hear the difference between high quality compressed audio...
There are people who insist that they can hear the difference between 320kbps mp3s (using the highest-quality available compressor) and their uncompressed counterparts
So you can't? And hence you conclude no one can?
Sorry, that is bullshit!
Science and math proves all of these things wrong, yet people still insist they're right.
A contrair! Sciense and math exactly proof that. You have a braindead idea about math and sciense.
You can only hear up to like 20k Herz.
But there are so called overtones, multiples of the base frequency. In this case 40k, 60k, 80k 100k etc.
No human is able to hear 40k and above frequencies, but we all can hear if a 20k frequency is combined with an 40k overtone, or an 100k overtone even. Modern lossy compression algorithms cut off these overtones (as the overtone itself is unhearable)
You, again - quite clearly, claim that "Sciense and math exactly proof" that people can high quality compressed audio and uncompressed audio.
You then claim you can hear frequencies outside of the human range of hearing because they are "combined".
You do not seem to realize that you are, at this point, arguing that you can hear overtones through what you refer to as being "combined" but that compression algorithms cut off these overtones.
As per your usual method of discussing with people you insinuated that the person you were replying to was "braindead" (your other preferred term is "idiot".) I applied your own negative terms to you because you used the non-sensical "combined".
Reading all of your posts it is clear that English is not your first language and that you don't understand that when you talk to other people who are detail oriented that it isn't their responsibility to figure out what you meant to say but simply to deal with what you did say.
I did not say anything about mp3s.
You didn't say anything about hearing the differences between "320kbps mp3s (using the highest-quality available compressor) and their uncompressed counterparts"?
Well, we know that isn't true.
And I told you that three or four times now.
Are you a crazy person?
Not agreeing with you at all.
You argued, quite clearly, that it is because of overtones that you can tell the difference between 320kbps mp3s (using the highest-quality available compressor) and uncompressed audio.
That's totally wrong.
Even you hear the difference between a simple 16kHz wave and one that is accompanied by a 32kHz and 48kHz overtone
Of course you do, and as usual, you're making an "idiot" out of yourself for everyone to see by claiming that you're hearing is "beyond human."
You DO hear when there's an overtone, but you don't hear the overtone, you hear the effect the overtone has on the audible range frequencies. See the "scientific facts" relating to destructive/constructive interference. This effect IS captured by the ADC, but can be filtered depending upon the overtone.
You can easily Google for it.
Last word, lol
Your talking about abstractions really makes not much sense, so I pray for the entroneurs you consult, good luck.
I'm sure it doesn't, because you have demonstrated quite clearly that you don't understand abstraction.
How can you be a competent architect when you don't understand abstraction? LOL.
In any case, you're a programmer, right?
It's a naive, domestic operating system without any breeding, but I think you'll be amused by its presumption.
