Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Passed data with a ton of noise? (Score 1) 322 322

I got into this with an audiophule type a few years ago. He, with a completely straight face, asserted that double-blind testing was an inherently flawed methodology for evaluating the objective marvelosity of some silly audiophule crap he was touting.

This has been a consistent argument from audiophiles for several years:

In short, for the important stuff, like "Do amplifiers or cables or differing storage media sound different", "blind testing" of any kind, single or double isn't likely to work because there are simply too many characteristics present and changing, and (if only because of the way human perception works) it's virtually impossible to isolate them and make sure that all of the testees are hearing the same test of the same thing in exactly the same way.

In short, "we believe in high fidelity but only in a purely non-falsifiable experiential sense." You can talk all you want about your error rates and THD+Ns but all they want to hear about is the "clarity," the "smoothness of the tone," and the "space around the instruments."

And these aren't crazy things to talk about, but insisting that a physical thing, a $300 ethernet cable, can actually create these things in a way that a cheaper one cannot is a kind of fetishism.

Comment Re:Nope (Score 1) 124 124

Well, from my personal experience (and I rarely get home without meeting at least a couple of bicycles) nope, it's quite an environmental hit, actually for two reasons:
1) I have to break and accelerate, which is apparent waste of resources (let alone my time)

Well, you may have to brake (if you car break's, that's another problem), but if there's a bike in front of you, you don't *have* to accelerate and pass. Every time you brake, you're dumping away energy that you'll never recover (unless you're in a hybrid), so minimize the braking and accelerating.

2) My car (heh, old VW Golf) consumes about 6.5l per 100km on average, when I'm trailing bikes it's about 10l.

Most of the time I am not alone, it quickly grows to about 5-10 cars trying to outmaneuver the bike rider.

Anecdotal evidence aside, your statement about "driving slower is more effective" is plain wrong. Most motors have a sweet spot which normally is at 2000 rpm.

Since you're such an eco-focused driver, worried about wasting resources and you often find yourself behind bikes, perhaps you should be driving a car that's efficient at those speeds.

http://home.hiwaay.net/~bzwils...

Comment Re:wait, what? (Score 1) 322 322

They tested the $340 one because they weren't willing to pay for the $1000 "Ethernet audio" cable.

Under normal circumstances a manufacturer would provide a sample for a media outlet. Audiophile gear manufacturers don't do this, for some reason -- reviews in audiophile mags usually seem to come from enthusiasts who've already bought-in, literally.

Comment Re:Mod parent up. (Score 1) 322 322

Keep in mind that the "directional" cables are grounded at only one end, and you can't guarantee that digital and analog will have separate ground paths.

The ones the audiophiles sell don't generally lift the ground on one end; also this is an ethernet cable which means it's electrically isolated, it usually doesn't have a shield and "signal" doesn't flow unidirectionally down it.

It makes sense to lift the ground on an XLR cable because in that case the cable shield is connecting either the audio or chassis grounds on two pieces of gear, but again we don't automatically lift the ground on the sending or receiving side, because it usually depends on wether or not both sides are audio ground, wether the ground is lifted in the box on one end or the other, and where this cable connects relative to where the ground stake is. Ground lifting is something you do once you've built the room, you don't just let the manufacturer do it.

Comment Re:MenuChoice and HAM (1992) (Score 1) 265 265

The problem with shell scripts for this kind of thing is that they're a Turing-complete language. This makes it very hard to present to the user what they actually do. .BAT files on DOS / Windows provided that functionality too, but unless you aggressively restrict yourself to a subset of the shell language it's very hard to check a .sh / .bat file and see exactly what command is going to be invoked.

Comment Re:MenuChoice and HAM (1992) (Score 1) 265 265

This requires the program to be explicitly written that way. Gcc and clang also do this, to detect whether they're invoked as C or C++ compilers, and clang will detect a target triple if it's the compiler invocation name prefix. This just goes in argv[0] though - you can't modify the other arguments from a shortcut. It would be really useful to be able to add things like --sysroot=/some/path and -msoft-float to a symlink so that you had a single cc that you could invoke as a cross compiler, but currently the only way to do this is with a tiny shell script that execs the compiler with the correct flags.

Comment Re:May you (Score 1) 289 289

If citizens of countries other than France pass laws that deal with this problem, then all is well and good - and you should be working to convince them to do so.

Why should other countries, the citizens of which have decided that free speech is more important, be affected by that, though?

Economists state their GNP growth projections to the nearest tenth of a percentage point to prove they have a sense of humor. -- Edgar R. Fiedler

Working...