The theory of knowledge would be useful for students of other disciplines too, for example history. We are taught that in a particular year at a particular place something happened, but as Jack Pearl used to say, “Vas you dere Charley?” Historians use many techniques to piece together evidence, and there is often not universal consensus.
There’s a post somewhere of someone trying to prove that ethernet cables/switches affect video.
He got shot to pieces when someone else proved he wasn’t matching exact frames when comparing the “differences”…
I was told on another forum that the reason differences could be heard between one cable arrangement and another, contrary to electrical theory, was because the science wasn’t suitably developed!
No attempt to control or eliminate expectation bias on the part of the individual, but rather the science is wrong.
I fail to grasp why so many people seem unable to admit that they might be wrong. They buy the snake-oil product, drink the magic Kool-Aid and suddenly every scientist and engineer on the planet is wrong. But the audiophool marketeer, he’s right on the money.
I’ll probably receive a telling off, but I really fail to see why this was hidden. I appreciate that a certain number of flags automatically results in a post being hidden, but this is nothing short of comic genius and raises some very valid points.
As someone who was involved in optoelectronics and laser engineering back in the late '80s, and fully understands how optical fibres are designed and manufactured, I find it alarming that people even contemplate the fact that there could be audible differences between audio data transmitted over single mode vs multi-mode fibre.
Do they even understand the concept of one vs the other? How the fibre is constructed that makes the difference between single mode and multi-mode? The miniscule temporal variations between the two due to modal dispersion and how insignificant they are at audio data rates compared to their design capacity?
I have a philosopher’s stone I can sell you, but it only works for me and only I can see the gold. You’ll just have to take my word for it that it works.
3 Likes
@Leporello, @Graeme_Finlayson, and anyone else for that matter, if you have any concerns regarding moderation or the Roon community, please contact the moderators directly via a PM.
For clarity, any community member may flag a message: the moderators will review this to determine if any action is necessary. When a post is under review, it is hidden automatically, but may still be viewed by clicking on “View ignored content”.
There are currently no posting restrictions on this thread.
This is because the moderation team deals with breaches of the community guidelines.
2 Likes
Just to be absolutely clear here.
The Roon Community Forum is run by and for Roonlabs and the support of said Roon product.
That is the central core reason for it’s existence.
Any other discussions are accepted and tolerated as long as they adhere to the Community rules and guidelines.
This is not Facebook and while healthy discussion is always welcome please remember that it is not the main core reason for Roon Community existence.
4 Likes
You can’t post more than 3 posts in a row, but you can reply to as many posts as you want by putting the quotes from the other posts into one reply post.
2 Likes
Nah, they don’t, and they don’t need to. They are quite proud of not needing any blind tests, measurements, knowing how things work, or any of that egghead stuff.
Anti-intellectualism is pretty popular, and when you couple it with a chance to preen about expensive toys they got and the ability to hear things that us plebs can’t, let alone some stupid lab equipment… they are having a field day.
1 Like
Pseudoscience by way of flawed experimental procedure.
AJ
1 Like
This is the main reason I avoid mainstream social media. When someone starts to argue that science doesn’t apply in their reality, I walk away. I used to lose my sh!t over it, but now I go off and listen to music or go out to my workshop and make something.
Fortunately, the stupid aren’t responsible for designing anything that’s critical to human life. That stuff and the applicable standards lie firmly in the hands of scientists and engineers.
1 Like
That’s a political satire, but I think it has wider connotations.
1 Like
I am afraid you’d be surprised…
Their politics are way off 
and their music sucks but it actually is surprisingly accurate regarding our audiophile friends…
Do tell…
They’re my favorite dance band but I’ll give you a pass this time.
1 Like
Do you see what kids are learning in college today? I doubt it is significantly different for real engineering vs. software engineering, but I definitely would NOT trust any FAANG engineer with designing anything vital.
And government bureaucracy that’s supposed to regulate it… they have different priorities, too. Didn’t we have someone whose only qualification was being pretty good at stealing luggage in airports be the heads of nuclear waste disposal?
De gustibus non est disputandum 
To be fair, I worked with a couple of graduate mechanical engineers who couldn’t tell a bolt from a set screw. Why would I let them be involved in designing anything that was critical?
Despite various government interventions, social media platforms have proved themselves time and again incapable of protecting children. I take your point.
The problem with the likes of Facebook/Meta is it’s so huge and makes so much money, that any kind of punitive financial judgement by a court would easily be covered by the contents of Zuckerberg’s wallet.
Of course, the anti-intellectuals think social media is a great way of hanging out with “friends” and the like-minded, yet seem to have no idea of the level of manipulation involved and how it’s really all about nothing other than money.
1 Like
I was going to say “hey let’s keep things on topic!” but then I read the last line and realized that it is completely on topic!
3 Likes
Social media is an amplifier, for sure, but the problem IMO is much deeper (and completely off-topic).
On-topic, it is all about the money for the manufacturers, of course, but the gullible must be getting at least some psychological satisfaction out of it, too.