Fizbin wrote:
> You guys have WAY too much time on your hands.
If you are interested in understanding high-end audio, studying how and
why some people have a need to believe pseudoscience, voodoo and BS is a
much better use of your time than fiddling around with silver cables and
superfluous
Archimago wrote:
> It looks like folks just stopped experimenting with OS optimizations,
> playback software and silver cables awhile back... More time to consider
> other academic pursuits!
Fortunately there is always the 'New Age Bullshit Generator'
(http://sebpearce.com/bullshit/) - clearly
Julf wrote:
> If you are interested in understanding high-end audio, studying how and
> why some people have a need to believe pseudoscience, voodoo and BS is a
> much better use of your time than fiddling around with silver cables and
> superfluous loop instructions. :)
+1 to the thought that
Julf wrote:
> If you are interested in understanding high-end audio, studying how and
> why some people have a need to believe pseudoscience, voodoo and BS is a
> much better use of your time than fiddling around with silver cables and
> superfluous loop instructions. :)
Why bother with
SBGK wrote:
> Shhh, don't tell them that.
It looks like folks just stopped experimenting with OS optimizations,
playback software and silver cables awhile back... More time to consider
other academic pursuits!
:rolleyes:
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
dsdreamer wrote:
> Just because a long, detailed paper may give the reader fatigue or a
> headache is not an indication that it lacks academic rigor, potentially
> quite the opposite.
>
> On the other hand, the authors' concluding sentence is quite humorously
> self-aware:
>
>
> The claim
ralphpnj wrote:
> I could not agree more since attempting to read the entire paper just
> gave me a terrible headache. So while the paper may or may not be an
> example of pseudo-profound bullshit, it is most definitely a very fine
> example of pseudo-academic bullshit.
Just because a long,
dsdreamer wrote:
>
>
> My summary: quite entertaining, but not useful.
I find your summary to be entertaining and useful because it promotes
alternative thought.
I find the paper to be both entertaining and useful because may make
people aware of what may be a dominant trend in contemporary
ralphpnj wrote:
> Spoken little a true academic!
>
> (Lots of headache inducing big words and long sentences with little real
> meaning. However the paper and your response does bring to mind those
> infamous words that many students live by: Lots of bullshit, piled high
> and deep!)
-That the
arnyk wrote:
> I find your summary to be entertaining and useful because it promotes
> alternative thought.
>
> I find the paper to be both entertaining and useful because may make
> people aware of what may be a dominant trend in contemporary life.
>
> We can still be friends, right? ;-)
You guys have WAY too much time on your hands.
Fizbin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=58734
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104729
Fizbin wrote:
> You guys have WAY too much time on your hands.
Shhh, don't tell them that.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52003
arnyk wrote:
> Why are we sure that the paper itself is not an example of this problem?
I could not agree more since attempting to read the entire paper just
gave me a terrible headache. So while the paper may or may not be an
example of pseudo-profound bullshit, it is most definitely a very
RonM wrote:
> I loved it! And I noted that it in fact comes from Canada. Not that
> we're immune to bullshit, but I'd like to think that our stoic
> northern-ness leads us to be perhaps less vulnerable than others.
>
> Besides, it's written by psychologists, a fraternity to which I belong,
>
I loved it! And I noted that it in fact comes from Canada. Not that
we're immune to bullshit, but I'd like to think that our stoic
northern-ness leads us to be perhaps less vulnerable than others.
Besides, it's written by psychologists, a fraternity to which I belong,
so it must be true.
R.
Julf wrote:
> A case of circular irony?
Could be that, could be me punching my skptic's card.
Good read, regardless.
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread:
Julf wrote:
> '\"On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit\"'
> (http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.pdf)
Why are we sure that the paper itself is not an example of this problem?
arnyk's Profile:
arnyk wrote:
> Why are we sure that the paper itself is not an example of this problem?
A case of circular irony?
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" -
'\"On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit\"'
(http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.pdf)
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" -
That was a fun read. Thanks.
induna's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34626
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104729
___
20 matches
Mail list logo
