• 0 Posts
  • 48 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 3rd, 2023

help-circle





  • You may know the difference between a DAC and Amp, but you clearly don’t understand what I’m trying to say. I’m saying that a DAC doesn’t have its own power output. It literally takes a digital signal, and converts it to analog. In order for it to add any power to the signal, it needs to include an amplifier. Otherwise, the signal will always be a little bit weaker due to the power loss from traveling through the DAC. Most DAC units have at least a weak amplifier for this reason, but there are some units that are just a DAC. And the Amp part isn’t going to be controlling the digital volume, i.e. changing the system volume on your device. It will operate on its own volume control, so regardless of how limited the output is from your phone, it will still be made louder as it amplifies the volume independently of the phone. A unit that is just a DAC doesn’t have any way to amplify the signal it receives, so it will never be able to make it louder.

    You said explicitly that the android system will limit the output of any DAC, but that is wrong on multiple counts. The android system will not limit the output of a DAC because a DAC itself just 1:1 outputs an analog signal converted from a digital source so there is nothing to limit. The android system will also not limit the output from an Amplifier because it literally is not capable of that. That’s like saying your water faucet can limit how hot your water can get when you boil it on the stove. An Amp increases the power of the signal after it has already left the phone.



  • Lmao you are actually incapable of good faith, probably because of how obviously angry you are hahaha

    You are still trying to argue that your idealized theoretical version of communism is what needs to be accepted, but that a corrupted and condemned version of capitalism is what capitalism is inherently at its core. By your own standard, communism is equally abhorrent because of how it has been actually implemented in the past.

    A company getting bailed out is not capitalism. It is socialism. A capitalist society implementing corporate socialism is a corruption of the core ideology of capitalism. I will agree that it is the end goal of corporatism, but corporatism is a corruption of capitalism.

    And wow you really still don’t get the “no true scotsman” thing… I mean you probably do but once again, you are only putting bad faith forward. Since you clearly need it spelled out in detail, let me just copy this excerpt from the Wikipedia article on “No true Scotsman”:

    The “no true Scotsman” fallacy is committed when the arguer satisfies the following conditions:[7][3][4]

    not publicly retreating from the initial, falsified assertion

    offering a modified assertion that definitionally excludes a targeted unwanted counterexample

    using rhetoric to hide the modification

    Oops, you accidentally did all those things. You never retracted your assertion, you modified the assertion with further qualifiers, and tried to downplay that further qualification. You actually pulled a “no true scotsman” on a statement about someone being a scotsman. It’s so on the nose that you MUST be a troll lmao



  • Capitalism is absolutely not functioning as intended and has 100% been corrupted… if capitalism worked as intended, then why have companies been “bailed out” from failing naturally under capitalism? Capitalism has failed just as much as everything else has failed, and has been corrupted by the people in charge just the same. Communism doesn’t work, Capitalism doesn’t work, nothing we have right now works.

    And you literally still don’t understand the concept of “no true scotsman” lmao. It is also known as the “appeal to purity”. Let me be more clear:

    If someone has Scottish ancestry, is born in Scotland, naturalises to Scotland, or is born and raised within largely Scottish culture, they are Scottish. It doesn’t matter where that person was born or where they live. To say that someone cannot be Scottish unless they fit your specific definition and criteria is the exact fallacy being referenced, and you actually just doubled down on that thinking that it somehow makes you not guilty of that fallacy? Wild.


  • Lmao what side are you on? Your entire rhetoric is equally critical of and applicable to communism. If communism is allowed to be viewed as an ideology that has been corrupted, then capitalism is exactly the same. You don’t get to cherry pick and say “you have to look at A with rose-colored glasses and you only get to accept the idealized version of it, but you must only look at the bad things that have come from B and don’t get to accept its ideals!”

    Also you literally went full “no true scotsman” at the end, literally verbatim lmao. You actually just tried to say that one of the most well known fallacies is not a fallacy hahaha wtf is wrong with you






  • Are you responding to the correct comment? I literally never said anything defensive… basically nothing you said applies to me or my comment, so it’s pretty clear you are engaging in some egregious projection there. Hopefully you figure your problems out.

    I mean, where did I specify right-wingers in my comment? I intentionally left it open because of course people of different opinions are capable of bad faith argument. Once again, you are projecting, and it’s making you look silly.


  • Goddamn, you really got yourself worked up there, and a shit take to boot. Most of the time that someone uses the phrase “facts don’t care about your feelings” those people are arguing in bad faith, cherry picking data and purposefully excluding context to cater to their desired conclusion. My go to example is the statistics of violent crime convictions by race. There are so many extraneous details to that statistic that you could never truly conclude anything based on that statistic alone. It fails to take into account the environmental conditions, social factors, economic factors, and biases in the justice system when you present that statistic at face value.


  • The manifest (at least how I am using the term) is whatever metadata a file has, and the format and location of this metadata can differ between operating systems. Usually the manifest is generated by the operating system based off of header data from the file itself, and details about the file that the operating system can deduce, such as file size, origin, location, file type, etc. In Windows you can view this info by right clicking/opening the context menu on any file and selecting “Properties”, on macOS by opening the context menu and selecting “Get Info”, and on other OSes such as linux/freeBSD it will be something similar.

    There are other usages for “manifest” depending on the context, for example a manifest.xml would be something a developer would include with an android app that has configuration settings and properties for the app.