OK fine, you made me look into it more...

So Bluetooth itself is an internationally agreed upon frequency range that the information is passed. The device itself dictates the frequency range of the sound you hear so you're right.

I think I either got misinformation or I might have gotten confused thinking that a cheap speaker would sound better direct connected where the reality is any particular speaker will have a range of capability and a cheap speaker may not have one as wide as human hearing.

#1 bluetooth uses a slight offshoot of mpeg2 audio compression which gets worse because you are most likely recompressing something already compressed with mpeg and that makes things even worse. This is the strength of AptX, it is an audio compression designed to not get exponentially worse when dealing with mpeg compressed audio. THAT SAID! Anyone know what phone he is using? The GOLD phantom supports AptX, so if he uses a samsung/htc/lg phone he would have been using AptX.

#2 speaker construction, it is an overblown Flip3 with radiators on the side. The radiators are designed to capture the back pressure of speakers and convert it into more audible sound waves, very good at saving the low frequencies and directing them back at the listener. The problem is it is a secondary uncontrolled speaker. This means your sound balance can go out of wack. Perfect for a $79 portable speaker, not ideal for a $3000 home theater setup. Also the speaker appears to be..mono? so you need 2 of them for stereo?

Yea, sorry, you can buy speakers that are not much bigger than this, hell you can buy a SET of front facing speakers and a good sub for $3000 and do better.

I know very little about this but logic has me thinking the frequency range of blue tooth has nothing to do with the frequency range of the final sound produced as it's just transmitting a digital signal.

amiright?

I'm pretty sure bluetooth has a smaller frequency range than human hearing so a true audiophile would probably scoff at this even if it has a jaguar on the box

i agree that, generally speaking, the best way to deal with stupidity is to let it expose and screw itself. but there is definitely a limit to that, a point where the stupid becomes too big to stop, and you have to take a stand before its too late.

I dont think that was the case here (though all I know of peterson is what was in the CBC article). But I would definitely protest if my university was paying an idiot a ton of money to give a speech where they could make themselves look smart; and lets not be naive, for all the calls for "free speech" and "debate", usually these speakers take few questions and dodge anything critical with the host moderators protecting them from embarrassment. So if my university wants to pay kissinger or hillary hundreds of thousands of dollars to talk about human rights or ethics, yes I would protest that...

this guy is small fry and is basically looking for it to validate his position, as the article stated other speakers declined precisely because they could foresee that the free speech vs political correctness summit having a speaker whose contribution to the discussion is: "[he] does not recognize another person's right to determine what pronouns he uses to address them." I dont care what whose beliefs are, if you dont want to call someone how they want to be called, you are looking for a fight. and if the other person does not recognize your right to self determine how to address them?! Wow, so deep. this is really what university is for!

my response also comes from a recent discussion elsewhere, regarding the pervasiveness/frequency of the "safe space, snowflake, trigger warning" phenomena that occasionally comes up in videos like these. how many people actually have personal experiences, even indirectly, with professors giving trigger warnings or of a safe space? i have several professors in my circle of friends and family and none have ever witnessed it.

I was born in the late 70s and had the fortune to experience the early days of personal computing and the internet via BBSes. The biggest issue I've personally experienced with the modern internet is the ease at which you can get side-tracked by deep links. I've lost count of the number of times I've started researching something work-related in the evening only to end up linking through two or three related articles and ending up on a YouTube video about the latest game trailer or whatever.

I've also noticed that my reading habits have changed. Instead of reading articles in their entirety, I will, at times, read a few sentences to get the gist then scan ahead to continue reading. I never used to do this but it is something I've caught myself doing with greater frequency over the past couple of decades. This has tripped me up a few times where I've had to go back and read the information again. I wonder if children that have grown up with the modern internet and its web of distractions (pun intended) are even worse off.

Maybe our brains are trying to adapt to a new way of gathering and processing so much disconnected information (e.g. one minute you're reading about a physics algorithm the next minute about screaming space goats). Perhaps it is a way to contain information overload and only retain what is useful?

The internet is an AMAZING invention and something everyone should have access to and be taught how to use effectively. As was mentioned above, you can pretty much teach yourself anything using the internet. The challenge is staying focused and sifting through all the ads, fluff articles, and random garbage that you get bombarded with every time you browse a website.

Well, OK. I do love me some Chris Hedges, but god damn - the left is never going to win anything with tone like this. No one *wants* to listen to it. Sure, they should, but it's hard to be annihilated by the truth when it's spoken in a piercing frequency, lol.

I think that is what Sanders was trying to do - the political establishment understands this "Tweet" culture, of simple-minded ADHD, ritalin addicts who know nothing about politics, or the truth so you basically have to keep it short & sweet. I definitely don't believe Sanders would have made any better impact as an Independent (except for the fact that I would have voted for him), I agree - he didn't teach us much, but he kept it slightly angry (good tone though and tone is huge) and simple for mass consumption.

I feel like the only thing to save humanity (and the environment) is massive & sheer economic collapse to fucking ruin capitalism FOREVER, let's move to a forest and make a 100% sustainable living & future. We have the tech to do it now. And it needs to be done right now, like right this split second.

They messed up a little bit. Hand wound pocket watches don't tick in the traditional sense as they have a balance spring that causes the balance wheel to oscillate at a resonant frequency typically much greater than once per second (usually at least 4 beats per second). Only quartz watches have the classic tick/tick/tick sound each second. Those only came out in the late 1960's and don't require winding.

this was oddly uninformative and misinformative. the names for white and pink noise are related to light but brown noise is named after robert brown.

white noise is equal power (amplitude/"volume") across frequencies (1/1), pink noise equal power per octave (1/frequency), and brown/red noise is -6dB/octave (1/frequency^2). there is also grey noise, blue noise, black noise, violet noise, and others. and no mention of the fletcher-munson curve (how sensitive our ears are across the frequency spectrum).

Love me some sand dunes. I've heard low droning sounds while out in Guadalupe sand dunes in central california and in Death Valley. I remember researching why and there were some theories - something about grain size (changes pitch), friction & amplification from a layer of moisture below the surface and sand collision upon the surface creating vibrations that in turn create a feedback loop of low frequency. Stony stuff, lol!

My understanding is that the voltage being sent to the LED headlights is passed through a Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) driver that creates a pulsing effect so that the LED receives a consistent average voltage over time and allows for the control of the LED's perceived brightness. If there is a mismatch between the PWM frequency and the frame rate of the camera, you will see pulsing or flickering. You see the same kind of effect sometimes when a camera records a helicopter and the rotors appear to be stationary like here.

At least I'm pretty sure that's what's going on.

Whenever there's a mosquito vectored disease, people talk about eradicating mosquitos, but never consider their role in the food chain, and it is not a small role.
They also never consider the effects of the eradication methods, which are often poison sprayed into the air or onto ponds. Decades ago, a 12 year old boy designed and made a device for eradicating mosquitos in water using sound waves for a science project, and it worked. He tuned his device to resonate at the same frequency as the gas bladder in mosquito larva, popping it and killing the mosquitos without effecting anything else, and leaving no residue. For some reason, I never hear about that method being used, but instead often see people dosing small ponds with poison, oil, or bacteria, all of which harm other organisms.
Targeting single strains of mosquito with genetics may be a good way to deal with disease issues, but will certainly also have unexpected unpredictable consequences. I hope they remember the fiasco caused by creating killer bees and study the issue from all sides thoroughly before releasing them into the wild.

I'm sure there are people out there that have come up with software/technology from the influence of DMT, they just haven't come forth. I'd say that it has recognizably influenced ideas & thought - especially in the area of frequencies, energy, reality is a hologram sort of shit like that because the DMT experience is the frequency, mandala portal experience, lol! It's certainly influenced great art, look at Alex Grey. I've learned a lot of things that seem to not apply to this reality and the last time I took it, the only thing I learned was "GOOGLE", lol.

LSD on the otherhand has definitely influenced technology and science. My favorite LSD thought experiment become reality was Francis Crick's discovery of the DNA strand while on it.

"I'm still waiting for the insightful invention someone comes up with after one of these amazing 'conversations' with non-human beings. If this drug really did what those into it claim, you would expect most users to be incredible 'outside the box' inventors advancing science in ways normal people would never consider...but I have not heard of even a single instance of that kind of useful insight coming from DMT."

It seemed like they were all marching in step. I wonder if they just happened to march in the same frequency that the bridge naturally resonates in, causing a feedback/amplification that over stressed the cable, or if it was simple cable failure for other reasons.
Either way, I'm glad no one was hurt (according to the TV piece I saw about this). It could have been far worse.

Because nicotine itself is not terribly addictive. The main components of addiction to tobacco are now believed to be other substances.

Now consider the mechanical act of smoking; inhale, exhale cloud, reward.
Using a vaporizer reproduces the physical act that smoker's brains associate with the reward.

There does seem to be a period at the beginning of using a vaporizer, where there's a craving for cigarettes, perhaps because of the other addictive chemicals that are absent. But this craving isn't particularly difficult to overcome when you're satisfying the other elements of your habit. Not to mention, lungs clearing, sense of taste returning...

Then there's the final stage of using a vaporizer, which I've seen happen with others and I've experienced...you lower the nicotine levels further and further and then one day you start forgetting to use it at all. Your frequency of use may drop to nothing. Not always though. Some people go truely insane. We call them "scuba vapers". One of my buddies has earned the nickname "Darth Vaper".