Popular Post esldude Posted August 6, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted August 6, 2019 Can we just say Darko is effectively full of it. Followed by he apparently is a shill for AQ. Then leave it at that. Or does the OP want explanations for why each of the points in the article are FUD, and while sort of true, the information presented is so misleading as to be borderline lying? lucretius, crenca and semente 3 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted August 6, 2019 Share Posted August 6, 2019 4 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said: Darko can't be an "influencer" without some allegiance to the manufacturers. While I'll admit that some internet culture passes me by, I'm pretty sure an "influencer" is just someone who gets page views and free stuff from the companies they help. I'm surprised by the people with blogs who are so proud to be "influencers". Hey they have influence. And thru freebies and other methods that influence has value. And most of them probably pedal the influence they "created". After all who influences the influencers? And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted August 7, 2019 Share Posted August 7, 2019 1 hour ago, sandyk said: How many here bother to read the Blogs in this forum ? I take spells reading them from time to time. Mostly don't. Some interesting. And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted August 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted August 7, 2019 3 hours ago, tmtomh said: For those who care, here is the crucial passage from the linked article where the author switches from "They Say" to "I Say" - in other words, when the author finishes summarizing the point of view they are going to disagree with, and when they begin to lay out their own response (counter-argument) to that point of view: "It's important to understand that there are no “digital signals”; there are analog signals that carry digital information. High-bandwidth digital signals are not 'pulses and no-pulses' marching down a wire like a line of ants—they are complex, high-frequency analog waves, and digital processors must recognize and decode many different voltages (16 or more for Ethernet) to turn the transmitted data into information. Because "digital signals" are high-frequency analog signals, cable design matters. This is why there are different Cat levels of Ethernet cable, and why cheap USB cables often don’t work with high-speed devices. Shielding a cable can damp energy peaks in the signal or cause non-linear distortions, and so designing a digital cable is most certainly not an “on or off” engineering task." If we're going to have an intelligent discussion about the actual content of this argument (and we certainly don't have to have an intelligent discussion!), then it would make sense to respond to specific claims the author makes in this passage. A few that jump out at me immediately include: The passage implies - and the argument is based on the claim - that properly decoding "complex, high-frequency analogue waves" is a hit-or-miss challenge for modern digital and networking hardware and cables. The passage specifically implies that distinguishing between 16 different voltages is difficult or challenging for "ethernet" to do. The passage conflates cables, the hardware the cables are connected to, and the software running on that hardware into a single thing - in this case "ethernet." The passage equates different CAT levels of ethernet cable to the accuracy of decoding the aforementioned voltages; and it claims that cheap USB cables do not work with high-speed devices - and further strongly implies that devices that transmit digital audio are high-speed devices ("high-bandwidth digital signals" transmitted as "complex, high-frequency analogue waves." The passage claims that cable shielding can cause analogue-like distortions when a digital audio signal transmitted over that cable gets translated into an analogue audio signal ("shielding a cable can damp energy peaks... or cause non-linear distortions"). I don't think one needs to talk about shills or make ad hominem attacks. Instead, I think one need only point to the above points and many more, and ask anyone who wishes to defend this article and argument to explain and support these claims. In fact, I would say that by calling Darko a shill and resorting to name-calling, folks give defenders of this poor argument a great way to deflect from the actual content of the argument - they can instead sidestep the argument itself and post the kind of response Alex has posted above, pointing out and decrying the nastiness of a "small vocal minority" of naysayers. Good post. But that is why I posted upstream as to whether the OP wanted an explanation of why the assertions don't add up to what Darko is concluding in his writing. 1st Darko is usually full of it, and hasn't failed to be in a long time if someone starts talking about his blogs. He is a shill who sells his influence. So maybe if you don't know this, check into it and stop paying attention to him. If you are open to learning why, or would like to know, those list of points in the latter part of your post can be addressed effectively, easily and simply . Does anyone who doesn't know, want to know? OTOH hand, debunking or correcting misdirection from the likes of Darko gets tiresome. The bottom line is any seemingly technical info in a Darko post is usually not correct on the point, and usually is intended to mislead readers whether he realizes it or not. Don't get your technical info from Darko. This particular blog referred to in the OP is a textbook example of the problems of listening to or reading Darko. tmtomh and Arpiben 1 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted August 7, 2019 Share Posted August 7, 2019 3 hours ago, marce said: If bits aren't bits what are they then? meta-bits susceptible to meta-problems. jabbr 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted August 7, 2019 Share Posted August 7, 2019 https://www.upscaleaudio.com/pages/bits-is-bits This is what is in the Darko article. I guess a cursory view of it I didn't realize it was lifted verbatim from AQ. Not surprised. lucretius 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted August 8, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted August 8, 2019 1 minute ago, marce said: My main aim was to show digital (square wave signals) are pulses, current pulses, which is why the simulation software uses S parameters among other stuff. (to get the simulation to match the scope shots, you have to model the scope probe loading on the signal, most scope manufacturers have modelling info for their probes, its quite cool when the sims match the scope screen, don't get to play with it much these days,but if ever get time I've been meaning to download some USB driver IBIS data and model some USB cables, did some SPDIF years ago on DIYAudio several years ago to show just adding a 75R resistor cleans up the wave nicely.) My own view on the article is a set of relatively true statements mixed together in a bit of a mishmash to promote the belief in cables... This is my favourite bit.... ALL baseband Ethernet I have worked on has been digital, either on or off, not 16 different voltages... Maybe they are mixed up with broadband, which is frequency-division multiplexing, so I am unsure where the 16 different voltages comes from. Probably from the uninformed belief that 16 different voltages are transmitting 16 different bits on ethernet. crenca and lucretius 2 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted August 8, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted August 8, 2019 5 minutes ago, Soothsayerman said: I didn't call you an arrogant dickhead I asked about your attitude. It was actually an interrogative. Like I said. I believe the point of rapidly diminishing returns occurs quickly in cables and that a bit isn't always a bit. If that has too much gray area for you, there are a lot of things in life that are likely going to disappoint you. Returns are diminishing much more quickly than makers want you to know alright. I'd say they diminish to right about zero at just about this cable here for less than $7. https://www.amazon.com/Belkin-F3U133b10-Hi-Speed-Cable-Type-B/dp/B00004Z5M1 crenca and mansr 1 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 I wonder when Audioquest will come out with Audiophile wireless. Not the wire or cable, but wireless. Maybe in the form of a waveguide? We know them bits ain't bits all by themselves. crenca 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted August 9, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted August 9, 2019 2 hours ago, marce said: I am trying to work out what a bit is, if it isn't a bit! I am really at a loss, this is why I posted the pic of the current pulse, what else could it be! Any ideas because I am at a loss... Even if I describe it as a fundamental sine wave with many added harmonics the knee frequency depending on the signal rise time, it is still a BIT!!!! It is all ones and zeros. Various ways of transmitting and deciphering that. Still it is 1's and 0's. There is nothing else. It could be colored slips of paper, it could be two voltages with guard bands, it could be current levels or related resistance levels with fixed voltage. It can be directional differences in current flow, or voltage or the way the wind blows. It is all 1's and 0's. And despite all the attempts by anyone to make it more analog or more intuitive it is none of that. The obfuscation by any other method is simply trying to deny the most simple of truths. Twice as much or half as much is all it is. Yet that is very powerful, efficient and liberating. To try and approach it any other way is to deny the truth. crenca, marce and Teresa 1 1 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted September 3, 2019 Share Posted September 3, 2019 21 minutes ago, Rexp said: In a system where chain is phone>upnp streamer>dac. Why does Tidal app sound inferior to mconnect app, given same bits? Does it sound different? Rexp 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 4 hours ago, DonaldT2109 said: Hoorah !. At last somebody who realises that the cable doesn't know it is audio and therefore can not possibly 'enhance' the music which has been encoded into a bit stream Exactly how does the cable reformatt and purify the digital stream? OMG Pleae don't tell me that you think an expensive HDMI cable can improve picture quality Actually no. I clearly know more about data and audio transmission than most of the respondants. You can abuse me as much as you like, but it will not make me into somebody is so out of touch with reality that he will spend next years vaccation money on a cable that does absolutely nothing more than my $10 cable and then try to justify it bu telling everybody that the violins "sound more alive" ------ Iso Regens ???? Presumably this piece of audiofoolery makes the ones and zeros look cleaner Comparing USB audio to my water supply ? Why not compare it to a box of frogs? Oh, and the single malt whisky and water comparison is one of the funniest things I have read for ages ( I am assuming it was meant as a joke) 1110011 = 1110011 111111111=111111111 etc etc get it. Drag yourselves out of analogue and try to understand digital I notice nobody can explain how this fragile bitstream survives the 2 miles journey to my house as an audio signal Sorry guys, I thank you for your time but I'm out of here looking for a forum here they actually know how audio transmission works. I suggest you do some reading up on how sound is digitised, transmitted and then restored to audio See ya You could try www.audiosciencereview.com for a more rational audio forum. This is a good forum, but believers gotta believe stories on here sometimes at Audiophile Style. Speedskater 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 5 minutes ago, DonaldT2109 said: But you and all of the cable companies and reviewers on kickbacks all claim that these cables clean the signal ... and what is leaving my USB port is a bit for bit digital encoding of my music. it is the cable which transports it !!!! So what the reviewer should have said is that he was using different sources on different PCs or music servers on differeent USB ports............... in which case the review is useless (even though we already know it is) One more time How does the USB cable adjust the bit stream to, for example make "The soundstage (is) large with excellent width and depth" still waiting for an answer And by definition if it changes smoothness or soundstage or detail or apparent frequency balance it must be changing the analog output of the DAC. But do they provide measurements showing that? Nope. Hearing is complex, and you can hear it if you just believe. Or so the tale goes. A quite lucrative tale it has turned out. DonaldT2109 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted October 14, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 14, 2019 34 minutes ago, charlesphoto said: snippage........ And just because a cable is special (ie military or space spec) doesn't mean it will sound good for audio. Yeah, accuracy, and data, and the result are different for the military and space because bits are different around violence and in a vacuum. I just happen to remember the Voyager missions use Reed_Solomon code for data transmission. You know the one used by CD's. If only they'd waited until Audioquest could have helped with the design. That data near and outside the solar system would have been smoother, brighter, deeper, more silent and more better. marce, pkane2001, DonaldT2109 and 1 other 2 2 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted October 14, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Blackmorec said: OK, lets start again. No passive cable enhances SQ. How could it if its passive?. What cables do is to subtract. A cable that subtracts NOTHING (which to my knowledge doesn’t yet exist) would be considered and judged to be one of the best cables in the World. Here’s how it works Lets say I transmit a perfect signal at 100% and I have 2 cables. One loses 5% of the performance and the other 15%, so instead of 100% I’m going to hear 85% and 95% perfection so one cable is going to sound a lot better than the other. This is an oversimplification simply to illustrate the concept. All the items you mentioned above....Jitter, reflection, impedance mismatch, RFI and EMI, phase noise......non of which are likely to cause bit errors, will all cause problems of one sort or another with components in the DAC. There’s enough published technical information about how these issues are caused if you care to look. So a really cruddy stream arrives at your house, with noise, jitter etc. It goes through a number of cleanup steps to remove noise and reconstruct the timing to remove jitter. This pristine signal is then sent to the USB output. If that has a decent clock and power supply then a good signal is fed into the cable. If the cable is sufficiently screened, has the correct impedance, picks up no EMI or RFI etc then a good clean stream arrives at your DAC. A poor cable on the other hand will deliver a distorted and contaminated stream that causes your DAC problems. This is not an issue about bit stream errors...its noise and timing issues that cause the problems. Feed a DAC a perfect bit stream i.e all bits present and there’s no guarantee you’ll get great sound. It has to be a clean, error free, contaminant free bit stream to achieve excellent results. One of the beauties of digital is your signal could be degraded by quality to only 60% and still get the same result as if it were a 100% quality signal. DonaldT2109, Ralf11, marce and 1 other 3 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 19 minutes ago, charlesphoto said: Right here on another thread. So this explanation that tells us the eye patterns shows there are signal differences on USB, but that one can't use the eye pattern to determine what differences in sound will result. But trust John, he has it figured out. Okay here is a long thread with measurements of what a Regen does. Along with one DAC where a Regen makes a measureable and beneficial difference in the analog output of the DAC. It is a lousy DAC, but it shows what a Regen can accomplish. Most DACs don't need or benefit from what a Regen does, but some can. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/uptone-iso-regen-review-and-measurements.1829/ And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted October 14, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 14, 2019 2 minutes ago, marce said: Note: Military and space cables are engineered, 100 percent shielded (full faraday cage, connected both ends), wire chosen for the environment/signal, good quality connectors, usually MIL-DTL-38999 type. No magic. See you've explained why military cables are no good for audio. No magic. Arpiben, pkane2001, mansr and 2 others 2 3 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted October 15, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 15, 2019 41 minutes ago, Blackmorec said: Well that obviously that went right over your head, like most of this stuff appears to be doing. Both your water supply and your music stream travel along a myriad of pipes and cables before reaching your home. When they reach your home they both have a level of contamination and while both can be used directly, as is, both highly benefit from some clean-up. Once cleaned up both ‘taste’ better....one makes better music, the other better washing water, potable water, tea, coffee or whatever. Both can be cleaned up by short runs of specially engineered ‘piping’, namely filters Both are easily recontaminated, one by contaminated house piping and appliances, the other by EMI, RFI, poor quality power supplies, poorly executed oscillators, noisy mains etc. All you need do to educate yourself is to read some of John Swenson’s work...available here on the sponsored Uptone Audio Forum.... .most of this stuff is covered and I highly recommend it. I happen to know something about electronic filtering and water supply filtering. Why don't you point out to us the web link for all of John's white papers and testing regimes he keeps promising. Oh, yeah......right...................you can't. So sorry. Don't know whether you'd be better served to learn about water filtration or electronics. Your level of understanding about both seems to be at the level of marketing spiel. Maybe time to stop digging.................................................................... Ralf11, sandyk and crenca 1 1 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted October 15, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 15, 2019 1 hour ago, Blackmorec said: Oh boy....completely misinformed, as usual. https://uptoneaudio.com/pages/j-swenson-tech-corner His writings are of the form of telling me if we build a bridge with twice the material it can be stronger. Which it can. And he is willing to use 4 times the material for 16 times the price. Of course a bridge is meant to convey traffic from one side to the other without collapsing. If it does that, then there is no twice as good or four times as good. There is no benefit to the elaboration. Unless you are selling bridge materials. If he starts writing about how to actually improve results, rather than over building that which already works just fine, then let me know. pkane2001 and crenca 1 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted October 15, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 15, 2019 26 minutes ago, DonaldT2109 said: One more time, the bits received will be the bits that were sent. The protocols do not care about the cables and voltage drops and do not care if you are in a domestic environment, a major bank or, the space station Did I receive that packet correctly? No I didn't. Hey, can you send it again That is why I am suggesting reading up on these protocols Any answers to my question on USB audio yet? anybody? Here is the FFT of a Schiit Modi 2 DAC. This DAC is very susceptible to junk coming across the USB cable. You have some complaints you hear mouse clicks, hard drive activity etc when connected via USB. Like old SoundBlaster sound cards in the old days. This is an example of what can happen even though the bits were transferred correctly. You also see the result when an Uptone Regen is used to clean up the USB signal. A genuine improvement and change at the analog output of a DAC receiving bit perfect bits. So in principle and in reality such problems are real. OTOH, few DACs are effected like this. Here is an iDac and Mytek with and without the Uptone Regen. So do you need a Regen or just a good DAC? Even with good DACs are similar smaller effects happening below the measurement noise floor? I guess that could be the case. Are they meaningful in the sense they change the sound if the effects are that far down. I'd guess no if you have a DAC not so easily corrupted by the USB connection. Which is most of them. Though not shown that Modi 2 DAC was found to vary in artifacts with various length and quality cables, and I seem to recall even different PC's for the USB source. Again, I don't think it matters for nearly all other DACs. Teresa and Ralf11 1 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted October 15, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 15, 2019 1 minute ago, DonaldT2109 said: All this shows is somebody taking a really bad USB connection and 'cleaning it' (LOL) It does not show how the bits were received. And unless you have a home made Micky Mouse DAC, the audio side cannot be affected by noise or anyting else on the USB cable. What the DAC does is take the digital input from USB and converts it to audio. This is basic stuff and why would you bother with a regen unless you had to have avery long USB cable run? Any response to my question yet? Anybody? It actually was a simple functional certified 2.0 USB cable from a Lenovo laptop. The clock of the DAC is being effected by the USB connection. I'm not claiming the bits are changed. Only that without changing the bits it is possible to have the analog result altered. It happens with poor incompetently designed handling of the USB input to the DAC. marce, Blackmorec and Teresa 2 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted October 15, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 15, 2019 3 minutes ago, DonaldT2109 said: At last we have it. A bad DAC can degrade the audio. but of course, the USB cable can' enhance it Yes in the case of the Modi 2 it might enhance it a little. The take home message isn't to worry about the USB cable. The message is don't use a Modi 2. Instead of buying an expensive USB cable (which isn't likely to help) or a Regen (which does help the Modi 2), I'd suggest someone spend that money on a different DAC that needs no such crutches. Don Hills, Teresa, marce and 1 other 1 3 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 4 minutes ago, DonaldT2109 said: How the hell is it nauseating ????? What method ? How many methods are there of asking a question ? I asked an important question a while ago and nobody will answer it What is the problem other than it will prove that A USB cable can not possibly affect the audio. I really don't understand how people still beleve these crooks, even after being caught red handed cheating at an A/B test, when they say thar their ultra-expensive cables can improve the audio Ultra expensive USB cables aren't necessary nor even likely helpful even in the worst cases. However, with poor design it is possible for the USB cable to alter the analog output. So yes it is possible. Expensive cables aren't the answer, and with most gear doesn't happen. But it is possible. Look here for measured proof of that. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/do-usb-audio-cables-make-a-difference.1887/ Confused 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted October 15, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 15, 2019 Just now, DonaldT2109 said: So you honestly believe that a USB cable can give the digitised data "extreme smoothness in the midrange and high end that at the same time, is detailed and very revealing" ? Techno-babble and psuedo-science can not give the audio over a USB cable "extreme smoothness in the midrange and high end that at the same time, is detailed and very revealing" to give "extreme smoothness in the midrange and high end that at the same time, is detailed and very revealing" ? Really. That is very clever DonaldT, stop putting words in my mouth. My prior comments including the selectively quoted one you replied too in no way indicated what you just posted. If you wanted to discuss the issue fine, but if you have to ignore measurements of the phenomena to do that, then you aren't conversing in good faith. I've not said or implied basic sound quality is altered by USB cables. I've even said, get a good DAC, and it isn't a thing anymore. Yet, it is possible to alter the analog output of a DAC via the USB cable with bit perfect transmission. That you twisted that into your most recent reply indicates you are just here to stir the schiit and troll. You didn't even have enough sense or courtesy to read the link I posted. You'd realize just how off base you were unless you intended to be all along. sandyk and RickyV 2 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 Were he less dense he'd have hints already. Sonic77 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Recommended Posts