Qubes OS
Edit: stop downvoting correct answers. If you don’t want to be helpful, just leave
Cryptography nerd
Fediverse accounts;
Natanael@slrpnk.net (main)
Natanael@infosec.pub
Natanael@lemmy.zip
@Natanael_L@mastodon.social
Bluesky: natanael.bsky.social
Qubes OS
Edit: stop downvoting correct answers. If you don’t want to be helpful, just leave
Yup, don’t be sole owner if you can’t afford a lawyer to make sure you get a good deal
And you can have a union even in a co-op (would mostly help if the majority / appointed leaders make decisions that break some rules, think enforcing safety rules and such)
You could also Steve Jobs yourself with a treatable but deadly disease
The Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem isn’t subjective, it’s physics.
Your example isn’t great because it’s about misconceptions about the eye, not about physical limits. The physical limits for transparency are real and absolute, not subjective. The eye can perceive quick flashes of objects that takes less than a thousandth of a second. The reason we rarely go above 120 Hz for monitors (other than cost) is because differences in continous movement barely can be perceived so it’s rarely worth it.
We know where the upper limits for perception are. The difference typically lies in the encoder / decoder or physical setup, not the information a good codec is able to embedd with that bitrate.
Newer fractional arithmetic encoding can get crazy
Why use lossless for that when transparent lossy compression already does that with so much less bandwidth?
Opus is indistinguishable from lossless at 192 Kbps. Lossless needs roughly 800 - 1400 Kbps. That’s a savings of between 4x - 7x with the exact same quality.
Your wireless antenna often draws more energy in proportion to bandwidth use than the decoder chip does, so using high quality lossy even gives you better battery life, on top of also being more tolerant to radio noise (easier to add error correction) and having better latency (less time needed to send each audio packet). And you can even get better range with equivalent radio chips due to needing less bandwidth!
You only need lossless for editing or as a source for transcoding, there’s no need for it when just listening to media
Except Opus. Beats it at most bitrates
You literally can not distinguish 192 Kbps Opus from true lossless. Not even with movie theater grade speakers. You only benefit from lossless if you’re editing / applying multiple effects, etc, which you will not do at the receiving end of a Bluetooth connection.
That’s more than a codec question, that’s a Bluetooth audio profile question. Bluetooth LE Audio should support higher quality (including with Opus)
Nobody needs lossless over Bluetooth
Edit: plenty of downvotes by people who have never listened to ABX tests with high quality lossy compare versus lossless
At high bitrate lossy you literally can’t distinguish it. There’s math to prove it;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist–Shannon_sampling_theorem
At 44 kHz 16 bit with over 192 Kbps with good encoders your ear literally can’t physically discern the difference
Transparency is good enough, it’s intended to be a good fit for streaming, not masters for editing
Transparent or indistinguishable lossy compression are other common terms
There’s a push for Opus now, it’s the perfect codec for Bluetooth because it’s a singular codec that fits the whole spectrum from low bandwidth speech to high quality audio, and it’s fully free
Opus! It’s a merge of a codec designed for speech (from Skype!) with one designed for high quality audio by Xiph (same people who made OGG/Vorbis).
Although it needs some more work on latency, it prefers to work on bigger frames but default than Bluetooth packets likes, but I’ve seen there’s work on standardizing a version that fits Bluetooth. Google even has it implemented now on Pixel devices.
Fully free codec!
The number of channels should not be the issue. However, the conversions involved might be bad at translating expected relative volume.
Another thing is that in the movie theater they might tweak volume independently per channel to boost stuff like speech while at home you’ll watch with default volumes
Linux spent AGES on 2.x
Upside down
The only things I’ve ever heard of doing that is in very high security corporate environments