The OP is saying that it's the same headphone and USB DAC....that there's still an audio difference between the two if plugging in an Android device or iPhone. It's possible there is an audio difference if you do level match the two: we're not talking about a direct connection-there could be...

Oh why did we have CD players in the 1980s if 16bit (or 14bit) wasn't adequate enough?

At one point sunjam was addressing whether he was an AI bot, or he was just utilizing AI to come up with all his answers. At this point, what is the difference? He's able to lasso a few folks to engage with his fallacies and keep on with this thread. When I've engaged, he pretty much confirmed...

There you go again: confusing an optical illusion (which I have described ad nauseam) with a cognitive bias test. Or now you're saying "activity" because it's been highlighted how you're making up conditions if the image is resized. Once again, the aspects of the image being an optical...

Why won't I be surprised if you come back and ask someone else if they have confirmation bias, to then refer to the scaled down optical illusion?:beyersmile:

You claim you have the skills to debunk pseudoscience, but this is an example of you engaging in it! You've just admitted you've made up this scenario of an optical illusion being a confirmation test. You yourself said the squares were a solid gray if they are rendered in the original image...

BTW, you have not posted a confirmation bias test. You have claimed a scaled down optical illusion is a confirmation bias test, when it reality it stays an optical illusion illustration!

Go back to your original tomfoolery post. You said this was confirmation bias with a scaled down image of the original (in which you admitted they were solid gray squares). What the heck? There is no difference with an image when it is scaled up or down: it has the same properties. You’re...

Cool....I see you've completely ignored everything to do with our exchanges and continue to confuse your made up preface as having anything to do with confirmation bias (when all it is is misunderstanding of optical illusion).

I didn't avoid the answer: I revealed exactly what the values of the squares in the center column are if you were to understand what an example of opitical illusion is. You yourself revealed it when you gave the answer for "larger" image vs the same smaller image. But then you continue to...

Eh, you're saying you have been disingenuous in claiming this example is "confirmation bias", and now you want me to ignore that and answer your made up argument? My undergrad is a BFA in Art (then I got a MS in medical illustration, worked in 3D animation, and currently work with software...

LOL....except this isn't an example of confirmation bias. It's an example of optical illusion. It's one of many examples of a graphical contrast illusion (in which our brains fill in information from what our brain thinks is true): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checker_shadow_illusion

I've never viewed flat Earth or chemtrail conspiracies as being "political stuff"🤷‍♀️. The OP went there about comparing science discussion, so I detailed how flat Earth conspiracy is far removed from any science argument.

No, there's a minority of people who are more susceptible to believe in conspiracy theories. They'll be in a "team" that supports their beliefs (which in this case are not based in any scientific evidence). Conspiracy theorists are also more likely to believe that airplanes spray chemtrails...

My key point was they are the same if the intended output is a hundredths decimal. That's the way computer science works (and is not subjective). Same also with your example: 90 dB SPL ==> 89.999999999725328 dB SPL. Well beyond the limits of human hearing, and may be the same in computer...