Fuses that matter.

Thank you, Lacee for your kind words.

My amazement is that we are arguing about a device that costs less than 100 bucks.

That irony isn't lost on me. But as I'm sure you're aware, this thread isn't really about fuses, at least not any more. It's about Reality, IMO, and three entirely different attitudes toward it…

1. Reality = the world and everything in it
2. Reality = my mind alone
3. Reality = my mind + the minds of other people

…or put another way…

1. The Realist
2. The Solipsist
3. The Sophist

These three categories have been around at least as far back as ancient Greece. Don't worry, I’m not going to launch into the history of philosophy. I’ll limit my comments to what, IMO, is happening on this thread...

What’s happening is that The Realist and the Solipsist and the Sophist are at war. It's a fight that started long before them, and that will outlive them. And it’s not merely academic. These conflicting attitudes toward Reality shape a huge array of individual behaviors and cultural forces. I talked about that at length in this post on 6/8. In it, I framed things in terms of Dogmatism and Obscurantism, but it's easy to see that Dogmatism is a *de facto* form of Solipsism and Obscurantism is a *de facto* form of Sophistry.

Whereas the Realist knows that Reality is mostly outside his control, the Solipsist and the Sophist act as though Reality can be controlled by thoughts, hopes, wishes, fantasies. This is the essence of Magical Thinking.

The loose connection that Solipsists have to Reality can be seen in the Dogmatist’s hostile resistance to opposing views on it. The loose connection that Sophists have to Reality can be see in the Obscurantist’s flagrant disregard for it.

The Solipsist needs to convince only HIMSELF to feel vindicated in his sense of Reality. The Sophist needs to convince OTHER PEOPLE to feel vindicated in his sense of Reality.

The principal thing the Solipsist gains from his attitude toward Reality is the illusion of control over it, which can be a great source of comfort. The principal thing the Sophist gains from his attitude toward Reality is control over the minds of other people, which can be a great source of personal gain.

Because of his inclination toward Magical Thinking, the Solipsist is the Sophist's primary victim. Because of his allegiance to a Reality outside himself, the Realist is the Sophist's primary enemy.

This fight happens every day, both here on Audiogon and out there where it counts.

Bryon

Chad

No I suppose I put that to the side. The magnet makes a huge improvement especially on the AC side of things. I have the magnets thru out my system. 3 in each amp 1 in each sub 1 in the pre amp and 1 in the transport. The DAC has a blade fuse like that in a car...that has more substance than the usual ware. I lent a friend a couple of magnets for his system just to mess with him. The dynamic balance was so skewed to one side he had to move his listening position way off center. He ordered some right then. Maybe the single greatest improvement I have made except for mechanical grounding schemes and subbing crap resistors with Vishay Z-foils.

Enter at your own risk. I know my system inside and out. All my electronics are the same over the course of many years. Of course all the components have been modded several times with more extreme parts. But all the gear is super stable and have never blown a fuse or a circuit breaker which resides in my listening room. Oh the system sounds better since I removed the front cover from the breaker box. Easy to do an AB with a couple witnesses present that quick.. its on its off..Looked at your system and I know some folks who designed some of your products.

The system is only on when I am awake and present.

Tom

Bryon wrote,

"Taken on its own, this comment could be interpreted either literally or ironically. You're telling us now that you meant it ironically. If that were true, then why did you go on to say in the next sentence…

"Hell, I wasn't allowed to post here for four years, even to defend myself, because the threads tended to get a little, uh, out of hand." (Geoff's statement)"

The threads went south even when I wasn't allowed to post. Didn't I already say that? I.e., I was not the troll, I was the victim of trolling.

Bryon also wrote,

""…all this angst and hand wringing has me a little puzzled. I wonder, IS IT SOMETHING I SAID? HA HA HA[emphasis added]" (Geoff's original statement)
You are acknowledging in that sentence that you find it funny to provoke people with your posts. That is the VERY DEFINITION of a Troll. You are leaving Smoking Guns all over the place, Geoff. It's almost like you WANT to get caught."

Huh?! The angst and handwringing is there whether provoked or not. Folks have gotten their panties in a bunch over controversial tweaks for years. I do not happen to agree with you that provocative posts are necessarily trolls. If that were true, wouldn't that also make you a troll?

Bryon also wrote,

"You radically overestimate the plausibility of your façade of nonchalance. And you underestimate people’s ability to see what's underneath it. You can pretend to laugh this off, but the genie is out of the bottle."

Again, Huh! I thought I've been completely transparent, why should I try to hide anything? Pretend to laugh what off? I'm not guilty of anything. Besides, I am laughing, but laughing seriously, nothing pretend about it.

Bryon also wrote,

"Moving on to your latest attempt at misdirection…
"Now, the real question is who is the troll here, you or me? You have certainly stalked me like one." (Geoff's statement)

I'VE stalked YOU? Hmm. Let me think about that. Why don't we take a look at the evidence? Here are our first five interactions on this thread..."

Well, I suspect you're probably making too much of the way the thread developed as to whether I was actually stalking you. As I recall I responded to some of your posts early on because you made some interesting/provocative statements that I felt obliged to respond to. Nothing so profound as stalking, though.

Bryon also wrote,

"As for your comments about my system and my hearing, you really are grasping at straws. It’s sad."

Well, what else could you say?

Nice stalking with you,

Geoff Kait, Machina Dynamica

Geoff -- Your energy must be flagging, because those were some feeble responses. They're not even interesting enough to analyze and discredit. Coming from me, that's saying something. What I will say is that, if you haven't read my last post, you should, with particular attention to the passages on Sophistry.

By your own admission, Geoff, trouble seems to follow you around. That would make most people wonder if the trouble was somehow coming from themselves. Not you.

You seem to think that the recurring opposition to you, your ideas, and your products is a form of persecution. I would invite you to consider that the force you've been fighting against for years isn't persecution. It's Reality.

Bryon

Bryon, you seem to have something against sophistry.

From Wikipedia/Sophistry:

In the second half of the 5th century BC, particularly at Athens, "sophist" came to denote a class of mostly itinerant intellectuals who taught courses in various subjects, speculated about the nature of language and culture and employed rhetoric to achieve their purposes, generally to persuade or convince others: "Sophists did, however, have one important thing in common: whatever else they did or did not claim to know, they characteristically had a great understanding of what words would entertain or impress or persuade an audience."

I think that the selling of ideas is just as important as the ideas sometimes, don't you? If you can't sell the idea the idea will be lost. So chalk one up for the sophists.

"[1] A few sophists claimed that they could find the answers to all questions. Most of these sophists are known today primarily through the writings of their opponents (specifically Plato and Aristotle), which makes it difficult to assemble an unbiased view of their practices and beliefs."

That I can certainly understand, that it's difficult to assemble an unbiased view of their practices and beliefs.

"Many of them taught their skills for a price."

I think that's what any reasonable person would do.

"Due to the importance of such skills in the litigious social life of Athens, practitioners often commanded very high fees. The sophists' practice of questioning the existence and roles of traditional deities and investigating into the nature of the heavens and the earth prompted a popular reaction against them."

Again, the popular reaction is quite understandable. Why not question the existence and roles of traditional deities and investigating into the nature of the heavens and the Earth, indeed? Chalk another one up for the sophists.

"The attacks of some of their followers against Socrates prompted a vigorous condemnation from his followers, including Plato and Xenophon, as there was a popular view of Socrates as a sophist.[2] Their attitude, coupled with the wealth garnered by many of the sophists, eventually led to popular resentment against sophist practitioners and the ideas and writings associated with sophism."

The resentment and vigorous attacking sound so familiar, I can't quite place where I've seen this sort of behavior before.....lol. You can't tell the Sophists from the Realists without a scorecard. Lol

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
We do Artificial Atoms Right