No; he clearly acknowledges that FLAC is lossless, so the audio is bit for bit identical to the original waveform.
The claim is that FLAC decoding digital hardware performs processing which causes noise ("computer hash") if it is not isolated from the audio paths. He gives an example of some hardware where isolation eliminates the problem, supposedly.
I'm skeptical of the claim. Not in the sense whatsoever that I suspect it being false (I don't), but in the sense that the same noisy hardware would produce some "computer hash" even if it were processing uncompressed waveform data. I don't know anything about FLAC, but cursory searches suggest that decoding it is very lightweight. Whether processing raw PCM samples, or decoding FLAC, the hardware would mostly be idle in between producing audio frames (unless it is an embedded processor that is very low in terms of computational power?)
Anyway, he's not simply an crackpot claiming that FLAC quality is inherently different from WAV.
Given a sufficiently crappy hardware setup that the CPU activity is injecting noise into the audio path, then in principle the FLAC decoding could be more inconsistent in that regard, because the processing is much more data-dependent with FLAC. But even with WAV your CPU activity is not going to be completely regular, so this still stretching credibility as something you should actually care about instead of just fixing the underlying problem, which should only be a problem on utterly bargain basement non-audiophile/fool setups anyway.
"The Great Firewall (GFW; simplified Chinese: 防火长城; traditional Chinese: 防火長城; pinyin: Fánghuǒ Chángchéng) is the combination of legislative actions and technologies enforced by the People's Republic of China to regulate the Internet domestically" [1].
The beta installer was completely unsuccessful in setting the TPM-backed disk encryption on both a ThinkPad X1 Carbon (Intel 258V) and a ThinkPad P14s (AMD 300-something). Hopefully they ironed that part out in the release, but it seems still early for this feature (at least for my comfort level).
The constructed policy is quite strict and expects certain UEFI things to be set up correctly. For example both this https://github.com/canonical/secboot/blob/7434bac27844362ff8... and https://github.com/canonical/secboot/blob/7434bac27844362ff8... are enabled in the policy. The policy choices and various early checks, even as trivial as confirming that the TCG log content is correct after booting into installation system, are enough to rule out a lot of potentially problematic EFI deployments. Effectively making it more strict helps avoid a lot of funny issues where the firmware is clearly buggy and things would fall apart sooner or later.
Strict is probably good. My company started to enable bitlocker this year on win11, and a non trivial amount of initial encryptions seem to be failing, destroying the user data and requiring a full reformat.
that's how it works. point a free-to-air dish at the right place in the sky, demodulate the DVB-S2 signal, and it's often IP traffic moving through mpeg transport streams.
File system is the wrong word.
What they should have used is file format.
It is not wrong that you can have a file (bits and bytes encoded in the shape described by a file format) on some remote point. If you have an index of those files where you can programmatically choose between multiple files that could even pass as a crude "file system". But I doubt this is what they meant to refer to.
It is likelier they wrongly assumed a file system is the system in which a file is organized, where in fact they meant file format.
I think they were going for a reasonable analogy, especially when a stream is saved to disk to have its contents extracted: each channel contained in the stream can then be thought of as a separate file, not unlike files in a zipped directory.
That's probably better, but also that's not much different on a conceptual level from a "filesystem". Both contain multiple files, and describe where in the overall image those files are. The difference is exactly in the interleaving - a multiplexed media container is somewhat constrained to a packet-based scenario, where individual packets of the constituent files are separated so that video, audio, and ancillary data all reach the decoder at roughly the same time. A pure filesystem is not constrained as such and can put the files anywhere within the container.
A filesystem stored in a monolithic file is not so constrained. I work with Harmonix games as a modder, and they use a bespoke format called "ARK", which is a two-part format. There exists one or more "ARK parts", which in implementation are virtually concatenated, and then the HDR lists a binary offset from the beginning of the first ARK part to tell the games where the individual files are. This could also be called a "container" conceptually. But none of such files are interleaved in any way except for the audio files, which use encrypted multichannel Ogg Vorbis streams plus a bespoke header to aid in seeking.
Plus, the context was explaining it to laypeople, where the specific jargon is less important than imparting knowledge and understanding.
The difference between a file system and a container format is mostly a matter of perspective - indeed OSX literally uses "disk images" as their container format. Is .zip a filesystem? You probably wouldn't want to use it natively on a disk, but for a lot of purposes it's the same kind of thing.
We build bespoke servers installed at client properties to support our service. Since August, our unit cost has jumped from $3,500 to $5,500. It’s a bleak situation and will directly impact many businesses.
I think their bias shows primarily in which stories and topics they choose to cover. But it seems like they do a good job finding and reporting facts in the stories they do choose to cover.
It’s a good example of why people should seek out a broad mix of media sources. Pretty much every outlet is going to have a bias embodied in what they choose to cover.
I hesitate, because I don't disagree - They do find and report some very interesting information. They're not just "repeating" stuff others have found.
However, their interpretation of facts is the bias I'm referring to, and in almost all cases I've seen, their reporting has a very visible prejudice.
Correction: Only some articles are. I thought everything was. If that was the case then you wouldn't really know what you're subscribing to. That was my initial objection, but the site seems to follow the lwn.net model. Mb.
Prism's llama.cpp fork only has the kernels for CUDA, CPU and Vulkan. No SYCL at all :(
reply