frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Show HN: Azazel – Lightweight eBPF-based malware analysis sandbox using Docker

https://github.com/beelzebub-labs/azazel
1•mariocandela•2m ago•0 comments

We urgently need a federal law forbidding AI from impersonating humans

https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/we-urgently-need-a-federal-law-forbidding
1•headalgorithm•3m ago•0 comments

Show HN: File Brain – Local file search with OCR and semantic search

https://github.com/Hamza5/file-brain
1•Hamza5•5m ago•0 comments

Show HN: CLI Rust tool gitorg helps manage GitHub orgs

https://crates.io/crates/gitorg
1•DavidCanHelp•12m ago•0 comments

Gitdatamodel Documentation

https://git-scm.com/docs/gitdatamodel
1•todsacerdoti•13m ago•0 comments

Men lose their Y chromosome as they age – how it may matter

https://theconversation.com/men-lose-their-y-chromosome-as-they-age-scientists-thought-it-didnt-m...
4•bikenaga•15m ago•1 comments

Biases in the Blind Spot: Detecting What LLMs Fail to Mention

https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.10117
1•mpweiher•17m ago•0 comments

Free SERP Content Analyzer

https://kitful.ai/write-tools/serp-content-analyzer
1•eashish93•17m ago•1 comments

Why I'm Not Worried About My AI Dependency

https://boagworld.com/emails/ai-dependency/
1•cdrnsf•20m ago•0 comments

AI Agent Lands PRs in Major OSS Projects, Targets Maintainers via Cold Outreach

https://socket.dev/blog/ai-agent-lands-prs-in-major-oss-projects-targets-maintainers-via-cold-out...
1•cdrnsf•21m ago•0 comments

Internet Increasingly Becoming Unarchivable

https://www.niemanlab.org/2026/01/news-publishers-limit-internet-archive-access-due-to-ai-scrapin...
26•ninjagoo•23m ago•8 comments

Intent to Experiment: Ship Rust XML Parser to 1% stable for non XSLT scenarios

https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/D7BE4QPw0S4
1•justin-reeves•25m ago•0 comments

Google Search Isn't a Common Carrier–Richards vs. Google

https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2026/02/google-search-isnt-a-common-carrier-richards-v-goog...
2•hn_acker•27m ago•0 comments

Rendering attractors at 200 megapixels on A100s

https://axisophy.com/collections/mersenne
2•scylx•27m ago•1 comments

First Ariane 6 with four boosters lifts off

https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Transportation/Ariane/More_power_first_Ariane_6_with_f...
3•belter•28m ago•0 comments

What If AI Isn't the Goal? – Living in a Post-AI Society

https://zias.be/blog/living-in-a-post-ai-society
1•ziasvannes•31m ago•2 comments

Putting economic theory to the test: Cutting local taxes cuts household income

https://phys.org/news/2026-02-economic-theory-local-taxes-household.html
2•bikenaga•32m ago•1 comments

How AI slop is causing a crisis in computer science

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-03967-9
4•gnabgib•36m ago•0 comments

Show HN: AuraSpend " Voice-first expense tracker using Gemini for NLU

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.intrepid.auraspend&hl=en_US
1•subhanzg•39m ago•0 comments

Every App Needs Auth / Ory Helps / This Template Fixes It

https://github.com/Samuelk0nrad/docker-ory
1•samuel_kx0•40m ago•0 comments

Show HN: DryCast – Never run outside to save your laundry from rain again

https://drycast.app/
1•AwkwardPanda•40m ago•0 comments

Manage, freeze and restore GPU processes quickly

https://github.com/shayonj/gpusched
2•shayonj•40m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Tilth v0.3 – 17% cheaper AI code navigation (279 runs, 3 Claude models)

1•jahala•42m ago•0 comments

Tech leaders pour $50M into super PAC to elect AI-friendly candidates

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2026-02-13/tech-titans-pour-50-million-into-super-pac-to-e...
3•geox•43m ago•0 comments

How Head Works in Git

https://jvns.ca/blog/2024/03/08/how-head-works-in-git/
3•b-man•43m ago•0 comments

I Visited the Future of AI Engineering – and Returned with a Warning

https://igor718185.substack.com/p/i-visited-the-future-of-ai-engineering
2•iggori•45m ago•3 comments

Dr. Oz pushes AI avatars as a fix for rural health care

https://www.npr.org/2026/02/14/nx-s1-5704189/dr-oz-ai-avatars-replace-rural-health-workers
13•toomuchtodo•46m ago•8 comments

TikTok

https://www.tiktok.com/explore
1•Hackersing•47m ago•0 comments

Bloom-Filter Art: Encode words in a heart; Send it to someone special

https://improbable-heart.com/
1•nait•47m ago•1 comments

Show HN: Clawsec - Open-source plugin for OpenClaw that blocks dangerous actions

https://www.clawsec.bot
1•subho007•51m ago•1 comments
Open in hackernews

Audiophiles Can't Distinguish Audio Sent Through Copper, Banana or Mud

https://www.tomshardware.com/speakers/in-a-blind-test-audiophiles-couldnt-tell-the-difference-between-audio-signals-sent-through-copper-wire-a-banana-or-wet-mud-the-mud-should-sound-perfectly-awful-but-it-doesnt-notes-the-experiment-creator
53•RandomGerm4n•2h ago

Comments

ungreased0675•1h ago
While I believe a significant portion of audiophile gear is unscientific nonsense, in this case it’s not clear how adding different materials into the circuit would add distortion or change the audio in any way.
nkrisc•1h ago
I think that’s the point, that according to audiophile “lore” higher quality materials enhance the sound, thus mud should sound bad under that assumption, but they (apparently) can’t tell the difference.
kelipso•1h ago
It depends on the experiment done… You need every intermediate point between the wires to be low distortion too. As in, audiophiles cannot distinguish between distortion and distortion+distortion is not really an interesting result.

You need source, digital to analog conversion, pre-amp, amp, speakers to have low distortion too, and you need the room to be appropriately treated too. I didn’t look at whether they did all that but I seriously doubt they did.

wtallis•30m ago
Did you really mean to say that audiophiles can distinguish between no distortion and some distortion, but cannot distinguish between more distortion and less distortion?
phil21•25m ago
I'm not sure it's a really great experiment though?

Outside of the hyper-crazies, no one is really stating that a 6-12 inches of conductor is going to make a giant difference in audio quality. Yes, I'm aware of the super-premium-gold-plated-platinum-encrusted 12" audio patch cords available. But almost no one really makes serious arguments those do anything.

I don't think running a 50ft banana is going to have similar performance to a 50ft properly-sized copper conductor though.

Where you get into the "debate" is the difference between buying a spool of 12ga stranded copper wiring from Home Depot, or buying the same thing only with de-oxygenated or whatever silliness some audiophile brand is selling for 10x the cost.

There are levels to things. I imagine copper speaker wire to be essentially fungible. Just size it to your length of run and max power needs. Calculate the total resistance for your wire run and done/done. All professional level sound installations for venues and what-have-you do this already.

This sort of test just seems to prove nothing in either direction other than provide bait for folks to point and laugh (or defend) in comment sections. Consider me baited, I suppose!

anonym00se1•1h ago
If nothing else it shows those high end $1,000+ cables they buy are nothing but placebo effect.
turnsout•1h ago
This may be an unpopular opinion, but if people believe they can hear a difference in their $1000 cables, and they enjoy purchasing and testing them, I'm inclined to let them enjoy themselves. I have a basic hi-fi setup with rational cables, and enjoy the cost savings, but to each their own.

I feel the same way about wine. At a certain point, it's not really about objective improvements, it's about vibes and lore.

BurningFrog•55m ago
I also don't need to storm these people's homes and tear up their expensive audio setups. Life is hard, and if you find something to enjoy, I'll let you have it.

That said, think there is value in putting out facts that let people make informed decisions and not spend tons of money on things that don't actually work.

turnsout•51m ago
Absolutely. I'm glad the linked article exists! Hopefully it can prevent someone who really can't afford it from splurging on expensive cables.
rsynnott•50m ago
The vendors of such snake oil often make specific, incorrect claims. Fraud is still fraud, even if the victim enjoys it.
ungreased0675•44m ago
Yes, but there is a negative societal cost to allowing quacks, frauds, and hucksters to exploit the naive.
polotics•56m ago
it also puts a market value on said placebo effect...
analog31•37m ago
My hypothesis is that the $1000 cables help sell the $300 cables. I’ve seen comments to the effect of: “I’m not fooled by those $1000 cables, so I saved my money and got the $300 cables instead.”

In other words, they got fooled.

What’s happened in electronics is that there’s a cutoff, above which the audio quality doesn’t get any better, but that cutoff is much lower than anybody can believe. So the psychological cutoff is higher than the physical one, and a role of marketing is to raise that cutoff even further.

wat10000•1h ago
You make it sound like these two ideas are somehow opposed.
helsinkiandrew•1h ago
I think the (unstated) point of the article is that if banana/mud can’t be differentiated from copper wire then the audiophile/fool level cable is also nonsense, for example:

https://www.audiotherapyuk.com/product/oephi-reference-inter...

bayindirh•59m ago
I have always said and will always say the same thing:

Up to a point, there's an easily distinguishable sound and detail difference between cheaper and more expensive gear, given that you don't cheat (i.e. put cheaper gear in expensive enclosure), but that difference indistinguishable well before these "true audiophile" level stuff.

For example: I run a pair of Heco Celan GT302s. They are not something exotic. 100W per channel, adequately detailed speakers with great soundstage. The manual gives you a table: Wattage -> Recommended wire gauge. I got a high quality, 100% copper cable (from Acoustic Research, so nothing fancy) at the recommended gauge, and connected them. You can't convince me to get a better cable. It's pointless.

Do I enjoy the sound I get, hell yeah. Do I need to listen to my system instead of listening to the music, hell no. I feed the amplifier with a good turntable (which is 40 years old, shocker!) and a good CD player (which is pretty entry level for what's out there), and that's it.

That set will nail any person who likes to listen to the music to its chair. That's the aim of a good system. Same for personal DAPs and DACs. If you enjoy what you have, who cares!

k2enemy•52m ago
> Up to a point, there's an easily distinguishable sound and detail difference between cheaper and more expensive gear, given that you don't cheat (i.e. put cheaper gear in expensive enclosure), but that difference indistinguishable well before these "true audiophile" level stuff.

I don't understand how that is cheating. Isn't it a better controlled experiment if the equipment looks the same?

bayindirh•45m ago
No, I mean "cheating at the market". Some companies sell literal snake oil for 10x the price, then they make the market unreliable for everyone, and nobody believes a company which really uses more expensive components can get better sound.

If you want a good controlled experiment, create a literal black box, without any distinguishing features, or lose the box completely and give them an output (speakers or headphones) only.

Another bad thing is, sound is so subjective and experience changes between brands a lot. For example: headphone "burn in" is considered an hallucination, it mostly is. However I have bought a set of RHA MA750i earphones which changed from "This is not what it says on the box" to "am I sure that these are the RHAs I hated" in a month, because it's sound character changed so immensely. No other headphone I had in my life did that.

So, everything is so muddy, subjective and unreproducible. When a room's organization or floor carpet density can change its frequency response, you can't control anything. Moreover, every human's ear profile is different, so you can't be sure that their ear is hearing that the same (e.g. one of my ears have a notch in its hearing curve around mid frequencies. we don't know why it happened).

If anybody wants to learn some of the tricks which can be done to get better sound, please watch Mend it Mark's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RJbpFSFziI

While the £25.000 price tag on that preamp is literal snake-oil level and the builder has the audacity to erase the model numbers of the ICs (and OpAmps) he uses, some of the methods he uses are legit and Mark explains them exceptionally well.

k2enemy•19m ago
Got it, thanks for the explanation!
bayindirh•16m ago
Always! Don't mention it. :)
troupo•51m ago
> That set will nail any person who likes to listen to the music to its chair. That's the aim of a good system.

We all know that the aim of a good system is to blow your clothes off ;) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNZ-nEGHDKk

chmod775•39m ago
> Listening Room

I wonder what would happen if you went there and absolutely smashed the place up, then force them to sue you for damages. Would they even do that, given that this would likely force them to disclose what the replacement value of that $4500 cable actually is?

rsynnott•51m ago
Magic cables are a _huge_ thing in the audiophile nonsense world.
kachapopopow•1h ago
I don't know... this test is unscientific... clearly mud and banana can have an unintended side effect that makes audio sound better and needs to be investigated immediately.

on a more serious note.. doesn't seem like the "good" audio was good? there is a huge difference between noise free audio and garbage integrated audio / speakers with hizz imbalance and peaking... if the "good" audio is bad then there obviously won't be a difference between any of them.

which makes me think... banana and mud are noise filters... hmm...

hackingonempty•1h ago
> As we can see in the image above, there are only six correct answers out of 43 guesses

I would guess that this experiment is under powered and no conclusions can be drawn from it.

porcoda•1h ago
This seems like a business opportunity. “Ethically sourced organic mud speaker wires for a clean, organic, pure sound.” /s
RedShift1•1h ago
Forged under blue moon light for perfect electron alignment inside the wires.
dylan604•40m ago
Don't forget to use the full moon to recharge the quartz crystals in that analog gear
consp•27m ago
Ah, that's why Paix Dieu is such good beer. The electrons are aligned.
RedShift1•1h ago
I remember Technics used to advertise with amplifiers that used bamboo somewhere in the capacitors? Always wondered if there was actual bamboo in there somewhere and what the electrical effects were...
gorgoiler•58m ago
The classic fable round these parts is Quad (and/or Cambridge Audio?) demo-ing their latest and greatest at a 1970s Heathrow Expo using mains cables as speaker wire.

It’s the least important part of any system and indeed my Quad amp and CA R50s are wired with twisted, braided, brown lamp cable as a nice aesthetic homage.

toast0•28m ago
Why wouldn't mains cable make good speaker wire? Probably much larger diameter than needed for audio and therefore more expensive if fairly priced, but if you've got to wire speakers and that's what you've got, should be fine.

About the only things you could do wrong would be using wire that's too small to carry the load, is frayed/broken/severely corroded, or is coiled in a way that inductance becomes a real issue. Running parallel and near electrical or signal wires is problematic, and largely different run lengths can make a difference.

spaceport•52m ago
I cant pack wet mud into a tube and run it in the attic and it stay wet. Same with bananas unfortunatly as that would give banana plugs a lot more meaning.
crims0n•45m ago
Probably going to make some people mad... but I went down the Audiophile rabbit hole last year before ultimately coming to the conclusion that it just isn't worth it. I understand the appeal, especially someone who values a nice piece of hardware. There is so much to choose from... DACs, DAPs, amps, fancy looking balanced cables in quality braiding, headphones with solid wood accents, IEMs that look straight outa sci-fi.

A few things I learned that may save someone time:

(1) Sound quality is in the medium, not the build. Speakers almost always sound better than a pair of cans (headphones), headphones almost always sound better than IEMs, IEMs almost always sound better than over the ears.

(2) The difference in sound quality between something that is a few hundred dollars, and something that is a few thousand is so small that "diminishing returns" as a phrase doesn't do it justice.

(3) The stack of DACs, EQs, preamps, and neatly managed RCA/XLR cables looks cool on your desk - but they take up a lot of space and cost a lot of money for something that sounds maybe 10% better than a pair of AirPods Max (provided you remember to turn on lossless in apple music, which I forgot to!)

wccrawford•30m ago
#2 - Can be. Or it might actually make a difference.

We had 2 "living room" setups for a while, upstairs and down. We eventually realized how dumb that was, and condensed to 1.

Doing that, we stopped using some really expensive speakers and started using some that were 1/5 the price because we couldn't tell the difference.

Then, one day, I brought those expensive speakers down and set them up. Wow. There was a definite difference after all. I'm not an audiophile and can't tell you what that difference was, just that both of us could immediately tell the expensive speakers were better, and we were not going back to the cheaper ones. Nothing else in the setup changed.

Also, I eventually upgraded the receiver to something that could better drive those speakers. An upgrade from $600 to about $900. And there was a definite difference there, too. The older box should have been enough, but it just wasn't.

Do I recommend that someone on a budget spend $4000 instead of $1500? Nope. It's not enough difference. But for stuff we already had, or for someone that really cares, it's definitely better.

alexchantavy•28m ago
Dumb question but what's the difference between headphones and over the ears? I looked it up but I'm still confused
crims0n•24m ago
Not a dumb question... I phrased it badly. I was referring to over the ears as something like Koss Porta Pros or similar.
onli•15m ago
Then I think I disagree with the specifics of that statement, or am I reading this wrong? The porta pros have to sound better than the average IEM, or think of the KSC 75 for another quite nice option in that space. Especially for the price. And I'm not even sure that speakers sound better than headphones most of the time.

+1 though for the thought that the medium makes the biggest part of the sound quality.

cbg0•23m ago
For 3) I would argue all that stuff is where you should spend the least of your money. The biggest improvement comes from the speakers or headphones themselves.
londons_explore•39m ago
The perfect speaker system is indistinguishable from having a live band in the room with you (when blindfolded).

Can today's audio systems do that? How much money do I have to spend to get there?

nkrumm•33m ago
I've been in demo rooms that priced in about $100-300k (~2015 dollars), and those sound remarkably close. Not all sound/bands can be reproduced, and it really depends on the recording. Could you do it for less, also? Probably. But it was pretty fun to hear the highest end.
ozim•25m ago
I am quite sure live band will definitely sound worse than most sound systems.

My experience is I hanged out with one band in a garage where they were practicing and I attended couple live music shows in pubs.

Main upside of those live music shows is that they are not "perfect" like playing a record and each one of the gigs will be off here or there, tempo somewhere will be off or a tune will be off - or you are just having enough beers you don't care pick your way :)

input_sh•22m ago
The sound system isn't the limiting factor there, the recording itself is. If the input wasn't recorded with that in mind, no amount of money wasted on the outputting system can fix that.

Usually you only get some specially-crafted demo files that are capable of fooling you.

amluto•26m ago
One could modify this experiment to have very obvious effects. For example:

- Run the amplifier output through a banana or mud. Even if this somehow works and you can hear the sound, you’ll probably smell it as you cook and/or electrolyze your conductor :) (The banana likely works because the load impedance is very high in the experiment they did. The load impedance with an actual speaker is typically in the ballpark of 8 ohms. I admit I haven’t stuck a pair of multimeter probes in a banana lately, let alone done a proper I-V or AC impedance measurement.)

- Use really long cables. It’s not especially rare to be able to hear and even understand AM radio that gets accidentally picked up on a long cable and converted to baseband by some accidental nonlinearity in the amplifier.

- Use the actual outdoor mud on a rainy day as your conductor. I bet you can get some very loud mains hum like that.

Even audiophiles can probably identify these effects!

cheschire•25m ago
I've recently been wondering if audiophilia is so polarizing a topic for reasons related to concept that some folks hear Laurel instead of Yanny.
AngryData•21m ago
The biggest problem with audio hardware businesses is 95% of what they say about their products is marketing bullshit. It doesn't take a lot of money to get really good gear, if you put in the research, but its very easy to get ripped off if you don't, spending multiple times more than you need to get a worse result.

Just look at the boxes for half this stuff, quoting peak power for speakers instead of RMS, which is the equivalent of saying "This LED hits 50 watts for .00001 seconds during startup! Wow so amazing! (but don't look at the average 1 watt of output past that)"

The speakers, the cables, the AMPs, even digital source cables nearly all have 90% marketing budgets which drive up the price of many products without increasing quality at all.

lich_king•5m ago
It's fashionable to dunk on audiophiles because many of their beliefs are silly and there are businesses that prey on them selling them "oxygen-free" cables and stuff like that. And some of their beliefs are auto-suggestion. But here's another way to look at it: some audio setups will sound better than others in your living room, because of a million variables you can't really control for. But maybe one manufacturer compensates for speaker characteristics in a different way and it really works better with this type of a speaker in this particular room. Maybe it's the deficiencies of the amplifier that work well with a particular speaker enclosure. Maybe they prevent some sort of resonance from a nearby bookshelf. Or a ceiling lamp.

So yeah, audiophiles are in over their heads and tend to attribute near-mystical properties to individual electronic components, but the only tool they can rely on is trial and error. So if you can afford it, and if some of it sounds better to you... have fun?

kraussvonespy•2m ago
I don’t question that audiophiles hear different things on expensive equipment, but I think it’s all placebo. “If I spend a stupid amount of money on this, my brain will gin up the sound to satisfy my expectations.”