Agree to Disagree on how we Disagree

The record will show that @ColtMrFire welcomed differing opinion by @ChaChaRealSmooth but chose not to indulge in a point by point response at the time. And that's completely fine. This alone is not sufficient to establish the truth or falsity of respective claims. Readers can make their own determinations based on the totality of discourse, and the day will pass.

The manner in which we discuss or scrutinize need not require that we handcuff people to their opinions, compelling, coercing, or insulting them if they choose merely to speak their thoughts. Is it reasonable to ask contributors to elaborate or qualify their claims? Of course. I will also grant that more elaborate and inquisitive discussion is in line with SBAF culture. Yet I still fail to see how this justifies your extremely unwarranted, distasteful, toxic, and despicable comments.

 

Let’s have ChatGPT settle this debate and move on!

 

When asked "Contrast the characteristic sounds of Donald North Audio and Eddie Current headphone amplifiers", https://toolbaz.com/writer/ai-writer (free, no sign-up required) is positively verbose:

"When it comes to high-quality audio equipment, there are few names that stand out quite like Donald North and Eddie Current. Both companies have gained a reputation for producing exceptional headphone amplifiers, but what sets them apart? In this article, we will contrast the characteristic sounds of Donald North Audio and Eddie Current headphone amplifiers to help you understand the nuances and differences between these two renowned brands.

Donald North Audio, founded by Donald North in 1990, is a company known for its hand-built, high-end audio equipment. Their headphone amplifiers are no exception, with each unit meticulously crafted and designed to deliver a premium listening experience. On the other hand, Eddie Current, founded by the electrical engineer and audiophile, Craig Uthus, is a relatively newer brand that has quickly gained a loyal following in the audiophile community for their innovative designs and exceptional sound quality.

One of the most significant differences between the sound characteristics of Donald North Audio and Eddie Current headphone amplifiers lies in their overall sound signature. Donald North Audio amplifiers are known for their warm, rich, and full-bodied sound. The company's philosophy is centered around the belief that music should be reproduced as close to the original recording as possible, and this is evident in the sound of their amplifiers. With a strong emphasis on tonal accuracy and naturalness, Donald North amplifiers are perfect for those who prefer a more laid-back and natural sound.

On the other hand, Eddie Current amplifiers are renowned for their dynamic and transparent sound. The company's design philosophy revolves around creating amplifiers that allow the listener to feel as if they are in the recording studio, experiencing the music in its purest form. Their amplifiers are known for their exceptional clarity, detail, and soundstage, making them a popular choice among audiophiles who prefer a more analytical and precise sound.

Another significant difference between the two brands is the type of amplifiers they offer. Donald North Audio specializes in single-ended triode (SET) amplifiers, which use a single power tube to amplify the audio signal. These amplifiers are known for their warm sound and are often chosen by audiophiles for their ability to reproduce the subtle nuances of music. They are also relatively low-powered, making them a popular choice for use with high-sensitivity headphones.

In contrast, Eddie Current is known for its balanced amplifiers, which use two power tubes per channel to amplify the audio signal. These amplifiers are known for their higher power output and greater control over the headphones, making them suitable for a wider range of headphone types. They also offer a more neutral sound signature, making them a popular choice for those looking for a more transparent and accurate sound.

When it comes to build quality, both Donald North Audio and Eddie Current excel in their respective ways. Donald North Audio amplifiers are hand-built and use high-quality components, ensuring durability and longevity. On the other hand, Eddie Current amplifiers are known for their innovative designs and use of high-quality materials, resulting in a robust and reliable product.

In conclusion, while both Donald North Audio and Eddie Current produce exceptional headphone amplifiers, there are distinct differences in their sound characteristics. Donald North Audio offers a warm and natural sound, with a focus on tonal accuracy, while Eddie Current amplifiers provide a dynamic and transparent sound with a more analytical approach. Whether you prefer a laid-back, natural sound or a more precise and detailed sound, both brands have something to offer for every type of audiophile. Ultimately, the choice between Donald North Audio and Eddie Current headphone amplifiers will come down to personal preference and the type of sound you enjoy."

 

That settles it.

 

You: write a 500 word essay on the futility of arguing on the internet

Copilot: I can try to write a short essay on that topic. Here is what I came up with:

The Futility of Arguing on the Internet

The internet is a powerful tool for communication, information, and entertainment. However, it also has a dark side: it can be a breeding ground for conflict, hostility, and polarization. Many people engage in online arguments that are unproductive, disrespectful, and harmful to themselves and others. In this essay, I will explore some of the reasons why arguing on the internet is futile, and suggest some ways to avoid or improve online discussions.

One reason why arguing on the internet is futile is that it is often based on misunderstanding. Online communication lacks the cues and context that are present in face-to-face interactions, such as tone of voice, facial expressions, and body language. This makes it easy for people to misinterpret each other’s intentions, emotions, and arguments. Moreover, online platforms tend to favor brevity and speed over clarity and nuance, which can lead to oversimplification and distortion of complex issues. As a result, online arguments often devolve into straw man fallacies, ad hominem attacks, and confirmation bias.

Another reason why arguing on the internet is futile is that it is often motivated by ego and emotion rather than reason and evidence. Many people use online arguments as a way to vent their frustration, assert their superiority, or seek validation from others. They are not interested in listening to opposing views, learning new perspectives, or finding common ground. They are more concerned with winning the argument, defending their identity, or satisfying their curiosity. They are also influenced by the anonymity, distance, and lack of accountability that the internet provides, which can make them more aggressive, impulsive, and insensitive than they would be in person.

A third reason why arguing on the internet is futile is that it is often ineffective and counterproductive. Online arguments rarely change anyone’s mind, and may even strengthen their existing beliefs. This is because people tend to resist information that contradicts their worldview, and seek information that confirms it. They also tend to attribute their own opinions to facts and logic, and attribute others’ opinions to bias and emotion. They also tend to ignore or dismiss evidence that challenges their position, and exaggerate or distort evidence that supports it. Furthermore, online arguments may damage relationships, reputation, and well-being. They may cause stress, anger, anxiety, and depression. They may also alienate, offend, or hurt the people involved, as well as bystanders and observers.

Given these reasons, it is clear that arguing on the internet is futile and should be avoided or improved. Some possible ways to do this are:

• Choose your battles wisely. Not every issue or comment is worth arguing about. Some topics are too sensitive, controversial, or personal to be discussed online. Some people are too stubborn, hostile, or irrational to be reasoned with. Before engaging in an online argument, ask yourself: Is this important? Is this constructive? Is this respectful? If the answer is no, then it is better to ignore, block, or report the source of conflict, and move on.
• Seek to understand, not to persuade. Instead of trying to convince others of your point of view, try to understand theirs. Listen to what they have to say, and ask questions to clarify their assumptions, arguments, and evidence. Acknowledge their concerns, values, and emotions. Try to find areas of agreement, or at least disagreement. Respect their right to have a different opinion, and do not judge, insult, or mock them. Remember that they are human beings, not enemies or targets.
• Provide evidence, not opinions. Instead of stating your opinions as facts, provide evidence to support them. Use reliable sources, such as peer-reviewed journals, reputable news outlets, or official statistics. Cite your sources, and provide links or references for further reading. Avoid using anecdotal, hearsay, or biased evidence. Be honest about the limitations, uncertainties, and controversies of your evidence. Be open to new or contradictory evidence, and be willing to revise your opinions if necessary.
• Be civil, not rude. Instead of using harsh, vulgar, or abusive language, use polite, respectful, and courteous language. Use proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Avoid using caps lock, emojis, or memes. Do not use personal attacks, name-calling, or threats. Do not use logical fallacies, such as slippery slope, false dilemma, or appeal to authority. Do not use emotional manipulation, such as guilt-tripping, shaming, or fear-mongering. Do not use sarcasm, irony, or humor, unless they are clearly marked and appropriate.
• Know when to stop. Instead of prolonging or escalating an online argument, know when to end it. If the argument is going nowhere, or is becoming too heated, or is affecting your mood or health, then it is time to stop. You can agree to disagree, or agree to continue the discussion later, or agree to end the discussion altogether. You can also apologize, thank, or compliment the other person, or wish them well. Do not leave the argument hanging, or end it on a bad note.

In conclusion, arguing on the internet is futile, because it is often based on misunderstanding, ego, and emotion, and because it is often ineffective and counterproductive. However, there are ways to avoid or improve online arguments, such as choosing your battles wisely, seeking to understand, providing evidence, being civil, and knowing when to stop. By following these guidelines, we can make the internet a more positive, productive, and peaceful place for everyone.

 

Internet argument is futile - prepare to be assimilated

 

Probably time to lock this one