[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 02:32:08PM +0000, bas wrote: > > > >However, if you were to claim that the image was sharper, that it > >displayed colours better, and so on, then though it seems likely to me > >that this is true, I'd still say you'd need to test it. > > > >(If you can test something without relying on human senses and > >judgement, then I suspect you don't need to worry about double-blind > >trials. As soon as you bring humans into the equation, though, you need > >to be careful.) > surely if a human has no interest if some thing is cheaper, better > quality, sharper or any other improvement its not a biased > assessment. trouble is with what you are saying is that all things > replaced arent possibly any better than the "old" one. cant really > understand your logic. No, that isn't what I'm saying. I'm not saying it can't be better. I'm saying that you can't necessarily tell whether it really is better, or that telling the difference isn't necessarily as simple as you might think. -- Benjamin M. AâLee || mail: bma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx web: http://bma.subvert.org.uk/ || gpg: 0x166891C7
Attachment:
pgp8X2VwyiXu5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html