What do you think the future holds for digital music/audio ?

[castalla]

It's an unfortunate placement of the statement about streaming- that should have been under the line about WiFi-6.
I know enough about BT to know that SBC and AAC are not high resolution codecs, but there are probably a lot of people who don't. Of course, if they are listening to BT music, they probably don't really care about high res codecs. I don't know if anyone buys Wiim products because of their BT capability.

BT 5.3 is good for LE devices like the remote control that stays connected and doesn't require re-pairing every time you want to use it, as long as the battery still has a charge.

I have a mini which is dedicated for bt transmit to a pair of earclips - casual listening to radio & podcasts.

 

[GeeTee]

i think wiim is trying to appeal to the mainstream 'decerning' listener and not 'audiofools' .. the fact that some have adopted the wiim i think is mainly because its very good value package. Many non 'audiofools' will indeed want to stream content from their mobile devices using 'hi res' bluetooth protocols.
As Mr Darko has explained many times the 'format argument' is a bit misleading and a unit that is based on 'hi res' audio streaming including 'next gen wireless streaming' to me that means not just 'wifi' but also bluetooth.

 

[GeeTee]

It's an unfortunate placement of the statement about streaming- that should have been under the line about WiFi-6.
I know enough about BT to know that SBC and AAC are not high resolution codecs, but there are probably a lot of people who don't. Of course, if they are listening to BT music, they probably don't really care about high res codecs. I don't know if anyone buys Wiim products because of their BT capability.

BT 5.3 is good for LE devices like the remote control that stays connected and doesn't require re-pairing every time you want to use it, as long as the battery still has a charge.

'unfortunate' .. i don't think so

 

[Bigburban]

AI covers of everything that’s just different enough so they don’t have to pay royalties

 

[GeeTee]

AI covers of everything that’s just different enough so they don’t have to pay royalties

just a question .. so who do you think would 'own' or control the Ai versions ?, especially as 'so called Ai' is harvesting 'our' data.

 

[MCG555]

just a question .. so who do you think would 'own' or control the Ai versions ?, especially as 'so called Ai' is harvesting 'our' data.

This is exactly the point and not clearly defined. There are „guidelines“ along the EU Act, the regulatory bible of the EU, but things are still defined vaguely and outside the EU is the wild-west. There will be lots of „cort-walks“, this is for sure…
As long it is not even a given that it is marked where AI is part of, it is going to be a long way. Unless a major „terrifying“ incident - a wake up call of some sort - takes place…

 

[RazzFazz]

Can not imagine speakers which are able to play that wake-up call loud enough.

 

[GeeTee]

This is exactly the point and not clearly defined. There are „guidelines“ along the EU Act, the regulatory bible of the EU, but things are still defined vaguely and outside the EU is the wild-west. There will be lots of „cort-walks“, this is for sure…
As long it is not even a given that it is marked where AI is part of, it is going to be a long way. Unless a major „terrifying“ incident - a wake up call of some sort - takes place…

at the moment i think these 'free' Ai platforms make you sign an agreement that they have control of anything produced on 'their' platform and people are happy to do that whilst they 'play' with the software, but the whole purpose is to 'harvest' as much of our data as possible without any cost to the 'Ai' company.
Using your phone requires you agree to a EULA loads of pages of legal stuff that nobody reads or understands but basically takes away any 'legal' rights you 'think' you might have to your own data and information.

 

[MCG555]

Can not imagine speakers which are able to play that wake-up call loud enough.

Obviously this can happen anywhere in respect to AI.

 

[Bigburban]

just a question .. so who do you think would 'own' or control the Ai versions ?, especially as 'so called Ai' is harvesting 'our' data.

The ai owner or if they are clever perhaps a separate ai. I don’t know very scary times as they use existing works to build the ai. Should an ai have to quote what they used?

 

[MCG555]

at the moment i think these 'free' Ai platforms make you sign an agreement that they have control of anything produced on 'their' platform and people are happy to do that whilst they 'play' with the software, but the whole purpose is to 'harvest' as much of our data as possible without any cost to the 'Ai' company.
Using your phone requires you agree to a EULA loads of pages of legal stuff that nobody reads or understands but basically takes away any 'legal' rights you 'think' you might have to your own data and information.

The same IT firms do already for years! Google, Apple, Meta, MS…

 

[MCG555]

The ai owner or if they are clever perhaps a separate ai. I don’t know very scary times as they use existing works to build the ai. Should an ai have to quote what they used?

Of course it should! But it is probably impossible, as they consume so many sources that it‘ll be impossible to quote what it ised for what…
One of the many legal aspects that are ahead of us…

 

[castalla]

The ai owner or if they are clever perhaps a separate ai. I don’t know very scary times as they use existing works to build the ai. Should an ai have to quote what they used?

Ultimately, AI will own everything in its own right - humans will become irrelevant. This is a paradigm shift of unknown outcomes for humanity.