As I mentioned in other thread
1. What proportion of people with straight pipes take them on a track or engage in competitive endeavour
2. What proportion take advanced classes and have the skillset to take advantage of increase performance
3. What proportion put their bike on a dyno before and after to have a foggiest clue if straight pipe does anything
4. What proportion of them tunes the rest of their bike to take advantage of new pipe
5. For how many loud cruisers is performance in any way even remotely an actual consideration? You don't buy a cruiser for speed.
Finally, you can get high flow pipes which are quiet. But that's not really the point is it ;)
I actually respect people who say "I got it because it's loud and cool and gives me a rush" because they're at least honest a*oles, more than 98% of people who claim its for performance but don't have a clue - they're fooling themselves as much as others :-/
I realize that audible noise is very readily recognized as harmful. It’s been studied and proven to be harmful, as have other forms of pollution. I think EMI affects less people directly but it’s still noise.
You're putting the argument that overclocking a CPU, due to increased impact, is analogous to putting a straight pipe on a Harley.
I would imagine that difference is sufficient number of orders of magnitude different to be a fundamentally ignorable comparison, and obviously so.
A loud pipe has an immediate and continuous demonstrable negative impact on hundreds and thousands of people per trip.
You would need to show me some reaaally good studies to show that increased (not just baseline) EMI of overclocking is even readily detectable through the faradey cage of computer case and then three houses down the road, and distinguishable in the noise of street transformers, Fridges, laser printers, etc.
If it affects 1% of the population instead of 50% then it’s far more likely to be dismissed.
Also, given other similar noise, adding a little more doesn’t seem like an issue.
None of this is to say that two stroke motors and loud vehicles don’t get on my nerves. Rather, we all have more in common than we think we do.
I used to be considered “sensitive” because I hated all of the latent noise. I feel like I would be considered “reasonable” based on this thread which is now backed by studies showing noise and environmental pollution as having long-term, negative side-effects.
On a technical note, Faraday cages are much better at protecting receiving electronics from outside signals than the other way around. Signals have an easier time leaving a Faraday cage than entering.
I wouldn't call it insight, I'd call it prioritization; but perhaps more to the point, you've provided no evidence whatsoever that overclocking a CPU will affect any proportion of population whatsoever (not 50%, not 1%, not 0.01%), at any distance, in any circumstance. And remember, we're not even saying "whether a computer emits EMI". The claim put forward is that overclocking a PC, say from 3ghz to 3.3ghz, has detectable enough negative impact on people other than the owner / in other households, to be part of this discussion.
Certainly, I currently do not believe so and am dismissing your argument for that reason. You are welcome and indeed encouraged to persuade me otherwise :)