if you start looking for it, or rather, start understanding that it's there, you will soon see an alarming number of people doing things solely because it makes them feel like a badass. it is 100% of the entire reason to live, in some people.
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 :)
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 don't dispute that some loud exhausts are the result of exactly what you describe, but also many are motorheads who have less restrictive exhaust systems for performance reasons or just to enjoy their vehicle (unfortunately sometimes at the expense of other peoples hearing)
Don't get me wrong, I've got both a car and a bicycle, not 100% for road cycling but count it as if it was (it's a gravel bike.)
For me cycling beats running 100-0. I can easily pedal 100+ km but I can't run 100 meters, too tiresome. Furthermore I see 100 km of the world vs a small area around my home.
Ultimately it's all subjective. Each of us likes something different and it's OK.
Less of this, please.
It is fine to speculate, but "must" is a strong assumption. Your analogy is also based on flawed data. Yes, when riding on streets there is a chance of getting killed, but getting regular exercise reduces your chance of dying for other reasons. There are many studies that demonstrate this. Here is one:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2237214-why-the-health-...
https://www.bmj.com/content/357/bmj.j1456
Tell me what you think the benefit:risk ratio is of doing jumping jacks at a gun range.
I have worked from home for a long time, but 15+ years ago I commuted by bike about 12 miles each way three times a week when the weather was good. Dominance had nothing to do with my choice to bike there.
I could ride there by bike in 45 minutes, or I could drive there in 25 minutes (lots of stop and go). Same on the return trip. My mental calculus was I got 90 minutes of exercise for an incremental time expense of 40 minutes. That I was also not polluting was a bonus.
The nearest accident I had ever was one day when I was on connector road that had recently been widened and hadn't yet picked up a lot of use. Despite there being no traffic at that moment, I've always 100% obeyed traffic laws, so I stood over my bike waiting for the red light to change. About 20 seconds into it a pickup truck came screeching to a stop just about five feet behind me - he literally locked the tires and left skid marks. Guess what his reaction was: to shout and scream to the point of spitting that I was lucky to be alive and that I wan an asshole for biking on the road. I still don't know if he saw me all along and it was a calculated dominance display, or if he was daydreaming and really did nearly cream me.
I regularly get small children approach me on motorcycle and want to pull the throttle, then get scared, then want to do it again, there's something primal about that, it's (mostly) not about other people.
In a different lifetime I had a few bikes including a TL1000R that was just plain intoxicating to ride with aftermarket pipes.
There is no way in hell I could do that to my neighbors at this stage of my life, however, and I often cringe at the actions of my younger self. Nowadays, I refuse to even use gas powered garden tools for noise (and environmental) reasons.
I understand many people put the aftermarket pipes "for themselves", at least consciously, or at least claim so - but I feel at best, it's a degree of self-centerdness to not realize impact on others. I see it on Subaru forums too - fellow WRX/STi owners moaning about their neighbour's complaints and cops stopping them and people giving them dirty looks etc etc - obliviously blind that it was themselves who brought in on by installing ridiculous loud exhausts. A factory exhaust on my bikes gave me plenty of thrill, and while I did put a high-flow cat on my Scoobie, I searched for an exhaust with nice sound but quieter actual dBs than stock. Few things are B&W - but there is a loudness at which point it really really is about others.
(note that when you say "past 10k RPM", it sounds like you likely have a sportsbike, and as you say a stock one; those can be loud at high revs, but generally speaking the loudest bikes in my experience tend to be modified cruisers and wanna-be Harleys.
Also note that rider may not always get straight opinions from friends, depending who wants to fight what battle when - e.g. last summer, a rider was revving his throttle at a friends' cottage and boasting about his aftermarket pipes; given we were both guests, I politely nodded and meandered away... but everything for the rest of the evening confirmed the image I formed the moment I heard his pipes :-/)
I'm not a fan of aftermarket exhausts, stock one is plenty loud for me and doesn't disturb anyone while I'm riding normaly. I especially dislike the grandpa chopper bikes that sound like tanks, like you said my sports bike gets insane at >9k RPM - but I don't ride insane in populated areas.
Things are usually on a spectrum and not binary; I agree that part of the thrill of ride is the sensation - vibration, noise of wind and engine, gravity forces, etc - and certainly manufacturers of both performance bikes and cars frequently tune the engine and particularly exhaust for desired image and sound.
I still maintain though that there is a wrong side/portion of that spectrum, and that e.g. a straight pipe on a Harley does far more negative impact on others than positive impact (real or perceived performance, rush, etc) on the rider.
I almost buy the “loud pipes save lives” angle but if you need to deafen others to protect yourself maybe motorcycling just isn’t an institution worth keeping around. That said, I don’t think it needs to come to that.