“MQA is a philosophy”..John Stuart

I don't consider my position to be closed minded. I don't own an SACD player or even a CD player, everything is digital files--10 Tb in the server with back-up, 4Tb of 16/44, 24/96 FLAC and MP3-320 files.

Can we improve upon the sound of 24/192 PCM?
 like @elizabeth,

Don't Know, Don't Care.

When I stopped watching TV and started listening to my Musical Medicine, I lost interest in the clown car and circus parade which is the daily "news" 

Now, tell me about a Jazz player I need to hear...

@cj1965 some excellent points there.

I own SACD, CD. But I now stream MQA through Tidal. Compare to 44k/16bit, MQA does sounds better. Since it come with Tidal HiFi. Why not listen to them? I recently acquired an Opportunity 205 enable me to do SACD/CD/4K/MQA. I am open to any formate that improve my listening experience.

I am constantly seeking out new music, much of which is older -- until I recently brought digital into my systems, there were many recordings I did not have access to. 
In my case, I suppose being uninformed is better than being misinformed, I gather the industry is promoting MQA and there is a fair amount of resistance to it from the audiophile community. Rather than stake out a position-- since I don't really have one-- I have a few questions:
1. Wasn't MQA through some sort of file compression, supposed to facilitate streaming of hi-rez files which could get bottlenecked in the passage from the originating server to the user's player?
2. Is DRM part of the code, or is it simply a fear that once you allow a standard like this to gain traction, that is a potential next step?