Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.
What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.
Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.
Download on the App StoreLoopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.
Comments
@AudioGus said:
I hope for those things, too. And for everyone else, as well. These are very complex times.
Here’s a story about the origin of the Oprah QAnon Conspiracy theory. An ex AB forum member posted a video which supported the conspiracy. It’s bizarre and concerning.
Common sense indeed.
You seem to be comparing Flu death data captured over a year to Covid-19 data in various capture intervals but nothing like a year and only 3 months into the history of the epidemic globally.
Can you see that as a flawed comparison that does not serve your argument well?
Beyond dispute.
I hope you'll agree we have herd immunities and vaccines for the pro batch of epidemic virus to
assist and yet.
2000 deaths in uk last year from flu
2015-2016 saw nearly 30,000 how can you even say this outbreak is as bad with 104 deaths to date .......
OK. But we have the potential to see Millions this year. See... an order of magnitude different with no vaccine and no herd immunities.
There's no data to support this and that means you are proposing based upon no data to assist you.
Thousands like before or another year that takes out Millions in the same interval? Hard to forecast but
we are trending into new dark waters. The data is clear if you'll check and use apples to apples and see the
differences in the potential tools to bend the curves.
Touching the germ is one vector for infection. Proximity to a lot of infected people is another: so
social distancing is requested as a tool to bend the curves.
It would take a couple years for the data to come in to support your views. The data on hand does little to
help you look like someone that should be using data in a well reasoned argument. I'm sure this will frustrate you and seem unfair. But the numbers don't lie. I'm telling you some uncomfortable truths that I'm firmly expect you will reject... 3rd times a charm unless it's not in which case. It's the Boy Crying Wolf.
When the data supports your contention that this year is no different than last year of next we'll apologize.
Until then there's a lot of work to do to see lives. This is a year history will never forget. Last year... meh.
1929
1939
2001 (only 3,000 US lives but the response)
2008
2016
Just the numbers trigger so many images.
Indefinite lockdown will not work, in fact it will just move the problem closer to wintertime, the only solution is to reset the virus exponent growth, then to return to work, then keep repeating this over, lockdown, work, over and over. This will limit the flow of people who become more severely infected by the virus, it will keep the economies ticking over and would also maximise our efforts to find solutions to shortages of beds, equipment and medications for the virus.
This will still be bad, yes, but what’s the alternative.
Just wanted to say... This is the best article I've read on the Coronavirus to date, and I would recommend forwarding to any relatives or children who are either nervous and/or struggling to learn the facts amongst all the bullshit, hysteria and clickbait out there:
https://www.timjamesscience.com/blog/so-i-guess-im-writing-about-coronavirus
Tim is a science teacher based in the UK and author of two fantastic books (Elemental and Fundamental)
A bit of Australian gallows humour: https://chaser.com.au/national/nation-thinks-fondly-back-to-simpler-time-when-country-was-just-engulfed-in-fire/
The people who will have the most difficulty surviving are those who are the most individual, those who don’t trust, those who won’t comply to going along with what’s best, those who criticise and blame from the side, those who are still unhealthily fixated on the notion of the self.
This I predict, if prolonged, will see a demolishing of the 20th century smaller-family-unit values and a comfort in moving to a more consensus or community based way of living. Some nations in the world are already adequately versed in this and are going to survive. Other nations around the world are far away from this and won’t survive as well, individuality will be the killer.
Hopefully, but worry not we won’t become the Borg, it will take many generations as well, we won’t just wake up one morning to find this, it’s evolution not revolution.
I’m curious how this ideal will fit in with any current political thinking. Would consensus or community based living care for intersectional or the current in vogue London bubble thinking? or do you mean the populous will not just be told what to think, but to have societal pressures to conform actions of living to the current thinking of the state?
One thing is for sure, neither the far left or far right thinking in general terms fits into any form of community based way of living, when both disagree with the majority on most issues. Doesn’t surprise me that out and out left or right wing policies no longer work - imagine the lefties surprise when their utopian image of a border less world is swept away by similar thinking to those ‘state above individual’ nations. Imagine the righties surprise as their god of purchase is taken away in the name of their beloved fiscal morality of the nation.
Yep, changes are coming, but absolutely no one has the answers to what society will eventually become in the west. History has shown some commonalities in the end days of some civilisations. Similarities between the west and the fall of past civilisations are quite easy to spot now imo. Interesting times ahead. Will people be able to understand that following the usual simplistic ideals of ‘left, right, socialist, communist, globalist, liberalism, nationalism, populism etc etc etc, just wont work well. Can we even bring people together yet, or are more serious conflicts inevitable before the new societal norms become apparent?
I suppose being in the later years of my life, I will never truly see the result. So good luck with it all you younger folks
Just to add, yes, I’ve asked a couple of questions, but doubt I will remain to enter into conversation, as these political threads always end up the same - was just bored this morning and writing this just took my mind off more personal family thoughts at this time. Bye folks have fun AND KEEP SAFE.
When faced with asymmetric risk you have to apply the precautionary principle, otherwise you risk catastrophe.
It's simple: when faced with uncertainty, you have to weigh up the potential outcomes, if one outcome is catastrophic and the other is merely inconvenient or expensive, you do everything you can to avoid catastrophe.
To risk manage that, you’d have to assess the likelihood or frequency of the catastrophic risk (we’ve already assessed that it is catastrophic, which is the highest bad it could be). The other, the inconvenient / expensive one, you’d have to assess the frequency and also the severity of that too. There’s a bit of calculation to normalise the figures, but you’d end up being able to place the risk on a grid, likelihood vs severity, and the further from the origin the risks fall (they could be combinations of more severe but less likely, or less severe but more likely) that allows you to assess what the monitoring frequency should be. Low risks require lowest frequency of monitoring. Medium risks, wherever they’re scattered, a more mediumy frequency. The highest, you have to keep on top of changes while comparing to the ongoing plan, in order to effect changes if required. Etc.
I see you've been advising no. 10 👌
Agree. All else is (t)wittering.
In other news, @MonzoPro, I was lying in bed last night thinking of you (as I do so often) and my black entrepreneurial heart suddenly remembered your possession of your mother-in-law's thousands of books and then, of course, people’s need for ‘special’ paper.....Perhaps there's more of a legacy there than you first realized....
@Max23 and @knewspeak : we can't say at this point what the best plan for 4 of six months from now will be. Not far up-thread, are links to opinion pieces by two well respected epidemiologists and the bottom line is we don't have the data we need to really know what the best plan will be or to make accurate projections for the various possible courses of action.
Also what the right course will be heavily influenced by what treatments become available and whether adequate supplies of equipment are available and whether we bring sufficient hospital capacity we bring online.
We need to be aggressively testing lots of people, get a test to see who has antibodies, etc
We need knowledge.
If the worst-case estimates of viral spread , the cyclic quarantine/shutdown thing would be a disaster. But with knowledge, we will know more.
As they point out, we have no knowledge at all of how many people might have been exposed and remained a symptomatic and developed immunity. If the numbers were large then what the right thing to do is radically different from what to do if the number is very small.
We need information. Epidemiologists that disagree about policy are mostly united on this topic.
For how long would depend on several factors, production of required medical equipment, tests kits, eventually a vaccine, but would also be adjusted for a possible seasonal decrease in infection rate, this virus isn’t going to disappear, it will sweep around the world in both northern and southern hemispheres back to China. Yes it would be gambling with life, but we do that by the very act of living, we just manage the risk.
True we need information, but the world cannot remain under lockdown indefinitely, the economic situation is in dire straits already, the consequences of this massive mental trauma inflicted on the worlds population would make death from the virus seem like a blessing and I don’t say this lightly. We have information based upon the flu epidemic of 1918, of course the methods of transportation have changed so today transportation would speed up the spread of the epidemic, so reducing mass transportation of the population would be a key element in any plan.
As I posted above, one can't suggest what will be effective without a lot more data than we have. We still have close to no idea (since the U.S. government didn't take this seriously in mid-January and early February when there should have been massive mobilization to getting test resources going) about how widespread the outbreak. The next several weeks will develop a lot.
Anyone that talks about seasonal variation of the virus is speculating -- epidemiologists keep on trying to tell people : 'we have no idea if this virus will show seasonal fluctuations. And most add: 'even if there are, it might mean there will be a sudden explosion in the fall' (which is what happened in the 1918 (so-called Spanish but probably American) Flu.
We need to wait for better information to make any sorts of predictions. In the meantime, we need to be save.
We also need to push our governments to get invest in getting the effing data. Politicians mostly don't understand science. While we need to be getting things up-to-speed to deal with the current infections, it is just as important for the government to be aggressively funding scientists private and public to develop the tests we need.
In my opinion, you are sort of presenting a false dichotomy. No one is suggesting indefinite lockdown. So, using that as the launching point for alternatives seems to be alarmist.
What we can "afford" to do depends tons on what the virus will do to us. Waiting to know more doesn't mean being in lockdown indefinitely. In a few weeks, we will know a lot more than we know now. Just wait before you decide what we should be doing months from now.
Wait for the science before telling us that what we need to do is a plan that might kill tens or hundreds of millions around the world if the rosiest projections aren't true. We'll know a lot based on what happens in Britain (where measures have been slow to be put into effect). We'll know a lot based on what happens in communities like mine where the not-quite-lockdown has only been in effect for a few days. There is a 3-weekish data lag as the people just getting exposed now won't be sick enough to show up in the data till then.
@Fruitbat1919 wrote: " imagine the lefties surprise when their utopian image of a border less world is swept away by similar thinking to those ‘state above individual’ nations. Imagine the righties surprise as their god of purchase is taken away in the name of their beloved fiscal morality of the nation."
Almost no one on the left believes in a borderless world.
Do you actually believe that they do?
I am not being provocative. I genuinely wonder if you believe that. This is the sort of thing that Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and Tucker Carlson say -- but it doesn't represent anything like the predominant view on "the left" (which is a far less unified group than the right in the U.S.)
+1
https://www.plutobooks.com/9780745337326/reclaiming-the-state/
Yes the death and infection rate in Italy will continue to rise for about 2 to 4 weeks after lockdown. Yes any method should be tested on a small scale first. When I say indefinite, a better term would be uncertain, it’s this uncertainty that’s ravaging the world economy.
It seems to me that the way that you are putting things proposes a false dichotomy. Uncertainty is hard. I get that. But I think it is wrong for fear of uncertainty to dictate proposing what might be a disastrous course of action.
Much better, in my opinion to say, extended lockdowns are potentially disastrous, we need to get the data and consider alternatives.
Suggesting what the alternative would be at this point seems unwise. We just don't know enough. We just don't know.
And we don't know the consequences of adopting a plan like you have suggested.
Wait and see.
Looks like the 'vent' thread has overtaken 'positive advice', in terms of posts, despite being started 11 days later. Soon it will surpass it in views as well.
Question, does quarantine and social distancing work.
Answer, yes, but the real question is how long does it take to reduce the possible infection rate to level that won’t impact on the social economic system too detrimentally. It’s going to be a balanced approach that is needed, yes of course data works, we are in uncharted territory, but too much inaction could be more catastrophic.