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 Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

OT: Tracking Current Developments in Coronavirus Science and Public Health

12346»

Comments

  • McDMcD

    @knewspeak said:
    Well at last some good news with Dexamethasone

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53061281

    It's good to change the stats on ventilator outcomes: 33% more survive the ventilator stage.
    We still need to insure we don't create more that need ventilators by reducing the R0.

    But maybe people can get back to certain types of work with new precautions.

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]

    @u0421793 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @u0421793 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @JohnnyGoodyear said:

    @u0421793 said:

    @u0421793 said:

    @richardyot

    I was reading that earlier, it’s very interesting.

    https://covid.idmod.org/data/Stochasticity_heterogeneity_transmission_dynamics_SARS-CoV-2.pdf

    I think this is one of the most important papers I’ve read so far and at this stage represents a turning-point in what we should all now be able to understand.

    ....hmmm. And if you were going to sum it up in a half a paragraph for those of us (self) who didn't pass their biology O Level, what would you say Mister Ian?

    80% of spreading is from 1 to 10% of infected people. This virus tends to spread from super-spreading events and disruption of possible events and quarantine of exposed individuals will radically disrupt the epidemic’s spread.

    Also, a significant point (among many in the paper) is that, well, I’ll quote from the paper:

    Many classical models in epidemiology either assume or result in a Poisson distribution of secondary infections per infected individual. Because Poisson distributions have the same mean and variance, they often fail to capture the relevant features of SSEs. As a result, SSEs are now commonly modeled using a negative binomial (NB) distribution of secondary infections per infected individual.

    This is significant because it means that most graphs drawn will be misleadingly monotonic, giving the impression that far worse than is happening, is happening. That’s not to say bad shit isn’t happening, but the charts will at most times have a tendency to give the impression that it’s going to be worse for longer periods than it actually turns out to be after a while.

    It is more nuanced than that. If you aren’t controlling super-spreader events, over time you have something that looks like homogenous spreading (I.e. you have huge numbers of people becoming infected and dying as in NYC, Spain, Italy, UK, France, etc). This doesn’t happen if you prevent super-spreading events and trace and isolate exposed individuals.

    It means that it is possible to change what sorts of social distancing practices are needed. But first you need to figure out where the choke points are.

    Absolutely. The blunt measures of stay at home, work from home, worked excellently here in this context because it prevented SSE scenarios. It also ghost-prevented a lot of scenarios which were never going to amount to any kind of spread at all. However, the distinction between the two was lost. In effect, the whole class got detention because of the one student who wouldn’t own up. If it were possible to discern the SSE scenarios from the non transmission scenarios, we’d be much further ahead. This of course takes testing, lots of testing. Or does it? It could also take recognition of the kind of situation that permit SSE, and those that simply inhibit or diminish the possibility of SSE. So, for example, comparatively little restrictions on outdoor meeting (still with social distancing, and no religious behaviour such as singing etc), whereas indoor poorly ventilated situations get all the restrictions we can lay on. It’s a slightly more granular step than a blanket quarantine for everyone under all circumstances (the bluntest and so far the only tool).

    It’ll be interesting to see what effect the lockdown relaxations will have on new infections. With all the beach invasions, demos, raves, and now shops opening - it’ll provide a good indication of how far we can push things at this stage.

    Here in Wales the shops and schools are still shut, and you can only travel up to five miles. But I kinda like that approach. Happy for England to take the lead on this one.

  • knewspeakknewspeak

    @MonzoPro said:

    @u0421793 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @u0421793 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @JohnnyGoodyear said:

    @u0421793 said:

    @u0421793 said:

    @richardyot

    I was reading that earlier, it’s very interesting.

    https://covid.idmod.org/data/Stochasticity_heterogeneity_transmission_dynamics_SARS-CoV-2.pdf

    I think this is one of the most important papers I’ve read so far and at this stage represents a turning-point in what we should all now be able to understand.

    ....hmmm. And if you were going to sum it up in a half a paragraph for those of us (self) who didn't pass their biology O Level, what would you say Mister Ian?

    80% of spreading is from 1 to 10% of infected people. This virus tends to spread from super-spreading events and disruption of possible events and quarantine of exposed individuals will radically disrupt the epidemic’s spread.

    Also, a significant point (among many in the paper) is that, well, I’ll quote from the paper:

    Many classical models in epidemiology either assume or result in a Poisson distribution of secondary infections per infected individual. Because Poisson distributions have the same mean and variance, they often fail to capture the relevant features of SSEs. As a result, SSEs are now commonly modeled using a negative binomial (NB) distribution of secondary infections per infected individual.

    This is significant because it means that most graphs drawn will be misleadingly monotonic, giving the impression that far worse than is happening, is happening. That’s not to say bad shit isn’t happening, but the charts will at most times have a tendency to give the impression that it’s going to be worse for longer periods than it actually turns out to be after a while.

    It is more nuanced than that. If you aren’t controlling super-spreader events, over time you have something that looks like homogenous spreading (I.e. you have huge numbers of people becoming infected and dying as in NYC, Spain, Italy, UK, France, etc). This doesn’t happen if you prevent super-spreading events and trace and isolate exposed individuals.

    It means that it is possible to change what sorts of social distancing practices are needed. But first you need to figure out where the choke points are.

    Absolutely. The blunt measures of stay at home, work from home, worked excellently here in this context because it prevented SSE scenarios. It also ghost-prevented a lot of scenarios which were never going to amount to any kind of spread at all. However, the distinction between the two was lost. In effect, the whole class got detention because of the one student who wouldn’t own up. If it were possible to discern the SSE scenarios from the non transmission scenarios, we’d be much further ahead. This of course takes testing, lots of testing. Or does it? It could also take recognition of the kind of situation that permit SSE, and those that simply inhibit or diminish the possibility of SSE. So, for example, comparatively little restrictions on outdoor meeting (still with social distancing, and no religious behaviour such as singing etc), whereas indoor poorly ventilated situations get all the restrictions we can lay on. It’s a slightly more granular step than a blanket quarantine for everyone under all circumstances (the bluntest and so far the only tool).

    It’ll be interesting to see what effect the lockdown relaxations will have on new infections. With all the beach invasions, demos, raves, and now shops opening - it’ll provide a good indication of how far we can push things at this stage.

    Here in Wales the shops and schools are still shut, and you can only travel up to five miles. But I kinda like that approach. Happy for England to take the lead on this one.

    Should be about 2 to 4 weeks before we get any information about the effects with regards to lessening restrictions, but I can see 1m being the norm soon, if so I can also see face coverings becoming the norm in public places too. Hopefully the test and trace system will be of better quality too, because it still seems quite shambolic at the moment. Certainly not world beating :#

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]

    @knewspeak said:

    @MonzoPro said:

    @u0421793 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @u0421793 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @JohnnyGoodyear said:

    @u0421793 said:

    @u0421793 said:

    @richardyot

    I was reading that earlier, it’s very interesting.

    https://covid.idmod.org/data/Stochasticity_heterogeneity_transmission_dynamics_SARS-CoV-2.pdf

    I think this is one of the most important papers I’ve read so far and at this stage represents a turning-point in what we should all now be able to understand.

    ....hmmm. And if you were going to sum it up in a half a paragraph for those of us (self) who didn't pass their biology O Level, what would you say Mister Ian?

    80% of spreading is from 1 to 10% of infected people. This virus tends to spread from super-spreading events and disruption of possible events and quarantine of exposed individuals will radically disrupt the epidemic’s spread.

    Also, a significant point (among many in the paper) is that, well, I’ll quote from the paper:

    Many classical models in epidemiology either assume or result in a Poisson distribution of secondary infections per infected individual. Because Poisson distributions have the same mean and variance, they often fail to capture the relevant features of SSEs. As a result, SSEs are now commonly modeled using a negative binomial (NB) distribution of secondary infections per infected individual.

    This is significant because it means that most graphs drawn will be misleadingly monotonic, giving the impression that far worse than is happening, is happening. That’s not to say bad shit isn’t happening, but the charts will at most times have a tendency to give the impression that it’s going to be worse for longer periods than it actually turns out to be after a while.

    It is more nuanced than that. If you aren’t controlling super-spreader events, over time you have something that looks like homogenous spreading (I.e. you have huge numbers of people becoming infected and dying as in NYC, Spain, Italy, UK, France, etc). This doesn’t happen if you prevent super-spreading events and trace and isolate exposed individuals.

    It means that it is possible to change what sorts of social distancing practices are needed. But first you need to figure out where the choke points are.

    Absolutely. The blunt measures of stay at home, work from home, worked excellently here in this context because it prevented SSE scenarios. It also ghost-prevented a lot of scenarios which were never going to amount to any kind of spread at all. However, the distinction between the two was lost. In effect, the whole class got detention because of the one student who wouldn’t own up. If it were possible to discern the SSE scenarios from the non transmission scenarios, we’d be much further ahead. This of course takes testing, lots of testing. Or does it? It could also take recognition of the kind of situation that permit SSE, and those that simply inhibit or diminish the possibility of SSE. So, for example, comparatively little restrictions on outdoor meeting (still with social distancing, and no religious behaviour such as singing etc), whereas indoor poorly ventilated situations get all the restrictions we can lay on. It’s a slightly more granular step than a blanket quarantine for everyone under all circumstances (the bluntest and so far the only tool).

    It’ll be interesting to see what effect the lockdown relaxations will have on new infections. With all the beach invasions, demos, raves, and now shops opening - it’ll provide a good indication of how far we can push things at this stage.

    Here in Wales the shops and schools are still shut, and you can only travel up to five miles. But I kinda like that approach. Happy for England to take the lead on this one.

    Should be about 2 to 4 weeks before we get any information about the effects with regards to lessening restrictions, but I can see 1m being the norm soon, if so I can also see face coverings becoming the norm in public places too. Hopefully the test and trace system will be of better quality too, because it still seems quite shambolic at the moment. Certainly not world beating :#

    What more is there to say about this government? What an embarrassment, and now we're infecting countries that had become virus free.

  • Paul16Paul16
    edited June 2020

    https://hectordrummond.com/2020/06/15/week-22-graphs-from-christopher-bowyer/

  • u0421793u0421793

  • robosardinerobosardine

    Do you know what what happened to this mans hat?

  • knewspeakknewspeak

    @robosardine said:
    Do you know what what happened to this mans hat?

    He lost it in a club in 1968

  • richardyotrichardyot

    Did it run away?

  • u0421793u0421793

  • richardyotrichardyot

  • espiegel123espiegel123

    @richardyot said:

    While some common colds are coronaviruses, most are rhinoviruses. So, while this hypothesis may be true, people should not jump to the conclusion that because they had a cold recently that they have some immunity to COVID and engage in risky behavior.

  • u0421793u0421793

    In my opinion this is one of the more important episodes of this:

  • richardyotrichardyot

    This is worth a read:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overlooked-variable-driving-pandemic/616548/

  • AudioGusAudioGus
    edited October 2020

    Ack! We were covid thread free for a bit. :( yah, yah I'll ignore it.

  • dendydendy
    edited October 2020

    possible explanation why there is so much asymptomatic people with covid

    https://www.firstpost.com/health/sars-cov-2-blocks-pain-receptors-results-in-asymptomatic-patients-may-pave-way-for-creation-of-new-pain-relieving-drug-8880901.html

  • u0421793u0421793

    @richardyot said:
    This is worth a read:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overlooked-variable-driving-pandemic/616548/

    I remember posting about exactly that, on the previous page of this thread:

    @u0421793 said:

    https://covid.idmod.org/data/Stochasticity_heterogeneity_transmission_dynamics_SARS-CoV-2.pdf

    I think this is one of the most important papers I’ve read so far and at this stage represents a turning-point in what we should all now be able to understand.

  • richardyotrichardyot

    @u0421793 said:

    @richardyot said:
    This is worth a read:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overlooked-variable-driving-pandemic/616548/

    I remember posting about exactly that, on the previous page of this thread:

    @u0421793 said:

    https://covid.idmod.org/data/Stochasticity_heterogeneity_transmission_dynamics_SARS-CoV-2.pdf

    I think this is one of the most important papers I’ve read so far and at this stage represents a turning-point in what we should all now be able to understand.

    Yes, but yours linked straight to the source whereas mine was the dumbed-down "for dummies" version that I could actually understand. 😝

Sign In or Register to comment.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2024