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.
Off-Topic discussion about Bitcoin and cryptocurrency.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
except in this case you're sending fiat and recipient gets fiat
))) in second... strike as extension of ligtning network just mades all realtime conversion and transfering ... bye bye obsolete banks...
https://beta.strike.me/
So it's like Paypal?
@dendy thnx for the list！
yeah just better ... using decentralized network for payment clearing, it's faster and no transaction fees ... i can do things which paypal cna just dream off (like realtime micropayments)
somyeah, lole paypal jusy way better ...
they are also going to release physical card
What happens in the case of a dispute?
you're welcome
None.
Which is for me big advantage when compared to paypal. Ability to raise dispute and cancel transaction makes lot of troubles to merchants. People should learn think twice before they send some money somewhere and not to be lazy and rely on some big brother who will fix shit they caused by own lazyness to take a serious care about own finance.
At the, if you send some money from your bank to aomebody else, amd then you decide rever it, will bank do it for you ? Highly in doubt until serius breaking of law didn't happened. Paypal is (bad) exception. People should learn take responsibility for own decision, it's benefitial for them in long term.
As i said, for small payments advantage is no fees. Paypal fees are horrible when you want to pay small payments like few dollars.
A paradise for scammers then!
Richard what to say, i preffer better technology and take full responsibility for my decisions, you're more for big brother world watching every your step. Two different world views.
Changing topic.
I know i should like this one but i don't. I wish this market mature more to be resistent to tweets of some random excentric billionaire..
I think my view is more nuanced than you give me credit for
The problem with irreversible transactions is that we don't live in a world where everyone is honest, and no mistakes are ever made. Technology and personal responsibility are not enough to prevent the existence of criminals.
If the crypto world's response to crime is just a shrug of the shoulders and blame the victim, then maybe the system needs a rethink?
That’s not how these things work, Richard. Nothing is “lost” unless you sell. People who hold for the long term are going to be fine. Bitcoin (and cryptos in general) have had MANY bubbles. In fact, on an average day, you can watch a bubble build and pop in nearly any of the cryptos. But day traders (in cryptos and in the stock market) tend to lose much more often than the longs.
LOL. Why do you even make these ridiculous statements?
If this was the Venezuelan Bolivar that statement would be fine, no? So if Bitcoin is a currency then its volatility should count against it IMO.
The trouble is the narrative changes depending on the time of day. Sometimes it's a currency, sometimes a store of value, sometimes an investment. It can't be all of those things at the same time.
Here is main collision of our worlds. In see no reason why payment processor should take a care about anything else the than safe, fast and cheap (ideally free of any fees like Strike is and Paypal is not) delivering of payment from person A to person B.
Payment processor should be payment conditions and sender/recipient agnostic and should not apply any own rules into transaction itself.
In case somebody gives cash to fraudster, he will not expect that some mysterious entity will reverse this transaction. He simply goes at Police and reports fraud.
To put it together:
if mistake happens and both persons are honest, with Strike, person B can return money to A and no single cent is lost. Not the case with PayPal or for example bank transfer, where fees are paid twice
if law was broken, there are official authorities who should solve this problem. Not payment processor.
Btw. even worse it is with banks. It happened to me that my bank prevented me to send money into (totally legal and regulated) crypto exchange with vague explanation like it is their internal rule to protect customers. I was like WTF ?? My money and i'm not allowed to do whatever i want with them ?
Another reason why my final goal is to completely move away from classic banking (i know it is a bit different topic than payment processor responsibilities, it's just example what i don't like in world which you are preffering
Of course it can! It is. What is your basis for saying that?
I have great respect for the majority of your posts, and learn a lot from them, but every once in awhile you say things that I can only describe as ... goofy? You really leave me scratching my head sometimes. 🤷🏼♂️
I think crypto, and BTC in particular, is basically the opposite of Paypal. With Paypal you wouldn't want to keep your own money in there for any longer than you have to, you certainly wouldn't just keep money there for no reason, accumulating or hanging around waiting. What you want is money quickly going in, going through, going out. You also want it to be worth the same all the way through the transit.
There’s a few real downsides to crypto as I see it at the moment. None of these need be permanent downsides, but they’re impediments at this moment, to people adopting it more fluidly:
It is quite difficult to actually buy it. I tried buying some small amounts a few years ago and got away with it the first few times, then the bank kept on locking my account requiring me to phone up each time to get it working again, but the transactions didn't go through. Each time I’d try again the same thing. In the end I stopped trying. It is apparently not possible to buy crypto, in my experience.
It is very difficult to understand two-factor auth. Well, it is easy to understand an app like google authenticator, but what isn't made clear to most civilians out there is that the app actually works on a public/private key (of course) and when you change your phone and wipe the old phone, there goes the key pair, and you then can’t log in to any accounts, including all the crypto account on line. The solution is to use Authy, not Google Authenticator, but that isn't apparent until you've lost everything once.
It is very difficult to understand hardware wallets, including sweeping paper wallets, using Electrum to do so, and all that stuff. It is easy to buy pre-compromised wallets from eBay, which have all the keys filled in for you by some crook with a shrink wrap machine. I mean, it‘s easy to understand a hardware wallet, but there’s a surprising amount of weak points beforehand along the way which require higher than I would consider normal knowledge to get it working safely. Most non-experts could easily lose everything prior to getting it onto their hardware wallet, or even lose everything once in it (by losing their keys, or publicising their keys, or using keys given to them when bought from dodgy dealers over eBay). Once this happens, there’s no come-back.
Overall, it’s a good idea, but I don’t think the general public are ready for it. Or to put it another way, I don’t think this is ready for the general public.
This is pretty close to my feeling as well if crypto acts like most other publicly traded commodities. (Which I'm not fully convinced of, but seems to be largely the case, albeit with higher than average volatility).
I'm guessing things will continue to confuse and scare everyone for awhile before settling out in the low 40's for a long, dull, consolidation period. I feel like the fun is over for awhile but that there will be a less dramatic return to rising prices after that. I'm expecting more like 3 months than 3 weeks, but we'll see.
yes, this is problem of old world, which is trying to prevent loosing power and control over people money.. thanks god banks are slowly loosing this power ...
Yeah because majority is not used to think for themselves and to take full responsibility for own decisions (especially financial ones).
Most people like to live in world where they're still guarded and protected by all kind of authorities, even for high price - price of loosing freedom. They doesn't need to think too much - if they make mistake, somebody will fix it.
This is in my opinion main reason why people are more and more dumb in general. It's not because of social networks (like few thinks). It's because we live in system designed to trade freedom for need of think and act responsibly.
Crypto learns people to get full controll and reaposibility into own hands. Probably main reason why so much people is still afraid of crypto.
Something can't be both an effective efficient currency and volatile speculative token of ever-changing value.
Yes, it's not easy putting a clock on the internet's refractory period. I was thinking it'd have to be long enough for people to get really bored, and to stop checking every day. A watched pot and all that. I really don't think the internet has such a great attention span. Ooh shiny.
It could be a while, mind you.
Thanks for that post @dendy. As someone closely connected to a family from El Salvador, and having heard their stories of surviving the revolution and the current environment, and who do send money back there regularly, this was especially encouraging.
I can kind of understand why people who fear and loathe bitcoin overlook the promise of the transactional aspect of blockchain technology, but to me it's crystal clear that there is potential for great enabling and even stabilizing innovation over time. Sadly there is opportunity for scam and fraud as well, but that has always been the case with any transformative changes throughout history.
One of the main requirements of a currency is price stability, in fact that's the criticism that Bitcoiners aim at fiat (it's too inflationary). But Bitcoin is way more volatile than any fiat currency.
And as @espiegel123 says, either it's a currency with price stability, or it's an investment which rises in price over time. It can't be both, because they are contradictory states.
It's a dessert topping and a floorwax!
No argument there. I agree that's a fundamental problem with thinking of cryptos as currency.
You lost me there. Those are only contradictory states within a given time window. An investment can have tons of volatility over short time periods while increasing overall in value over longer timeframes, making it a good investment. Also, if it shows signs as a good hedge against inflation or falling markets (as Gold and other commodities often are), it can be useful as temporary storage for wealth, while simultaneously acting as an investment.
@wim said:
@wim: An effective currency needs value stability. If bitcoin (or ANY currency) wants to be an effective currency it's value needs to be stable. Securities -- even legitimate ones -- are not effective currencies. I think you are confusing the question of whether something is a reasonable investment with whether something os effective as a currency.
The more volatile something's value is, the less effective it is as currency. There isn't anything controversial about this statement.
Gee professor, thanks for educating me about what I already said I agreed with. I guess "No argument there." wasn't clear enough?
And I think you're confusing what I was responding to. @richardyot said it couldn't be simultaneously a currency, a store of value, and an investment. I called on that statement silly. I did not say a thing about whether it was good as a currency or not.
I am scratching my head. You literally said I lost you in response to my statement I that something can't have speculative ever-changing value and be an effective currency.
That is a completely separate question from whether something might be a good investment.
Now I understand. I wasn't responding to you at all, but to @richardyot.
I still disagree with both of you that "Either it's a currency with price stability, or it's an investment which rises in price over time. It can't be both, because they are contradictory states." Neither of you seems to be addressing that point. You both focus on only half the statement, that it's not a good currency, in response.
That's fine (really
) . If all I'm going to get is re-hashing of the same statements, then continuing is a waste of time. I was hoping for some enlightenment that would challenge the point I was making, not the part I agree with.
“Since we decided a few weeks ago to adopt the leaf as legal tender, we have, of course, all become immensely rich.”
@wim: > @wim said:
I genuinely don't understand what you are saying hasn't been dealt with when you say only half of the statement has been dealt with.
Are you saying that something might be both an effective currency and have significant short and medium term swings of value?
Nothing I said addresses whether bitcoin is or isnt a good long-term investment...that is irrelevant to the question of whether anything can be both an effective currency and an investment with significant value swings.