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.

Off-Topic discussion about Bitcoin and cryptocurrency.

1212224262749

Comments

  • @dendy said:
    But have to admit this discussion had another positive impact to me. I realised something what i wasn't aware before. Bitcoin is best working example of direct democracy which ever existed on this planet ... never had this point of view until i didn't read what you wrote in last few posts, thanks for eyeopening moment :-)

    Politics is democratic in name only. Capitalism is more democratic.

  • Let's imagine a future where Bitcoin becomes adopted as the world's Gold Standard, everything is going swimmingly well, except the hard limit of 21 million Bitcoins is causing deflation. After years of debate the consensus emerges that the limit should be increased so that there is a little more inflation in the system. 90% of the population agrees and this is reflected in the people controlling the nodes.

    However a minority of 10% are Satoshi originalists and they refuse to support the measure. They successfully block it year after year. Is this system truly democratic?

  • @Gavinski said:
    Reading Cryptoassets
    https://www.amazon.com/Cryptoassets-Innovative-Investors-Bitcoin-Beyond/dp/1260026671

    Seems very good so far. Can anyone recommend a good / cheap iOS app with nice candlestick charts?

    TradingView is the best:
    https://apps.apple.com/us/app/tradingview-stocks-forex/id1205990992

  • @richardyot said:
    Let's imagine a future where Bitcoin becomes adopted as the world's Gold Standard, everything is going swimmingly well, except the hard limit of 21 million Bitcoins is causing deflation. After years of debate the consensus emerges that the limit should be increased so that there is a little more inflation in the system. 90% of the population agrees and this is reflected in the people controlling the nodes.

    However a minority of 10% are Satoshi originalists and they refuse to support the measure. They successfully block it year after year. Is this system truly democratic?

    Bitcoin doesn’t need to be formally adopted as a replacement for gold. All it has to do is become a widely held store of value in competition with other assets, which it is already doing. It would never be a good idea to tie all of one’s wealth up in one thing no matter what it is.

  • @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:
    Let's imagine a future where Bitcoin becomes adopted as the world's Gold Standard, everything is going swimmingly well, except the hard limit of 21 million Bitcoins is causing deflation. After years of debate the consensus emerges that the limit should be increased so that there is a little more inflation in the system. 90% of the population agrees and this is reflected in the people controlling the nodes.

    However a minority of 10% are Satoshi originalists and they refuse to support the measure. They successfully block it year after year. Is this system truly democratic?

    Bitcoin doesn’t need to be formally adopted as a replacement for gold. All it has to do is become a widely held store of value in competition with other assets, which it is already doing. It would never be a good idea to tie all of one’s wealth up in one thing no matter what it is.

    You have mastered the art of answering a completely different argument to the one I'm actually making. It's impressive.

  • @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot said:
    You could say that about any democratic system, including the ones we live in. Rand Paul could run for president on a platform of ending the fed, if he got enough votes it could happen. Bernie Sanders could run on a platform of monetising the deficit, and if he got enough votes it could happen. Neither would need the 95% supermajority required for making changes to Bitcoin so I’m not buying the argument that Bitcoin is somehow more democratic than the Fed

    🤣😂 i don't believe you really believe whar you wrote here ... I'm starting to be suspicious you're just trolling me all the time 😂🤣

    No one could possibly believe that Sanders comment.

    You don’t grasp the concept of a hypothetical example? Maybe I’m not the one who is trolling :p

    Sanders is a sci-fi scenario, not a hypothetical. :p

  • @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot said:
    You could say that about any democratic system, including the ones we live in. Rand Paul could run for president on a platform of ending the fed, if he got enough votes it could happen. Bernie Sanders could run on a platform of monetising the deficit, and if he got enough votes it could happen. Neither would need the 95% supermajority required for making changes to Bitcoin so I’m not buying the argument that Bitcoin is somehow more democratic than the Fed

    🤣😂 i don't believe you really believe whar you wrote here ... I'm starting to be suspicious you're just trolling me all the time 😂🤣

    No one could possibly believe that Sanders comment.

    You don’t grasp the concept of a hypothetical example? Maybe I’m not the one who is trolling :p

    Sanders is a sci-fi scenario, not a hypothetical. :p

    But Rand Paul isn't? Now you're pulling my leg :p

  • @Darwin said:

    @Gavinski said:
    Reading Cryptoassets
    https://www.amazon.com/Cryptoassets-Innovative-Investors-Bitcoin-Beyond/dp/1260026671

    Seems very good so far. Can anyone recommend a good / cheap iOS app with nice candlestick charts?

    TradingView is the best:
    https://apps.apple.com/us/app/tradingview-stocks-forex/id1205990992

    @Darwin and @NeuM thnx for the recs

  • @Gavinski said:

    @Darwin said:

    @Gavinski said:
    Reading Cryptoassets
    https://www.amazon.com/Cryptoassets-Innovative-Investors-Bitcoin-Beyond/dp/1260026671

    Seems very good so far. Can anyone recommend a good / cheap iOS app with nice candlestick charts?

    TradingView is the best:
    https://apps.apple.com/us/app/tradingview-stocks-forex/id1205990992

    @Darwin and @NeuM thnx for the recs

    Sure! I actually use a lot of different sources. I recommend you set yourself up with a crypto market tracker so you can follow specific cryptos before investing in them. I have investments in about 30 different cryptos now and being able to see general market movement and specific potential investments has been useful for me. I keep an eye on a list I keep at www.cryptocompare.com in addition to monitoring the apps I recommended.

  • edited May 2021

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot said:
    You could say that about any democratic system, including the ones we live in. Rand Paul could run for president on a platform of ending the fed, if he got enough votes it could happen. Bernie Sanders could run on a platform of monetising the deficit, and if he got enough votes it could happen. Neither would need the 95% supermajority required for making changes to Bitcoin so I’m not buying the argument that Bitcoin is somehow more democratic than the Fed

    🤣😂 i don't believe you really believe whar you wrote here ... I'm starting to be suspicious you're just trolling me all the time 😂🤣

    No one could possibly believe that Sanders comment.

    You don’t grasp the concept of a hypothetical example? Maybe I’m not the one who is trolling :p

    Sanders is a sci-fi scenario, not a hypothetical. :p

    But Rand Paul isn't? Now you're pulling my leg :p

    Is a libertarian leaning President less likely to be elected than a Socialist? I think they’re both pretty unlikely unless some specific national events were to happen first. And both scenarios involve total economic collapse.

  • @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot said:
    You could say that about any democratic system, including the ones we live in. Rand Paul could run for president on a platform of ending the fed, if he got enough votes it could happen. Bernie Sanders could run on a platform of monetising the deficit, and if he got enough votes it could happen. Neither would need the 95% supermajority required for making changes to Bitcoin so I’m not buying the argument that Bitcoin is somehow more democratic than the Fed

    🤣😂 i don't believe you really believe whar you wrote here ... I'm starting to be suspicious you're just trolling me all the time 😂🤣

    No one could possibly believe that Sanders comment.

    You don’t grasp the concept of a hypothetical example? Maybe I’m not the one who is trolling :p

    Sanders is a sci-fi scenario, not a hypothetical. :p

    But Rand Paul isn't? Now you're pulling my leg :p

    Is a libertarian leaning President less likely to be elected than a Socialist? I think they’re both pretty unlikely unless some specific national events were to happen first. And both scenarios involve total economic collapse.

    Didn't I explain that they were hypotheticals? Oh yes, I did!

  • Why are you engaging with the Master of the Bad Faith Argument?

  • @ExAsperis99 said:
    Why are you engaging with the Master of the Bad Faith Argument?

    I'm enjoying the argument, and I don't bear anyone any ill-will. It's all good 👍

  • At some point, though, it just becomes a debate club speed round.

  • edited May 2021

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot said:
    You could say that about any democratic system, including the ones we live in. Rand Paul could run for president on a platform of ending the fed, if he got enough votes it could happen. Bernie Sanders could run on a platform of monetising the deficit, and if he got enough votes it could happen. Neither would need the 95% supermajority required for making changes to Bitcoin so I’m not buying the argument that Bitcoin is somehow more democratic than the Fed

    🤣😂 i don't believe you really believe whar you wrote here ... I'm starting to be suspicious you're just trolling me all the time 😂🤣

    No one could possibly believe that Sanders comment.

    You don’t grasp the concept of a hypothetical example? Maybe I’m not the one who is trolling :p

    Sanders is a sci-fi scenario, not a hypothetical. :p

    But Rand Paul isn't? Now you're pulling my leg :p

    Is a libertarian leaning President less likely to be elected than a Socialist? I think they’re both pretty unlikely unless some specific national events were to happen first. And both scenarios involve total economic collapse.

    Didn't I explain that they were hypotheticals? Oh yes, I did!

    Why bring them up unless the point was to derail the discussion? There’s been a lot of debate on the subject of Bitcoin and cryptos so far, usually based on false claims on your part. I enjoy the discussion, but keep it based in some semblance of reality please.

  • lets return back from theories and hypotheric examoles into rock solid blulletproof numbers

    OTC Exchange outflows biggest simce beginning of this bull run.

    OTC purchases are with REAL MONEY outside of vlassic exchange public liquidity pools. Big buyers - institutions and funds - are using OTC desks for directly buyinh from miners and other big sellers, to avoid causing price movement by big purchases. (just explained for @richardyot to avoid return of his beloved Tether FUD :-))

    TLDT; Institutions are buying the fucking dip 🤣

  • @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:

    @NeuM said:

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot said:
    You could say that about any democratic system, including the ones we live in. Rand Paul could run for president on a platform of ending the fed, if he got enough votes it could happen. Bernie Sanders could run on a platform of monetising the deficit, and if he got enough votes it could happen. Neither would need the 95% supermajority required for making changes to Bitcoin so I’m not buying the argument that Bitcoin is somehow more democratic than the Fed

    🤣😂 i don't believe you really believe whar you wrote here ... I'm starting to be suspicious you're just trolling me all the time 😂🤣

    No one could possibly believe that Sanders comment.

    You don’t grasp the concept of a hypothetical example? Maybe I’m not the one who is trolling :p

    Sanders is a sci-fi scenario, not a hypothetical. :p

    But Rand Paul isn't? Now you're pulling my leg :p

    Is a libertarian leaning President less likely to be elected than a Socialist? I think they’re both pretty unlikely unless some specific national events were to happen first. And both scenarios involve total economic collapse.

    Didn't I explain that they were hypotheticals? Oh yes, I did!

    Why bring them up unless the point was to derail the discussion? There’s been a lot of debate on the subject of Bitcoin and cryptos so far, usually based on false claims on your part. I enjoy the discussion, but keep it based in some semblance of reality please.

    The point was to illustrate that voting in a democracy (or indeed a republic) can affect change - did you really not get that?

    Here's the original post, I don't think the point is ambiguous:

    @richardyot said:
    You could say that about any democratic system, including the ones we live in. Rand Paul could run for president on a platform of ending the fed, if he got enough votes it could happen. Bernie Sanders could run on a platform of monetising the deficit, and if he got enough votes it could happen. Neither would need the 95% supermajority required for making changes to Bitcoin so I’m not buying the argument that Bitcoin is somehow more democratic than the Fed.

  • edited May 2021

    @ExAsperis99 said:
    Why are you engaging with the Master of the Bad Faith Argument?

    Perhaps you need to revisit the thread and count up the number of times this thread (which is ostensibly about Bitcoin/cryptos) has been derailed by the person who keeps insisting it’s a scam?

  • @NeuM said:

    @ExAsperis99 said:
    Why are you engaging with the Master of the Bad Faith Argument?

    Perhaps you need to revisit the thread and count up the number of times this thread (which is ostensibly about Bitcoin/cryptos) has been derailed by the person who keeps insisting it’s a scam?

    I started the thread 🙄

    And all my posts have been on-topic :)

  • edited May 2021

    @richardyot said:
    Let's imagine a future where Bitcoin becomes adopted as the world's Gold Standard, everything is going swimmingly well, except the hard limit of 21 million Bitcoins is causing deflation. After years of debate the consensus emerges that the limit should be increased so that there is a little more inflation in the system. 90% of the population agrees and this is reflected in the people controlling the nodes.

    However a minority of 10% are Satoshi originalists and they refuse to support the measure. They successfully block it year after year. Is this system truly democratic?

    As usually, i'm here with real world example solution for your hypothetic examples :-)

    Something like this actually already happened multiple times in past. There were famous "block wars" for example in 2017/2018 and Bitcoin passed through all those hard tests as great example how decentralisation, direct democracy and absolutely free market solves all problems.

    Certain percentage of Bitcoin users (devs, miners and nodes) had different ideas where Bitcoin should move. Because there was no way to get 95% consensus, they did something called "hard fork". They basically created a copy of bitcoin with different name (Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold, Bitcoin Diamond, Bitcoin SV and many other forks) with rules they decided to be the "right"rules. They took together part of miners and nodes and simply created new coin.

    When such thing happens, it's on market to decide which one they will believe, simply by puting own capital into it.

    All those forks ended after years as absolute fiasco. They faded out, nobody really uses them. Some of them died completely, some of them are existing with ridiculously small hashrate with ocassional random pumps and dumps.No support, no serious developement, no future. Vast majority of users (eg. capital) and miners and nodes sticked with orginal Bitcoin, supporting all it's developmenet. Many people after some time realised that given fork was mistake, sold all his coins (or simply accepted lost in case there was even nobody to buy them) and returned back to supporting original Bitcoin.

    This is how real freedom without central authority works in REALITY. Not some hypothetic examples.

    Btw here is current status of acceptance of upcoming Taproot update. So far it looks great, looks like we reach again wide acceptance. People who really understand network knows that this update is great step forward.
    https://taproot.watch/

  • edited May 2021

    However a minority of 10% are Satoshi originalists and they refuse to support the measure. They successfully block it year after year. Is this system truly democratic?

    back to this. In recent elections there was approximately 60% of voters. From those 60% some part (i don't remember numbers but let's say for sake of simplicity again 60%) voted for parties who are now our government.

    So basically. Our state is led by people voted by something around 40% (do exact math if you want) of people with voting rights. Yeah. Really great. Fairness at it's finest.

    This democracy system is basically about minority dictating to majority. What you think is good democracy is basically lot LESS democratic than Bitcoin. You cannot take a buch of people who aren't satisfied with system you live in and create new state, and leave rest of world to decided which one will be accepted. Which would be actually a LOT more fair and democratic. Unfortunately our world doesn't work this way, it's centralized shit controled by few powerfull authorities who are giving to people just false belief they can democratically decide about their lives and system rules. But they can't, not really about inportant parts of it, related to who is really in control. It's all scam.

  • @dendy said:

    However a minority of 10% are Satoshi originalists and they refuse to support the measure. They successfully block it year after year. Is this system truly democratic?

    back to this. In recent elections there was approximately 60% of voters. From those 60% some part (i don't remember numbers but let's say for sake of simplicity again 60%) voted for parties who are now our government.

    So basically. Our state is led by people voted by something around 40% (do exact math if you want) of people with voting rights. Yeah. Really great. Fairness at it's finest.

    This democracy system is basically about minority dictating to majority. What you think is good democracy is basically lot LESS democratic than Bitcoin. You cannot take a buch of people who aren't satisfied with system you live in and create new state, and leave rest of world to decided which one will be accepted. Which would be actually a LOT more fair and democratic. Unfortunately our world doesn't work this way, it's centralized shit controled by few powerfull authorities who are giving to people just false belief they can democratically decide about their lives and system rules. But they can't, not really about inportant parts of it, related to who is really in control. It's all scam.

    On the other hand, voting is not mandatory in the US. Free will is important. If 60% (or more) of the population doesn’t vote, then they can’t complain about who is elected.

  • edited May 2021

    On the other hand, voting is not mandatory in the US. Free will is important. If 60% (or more) of the population doesn’t vote, then they can’t complain about who is elected.

    Yes, but as i mentioned, they also can't create own alternative state build on rules they accept with representatives they believe in and leave rest of world to decide wich state would be accepted by other countries.

    For example i really haven't anybody to vote in next elections, because i think all of them are shitpeople, thiefs, lyiars or at least religious fanatics. Everybody wrong, just everybody in different way. But they all are crap.

  • @dendy said:

    On the other hand, voting is not mandatory in the US. Free will is important. If 60% (or more) of the population doesn’t vote, then they can’t complain about who is elected.

    Yes, but as i mentioned, they also can't create own alternative state build on rules they accept with representatives they believe in and leave rest of world to decide wich state would be accepted by other countries.

    For example i really haven't anybody to vote in next elections, because i think all of them are shitpeople, thiefs, lyiars or at least religious fanatics. Everybody wrong, just everybody in different way. But they all are crap.

    I don’t think your view on who runs is unique in that respect. A lot of voters usually end up voting for this or that candidate to vote “against” the other candidate, not necessarily because they support the person they vote for.

  • edited May 2021

    “against” the other candidate, not necessarily because they support the person they vote for.

    Yes, i voted with this motivation few times in past too :lol: But i'm refusing to do this anymore. Every time it ended as dissapointment. But that's different topic, not going down to this hole.

  • @dendy said:

    “against” the other candidate, not necessarily because they support the person they vote for.

    Yes, i voted with this motivation few times in past too :lol: But i'm refusing to do this anymore. Every time it ended as dissapointment. But that's different topic, not going down to this hole.

    Understood. 👍

  • edited May 2021

    Even if i go randomly around TV or radio and there is some politic discussion, my feelings are mixed between "i'll go vomit" and "what nice would be to pay visit to those people with steel rod" :D fucking clowns, hypocrites and bad actors

  • Looks like we might be breaking past the resistance at 38.5K. I'm still expecting a cash-out crash when it gets a bit north of 40, but obviously that's uneducated guesswork. Flying by the seat of my pants here.

  • @colonel_mustard said:
    Looks like we might be breaking past the resistance at 38.5K. I'm still expecting a cash-out crash when it gets a bit north of 40, but obviously that's uneducated guesswork. Flying by the seat of my pants here.

    I think the cash out crew dumped and ran at the first sign of trouble. Not here. Hodling for $100K.

  • @dendy said:
    Something like this actually already happened multiple times in past. There were famous "block wars" for example in 2017/2018 and Bitcoin passed through all those hard tests as great example how decentralisation, direct democracy and absolutely free market solves all problems.

    Certain percentage of Bitcoin users (devs, miners and nodes) had different ideas where Bitcoin should move. Because there was no way to get 95% consensus, they did something called "hard fork". They basically created a copy of bitcoin with different name (Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold, Bitcoin Diamond, Bitcoin SV and many other forks) with rules they decided to be the "right"rules. They took together part of miners and nodes and simply created new coin.

    When such thing happens, it's on market to decide which one they will believe, simply by puting own capital into it.

    That's a good counterpoint 👍

    A hard fork is not that different to just creating a new coin, and there's plenty of those anyway. So this is basically a case of "let the market decide". Sure, I can go along with that :)

This discussion has been closed.