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.

1…3233353738…49

Comments

  • NeuMNeuM
    edited June 2021

    @richardyot said:
    @wim it's all good, just an exchange of ideas.

    My counter to the double-taxation argument is pretty simple: your parents might have been taxed once on the money you inherit, but you haven't - so as it passes to you it's actually the one and only time you will be taxed on it. So IMO it's not really double-taxation, each beneficiary is taxed once.

    Neither the general public nor the government (whatever form that government may take) have a right to confiscate a person or family’s property for completely fraudulent reasons.

  • espiegel123espiegel123

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:
    @wim it's all good, just an exchange of ideas.

    My counter to the double-taxation argument is pretty simple: your parents might have been taxed once on the money you inherit, but you haven't - so as it passes to you it's actually the one and only time you will be taxed on it. So IMO it's not really double-taxation, each beneficiary is taxed once.

    Neither the general public nor the government (whatever form that may be) have a right to confiscate a person or family’s property for invented reasons.

    Rights are determined by societies.

  • NeuMNeuM

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:
    @wim it's all good, just an exchange of ideas.

    My counter to the double-taxation argument is pretty simple: your parents might have been taxed once on the money you inherit, but you haven't - so as it passes to you it's actually the one and only time you will be taxed on it. So IMO it's not really double-taxation, each beneficiary is taxed once.

    Neither the general public nor the government (whatever form that may be) have a right to confiscate a person or family’s property for invented reasons.

    Rights are determined by societies.

    Rights are inherent. They are not given.

  • espiegel123espiegel123
    edited June 2021

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:
    @wim it's all good, just an exchange of ideas.

    My counter to the double-taxation argument is pretty simple: your parents might have been taxed once on the money you inherit, but you haven't - so as it passes to you it's actually the one and only time you will be taxed on it. So IMO it's not really double-taxation, each beneficiary is taxed once.

    Neither the general public nor the government (whatever form that may be) have a right to confiscate a person or family’s property for invented reasons.

    Rights are determined by societies.

    Rights are inherent. They are not given.

    Many would dispute you.

    What is your basis for believing that there are rights inherent and not subject to society? The claim to inherency sounds like a statement of personal values or belief rather than an immutable objective fact.

    From whence do inherent rights flow?

    What other inherent rights are other than a right to property?

  • wimwim

    @espiegel123 said:
    What other inherent rights are other than a right to property?

    The right to free updates forever for iOS apps.

  • ExAsperis99ExAsperis99

    @wim said:

    @espiegel123 said:
    What other inherent rights are other than a right to property?

    The right to free updates forever for iOS apps.

    Now you have crossed a line.

  • NeuMNeuM
    edited June 2021

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:
    @wim it's all good, just an exchange of ideas.

    My counter to the double-taxation argument is pretty simple: your parents might have been taxed once on the money you inherit, but you haven't - so as it passes to you it's actually the one and only time you will be taxed on it. So IMO it's not really double-taxation, each beneficiary is taxed once.

    Neither the general public nor the government (whatever form that may be) have a right to confiscate a person or family’s property for invented reasons.

    Rights are determined by societies.

    Rights are inherent. They are not given.

    Many would dispute you.

    What is your basis for believing that there are rights inherent and not subject to society? The claim to inherency sounds like a statement of personal values or belief rather than an immutable objective fact.

    From whence do inherent rights flow?

    What other inherent rights are other than a right to property?

    You want to argue over John Locke and natural rights now? You have a lot of human history to battle.

    https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/822/natural-rights

  • espiegel123espiegel123

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:
    @wim it's all good, just an exchange of ideas.

    My counter to the double-taxation argument is pretty simple: your parents might have been taxed once on the money you inherit, but you haven't - so as it passes to you it's actually the one and only time you will be taxed on it. So IMO it's not really double-taxation, each beneficiary is taxed once.

    Neither the general public nor the government (whatever form that may be) have a right to confiscate a person or family’s property for invented reasons.

    Rights are determined by societies.

    Rights are inherent. They are not given.

    Many would dispute you.

    What is your basis for believing that there are rights inherent and not subject to society? The claim to inherency sounds like a statement of personal values or belief rather than an immutable objective fact.

    From whence do inherent rights flow?

    What other inherent rights are other than a right to property?

    You want to argue over John Locke and natural rights now? You have a lot of human history to battle.

    https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/822/natural-rights

    Someone's speculation or belief or hypothesis -- even a philosopher's -- is nothing more than that. It doesn't make it a fact. Some people may believe property rights are inherent. It isn't universally accepted. Someone claiming something is a fact doesn't make it so.

  • NeuMNeuM
    edited June 2021

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @richardyot said:
    @wim it's all good, just an exchange of ideas.

    My counter to the double-taxation argument is pretty simple: your parents might have been taxed once on the money you inherit, but you haven't - so as it passes to you it's actually the one and only time you will be taxed on it. So IMO it's not really double-taxation, each beneficiary is taxed once.

    Neither the general public nor the government (whatever form that may be) have a right to confiscate a person or family’s property for invented reasons.

    Rights are determined by societies.

    Rights are inherent. They are not given.

    Many would dispute you.

    What is your basis for believing that there are rights inherent and not subject to society? The claim to inherency sounds like a statement of personal values or belief rather than an immutable objective fact.

    From whence do inherent rights flow?

    What other inherent rights are other than a right to property?

    You want to argue over John Locke and natural rights now? You have a lot of human history to battle.

    https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/822/natural-rights

    Someone's speculation or belief or hypothesis -- even a philosopher's -- is nothing more than that. It doesn't make it a fact. Some people may believe property rights are inherent. It isn't universally accepted. Someone claiming something is a fact doesn't make it so.

    It’s the basis of our laws in the US and I accept that foundation as real. You evidently do not.

    Do you reject all notions that you yourself have an inherent right to life, liberty and property? And if you do, why are you here? By definition, your life would not be your own, nor would your freedom to speak your mind, nor would access to the computer in front of you be yours.

    One would merely be an unthinking animal without inherent rights. But you have them, I have them. We all have them.

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    It’s interesting, though not uncommon these days to hear US residents seemingly dismissing one the foundational pillars of the of the US Declaration of Independence. There could be much different context meant for of some of those statements so I don’t presume to judge what is being said.

    As for me, I profoundly agree with the sentiment of that document, and hope that will always remain the role of government and society to protect those rights for all. Never to bestow them.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --

    Not trying to start an argument. Just speaking from my own heart. ✌️❤️

  • wimwim

    Speaking of which, I do hope my government is interested in protecting my right to the pursuit of happiness in the form of wealth from trading of crypto currencies. ;)

    I assume they will as long as they can tax me on it. 😂

  • espiegel123espiegel123

    @wim said:
    It’s interesting, though not uncommon these days to hear a US resident seemingly dismissing one the foundational pillars of the of the US Declaration of Independence. I assume there must be a different context meant for of some of those statements so I don’t presume to judge what is being said.

    As for me, I profoundly agree with the sentiment of that document, and hope that will always remain the role of government and society to protect those rights for all. Never to bestow them.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --

    Not trying to start an argument. Just speaking from my own heart.

    You are misinterpreting and/or misrepresenting what I wrote.

    I did not dismiss anything. The Declaration of Independence and The Bill of Rights are great.

    That they are expressions of our society's belief system and statement of principles in no way dismisses, belittles or demeans them.

    They are great. They are also human creations that express the foundational principles of OUR society.

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    Fair enough. As I tried to make clear, I do not presume to know what you personally meant.

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    https://xkcd.com/2030/

  • dendydendy

    @richardyot said:
    @wim it's all good, just an exchange of ideas.

    My counter to the double-taxation argument is pretty simple: your parents might have been taxed once on the money you inherit, but you haven't - so as it passes to you it's actually the one and only time you will be taxed on it. So IMO it's not really double-taxation, each beneficiary is taxed once.

    Can't believe you're defending this madness. :open_mouth:

  • GavinskiGavinski

    I'm going to avoid this human rights discussion, as tempted as I am to get stuck in. Not in the mood for arguments today lol. I'll share this instead, I found it enjoyable and insightful

  • dendydendy
    edited June 2021

    Ok let's have fun. I want to hear rational explanation for this:

    • i have income, which is taxated
    • i bought house
    • this house is a again taxed (every year)

    So, basically my income is taxed twice now.

    Curious for any twisted explanation why this is fair 😂

  • NeuMNeuM

    @wim said:
    It’s interesting, though not uncommon these days to hear US residents seemingly dismissing one the foundational pillars of the of the US Declaration of Independence. There could be much different context meant for of some of those statements so I don’t presume to judge what is being said.

    As for me, I profoundly agree with the sentiment of that document, and hope that will always remain the role of government and society to protect those rights for all. Never to bestow them.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --

    Not trying to start an argument. Just speaking from my own heart. ✌️❤️

    Just a tiny bit of clarification, the Declaration of Independence is not the basis for any US laws. The Constitution and Bill of Rights do all of the work there. I assume this is what you meant. I made the same mistake myself in the past.

  • NeuMNeuM

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot said:
    @wim it's all good, just an exchange of ideas.

    My counter to the double-taxation argument is pretty simple: your parents might have been taxed once on the money you inherit, but you haven't - so as it passes to you it's actually the one and only time you will be taxed on it. So IMO it's not really double-taxation, each beneficiary is taxed once.

    Can't believe you're defending this madness. :open_mouth:

    If one logically follows a train of thought that individual rights are subservient or nonexistent compared to the needs of the state, then any schemes involving confiscation make perfect sense.

  • dendydendy
    edited June 2021

    @NeuM said:

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot said:
    @wim it's all good, just an exchange of ideas.

    My counter to the double-taxation argument is pretty simple: your parents might have been taxed once on the money you inherit, but you haven't - so as it passes to you it's actually the one and only time you will be taxed on it. So IMO it's not really double-taxation, each beneficiary is taxed once.

    Can't believe you're defending this madness. :open_mouth:

    If one logically follows a train of thought that individual rights are subservient or nonexistent compared to the needs of the state, then any schemes involving confiscation make perfect sense.

    Yeah. But then i'm the one who is accussed of dreaming about living in dystopy. Actually THIS system is on the short way to really horrible orwellian dystopy. And people even defending it and fighting for it voluntarily.

    Can't wrap my head around it.

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    @dendy said:
    Ok let's have fun. I want to hear rational explanation for this:

    • i have income, which is taxated
    • i bought house
    • this house is a again taxed (every year)

    So, basically my income is taxed twice now.

    Curious for any twisted explanation why this is fair 😂

    That house is likely serviced by roads, police and fire protection, schools, and other services. It makes sense to me that the infrastructure costs be shared among those who enjoy those benefits. That doesn’t seem twisted at all to me.

    It often gets abused, and property taxes get spent in unrelated ways, but that’s a different issue.

  • dendydendy

    roads

    i pad special tax as car owner. this should be covered.

    schools

    please, can i choose to not pay public schooling system and never use it ? :-) It's complete shit (like most of services provided by state) anyway :-)) I will never used it for my son :lol: Yes, unfortunately i went through it but i guess that was covered by taxes payed by my parents so i owe nothing for that.

    Anyway public schooling is for me more like part of social service, so it should be funded from social insurance.

    I also understand this is not possible because social insurance is mother of all bubble ponzi scheme scams people ever developed :lol:

    Btw. this leads me to my most favourite part, in my country i had to pay 50 euros yearly as form of "tax" for public media (public state television). Even through i don't watch it at all, ever. But law is build the way that EVERY household with electricity has to pay it. Nice.

    police and fire protection,

    okay, there is some portion of rationality in this, good argument :+1:

    But then. For what is needed income taxation ? What kind of state service should be payed from that, to have rational fair argument for this tax ?

    Thing is - politicians are developing new and new forms of taxation just to make bag of money they took away from people bigger and bigger, without scare them with one big 80% tax.

    So they split it in multiple tiny taxes, made from taxes made from takes. 4% there .. 10% there .. 12% there .. And most of herd is ok with that. They don't do math. They don't realise that state takes away vas majority of what they produce, but gives them back, in form of services, just tiny fraction of that value.

    This whole system is extremely inefficient and lot of money is just wasted by running it. It's really sad and ironic that most loud critics of bitcoin mining "energy wasting" are people who are fully supporting this system which is wasting resources (money) at such large scale, that no other existing system can competite with it. Ironically, bitcoin mining is atually one of most efficient use of resources in human history, was majority of it is converted into usefull information benefitial for all participants. I wish state has at least 20% of that efficiency.

  • dendydendy

    @Gavinski said:
    I'm going to avoid this human rights discussion, as tempted as I am to get stuck in. Not in the mood for arguments today lol. I'll share this instead, I found it enjoyable and insightful

    Great one, thanks !

  • dendydendy
    edited June 2021

    @wim said:
    https://xkcd.com/2030/

    Lol :-)

    Actually most of goverments and states reminds me Microsoft. They produce same shitty unstable unreliable all the time failing product. Lot of bluescreens. Yet there are still lot of people willing to pay for such poorly designed ugly product and use it with pleasure of selfpunishment. This is world i will never understand.

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    @dendy said:
    This whole system is extremely inefficient and lot of money is just wasted by running it. It's really sad and ironic that most loud critics of bitcoin mining "energy wasting" are people who are fully supporting this system which is wasting resources (money) at such large scale, that no other existing system can competite with it. Ironically, bitcoin mining is atually one of most efficient use of resources in human history, was majority of it is converted into usefull information benefitial for all participants. I wish state has at least 20% of that efficiency.

    Dude. Will you please not keep bringing crypto currencies into this discussion?? We’re supposed to just spout political ideologies here.

  • colonel_mustardcolonel_mustard

    @wim said:

    @dendy said:
    This whole system is extremely inefficient and lot of money is just wasted by running it. It's really sad and ironic that most loud critics of bitcoin mining "energy wasting" are people who are fully supporting this system which is wasting resources (money) at such large scale, that no other existing system can competite with it. Ironically, bitcoin mining is atually one of most efficient use of resources in human history, was majority of it is converted into usefull information benefitial for all participants. I wish state has at least 20% of that efficiency.

    Dude. Will you please not keep bringing crypto currencies into this discussion?? We’re supposed to just spout political ideologies here.

  • dendydendy
    edited June 2021

    @wim said:

    @dendy said:
    This whole system is extremely inefficient and lot of money is just wasted by running it. It's really sad and ironic that most loud critics of bitcoin mining "energy wasting" are people who are fully supporting this system which is wasting resources (money) at such large scale, that no other existing system can competite with it. Ironically, bitcoin mining is atually one of most efficient use of resources in human history, was majority of it is converted into usefull information benefitial for all participants. I wish state has at least 20% of that efficiency.

    Dude. Will you please not keep bringing crypto currencies into this discussion?? We’re supposed to just spout political ideologies here.

    :lol: :lol: :lol:

    @colonel_mustard said:

    @wim said:

    @dendy said:
    This whole system is extremely inefficient and lot of money is just wasted by running it. It's really sad and ironic that most loud critics of bitcoin mining "energy wasting" are people who are fully supporting this system which is wasting resources (money) at such large scale, that no other existing system can competite with it. Ironically, bitcoin mining is atually one of most efficient use of resources in human history, was majority of it is converted into usefull information benefitial for all participants. I wish state has at least 20% of that efficiency.

    Dude. Will you please not keep bringing crypto currencies into this discussion?? We’re supposed to just spout political ideologies here.

    :heart: :heart: :heart: :heart:

    Would be interested to know if ANYBODY ever used that thing other way than hysteric clicking on "cancel" button and swearing hard.

  • richardyotrichardyot

    @NeuM said:

    @dendy said:

    @richardyot said:
    @wim it's all good, just an exchange of ideas.

    My counter to the double-taxation argument is pretty simple: your parents might have been taxed once on the money you inherit, but you haven't - so as it passes to you it's actually the one and only time you will be taxed on it. So IMO it's not really double-taxation, each beneficiary is taxed once.

    Can't believe you're defending this madness. :open_mouth:

    If one logically follows a train of thought that individual rights are subservient or nonexistent compared to the needs of the state, then any schemes involving confiscation make perfect sense.

    Not really. Rights are balanced with responsibilities. Humans have always lived in groups and communities, as isolated individuals human beings would get nowhere, it's by virtue of living in groups that humans have been successful. So we all have responsibilities to the collective, without which we would literally starve.

    To go back to the point on inheritance tax and dynasties: why should the Duke Of Westminster own thousands of properties in central London, including entire streets and squares in Mayfair and Belgravia? He gets to extract rent from productive working people because of a dumb accident of birth, he's done literally nothing to earn his fortune other than having well-connected ancestors.

    Teddy Roosevelt campaigned for estate taxes because he didn't want the US to become like dynastic Europe. The notion of dynastic fortunes was seen as being the antithesis of the American Dream.

  • u0421793u0421793

    I’d be interested in knowing if there’s any overlap in the following, between crypto for/against people, and doing lottery (there’s a handful of people on this thread, so that’s a big enough scientific sample):

    A - never do the lottery
    B - occasionally do it but not regularly
    C - regularly do the lottery

    X - I’m against crypto
    Y - I’m for crypto

  • u0421793u0421793
    edited June 2021

    I’m C/Y
    (where C isn’t all that regularly, I might forget for weeks, then do several, who cares, but I’m calling it regularly overall)

This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2024