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.

14344454749

Comments

  • edited June 2021

    This is reason why our world is so much fucked up, until uneducated dumb assholes like this one will be allowed to be in charge, nothing changes "i known nothing about topic but i have some stupid comments to it all the time".

    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/government-must-have-power-to-reverse-crypto-transactions-says-co-chair-of-blockchain-caucus-11624995008

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    @dendy said:
    not just speculators and gamblers.. also senators ...

    So, you mean speculators and gamblers.. also crooks then?

    You understand current US politics very little if you think people would see US legislators as shining examples to trust. 😂

  • So, you mean speculators and gamblers.. also crooks then?

    :lol:

  • @wim @dendy im with ya,, but im not haha.. im only using my gains for trading. no way will I use money i cant lose. im also doing really small trades, literally 1 - 3 cents. I figure if i go any higher its more of a risk and im just being extra greedy.

    I also have my main portfolio staking, untouched, and plan to hold for ???? a long while?

  • @shinyisshiny said:
    @wim @dendy im with ya,, but im not haha.. im only using my gains for trading. no way will I use money i cant lose. im also doing really small trades, literally 1 - 3 cents. I figure if i go any higher its more of a risk and im just being extra greedy.

    Ok, if you really want to learn, then this guy has highes quality learning material i ever saw on CT .. really good experienced trader, succesfull for years..
    https://twitter.com/EmperorBTC

  • ohh perfect. thanks @dendy

  • @u0421793 said:

    @richardyot said:

    @Tarekith said:
    I think you guys have been going in circles for 30 pages now. 😂

    Sorry, I didn't realise anyone else was still reading 🤣

    I am

    +1

  • @dendy said:

    not just speculators and gamblers.. also senators ...

    So, science-denying, anti-democracy politicians are meaningful endorsements in your mind?

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    not just speculators and gamblers.. also senators ...

    So, science-denying, anti-democracy politicians are meaningful endorsements in your mind?

    She was elected with nearly 73% of the vote in her State, so she is accurately representing the will of her voters. Your personal criteria has no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

  • @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    not just speculators and gamblers.. also senators ...

    So, science-denying, anti-democracy politicians are meaningful endorsements in your mind?

    She was elected with nearly 73% of the vote in her State, so she is accurately representing the will of her voters. Your personal criteria has no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

    ????

    I am simply stating what she stands for. If you approve of those positions that is certainly your right. Being popular in Wyoming doesn't make her positions more or less reasonable.

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    not just speculators and gamblers.. also senators ...

    So, science-denying, anti-democracy politicians are meaningful endorsements in your mind?

    She was elected with nearly 73% of the vote in her State, so she is accurately representing the will of her voters. Your personal criteria has no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

    ????

    I am simply stating what she stands for. If you approve of those positions that is certainly your right. Being popular in Wyoming doesn't make her positions more or less reasonable.

    Again, your personal beliefs have no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

  • @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    not just speculators and gamblers.. also senators ...

    So, science-denying, anti-democracy politicians are meaningful endorsements in your mind?

    She was elected with nearly 73% of the vote in her State, so she is accurately representing the will of her voters. Your personal criteria has no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

    ????

    I am simply stating what she stands for. If you approve of those positions that is certainly your right. Being popular in Wyoming doesn't make her positions more or less reasonable.

    Again, your personal beliefs have no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

    Which is totally irrelevant to my comment. The beliefs of Wyoming voters has no bearing on whether her beliefs are reasonable. She was cited as evidence that BitCoin is legit -- in that context her beliefs (not those of the people that voted for her) is what matters. If you are excited by the endorsements of people with those beliefs that is totally fine and their qualifications and beliefs is totally relevant to whether their endorsement is meaningful.

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    not just speculators and gamblers.. also senators ...

    So, science-denying, anti-democracy politicians are meaningful endorsements in your mind?

    She was elected with nearly 73% of the vote in her State, so she is accurately representing the will of her voters. Your personal criteria has no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

    ????

    I am simply stating what she stands for. If you approve of those positions that is certainly your right. Being popular in Wyoming doesn't make her positions more or less reasonable.

    Again, your personal beliefs have no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

    Which is totally irrelevant to my comment. The beliefs of Wyoming voters has no bearing on whether her beliefs are reasonable. She was cited as evidence that BitCoin is legit -- in that context her beliefs (not those of the people that voted for her) is what matters. If you are excited by the endorsements of people with those beliefs that is totally fine and their qualifications and beliefs is totally relevant to whether their endorsement is meaningful.

    Your bias is that you feel her beliefs are “unreasonable”. Your point of view is not the same as those who elected her. By the numbers, your view is the “unreasonable” one.

  • @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    not just speculators and gamblers.. also senators ...

    So, science-denying, anti-democracy politicians are meaningful endorsements in your mind?

    She was elected with nearly 73% of the vote in her State, so she is accurately representing the will of her voters. Your personal criteria has no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

    ????

    I am simply stating what she stands for. If you approve of those positions that is certainly your right. Being popular in Wyoming doesn't make her positions more or less reasonable.

    Again, your personal beliefs have no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

    Which is totally irrelevant to my comment. The beliefs of Wyoming voters has no bearing on whether her beliefs are reasonable. She was cited as evidence that BitCoin is legit -- in that context her beliefs (not those of the people that voted for her) is what matters. If you are excited by the endorsements of people with those beliefs that is totally fine and their qualifications and beliefs is totally relevant to whether their endorsement is meaningful.

    Your bias is that you feel her beliefs are “unreasonable”. Your point of view is not the same as those who elected her. By the numbers, your view is the “unreasonable” one.

    I don't think truth works that way. People electing someone doesn't elevate their beliefs to truth. People that don't believe in climate change or evolution, for instance, don't become correct by being elected. You are certainly entitled...as she is...to believe whatever you want. What Wyoming voters think about her beliefs has literally no relevance to whether her beliefs are reasonable or the reasonableness of anyone's assessment of her beliefs. Strom Thurmond was elected by large majorities...that doesn't make his racism reasonable.

  • edited June 2021

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    not just speculators and gamblers.. also senators ...

    So, science-denying, anti-democracy politicians are meaningful endorsements in your mind?

    She was elected with nearly 73% of the vote in her State, so she is accurately representing the will of her voters. Your personal criteria has no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

    ????

    I am simply stating what she stands for. If you approve of those positions that is certainly your right. Being popular in Wyoming doesn't make her positions more or less reasonable.

    Again, your personal beliefs have no bearing on her doing the job she was hired to do.

    Which is totally irrelevant to my comment. The beliefs of Wyoming voters has no bearing on whether her beliefs are reasonable. She was cited as evidence that BitCoin is legit -- in that context her beliefs (not those of the people that voted for her) is what matters. If you are excited by the endorsements of people with those beliefs that is totally fine and their qualifications and beliefs is totally relevant to whether their endorsement is meaningful.

    Your bias is that you feel her beliefs are “unreasonable”. Your point of view is not the same as those who elected her. By the numbers, your view is the “unreasonable” one.

    I don't think truth works that way. People electing someone doesn't elevate their beliefs to truth. People that don't believe in climate change or evolution, for instance, don't become correct by being elected. You are certainly entitled...as she is...to believe whatever you want. What Wyoming voters think about her beliefs has literally no relevance to whether her beliefs are reasonable or the reasonableness of anyone's assessment of her beliefs. Strom Thurmond was elected by large majorities...that doesn't make his racism reasonable.

    Whose “truth”? Yours? This is a common error in thinking. Failure to acknowledge and understand the point of view of others. There’s no such thing as universal truth.

  • edited June 2021

    jeez.. things are not black and white .. there is thousands of shades of grey in between .. if she is wrong about climate change (which so complicated topic that i don't have any opinion about it at all, cause i don't feel i know enough to make opinion) - it doesn't mean she can't be right in other completely unrelated topic .. People are complex personalities with good and bad opionins, or in general with dark and bright sides ... Jackson fucked children but made some great music.. Kevin Spacey had same issues but played in some great movies which i can watch again without any moral dilemma .. People have dark and bright sides. Nobody is perfect. If they make wrong decisions, they should take consequences, but making one wrong decision doesn't affect any way other completely unrelated opinion / decision.

    I shared that link because i like what she said and it's totally my opinion too. Honestly i have no idea about her policial background and i don't give fuck about it, i don't give fuck about any politician career because in average they are all shit, just some subjectively more and other less.. My point was different - he represent signiicant group of bitcoin holders which are there not because of gambling or short term speculation, but because they believe in crypto/bitcoin in long term, as form of savings ...

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    😂😂 I didn't even watch the video or bother to check who she is or if she's a conservative or liberal. I figured I'd just hang around here to see which one of either @espiegel123 or @NeuM dismissed her opinion because of her political bent. Thanks for saving me the time guys. 😂😂

    Anyone who trusts the opinion of a actor, politician, or former rock star because of who they are or how famous they are is in for some sore disappointments. 😎✌🏼

  • @wim said:
    😂😂 I didn't even watch the video or bother to check who she is or if she's a conservative or liberal. I figured I'd just hang around here to see which one of either @espiegel123 or @NeuM dismissed her opinion because of her political bent. Thanks for saving me the time guys. 😂😂

    Total mischaracterization of my point. :)

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    @espiegel123 you are sooooo predictable. I love it. 😂😂😂

  • edited June 2021

    @wim said:
    😂😂 I didn't even watch the video or bother to check who she is or if she's a conservative or liberal. I figured I'd just hang around here to see which one of either @espiegel123 or @NeuM dismissed her opinion because of her political bent. Thanks for saving me the time guys. 😂😂

    Why would you? I haven’t commented here in weeks because of the anti-crypto trolling Dendy keeps dealing with. The thread is an endless demonstration of dysfunctional argumentation at this point.

  • wimwim
    edited June 2021

    Sorry guys, can't help myself. I'm just messing with you. Y'all make it too easy. B)
    Just stirring up some shit before a stressful day. Ignore me. :D

  • @wim said:
    Sorry guys, can't help myself. I'm just messing with you. Y'all make it too easy. B)
    Just stirring up some shit before a stressful day. Ignore me. :D

    It’s fine. And it’s no different than the tone established in this thread about 40 pages ago.

  • @wim said:
    Sorry guys, can't help myself. I'm just messing with you. Y'all make it too easy. B)
    Just stirring up some shit before a stressful day. Ignore me. :D

    you're doing pretty good job, your posts are refreshing... surprisingly usually one your post keeps me think more than 3 pages of Richard's lamentation about Tether (sorry richard :-)))

  • I love lamentations about the quality of discourse made by people trolling/insulting/teasing other people for respectfully disagreeing with them.

  • I love passive-aggressive comments. They’re so informative.

  • What's this? We're doing nuance now? Glad I checked in.

  • edited June 2021

    @NeuM said:
    I love passive-aggressive comments. They’re so informative.

    This, I would like to point out, is textbook irony. The literal saying the opposite of what is meant. Although I will go out on a limb and say that the much-derided Alanis Morissette usage has actual cultural resonance, the good, gray guardians of grammar be damned..

  • Let's not get this thread closed down though, at least not before Tether implodes.

  • Sick of dealing with sophistry. I'll strike my comment from the record.

  • @richardyot said:
    Let's not get this thread closed down though, at least not before Tether implodes.

    Oh, so this tread will exist for loong time .. like decade or more 👹😂

This discussion has been closed.