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.
Comments
Glad to see there are now a LOT more people here familiar with the basics and the more advanced concepts and implementations of blockchain based systems now.
It was only something like a year ago (or less) that people were literally throwing fits over every discussion and post involving cryptos.
I knew people would learn and adapt eventually, but this is a very promising development.
It's the same process for every new disruptive technology. Always will be I suppose.
I don’t know/care squat about it but I’ll take this darling crypto chatter over some of the far less savoury rabbit holes of the past year.
Just wait until someone proposes blockchain based voting machines. 😂
I don’t know enough about the original things that blockchain is apparently better for to even have an opinion on it. Blockchain automation lanes in BM3? I guess then I would have to read up on it.
Hashgraph was designed specifically to address this kind of thing. Look into it.
yay! Didn't have to wait long after all. Now maybe this thread'll get interesting.
I am so thankful for this thread. The next time somebody brings it up at a holiday party, instead of pretending I have to go to the bathroom, I will decidedly parrot whomever from this thread based entirely on my own convenience for avoiding arguments while appearing to be informed. Unless it’s my brother-in-law, then I’ll play devil’s advocate. So keep up the good work with the persuasive arguments guys.
I don't think that's anything new though is it? All the major financial companies have looked into blockchain tech, from Goldman Sachs to Citi (as per your example), as well as Microsoft, Facebook etc...
No-one as yet has managed to create anything workable though. And blockchain is 12 years old by now, almost as old as the iPhone.
Maybe one day there will be an actual use for it, who knows, but so far (outside of cryptocurrencies of course), it's been a dead end. It's not disruptive, it's simply not that useful.
There already is. Bitcoin. And Lighning network as layer over bitcoin. And Strike as layer over Lighning network. Which really saves LOT money to Salvador people (it was estimated that people working outside of Salvador, sending money to their families home, will save 400 millions of dollars just on fees they had to pay before Strike started to be available to Western Union. Yearly. That is HUGE).
Real use case of blockchain just before frond of your eyes.
Otherwise i agree with u. Any other use case of blockchain than sending money is bogus. People are wrong thinking it can be used for anything else, especially if that anything exists outside blockchain, and sooner or later they will realise and return to old good centralised database systems paradigm. They will just don't admit it publicly (can't imagine big companies admit they were wrong) so they will use blockchain elements as layer above classic centralised process workflow, so they will say "look, we are sooo progressive, we are using blockchain" when actually they will not use any of main reasons why blockchain was created in first place. Like using gun instead of hammer for nails :-D
Those gas fees are an ethereum problem. Gas fees on Kadena $kda are virtually non existent, even though it is also proof of work
Does that apply if the network scales though? I mean even Bitcoin had low fees ten years ago, but the bigger the network gets, the more computer power is involved and the higher the electricity bill becomes, by design (in order to secure the network). Is Kadena somehow getting around this problem?
@dendy I did say:
😀
fuck i have probably some serious brain damage, i just skip reading parts of text .. need some medication for this
Richard i explained this to you already multiple times. Size of network (number of transactions processed) has ZERO in common with need of more hash rate. In case that in this moment 99% of hashrate of Bitcoin would be turned on, or even all miners expect of single one - network can still run same way like now and you will not experience any slow down.
Hashrate increase is needed if PRICE of coin rises, to ensure network is SAFE. That nobody will be able in financially profitable way put together more than 51% of whole network hash rate to overwrite transactions. Hashrate size is function of PRICE.
So again and again. In PoW, you DON'T need more hash power to make network more performat. Zero correlation between network performance and hashrate size.
@dendy thanks for the clarification. 👍
(Edit) the point still stands though: the more popular a coin gets the more the price rises, so there is a correlation, which is why fees on Ethereum are higher than on Kadena
Any examples of widely used POW blockchains that don’t have high fees?
Here small explanation why PoW is way much better than PoS, because not many people are aware of that.
With PoW, if you can increase hash rate, you need invest money into physical world items (physical miner machines, you need enough room for them, cooling system, pay for electricity, solve all other partial issues - including legal issues dependent on country where your operation is located).
This works like natural protection from gaining too much control over network by one player. Years showed us this is pretty well balanced system which always tends to gravitate to perfect equilibrium (price goes down, less miners, less hashrate, price goes up, more miners, more hashrate)
Problem of PoS is - you don't need nothing to get more "hash power". You just need stack your coins, you're getting rewards, which means you can stack more, which means you get more rewars,... Your importance is growing exponentially. Just being rich makes you more and more rich without need of solve any real world investment / problem.
As creating of full nude starts to be unaccessible for small investors (like at Ethereum now, who can get together 32 ethers ?? Not everybody definitely... ), shared staking on exchanges is taking dominance. Which means, who is REALLY in control of network aren't decentralised small node owners BUT 2-3 biggest exchanges. This is hell. PoS is way completely away from main reason why this technology was created. It's way to huge centralisation and control over network in hands of super rich people.
Worst thing is - in PoW even if somebody obtains somehow for moment >51% hashrate of network, after he looses it ,network is inmmediately healed and can work again like nothing bad ever happened. But this is NOT the case with PoS - here if any node gets just for short moment >51% importance in network, it can revert and change transactions ANYTIME in future even if he will be not >51% anymore. That is serious fault of PoS concept. So, getting 51% of network basically destroys that network for good. Endgame.
Lightning network for example. You can convert your bitcoins into lighning network and from that moments you can send them to anybody who have lighhtning wallet (there are multiple LN wallets for desktop, android, ios - for example Blue Wallet). Those are with near zero fee transaction fees.
@dendy, thanks for your lengthy reply but you completely ignored that in my scenario the participants neither trust each other nor a central organization. That is the whole reason for the blockchain based solution. Of course a normal database is much more efficient than a blockchain. I never doubted that.
@dendy @hes I’m a big fan of PoW - didn’t you read my whole post? I even called Satoshi‘s invention one of the greatest achievements in the history if computer science. But I also acknowledge the downsides of it. PoW is extremely successful as a consensus algorithm but it has a high price tag. Yes, PoS is troublesome but I’m very confident that neither PoW nor PoS is the last word on consensus algorithms.
I must say that I find the discussion here not very fruitful and rather toxic and frustrating. I’m out. People seem to read only halfway through the posts and others even start to block each other. I seem to be one of a few people here who was actually using blockchain professionally in a software project but nonetheless I’m lectured about PoW and central databases. I can understand that it’s maybe too many and too lengthy posts to read thoroughly. No worries. I’m not a native English speaker, so I guess my posts are additionally not very well written.
I‘m off to take part in threads about apps and music.
Thing is - you need look at Bitcoin not as it was VISA or PayPal. Bitcoin is like inter-bank clearing system (or banking system at all, basically bitcoin blockchain represents replacement for central bank, banks and inter-bank clearing system).
People in future will not use directly on-chain bitcoin for everyday payments like now you don't use SEPA transfers for buying coffee or bread.
Second layer payments processors are normal part of traditional financial world to lower transaction fees, and same approach is in crypto. Lightning network is equivalend to VISA or PayPal (just WAAAAY much more performant, it can handle millions of transactions per second)
No i didn't. But it is dead end if you want to have trust less network which subject should be something which actually CAN'T exists without trusted central authority to verify validity of that subject (which is exactly what for example software licence is).
Give me one good example where people can use blockchain for transferring ownership of some asset / subject / thing, other than money, which don't need any external authority to validate if owner of that asset / subject is REALLY sender who initiates transaction on blockchain.
I'm deeply studying this space for probably 8 years, but i can't find single one example.
It’s pretty good at disrupting forum threads.
Which is useful for entertainment value too.
Just ended watching Mr.Robot on Netflix (it was epic btw. highly suggesting !), and was wondering what i will do with evening free time for next few days - now here is answer :-D :-D
Kadena uses braided chains that make it pretty much infinitely scalable. It's still relatively little known, but is aiming for a spot in the top 5. Unlike Bitcoin it is still profitable for individuals to mine and they are looking at ways to incentivize green mining.
"As network demand increases, Kadena's energy use remains constant. Its unique architecture makes it the only platform that can deliver increased energy efficiency as TPS (Transactions per Second) scales."
White paper etc here:
https://docs.kadena.io/
Well, things like $Flux are running decentralised cloud infrastructure similar to Amazon Web Services, but free (you just have to stake 200 flux which get returned when you stop using the service) and more reliable than AWS, which had a meltdown today that took Disney and other service providers down for hours.
I'd call that a real use case, wouldn't you? And that's just one example. The metaverse(s) will also become as much a part of everyday life as the Internet is now, for better or for worse.
For assets you actually won’t find an example because it’s usually not backed by the legal situation. In Germany there is a draft that is expected to become law very soon. I see a number of companies in Germany already being prepared for that. The German banking regulations entity also standing by prepared. It’s going to lift off very soon but it would have been mad without an adjusted legal situation.
https://www.securities.io/digital-securities-about-to-go-mainstream-with-germanys-new-draft-law/
If the legal situation is clear, you can perfectly do a software license being issued as a token and validated by the software on the blockchain. Then you could still sell and transfer the token even if the manufacturer is gone.
But I think you could already recognize existing utility token as actual assets that are owned on the blockchain. With Siacoin for instance you own storage capacity.
OK, I'd call that progress at least. Let's see how they fare
Maybe, but this all seems a bit speculative to me, we'll see how things shake out. Maybe in ten years AWS will be supplanted by some blockchain tech, but I am highly doubtful. The technical hurdles seem insurmountable to me.
Which technical hurdles?
well, choosing the logo colour, for a start…