Audiobus: Use your music apps together.
What is Audiobus? — Audiobus is an award-winning music app for iPhone and iPad which lets you use your other music apps together. Chain effects on your favourite synth, run the output of apps or Audio Units into an app like GarageBand or Loopy, or select a different audio interface output for each app. Route MIDI between apps — drive a synth from a MIDI sequencer, or add an arpeggiator to your MIDI keyboard — or sync with your external MIDI gear. And control your entire setup from a MIDI controller.
Download on the App StoreAudiobus is the app that makes the rest of your setup better.
OT: Apple/ 9To5 censor
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/63f44aa3010acdf0df624ae21b07b103/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F08d2f26fe847e2a8929b58db50a1de6e_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
Just read this about an Apple exec who seems to be a very nice, normal woman, who makes a perfectly valid point, only to be forced into a unnecessary apology by the PC brigade.
https://9to5mac.com/2017/10/14/denise-young-smith-apology/
Almost worse, is the editorial at the end of the article, where public comments have been removed because the editor doesn’t like them. He/she says ‘what is wrong with you people.’ Presumably, it’s that they support Denise Young Smith, and mistakenly thought they had freedom of speech.
Comments
Seems to be the way of the world, a sad reflection on an ever connected world, that viewpoints are closed down because the don't follow a overly sensitive ideal, if we are to move forward as a species we must approach many 'taboo' subjects in a honest and mature way.
Absolutely not. Not only was she correct but why should anyone apologise for their beliefs?
>
So are you saying that some aspect of your race, religion or sexuality makes you more diverse? Or that diversity of experience is not valid?
How about you answer the question instead of being judgemental?
>
Indeed. To my way of thinking and that of Demise Young Smith, who incidentally, is black, it is our life experience that makes us diverse.
Only when the majority see beyond color, gender, sexual orientation, etc etc, will we truly see the person. I think maybe that’s what she meant.
So you do believe sexuality, creed and race defines us more than humanity?
>
Yeah, that’s what I took to be her meaning. Just to be clear, had she used a different group in her analogy, and said that a room full of black gay guys could be diverse, I’d have no problem with that, either.
I doubt that. More likely she was forced to apologise because snowflakes starting screaming on Twitter
Yeah agree
>
Oh, I understand exactly what is going on, and I don’t like it.
Ah yes, the classic 'tolerant' response. Notice how i wasn't rude to you at any point, i simply asked a question yet you resorted to insults
Until we have access to the comments that were removed, it would seem to involve pure speculation as to their content relative to Denise Young Smith.
There's a difference between freedom of speech and whether or not a publication filters, removes comments, or declines to allow comments. There can be any number of reasons why a publication handles comments the way they do and they're not obligated to allow anybody to post anything on any article they publish. The readership is of course free to respond to these editorial decisions as they see fit too.
In many countries with open access to the internet, the ability for anyone to post their speech online is easier than it ever has been and is largely limited by the laws where they reside and their enforcement. The more challenging aspect is being able to separate the wheat from the chaff in order to be able to find well reasoned opinions. I can see why publications would not be willing to dilute the quality of their site by allowing unrestricted postings (not to mention potential legal liabilities).
It's conceivable the editors are concerned their readership may be turned off by the comments a particular article generates and act accordingly as ultimately it's a business and not an exercise in public discourse or the exercise of civil rights. All of this of course assumes publications are not obligated to act in ways that are in the best interest of the public-- which will not always be the case either.
To expect other people to foot the bill for our right to speak our mind seems to be too centered on our own sense of entitlement in my opinion. We can always start our own publication or find one that will publish what we have to say in many countries. Nevertheless I'm sure many people will disagree with my stance on these issues and I must accept that I can't expect them to fall in line with my thoughts nor that I'm cognizant of all the relevant issues.
Yet you can't even explain how i insulted anyone
That's the classic interpretation of freedom of speech but you have to keep in mind that those laws were made in a time where 2 companies didn't control almost the entire internet. Also, you can't just start your own company. Even Google, with all their money, failed to enter the ISP market in USA. If they can't, how is one person supposed to compete against companies who happily censor and ban opinions they don't approve of?
Of course, that's not pertinent to this particular case but it's at the center of why we need to revise laws governing freedom of speech
Horrible times. Hard to see how this can be changed to the better again. Best to drink something that desolves the brain and be included in one or another diverse group.
This illustrates the new diverse mindset.
Compelling argument
Yup. Sadly the irony is lost on him and his ilk
@jn2002dk I admit to expressing my opinion here which is largely informed by my experiences and biases so I would not expect others to necessarily value it. I am sure it's a very complex topic. For many people the barriers to entry in terms of being able to create your own website or blog are very low. There is no doubt that companies like Google and Facebook are trying to reap the rewards of the void created by the shift from paper to digital publication by trying to profit from creating more well worn pathways for public discourse.
There have been significant discussions about creating internet hosting sites which will be independent of editorial content monitoring and I think this is where the true battle for internet freedom of speech will lie. This in combination with bit coin type solutions and secure encryption are the technologies that can facilitate this.
Agree 100%
So you admit to being a hypocrite. At least we agree on something then