Another Senator saying he holds out hope for a continued movement to a "further right"

 What exactly is this "further right" he speaks of?   Is he certain that his definition and ideal "further right" are even remotely similar to other "fellows" ideals for "further right?"  

 Does he consider the agendas of well-armed fringe groups, who would certainly paint themselves with the brush of "further right" as they send what little $ they can to support a blatantly outspoken, yet clearly deluded man with whom, in reality, they've precious little in common beyond admiration for his disrespect of anyone who disagrees with his wild and varied speculations which reflect his puffery and egomaniacal imaginings based mostly in anger and self-doubt and a need to silence all dissention.  

Are these disparate pieces of "further right" in any way unified or in balance outside of their vitriolic, almost hateful energy - fueled by fear of losing control - over self and over others - over destinies.  Is racial bigotry and fear the unifying force within the "further right" today?  Does this man believe his religious righteousness is reflected, in ANY significant measure, within the agenda of those fringe groups who were emboldened by a recklessly deluded ex-president's rhetoric, filled with an endless chain of utterly false, baseless accusations fueled by one absurd conspiracy-theory after another... anger and - distrust and hate born of fear being the GLUE for this unhealthy reflection of a very malignant, tumorous growth upon the heart of what was once an honorable, if still fearful, basis for a shared vision of a return to honor and wholesome values which are based in a positive message of togetherness and not upon any judgment or inflation of gulfs which separate us from our fellow citizens.  All sides have allowed a sickness to penetrate and permeate within our ranks - highlighting our differences and exaggerating them - widening the gulf until we're no longer united within these "United States" which we all claim are ours, and ours alone.  We must find a way to STOP this division, this single, sinister path to .. what I believe is certainly ruinous - we have to recognize and acknowledge our own actions which contribute to this angry, subversive disunion.  In our democracy, when our votes have been tallied and we have suffered what we view as a loss, due strictly to a majority which has not agreed with our own agenda - we do not immediately cry "foul" and throw a temper tantrum, threatening revolution and sowing seeds of hate or violent discontent!  THAT IS NOT AMERICAN!!!!

   We work to bridge the gaps - to understand the things which compel ourselves and those who do not hold with all of our tightly held beliefs... we seek to learn and - to _compromise_ -- not our values or beliefs - but compromise with our fellows, by seeking common ground and SHARED dreams for the future.

Damn - we have to MAKE ROOM, in our visions for the future, for those fellow humans with whom upon all subjects we are NOT in full agreement.  How dull and -- truly dystopian the world would be if no one ever disagreed with any of our own opinions and beliefs.  Lord save us from such a false and malevolent vision of a shackled and constricted future.  WE ARE BETTER THAN THAT.  FUCK MAN... "Love thy Neighbor!"...   it doesn't say "Love thy Neighbor, so long as he agrees with you on all matters of opinion, taste and politic."

 RIGHT!?????

All of this is easier said - FAR easier said - than done, of course.  Well of course it is - 

Behavior on a forum. I rant against the ranters, or don't "doucherant" the noob

I had fun with this.  I had asked a question on a forum for satellite TV users, and got a scathing reply from some douchebag who didn't even realize I had asked a question, but rather thought I was making some technical assertion for my ego's sake, so he felt he had to put me in my place with a " we already know that" and "newbs always say what they know without reading...".  I had read the entire thread, had come across two completely contradictory posts, and was asking which one was correct.  Anyway, I decided to mess with the fragile forum-junkie for a bit.  The reason I decided to blog it was that I was so amused with myself and my utter brilliance with the hastily crafted response.  You already know that I am "aprilia1k" everywhere I go:

"

Quote:

Originally Posted by subeluvr I agree, but it's not too much to expect anyone looking for help to read back at least the last two or three pages in a long thread to see what the current info is because in many cases the answer to their question is in those last pages. Let's not forget that these are self-help forums and not do it for me forums...

Aren't they just called "forums"? ;-)

Or, perhaps "support forums?". I Really don't mean to be argumentative, but I am not seeing any mention of "self-help" OR "help me" in the naming. Just think the nomenclature is not necessarily universal. My point was clearly conceding that reading a little first is a good idea, but the venomous chastising (whether you think it is "deservedly" dispensed or not ) is never warranted. It's negative, infantile and rude. No need to say it again (do i need the last word or do you? etc...). I don't disagree with you about proper usage of such a thread; it's a courtesy to pre-read a bit to be sure. I am sure there are cases, as you say, where the answer is a page or two back. 

When I read this thread, I see a huge amount of chastisement, and these scoldings rarely ever ANSWER or ILLUMINATE, as though for punishment the offender must "keep reading" or seek elsewhere. If you're honest, you know I'm right. Go back and read it. All of that content just further obfuscates, hides the information a "NOOB" is looking for. And it explains why so many people start off their post with "I apologize if this question is stupid or has already been answered...". People shouldn't have to start off their posts in this manner. If, instead, the knowledgeable amongst us (not meaning myself) behaved like Rich and simply answered, helped - then the thread would be FULL of answers and illuminating info, instead of peppered with them, interspersed with the policing of the few upon the many.

It is clear that you are trying, and somewhat successfully for sure, to calm and soothe the "ogre" ;-), and I applaud you for that. Think that's likely why you posted this last one, to say "we understand', and yeah - kudos for that. Still, hope there's room for discouraging rudeness and perhaps for change. I stress this as being perhaps the most important point of all, on my part - while your "prickly but cool EE" is my "ogre under the bridge" within the forum, it bears remembering that, if he learns to lighten up, adjust the frown towards more of a smile with time, and to cut everyone a whole lot of slack - well, he will LIVE LONGER, be less-stressed and more healthy. That's not speculation, that's a fact.

Mods: I apologize if you think it's disruptive; I hope you see a little entertainment as well as a pertinent reminder for some serious-minded folks to enjoy themselves a little and to try being a little more courteous and friendly.

I apologize for the apparent "beating-of-the-deceased-equine", sincerely. But I think it's important to effect a shift in this unhelpful and discouraging behavior. People are afraid to post here. They start their posts with "I apologize" to try to avoid flames.

Speaking of which, I just got a private flame from the "ogre under the bridge" as I've decided to call him. You know who he is, he says he's an "EE" and at least half of his posts are attacks without any subsequent informative content. He says I "have nothing to show in public against (his) knowledge and experience". He just doesn't get it. It's not a contest. I also am not "out to get him" or compete. I am talking about rude behavior that discourages newcomers from even participating. I have analyzed the thread and there are _very_ few queries that had already been answered recently, if at all. There are numerous posts berating people though. If, like Rich, a person just simply sighed and "answered again", then the thread would be full of answers - and there would be fewer offensive NOOBs for the ogres to deal with.

My original post here was a question, stating (correctly and undeniably) that there was contradictory info regarding FS used by HR's... , and asking what was really correct please?

 He read it partially, didn't glean that there was a question, and thought I was asserting some technical info perhaps to inflate my ego or something, and - threatened by this - he posted an insulting reply that "everybody knows that" and "newbs always do this", paraphrased. It was very revealing in terms of the fragile ego and what-not, but it was also rude, unproductive and unjustified. He has never apologized to anyone on any threads I've perused, and is often, as was the case with me, outright mistaken about what was said or asked, or intended, cuz he's made it where it's impossible to tip-toe without hitting one of his toes. ;-) 

SMILE. I WANT YA TO LIVE LONGER, HONEST BROTHER.

Said equine thoroughly thrashed and buried. No more justifications. Wrong or Right, I'm asking for a little civility to future "NOOBS" (short for "NOt OBSessed with satellite forums) ;-) Just kidding, really."

Adaptation

Just need to get this down, before feeding the kid and hooking up my headset/mic so's I can give "talking" my blog and ... attempting the voice or speech interface of driving one's computer. 

The thing that others perceive as the person who is "me" - it's really, at best, a representation or a facsimile... no not a copy, a...  well, it's the interface, or interface , that is interacting with them.  The mind, well --- the speed of thought, for some - myself anyway - is just way faster than the speed of speech.  Like, for me, the idea of thinking out loud is ludicrous - beyond just verbalizing one or two specific thoughts anyway.   I couldn't possibly speak quickly enough to narrate, to verbalize, that mess.  By the time I speak a sentence, I've had dozens of separate thoughts - at least.  The sentence is, of course, often made far less comprehensible no doubt.  By the sound of it, you'd think that with all that time available, that every sentence spoken would be a gem, a true work of brilliance.  Heh.  Well, it is for some, more so than others - certainly more than I.  My problem is, I'm not really in control, not truly the master of my mind.  I envision trying to ride a wild horse that doesn't like being ridden, being sat on.  That's how I picture trying to "drive" this thing.  So - the fact that speech is a slow medium relative to thought means nothing, in terms of being able to do something amazing with any individual verbalization.  Sometimes I feel lucky to get a sentence, any sentence, out - in a semi-coherent manner.  I started out thinking about when I was a child - a bright, semi-precocious yet very naive (i.e. not street smart) child.  I started doing that supposed thinking-out-loud thing, I think in response to having just watched a movie that had a ton of voice-over narrative, y'know - inner thoughts stuff, done in voice-over.  Nic Cage was really damn good.  Guy has evolved a ton.  This was a movie done nine years ago too, 2002.  Oh well, better late than never.  I have to go do that feed-the-kid thing.  Eh.  My dog's my kid.  Maybe you understand.

My point about what others perceive as the person we are - just that it's clearly just the person we present.  Since most folks, in their daily lives anyway, are generally honest and not continuously duplicitous, then it's likely that the person presented is a fair representation of what's going on inside.  No way to be certain of that - not always - but it's probably safe to go ahead and assume it in most situations.  As far as really knowing someone - well, that is probably a lifelong endeavor for most reasonably intelligent people.  Maybe worthwhile every so often.  And of course there are exceptions - the rambling barrage of the over-sharer, the occasional verbal-dysentary afflicted narrator of one's own life.  There are always exceptions.  For me - I don't even know me.  Would probably make it difficult to be very good at acting - at least according to some.  Then again, perhaps I do, and don't see it clearly - a recurring problem for me.  Heh.  Oh yeah - kid.  food.  now.

Another ghost response to a proudly asserted falsehood - misconception maybe..?

"Lionesses are the true badasses of the Serengeti. they will kill a male lion at will ." - HUFFPOST SUPER USER lizsobelcolumbus

In Reply:

I don't disagree that Lionesses are badass -- but saying "..they will kill a male lion at will.." is pretty inaccurate.  The pride male is typically nearly twice as large as the largest lioness - and far more powerful - and she moves the hell out of the way when he charges in to take the first spot at her kill (their kill).  There are, naturally, quite varied personalities in any pride (like people - they're individuals), but by and large the pride male is definitely the badass - but he's also smart enough to avoid an angry lioness outside of the kill site or when attempting a pride takeover.   The stereotype of the lazy male letting the lionesses do the hunting and cub-rearing is well-deserved, but - credit where it's due - that same male is at least half the reason that her cubs will make it adulthood.  His continual "marking" the territory, dissuading, killing or chasing off all sorts of  threats - including competing males who will kill all their cubs as part of taking over the pride (a very common occurrence - unthinkable, but a part of the lion's genetic diversity imperative).   For a lioness to defeat, let alone kill, a healthy male lion - is the extremely rare exception. 

I knew this for a fact myself, but - anticipating some stubborn refusal to acknowledge (my apologies, just a gut feeling you could say) - I found a renowned and honored expert, and quickly located a quote of his assertions regarding this subject:

Prof Craig Packer, director of the University of Minnesota's Lion Research Center, told the BBC this sort of attack is "unprecedented".  Said Professor Packer, "We've seen examples of males killing females, and groups of females chasing away males, but a single female killing a male? Never heard of it."

Ph.D. in Behavioral Ecology, From 1978 was the head of the Serengeti Lion Project, the founder and director of both the Lion Research Center and Whole Village Project, as well as the co-founder of Savannahs Forever Tanzania. 
 

As for my own experience and reading, (naturally not worth mentioning after listing Craig packer's background ;-) - I've visited a few preserves in S. Africa, and to be honest never witnessed these confrontations, except for the male charging the lioness' kill (they usually do get outta the way) - but this is general knowledge that's easily verified.  The "cool" male lion - the "Pride Male", earns his keep by protecting his (and her) cubs from invading males intent on killing the cubs - as well as standing his ground with water buffalo (cub killers for sure -- they hate lions), packs of hyenas, etc..  (btw,  hyenas are an example of a true matriarchal species).    Anyway - I totally share your admiration of Lionesses, but the fact is that, frequently (i.e. statistically frequent), even two or three lionesses are too few to defend their cubs from a nomadic male lion in his prime.  Cubs get killed - all the time; the lionesses posture, fight valiantly, and often inflict injury but are no match for a massive male in prime -- and a few weeks later they go back in to estrus and end up mating with the new pride male - the very male lion that killed their cubs (provided he killed or chased off the previous pride male).   Brutal and unthinkable - but it's the way nature runs it's course for lions.  To give credit where credit is due, there are certainly times when lionesses succeed in fighting off a hopeful usurper, and there is plenty of ying & yang to be had - on average, a male lion is only able to remain dominant for about 2-1/2 years.  His reign is pretty brief, and his life is certainly no cup of tea on the whole (ejected pride males generally subsist - beaten and chased away from their pride/family, their large size and huge manes make them too visible to be the efficient stealth hunters the lionesses are.  They rely on scraps, etc.. and stealing kills from other predators like hyenas, cheetahs, etc..  Wow -- better go take a ritalin.  ;-)

This reply was a bit over twice the maximum size for a reply.  I didn't want to pare it down, even though it's far too verbose and straying...  oh well -- I'll simply post it here (or rather, add it to my unpublished posts -- which number about 8-10 for each published...  doh.

The State of the DAW Address - posted, un-posted, re-posted... a bit long in the tooth, but still representative of essential truth

First published 11th July, 2012 responding to forum posts discussing the top DAW tech of the day.

2021 - time-warped 9 years since writing the following correction to one or two posts I'd seen at that time.  I'm recovering and plan to rediscover my musical proclivities and continue creating my dream studio here, in home.   *********   -  Type a lengthy reply to an old thread, then chuck it... then revive it... and one more time now - 2013 - 2021 still the draft...

Damn - I'm officially "lurking". Well, I think you'll find that as the time goes by, it's going to be more and more difficult to wade through the debris of old posts - eventually we'll probably need a tech solution (perhaps HTML V's got something... dunno) to maintain relevant (this post is relevant and still current, even two years later) versus mostly ancient (reviews of hardware & s/w from 2001 are hardly relevant 11+ years later, after all.. yep, it's been awhile that we've been surfing now)... search engines will certainly continue evolving their ability to de-prioritize aged content yet recognize when it's useful or.. once more... relevant. Heck - I think I might need an upgrade m'self. oh well.. lurking or not, I've taken the time so I'm going to go ahead and share....

Dan Chapman: I remember using "Cakewalk for DOS" a very long time ago - 1991, in fact - using a Tascam 1/2" 8-track with my Korg M3R (M1 racked), Dx7, etc.. killer times. "Striping" the tape with a midi timecode track - I remember how cool it was the first time I went to record in sync with the synths - starting the sequencers when I hit Record (& Play iirc) and hearing the count-in before laying in to my (mic'd) guitar; pretty primitive to be sure - it was just cool how that "stripe" track told Cakewalk where to jump-to, and then kept it in lock-step with that MTC. If I'd only stayed with it... maybe tried midi-consulting, getting in to the studios early-on... (got married, went corporate (s/w), & shelved music for a decade or more... c'est la vie, eh? Cling to security and flee your dreams... let that be a lesson, kids.

One of the posts which prompted me to begin this response mentioned Cubase as follows: "I used Cubase and couldn't get anywhere with it"...   I wouldn't so readily admit that if I were you.  Cubase is patently easy to use, with tutorials and free video instruction available from Steinberg. Of course, if it was not a licensed copy or an active free trial, then that would explain such a statement. If you want to crack/steal, i.e. not-pay-for - an insanely killer DAW program like Cubase (or yeah, Pro Tools), then stick with the free/nag DAW ware.

Cubase, despite being strategically ignored by huge numbers of shill* bloggers (not Nathan, definitely) is arguably the most complete and powerful (features and function) DAW around, and is used by professionals all over the planet and within the environs of many highly prestigious commercial studios.  It's a digital audio powerhouse, despite PT being "Industry Standard" in the U.S., most notably in La-La Land as well as Nashville. 

Steinberg is arguably the most innovative and influential contributor to DAW technologies and standards, that's Industry standards.  They literally invented VST, significantly altering the DAW landscape and benefiting the entire community, irrespective of the particular vendor offerings and tools chosen.  Steinberg robustly support Cubase, their flagship product, with regular worthwhile updates and improvements , along with droves of highly usable (and often free) add-ons & plugins. Of course they are on the forefront of R&D as well, and maintain a wide array of products and tech across the entire range of DAW user-level, base tech and budget.  They were the quickest to fully embrace and support 64-bit (digital audio is among the most appropriate applications of 64-bit processing - at least for non-corporate s/w), for both Windows _and_ OS/X.   Cubase  6.5 has amazingly enhanced usability and state-of-the-art features & functionality - you're able to manipulate audio as easily as midi (real-time, super accurate and detailed audio editing - including individual note pitch and (event) length - we're talking audio, not just midi. It's incredibly easy to fix that one timing and/or pitch boner in an otherwise flawless performance (not talking about "autotune"-type features, which it also has for more general or sweeping usage). Of course a skilled editor could take a mediocre performance and turn it into a masterpiece as well, but clearly there's nothing like a true live-take performance for most of us.

I'm not saying that Cubase is the only smart choice - in fact, the competitive climate and the wide selection of available DAW platforms is of huge benefit to us consumers - keeping developers on their toes, working hard to keep or gain user market-share. It's natural to be somewhat bigoted when it comes to the DAW we eventually settle-in and get comfortable with, but statements like "nothing comes close to [my choice]" usually serve to betray an individual's ignorance - it's unlikely they've really taken the time to do an objective feature comparison, and their unique usage and needs may be quite different than the next person's.

Still - I have to admit that I've grown weary of the Pro Tools marketing/hype machine, and especially the shill-network, which consists of a large number of "musician/journalists" - PT (Digidesign for some time) were brilliant at penetrating the pro-studio market before the Music Business was totally wiped-out and re-written by the internet, and now the supposed "new economy" (Pro Tools was, and often still is, a lavish and enormous expense - proprietary, hardware-specific software - that really worked, and was easy enough for exhausted engineers to work with after a long night of recording. PT sales/reps were genius (devs too, yeah) - and, recently have wisely been relaxing that tight-coupling to proprietary hardware, although none-too-soon). The point is, Pro Tools is not the "only-game-in-town" that it is continuously billed as. Cubase has a large pro-community as well, both in the U.S. and especially in Europe and the southern hemisphere. There's definitely no "resting on their laurels" going on.

Use whatever works for you and floats your boat - and make music.


* SHILL: . "...someone who purposely gives onlookers the impression that he is an enthusiastic independent customer of a seller (or marketer of ideas) for whom he is secretly working..."

Best DAW review top five pick anyway:

"Cubase is a DAW with a storied history, created by German manufacturer Steinberg and released for the first time in 1989 on the Atari ST. Since then, Steinberg created not only successive versions of Cubase, but also created the VST plugin protocol, which is now widely used by software manufacturers to run programs, such as virtual instruments, within DAWs. Cubase is widely known as the DAW of choice among orchestral composers and orchestrators who create film music in so-called "synthestration," a virtual orchestra painstakingly recreated "in the box." Automation is spot-on, if the native effects are perhaps not as impressive as some other competitors in the field. The latest version includes the longstanding HALion sampler, the Time Warp Tool, as well as a real-time stretching and pitch-shifting function called Audio Warp" ed note: this was originally written nearly 9 years ago.  Needless to say, there have been plenty of changes these past 9 years, but - even without getting down to refreshing my DAW nous to 2021, I have little doubt that Steinberg are still delivering a top-tier, professional studio environment. When last I had looked, the now ancient ver 6+ had expanded Audio Warp to make it a seriously useful and powerful tool.. called vari-audio or ... vari... var.. something... ed. apology