octave

Here is a video from a musician who has a pretty good YouTube channel. This video is about how AI music will affect musicians. It is 15 minutes long, so I understand most folks are not that interested, so here is a summary of the conclusion. (created by AI of course) 6. The conclusion: art survives, even if the industry changes The overall message is cautiously hopeful. The speaker accepts that: AI is not going away, parts of the music industry will change dramatically, and some commercial opportunities may shrink. But he argues that: artists will still create, audiences will still seek authentic human connection, and genuinely creative music may become even more valuable precisely because it is human. His final idea is that true artists make music primarily because they need to express something — not just to make money — and AI cannot take that impulse away. The tone of the video is interesting because it starts from real fear and grief, but gradually moves toward adaptation rather than denial. It’s less “AI is wonderful” and more “AI is here, so what parts of music remain uniquely human?”

The Lark Ascending by Vaughn Williams, mimics a Lark within the confines of the music. We are talking here of an inspiration for a starting point not reproducing something faithfully. Any the 5/4 is the thing that drives the rhythm along

Nevertheless, that was the composers inspiration. The problem is that you can't just put a break in music without interrupting the time signature in this case 5/4. Using Morse code as a starting point for the rhythm of a piece need not be perfect Morse code. The important point is "inspired by" Don't you think it is of interest? I do.

Yes but long long is M and short short is I

Here are a couple of pieces of music trivia. During war 2, the BBC would play the opening of Beethoven's 5th Symphony (which I think everyone would recognise) before news programs. The rhythm is short, short, short, long, which is the same as the Morse code for V. This became part of the V for victory campaign. Famously, Churchill used to hold up his fingers as a V but initially got it the wrong way round, which meant something quite different. The well-known theme tune to Mission Impossible, composed by Lalo Schifrin started out with that famous long, long, short, short, which is Morse code for MI

Although I love aviation, I find commercial air travel to be mind numbingly boring. There are however usually some moments of beauty. I snapped this last night on my way home from Adelaide.

The thing is that written music only gives you so much information. It is a l like a script for a play. Shakespeare wrote the words but different actors deliver those lines differently. For any classical piece of music you can find recordings by many different performers. If they were identical there would be no point in there being any more than one definitive recording. Composers also often leave a lot to the performer. Mozart for example did not generally use articulation marks (slurs, staccato etc) as most composers did preferring to let the performer use their own interpretation. There is also issues such as tone quality. My primary instrument is clarinet. It is capable of producing an edgy bright tone or a richer darker tone or a jazz tone

OME if you did stream there is now Classic FM 2 which has no talking, just wall to wall music. I often listen to this overnight.

I mostly agree but are you confident you can identify AI music from human music?

I would say, though, that that is also what many composers do. You can take any modern song and find bits of older music in it. This is not necessarily bad; in fact, I think it is good. This is why music evolves rather than just making random jumps in all sorts of directions. The question is, will AI in the future be able to do this?

Interesting question. I could just wimp out and say, “I’m retired now.” Music has always evolved alongside technology. The instruments available to composers today are vastly different from those available centuries ago, whether in orchestras, jazz, rock, or electronic music. Of course, AI is a rather different innovation. I think AI in music is inevitable, and like most technological change, it will bring both benefits and drawbacks. On the positive side, AI is a democratiser. It allows almost anyone to experiment with composition, arranging, and production. That could open the door for talented people who may never have had formal training or industry connections. On the downside, it may also lead to an overwhelming amount of average material. Music has often evolved because composers and performers broke the rules of their time. AI, at least in its current form, largely works by analysing existing music and reproducing variations of it. Whether it can truly innovate in the human sense remains an open question. For me, music is deeply human. I would rather hear a second-rate live orchestra or band than a flawless recording of a world-class performer. The imperfections, the spontaneity, and the sense of shared experience matter. In some ways, this tension has existed for decades, as recordings became increasingly engineered and perfected. Technology has always reshaped the music industry. In the 1940s, venues employed large big bands with 20 or 30 musicians. The arrival of the electric guitar and amplified music made it economically attractive to hire four or five performers instead. That was a loss in one sense — the big band era was awesome, but it also helped create rock and pop music as we know it today. I suspect AI will become very useful in commercial areas of music. For example, we may not always need a human composer to create an advertising jingle or background track. My concern is whether this eventually leads to a kind of musical “fast food”, content that is efficient and disposable, but lacks depth, individuality, and genuine human expression. In the end, I don’t think AI will destroy music. But I do think it may change what we value in music, and perhaps make the human element even more important.

Here is one of several options for apartment dweller's Community Solar Programs If rooftop solar isn’t an option, residents can buy into a community solar project, where an external solar farm generates energy for subscribers. This works well when: The building can’t support solar panels. Residents want solar benefits without dealing with strata approvals.

As I posted earlier balcony solar is coming. There are also schemes where residents can buy into an off-site solar facility. I also imagine that in the near future apartment buildings will be built with rooftop solar

I used to take a HTV from every party so as not to signal my intentions. I haven't done this now for many years. My next stage where I used to live was because I knew the local school where the polling booth was, I was able to enter from a direction that avoided the people handing out HTVs Fir the last few years I have mostly voted by mail and therefore have done my research about who to vote for online. I did vote in person at the last election so I researched online, came up with a voting strategy and wrote it down so I wouldn't forget. My area is a very safe seat so I usually vote for a smaller party or independent knowing who will win anyway.

The Victorian and South Australian Electoral Commissions regularly analyse ballot papers and have determined that around 40% of major party voters complete their ballot paper with their preferred party’s HTV preference sequence. The proportion following HTVs is even lower for minor parties and independents. The difference in follow rate is largely related to the proportion of voters who receive the HTV for a particular party or candidate. Obviously the probability of a voter copying a HTV recommendation is higher if they receive a HTV than if they don’t.

Just jumping back to the first past the post voting systems. Here are the countries that have that system. I can't really see a trend here as to whether these countries are better or worse to live in. First Past the Post (FPTP) is a majoritarian electoral system where the candidate with the most votes in a constituency wins, even without an absolute majority. As of May 2026, roughly 68 countries and territories use this system for their national legislatures, many of which are former British colonies. Electoral Reform Society +2 Countries Using FPTP for National Legislatures This list includes major nations and representative examples across different regions: The Americas & Caribbean United States Canada Belize The Bahamas Barbados Jamaica Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Dominica, Grenada, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, and Trinidad and Tobago Europe & Central Asia United Kingdom (for House of Commons only) Belarus (House of Representatives) Azerbaijan Electoral Reform Society +3 Asia India (Lok Sabha) Pakistan Bangladesh Malaysia Nepal (Note: Nepal uses a mixed system, but the plurality component is significant) Laos Africa Botswana Ethiopia Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Uganda, and Zambia Zimbabwe Oceania Cook Island Country Cook Islands Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Samoa, Solomon Islands, and Tonga Key Characteristics Plurality-Based: A candidate only needs one more vote than their nearest rival to win. Single-Member Districts: Voters typically elect one representative for their local area. Direct Result: It often leads to a "winner-takes-all" outcome, frequently resulting in two-party dominance.

I was referring to interest rates and I got those figure slightly wrong, typed over a boozy lunch. Just referring to inflation we have 3.3 compared to 4.6. this means that a $100 item in the US would be $103.30 after one year whilst in Australia that item would cost $104.60. This is quite a similar inflation rate. It doesn't really scream great financial management compared to atrocious financial management. Different countries have different strengths and weaknesses such as the size of the market.

Why are most Uber drivers ethnic? I don't believe Uber recruits on ethnicity. I am sure they don't give a toss about the ethnicity of the people who make money for them.

I believe Australia is 4.35 percent and the US is 4.35 percent. Not a huge difference.

Is this government responsible for high interest rates? Being a logical rational person I ask if high interest rates are only in this country. The US has quite a right wing government and high interest rates. Inflation and interest rates are high everywhere.

Channel 7? Their recent hatchet job on batteries was disgusting. Sure make your case but don't lie.

Immigrants are also taxpayers. My son's partner (who I guess you wouldn't approve of) is a high flyer and pays loads of tax. The immigrants that some people think are stealing their jobs are also paying tax.

I haven't looked into this however if true does not bother me. At this point I don't own an EV but the the more of these vehicles on the road the better for everyone. As a regular cyclist I can say that I would rather be waiting at the traffic lights behind an EV than a car spewing fumes in my face We know the kids who live near major highways have more respiratory issues. My son recently spent time in Beijing. He was expecting the air to be thick with car fumes however the air was surprisingly clear thanks to the uptake of EVs. Thus benefits all of society.

The thing with preferential voting is that I can send a signal. My seat is a safe seat, it has not changed hands in decades. Whilst I know my vote will flow through to the least worst of the 2 major candidates. If the winning candidate only just scrapes in then post election analysis may pus a party right or left depending on where the preferences are coming from. A strong One Nation vote is a signal for the major parties to the right and a strong flow from the Greens may signal something different. No system is perfect.

I am not sure that more than 50 percent of voters follow how to vote cards I am the go today so I have not thoroughly read this article but here is a link. https://antonygreen.com.au/do-how-to-votes-matter-evidence-from-the-2022-sa-election/ The Victorian and South Australian Electoral Commissions regularly analyse ballot papers and have determined that around 40% of major party voters complete their ballot paper with their preferred party’s HTV preference sequence. The proportion following HTVs is even lower for minor parties and independents. The difference in follow rate is largely related to the proportion of voters who receive the HTV for a particular party or candidate. Obviously the probability of a voter copying a HTV recommendation is higher if they receive a HTV than if they don’t.