The Random thought thread

[octave]

 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 

Edited Tuesday at 03:39 AM by octave

[willedoo]

6 hours ago, old man emu said:

Pete Townsend of The Who played around with reverberation using an electric guitar. No AI program would have thought to do that. When he achieved a useable result, other rock guitarists began to use the technique.

ome, I'm thinking you're referring to Pete Townsend's use of amp feedback, as in Jimi Hendrix style (at a later date). Reverb is a built in amp feature on a lot of amps or an add on device that produces a constant echo type sound, a bit like being right up the back of a big concert hall. If you turn the reverb knob too high it will produce a cyclical sound, a bit like tremolo underwater which is not nice, but the right amount of reverb makes a lot of people happy. Reverb is a constant setting on the amp, just like setting treble and base levels, or some people might use a foot switch to activate it. Feedback is where the sound from the amp bounces back and makes the strings vibrate, the guitar pickups detect it and send it back to the amp creating a high pitched squealing loop.

[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?”

 

 

[willedoo]

7 hours ago, octave said:

Music has often evolved because composers and performers broke the rules of their time.

You've got a good handle on it octave. This quote from your earlier post is an important aspect. Rule breakers have always pushed the evolution. AI by it's nature is rule based and at this stage in history is limited by that. Whether AI can evolve to become more human is something time will take care of one way or the other.

[onetrack]

I can always remember the story about Pete Townshend as a young man, when he went for a jaunt on a little motorboat that was propelled by a small two stroke outboard engine.

 

Pete was so mesmerised by the sound of the engine, combined with the burbling water against the hull - which both created a hypnotic, "sublime" musical experience, he claimed - that he fell into a hypnotic trance, and didn't realise he'd reached the shore, until the boat grounded in the mud! He's stated he's always sought to recreate that "musical ideal".

[old man emu]

2 hours ago, willedoo said:

ome, I'm thinking you're referring to Pete Townsend's use of amp feedback

I know where I was wrong. I saw the use of a switch on the guitar by Hank Marvin of The Shadows. Pete Townsends' feedback was the death cry of his guitar

as he bashed it onto the floor of the  stage

[facthunter]

The squeeze boxes make the Best Sound as they land when they are thrown on the TIP. The Bagpipes are an ill Wind that Nobody blows any good. I like a Symphony Orchestra.  Nev

[facthunter]

It's supposed to be funny.. Ha Ha. Nev

[rgmwa]

Here's another one of those swamp blues music videos that comes with an `Altered or synthetic content' notification in the fine print. Still pretty easy listening however it was created. 

 

 

'Altered or synthetic content': This indicates that a video contains content that has been meaningfully altered or synthetically generated. There are several ways that this information ends up in the 'How this content was made' section of the expanded description of a video.

You should expect to see this disclosure when:

1. The creator has manually disclosed the use of 'altered or synthetic' content in the YouTube Studio workflow. When content is undisclosed, in some cases, YouTube may take action to reduce the risk of harm to viewers by proactively applying a label that creators will not have the option to remove. Learn more about our 'altered or synthetic content' disclosures.
2. The creator has used YouTube's generative AI tools (e.g. Dream Screen).
3. The content contains valid Content Credentials data indicating that the entire video has been made with AI. Learn more about Content Credentials (C2PA).

YouTube will carry forward disclosures available from tools and creators with secure Content Credentials (C2PA) 2.1 or higher that indicate that the entire video was made with AI. This may include a label on the video player itself or language in the detailed description.

 

[onetrack]

On my new Samsung 26 Ultra phone, I just have to ask AI to draw me up a wallpaper image that suits my description. I typed, "I want a beach scene painting and nothing else, drawn in the impressionist style".

It promptly produced a very good "art-deco, impressionist style" wallpaper, with a beach scene with chalk cliffs behind the beach, art-deco style ships in the distance, and impressionist images of people and umbrellas on the beach. I'd give it 9.9 out of 10.

 

Edited Tuesday at 11:16 AM by onetrack

[red750]

Definition of a gentleman - someone who knows how to play the bagpipes --  but doesn't.

[rgmwa]

1 hour ago, onetrack said:

On my new Samsung 26 Ultra phone, I just have to ask AI to draw me up a wallpaper image that suits my description. I typed, "I want a beach scene painting and nothing else, drawn in the impressionist style".

It promptly produced a very good "art-deco, impressionist style" wallpaper, with a beach scene with chalk cliffs behind the beach, art-deco style ships in the distance, and impressionist images of people and umbrellas on the beach. I'd give it 9.9 out of 10.

 

Have you tried ‘bring me a beer’?

[nomadpete]

Yeah, I know it's about Donold. But a lot of his utterances are random brainfarts so .......

 

“what a job our military and— others are doing with respect— is that right, Paul? with respect to drugs coming in by sea. meaning drugs coming in by water. by the ocean— because a lot of people don’t know what I mean by sea. they think I’m talking about vision. I’m not— I’m talking about sea, like the sea.”

 

?

 

?

[facthunter]

That's OUR  POTUS.   T'know. The one who fixes everything. Brilliant and eloquent, Master of the Language. Nev

[nomadpete]

Maybe DJT was cunningly trying to implicate  the other see?

 

The holy one?

 

He doesn't like the pope much!

Edited Tuesday at 11:01 PM by nomadpete

[facthunter]

He's made that pretty clear. Nev

[red750]

Thank you, Jim Chalmers, for your budget last night. Today CBA shares dropped about $18, which cost the parcel my wife left for the kids  a bit over $10,000.

[Litespeed]

I am sure it will quickly bounce back.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Yep - banks don't lose value for long.

[onetrack]

1 hour ago, red750 said:

Thank you, Jim Chalmers, for your budget last night. Today CBA shares dropped about $18, which cost the parcel my wife left for the kids  a bit over $10,000.

But if you bought them at $20 in 1998, you'd still be pretty happy - especially when you count the massive dividends paid out on them annually, along with the stock splits.

 

One of SWMBO's Uncles was a CTB manager, and he was made redundant around 1997 when the Commonwealth was taken over by the Big Banks.

 

He got a $250,000 redundancy payout, plus 50,000 Commonwealth shares as part of the deal. He's never sold any of them, AFAIK. Imagine what he's sitting on now.

 

I bought 100 local Bendigo Bank shares in 2000 - $100 worth, because that's all I could afford at the time, because I was as broke as they make them.

I was a founding customer of that branch at that time. Other well-heeled people bought up to several hundred thousand of those Bendigo Bank shares at $1 each.

 

The shares paid 10% dividend for years, then they started paying 15% dividend, and the last few annual dividends were at 20%. But I know those profits have been at the expense of working people.

I only wish I'd had $100,000 at that time, I'd be one of the baby boomers Chalmers is targeting - and I'd be squealing like a stuck pig, too - as they all are.

 

I have no problem with Chalmers grabbing some money off the wealthy baby boomers, most of whom have made incredible capital gains over the last 30 or so years. Most are multi-millionaires.

[nomadpete]

10 hours ago, onetrack said:

the wealthy baby boomers, most of whom have made incredible capital gains over the last 30 or so years. Most are multi-millionaires.

Sorry, but most of me disagrees with that assertion.

 

Maybe just I don't mix with the 'right' boomers.

[onetrack]

Nomadpete, I'm a boomer and I set about making money from property and other investments during the period 1965 to 1995. I spent 30 years busting my gut, and along with other family members, ended up with several properties, including a 2000 ac farm. I estimate I had about $350,000 in accumulated assets by 1995, with at least a third of that being property.

Then our bank foreclosed on us with no reason (no arrears, nothing), just saying they had "lost confidence" in our ability to service our loans. So they demanded repayment of $1M within 48 hrs, which forced us to sell everything we owned, at fire sale prices.

No other bank would even look at our business, as they all ganged up on us, and said there must be something bad going on, that we weren't telling them. There wasn't, we had a good operational business with minimal problems.

 

In the washup, a 5 acre block in Perth city got sold for $300K, the farm was sold for $550,000, a 1 acre industrial block with a huge shed in Kalgoorlie/Boulder sold for $50,000.

 

In the years since, the 5 acre block in the city was subdivided by others, and it reaped multi-million dollar profits for them - despite capital gains tax.

The farm is now worth $8M, and has been sold about 5 times since we sold it, and each time, the "baby boomers" who purchased it, made massive capital gains on their investment.

The industrial property in Kalgoorlie is now worth several million - more baby boomers made huge capital gains from the ownership of that block of land.

 

The above capital gains have been repeated ad-infinitum by baby boomers. One contributor here talks about he's just poured $500,000 into a subdivision, like he's done the nation a favour.

He hasn't. He's made huge capital gains out of that subdivision, greatly enriching himself - and pushed property ownership out of the reach of young people.

 

I feel that Chalmers hasn't gone far enough to tax wealthy baby boomers who have nearly all made vast profits out of property of all types - which property has gone ballistic in values in the last 25-30 years.

I do feel for those baby boomers who never did manage to position themselves to make gains from property, because of their circumstances, or the inability to be shrewd with property purchases.

 

I could never regain a fraction of my former wealth, as I had to start again at age 46, suffering from no assets at that age, and therefore no borrowing ability - as well as now carrying a life-long hatred of greedy, avaricious banks - who place unjust gains in shareholder wealth above all else.

 

The baby boomers who are struggling with no property assets, have nothing to fear from Chalmers budget. The ones with banks shares can't lose, their financial gains have been huge, and will continue to be huge, because banks make monstrous profits - the Commonwealth made $2.7B in profit in the March quarter alone.

 

There has not been a year for the last 30 years, where the Commonwealth Bank didn't make a monstrous profit - and this, despite also having to pay somewhere around $1B in fines, for devious and outright illegal corporate behaviour, over many years.

 

There is a need for major wealth redistribution in Australia today, the wealth gap between the haves and have-nots, increases daily.

 

[red750]

The only property I have is the house I live in, fully paid off, no mortgage. My car is a 22yo Holden Astra I paid $6,000 18 months ago. I have no super, just enough in the bank to pay my bills and be cremated. When I pay off the $45 outstanding on my credit card next pension day, I will owe nothing. The shares in my name belong to the kids, due to my wife not updating her will. They were left in my name, but she said they were to go to the kids and I will honour that. They decide what happens to the dividends. I've said it before, when I go I want it to be with the very minimum of assets to minimise or eliminate probate.

[onetrack]

But you're still a millionaire, Peter - because of the massive increase in your house value. Asset-rich, but cash poor, that's for sure. There are thousands of baby-boomers just like you, and they are trapped to a certain degree, by the distortion in property prices.

But at the end of the day, you can always cash in on that major value in your house, and purchase something smaller and newer and easier to maintain, such as an apartment.

A sizeable number of my baby boomer friends have "downsized", and ended up with a major amount of cash to invest, thus allowing them to improve their lifestyle.

 

You seem to have a lack of understanding as regards legalities and taxes around deaths. "Probate" is the act of determining the validity of a will, and the Court examines the will, determines if it's valid and then issues a "Grant of Probate", which allows the executor of the estate to proceed with asset distribution and finalisation of the Estate.

 

If the family home os passed onto children, it can be sold within 2 years without payment of capital gains tax. If a superannuation death benefit is paid out, it can sometimes be taxed, depending on the circumstances of the beneficiary.

As you have no super, there's no super tax to worry about. As to the shares, there's no tax payable upon inheriting them, only CGT when they are sold.

 

There are no death duties in Australia, and there haven't been for many years. I feel our Govt should probably start looking at death duties, just as Britain had to reintroduce them, due to massive untaxed wealth gains.

 

Edited 2 hours ago by onetrack

[nomadpete]

One T, 

I apologise for touching a raw nerve. That was not my intention.

I simply stated that I do not know anyone in my age cohort, that can be classed as 'multi-millionaires'.

 

No doubt they do exist. But *mostly* they are people who already privileged. Your own story confirms the difficulties that normal people face.

 

I think is unfair to use artificially inflated housing values, as an indicator of personal wealth. Yeah, technically it is wealth.... on paper. 

Often such claims ignore the simple fact that the family home for most people, is not bought as an investment.

So you can sell it and be a millionaire - so long as you don't mind having noplace to live.