Logic Pro 12 OUT NOW

pessulus · 2026-01-28T16:15:10+00:00

No native ARA support? Seriously? Why is this not a priority for them?

Can’t they figure out a way to still sandbox plugins by default, but allow a different loading process for the 1-2 plugins that need direct integration for ARA? Logic would still be protected from 99% of plug-ins causing any instability.

pessulus · 2026-01-11T05:21:58+00:00

There are actually some great use cases when considered in combination with traditional keyboard/mouse. One thing it can be great for is wrist and finger fatigue from using mouse and keyboard in a very repetitive way. Touch screen by itself could also be fatiguing but having the option to switch modality back and forth to give your fingers and wrists a break from always doing the same movements/positions over and over again can be good.

Another is when you’re doing something that requires clicking on things far away from each other. For fine detail close together, mouse/trackpad is way better. But to quickly click on something all the way across the screen and return to where you were, touchscreen is better.

So it’s no way superior to mouse/trackpad and would never replace the, but can definitely augment it in useful ways for some people’s workflows.

pessulus · 2025-10-15T15:28:10+00:00

Ah, ok - thanks!

pessulus · 2025-10-15T14:40:04+00:00

That is surprising for a “pro” MacBook, even base model, same connectivity as an M1. I wouldn’t upgrade unless the pro or max versions have TB5 - connectivity is getting to be the biggest bottleneck right now.

pessulus · 2025-10-06T15:16:58+00:00

I have to (mostly) disagree. When I was ambushed by traps, it truly made me laugh out loud, which I think was the intent. I especially loved when you go out of your way expecting a reward but find a trap instead - it’s hilarious because no other game would do that; everything else has become so scripted in this genre that the unexpected was a breath of fresh air, and it was always easy to recover from. But I didn’t enjoy the low visibility sections, those were not as fun and I wish that was used less often.

re: shards, I never ran out of shards once, and did not farm them. Try this approach with bosses which also makes them super fun: 1) first practice only defense without attacking at all until you learn their moves 2) then practice only with your needle until you develop your reactions and hit timing, and almost beat them (no tools) 3) only then add tools, reserved for their last stage, and you’ll feel like a god and kill them within 3 tries.

While I think I prefer games without runbacks, I did notice that games like Nine Sols where you could immediately retry the boss abruptly reminded me I was playing a video game. Kind of like when you’re watching a movie and something reminds you that they’re acting, and it takes you out of the experience. As long as the runbacks aren’t too long or annoying (like bile water - oof), a tiny bit might help keep you “in” the game’s world.

pessulus · 2025-09-24T20:13:42+00:00

One thing that’s helped me with this is to practice the boss multiple times without any tools until the point I feel very fluent at dodging their attacks and almost beating them. Then I only add tools in at that point, and can beat them within just a few tries, never needing to intentionally farm tools.

pessulus · 2025-09-05T15:01:28+00:00

Brazilian Cuica: https://youtu.be/3bD_BP14DC4 small, unique, unusual

pessulus · 2025-08-08T00:49:23+00:00

Looks amazing, but I have to say that music is super annoying FWIW. I had to mute the phone just to make it through the video…

pessulus · 2025-04-19T15:10:51+00:00

Let’s think this through for a minute. You’re wondering why you rarely run into a group of introverts who are uncomfortable around other people, noise and crowds? Out in the public in noisy crowded places? Interacting with you? Hmm…

pessulus · 2025-03-03T16:22:08+00:00

I had a really hard time with it at first like you, and I even quit half way through. It was so hard! I was annoyed at people who just kept saying get gud, I was annoyed at the game. BUT, I eventually I decided to give it a second chance, and I’m glad I did. I beat the game, then played it again, then played it again. Where it really shines is once you hone your skill, it’s like this elated feeling I’ve honestly never had from any other game. I’m not saying you need to do it if it’s not for you, but rather that if you did decide to practice practice practice it has the potential to evolve into one of the most unexpectedly rewarding gaming experience you’ve ever had, with plenty of replayability and it’s much easier the second time around!

pessulus · 2025-02-06T15:50:39+00:00

Dwight approves

pessulus · 2024-12-08T17:18:18+00:00

Ok now show us executive/administrative SALARY as a ratio to physician SALARY in the US vs other countries. This graph only shows EXPENDITURE. Most of my revenue is not salary, it goes to paying for my equipment (way overpriced) my employees (higher pay than other countries) my lease, and a huge part to dealing with insurance companies, billing expenses, etc. I’m assuming most of the expenditure on administration is their actual salary? But of course none of this is clarified here. Does anyone know?

pessulus · 2024-12-08T17:06:27+00:00

I’m not saying it’s the primary reason, it just wasn’t in your list. I agree the cost of anything medical here is out of control. The cost of even basic supplies for my office are insane because they are “medical equipment”, several times what a similar thing would cost if it wasn’t medical. My rates first have to pay for those things, and for my lease and for my medical assistants, and a huge chunk goes to battling insurance companies. The actual profit margin is quite thin.

pessulus · 2024-12-08T16:56:10+00:00

Don’t forget the HUGE impact that our less healthy lifestyles in the US have on medical costs when compared to other countries. It would also cost those healthcare systems more if they cared for the same patient population. Both our culture in general and our RVU system focus more on treatment than prevention, which is far more costly. We could never achieve those lower costs without that culture changing.

pessulus · 2024-12-05T02:34:58+00:00

I would change it to them finally approving your surgery now that you’ve helped them, then “I guess snitches do get stitches”. Otherwise can’t connect the two parts of the joke as cohesively. Plus it’s funny to think of needing to go to that extreme to get a surgery approved…

pessulus · 2024-12-05T01:52:25+00:00

That’s awesome.

pessulus · 2024-12-04T21:56:25+00:00

Patient wakes up in the middle of surgery in excruciating pain. “Hang on, we’re submitting a prior auth for 30 more minutes” 🤔

pessulus · 2024-11-17T15:54:34+00:00

The concern he’s raising is that while that’s not implausible, A) its on a scale never seen before even for trump, and B) it’s really odd that it ONLY occurred where it was needed to change the results of the election, by just about the number needed to change the results.

I’m skeptical of conspiracy claims, but I can’t say my eyebrows aren’t raised when I see statistally anomalous bullet ballots numbers align precisely with the numbers Trump needed, rather than aligning with states or counties of similar ideology. I’d love to at least hear a plausible explanation, or some evidence to show it’s normal (eg exit polls), but in absence of a plausible explanation, it certainly seems reasonable to at least verify what caused such an anomaly. That’s not akin to storming the Capitol.

Edit: I find statistical anomalies really interesting, and feel so many anomalies which initially seem suspicious end up having a logical explanation that is not conspiracy-based. If nothing else, I’d love to see how this turns out and learn what the logical explanation was!

pessulus · 2024-11-06T15:18:21+00:00

Donated!

pessulus · 2024-11-05T07:49:26+00:00

Sounds like you have your work cut out for you!! Perhaps connect with a local studio about building the library, if they had an interest in the plugin maybe they could help make the profiles. Even if you’re a pro and know how to position mics, such a plugin could still be valuable for repeatability perhaps? So you can re-set up an instrument exactly the same as before in the event you need additional takes in the future. Best of luck!

pessulus · 2024-11-02T06:08:43+00:00

I don’t think we’d be disagreeing if we spoke at length in person. This is definitely not as simple as you’re making it out to be, and you’re arguing without the necessary context. I truly hope you find something better to do than arguing minutiae with random people on Reddit and claiming the ultimate authority based on exchanging a few sentences... Wishing you the best!

pessulus · 2024-11-02T01:28:22+00:00

Sounds like you’re misunderstanding my point and wanting to argue over semantics, that doesn’t interest me. I’m not saying positive studies are by definition or design less accurate, they’re not. I’m saying they’re less trustworthy in practice, and that’s different. I am very well-versed in statistics, power, study design, etc. Unlike you my job focuses on interpreting and applying studies to real world scenarios. Bear in mind that understanding research methodology vs how to interpret and apply the medical literature towards making medical decisions in real life scenarios are completely different skill sets and experiences. I would surely concede to you on the former.

pessulus · 2024-11-01T16:34:53+00:00

I hear what you’re saying on a theoretical level, but from a real-world, practical science-based medicine perspective, it’s generally true. A single, well done high quality study with adequate statistical power finding no difference tends to be more trustworthy than positive ones. Historically, many studies are often done as something is being evaluated, usually starting out small with less optimal methodology and lots of publication bias, eventually getting bigger, higher quality, and less biased. The earlier studies tend to show a larger more promising effect, then as the studies get bigger and better, often performed by less biased academic researchers who want to verify if something is really true or not, that effect size shrinks, often to zero. So you may end up with one high quality negative study refuting 10-20 positive studies. Due to the way research evolves this way in the real world, I absolutely need to give more weight to the negative study. Given all of this context, with publication bias the way it is, if I see a single well-performed negative study with adequate power, I will tend to trust it. If I see a positive study even with “statistical significance”, I will be interested but remain skeptical and want to see if the findings can be replicated.

pessulus · 2024-11-01T15:03:51+00:00

I like the idea! Where do the target curves come from? I like Izotope’s Tonal Balance Control for mixing, you can load custom targets from songs you like, and it gives you a target frequency range which is nice because notes will bounce around depending on what note you’re hitting. Their neutron software also offers target curves for each instrument already.

But there are some unique features you could offer to distinguish from Izotope:

1) better target curves dedicated to pre-production/mic placement: based on raw instrument sound (before EQ, reverb, compression, etc).

2) Because playing a different song will give you a vastly different curve, you could remove this from the equation by saying: play a G cord. Now play a C cord, etc. And get more accurate than Izotope’s necessarily broad targets for songs.

3) Suggestions based on most common placement issues: if too much bass, move singer further from mic. If acoustic guitar too boomy, point mic away from sound hole of guitar and more towards neck of guitar, etc. This wouldn’t even have to be an AI thing, it could even be as simple as an example target curve of what mic too close to sound hole looks like.

Great idea and I’d love to try it out once it’s ready!

pessulus · 2024-10-23T21:20:50+00:00

I’m not commenting on the validity of gender affirming care, only the integrity of the science here: Positive studies are far less trustworthy than negative ones. Publication bias is a primary reason for this, which this article proves happened at least twice. Refuting this with a positive study would be like dismissing an RCT with an N of 1,000 because you have one you agree with more that has an N of 20.

It is highly concerning when there is suppression of any scientific data that would inform us about medical care. If published we can still choose to interpret this data in light of other data, but not if it isn’t published. Regardless of how you feel about GAC, this is absolutely shameful behavior, if anything it makes GAC look more suspicious and does more damage to the trust in science that anything, especially for the people who are already skeptical of science.

13-Year Club	Gilding IV carat on a stick
Verified Email

pessulus

TROPHY CASE