Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 4 hours ago, LesPaulLord wrote: Does anyone know a way to write music on a program that would make it sound like "old" RPGs ( FF VII, Chrono cross, etc.) ?

There are soundfonts that utilize the old SFX of various games (I've seen them for Secret of Mana, for example... though since I use Reason I can't verify how they sound, myself). That'll imitate the timbres of older games.

As for writing styles, that's a much more complicated affair. Just study the music and see the patterns that a given composer uses and try to imitate it. That's about the best anyone can offer on that subject.

At 36 minutes ago, Ignyte wrote: Yeah I sent him a PM before posting this thread.
Just wanted to find out if anyone else was encountering the same problem.

I have the same issues, and I find it's specifically a Chrome problem. My flash works virtually everywhere else, I'm up to date and still there's a missing plugin problem. What makes this even stranger is that it worked at the beginning of the redesign, and then it suddenly just stopped working.

It works on Firefox so far, though - as a temporary fix you can make the switch, for now. I hope it's fixed soon, though, as I'd rather be using chrome for most of my internet travelling.

Yeah, it's doing a similar thing for me, which is strange. It was working fine for about a day after the redesign, then it suddenly gave me the missing plugin message.

I'm using Chrome right now. It still works on Firefox, though... maybe it's a glitch with Chrome?

At 2/5/12 12:34 PM, sorohanro wrote: Well, I see why this kind of legislation can be made.
It's because people let it. I see here on NG almost no reaction of this, no site blackout, no official statement, no musicians outraged, not too many posts in the thread, no community protecting itself.
That means we will probably get the legislation that we deserve for our ignorance and laziness.

Mmm, and what would all that wonderful stuff do for us? Unlike the previous bills, this is something that's signed and kicked out the door already. While the European members among us can fight against it, the methods used against SOPA and PIPA would be meaningless.

Don't confuse laziness with the conservation of energy for the shit to come. Site blackouts, official statements and the like are a waste of time and energy on something like this - a different approach would be necessary, and it would need to be an internationally shared agenda. It's one that also hasn't been devised yet - if anyone knows how to unite to global population that's affected by this then I'll join that band wagon.

Oh wow, I didn't even know this sort of thing existed on here. Neat - I don't think I'd be able to review things on a constant enough basis to be a member, but I don't think you guys would mind if I dropped a review from time to time based on this thread, eh?

Since I'm here, though, a review of a track of mine that's gone under the radar would be appreciated.

• 
  Magnus Divinicus Chiptunicus by Gario

  Click to listen.

  Score

  4.33 / 5.00

  Type

  Song

  Genre

  Video Game

  Popularity

  81 Views

• Loading...

Thanks :)

Oh sure, why not - I enjoy a good conversation on skype as much as anybody.

TheGreatGario

At 2/1/12 04:32 AM, Chris-V2 wrote: Yup, that's about right - though the pulse/rectangle/square oscillators just have a variable duty cycle. 0, 12.5, 25, 50, 75 and 100 if I remember right.

Correct.

Does the noise channel have filtering capabilities or is it purely a volume sensitive white noise? Can it do polyphony? (can one white noise burst overlap another?)

Yes, IIRC. I don't believe the system allows for overlap, which holds true for all of the channels. Two channels can overlap each other though, obviously - using two rectangles that had the same oscillation settings and offsetting them by a tick or two you could create reverb of varying intensity. Some games also used the PCM channel as a percussion set (Mario 3 is famous for that, in particular), allowing for more complicated drum lines, or even saving one channel for SFX and the other for the music.

I think you missed the point of what I said, guys - I was simply explaining why they were called as such (and within that community, the labeling is pretty universal - have you heard anyone talk about 4-bit or 6-bit music lately?). Whether or not the music actually uses said number of bits is completely irrelevant - it's what these things are called, and I'm providing the reasoning behind it. It's pretty much the same thing as explaining why America is called America and not Columbia - it might be wrong, but it doesn't change the fact that it's the reason why we call it what we do.

I'm not arguing specs; I'm explaining the naming convention. What's so hard to follow about that?

Sorry, but that's the exact marketing speil they used that we use now to call dual core machines "Virtual Quad". According to wiki the NES sound format is a few fixed oscilators with, at most, 4 bit variable velocity. The 6 bit PCM output is interesting, as it's fairly efficent. There's also a Delta-Sigma out, which is a technique now used for oversampling and basicly involves 1 bit turning on and off really, really fast. However the master output was 7 bit, loosing a bit to encode it I imagine so it could be kept seperate from the video. The video was also 8 bit.

Yeah, I know most of that. I write and study chiptune music (specifically for the NES), I know how to use it and how it works. Specifically, there are two 'rectangle' oscillators that are variable in timbre, volume and arpeggio programming (as well as employ certain effects, such as fade in/out, pitch bend and the like), one triangle oscillator that can vary in only pitch, one 'noise' channel that can be programmed to make various white noise and a PCM channel, which is a very lo-fi sampler (I don't remember the specifics as to how low the sample rate needed to be). VRC6 added a saw channel and two more rectangle oscillators, as well, but it was rarely implemented on the NES (Castlevania 3 was one of the few games to employ it, and only the Japanese version did so). A shame, since it produced more interesting sounds than the Megadrive or the SNES, imho.

Hence why I specifically said 8-bit did not refer to the bitrate of the sound channels, but to the (advertised) bitrate of the systems. Whether or not the systems are truly 8-bit and 16-bit doesn't really matter, either - that's how they were marketed as, so that's what names musicians have stuck with.

The naming conventions you presented are interesting, though (Delta-Sigma... I didn't know that was the name for that technique; Here's a sexy example of it, by the way - gotta pimp out Silver Surfer, when the opportunity arises). Always something new to learn, eh?

At 1/31/12 05:09 PM, Computer112 wrote: Btw, NES chip only generate 4 bit not 8 bit. Do you mean SNES?

The NES was an 8-bit console. That's what the '8-bit' stands for, not how many channels it could produce or the bitrate.

SNES and Megadrive are 16-bit, for that reason, even though those use completely different methods of creating music (sampling vs. hardware synthesis). If people wrote in the style of the SMS (Sega Master System) it would also be considered '8-bit', since that was also an 8-bit system.

At 1/31/12 01:34 PM, Computer112 wrote:

To teh 'true' 8-bit war

What's with the fight over 8 bit musical tools?

People who get upset at others who want true 8-bit don't really get why people want true 8-bit. The fight over tools is because some tools impose the proper restraints of the NES machine while others don't. It's really, really cool listening to what people can do on these restrictions, and even cooler to think about the possibility that these sounds could have been in an NES if the composer was writing NES music back then.

I mean, how can you listen to something like this (which is 8-bit, by the way - made in Famitracker) and not be a little excited at the possibilities?

I'm not against people that want to just have an NES/Megadrive effect in their music (I mean, that's all I ever do, personally - I love that stuff); I just don't like it when it's proclaimed to be '8-bit' since that's a different thing, altogether. Know what you're arguing for/against before you get upset at people arguing for/against it.

Ich, sorry to step on your toes, there. I don't think that's anyone's intent.

All we're saying is that this is one case where the free options are also the best options (better than the alternatives, in this case), given someone who wants to write 8-bit music. There might be worse programs out there, but we didn't suggest those.

Famitracker really is the best there is in this degree, and no DAW with the right synths will be better at 8-bit music because there's more to making that music than making the synths sound right - the stringent rules and structures are just as important. It's possible, but it's actually more difficult to achieve the desired sound in a regular DAW than it is in Famitracker. That's all we're saying.

At 1/29/12 03:42 PM, Trampzy wrote: ...Why would you just go get free programs? Whether it's freeware or stolen you're obviously not going to get anywhere at that rate.

Um... most of the best tools for making authentic 8-bit sounds are free. Famitracker (for NES), VGM Music Maker (for Sega) and MODPlug (for any sample based sequencing, like SNES) are all the best tools for the given job since they recreate the tools that the old systems used in order to create their sounds (whereas even with the best DAWs and sample it's tricky to really recreate the old sound, though it's still possible, as stated before). They are also 100% free. I seriously don't see the problem suggesting free stuff when it's the best that's out there for the given job.

At 1/29/12 05:12 AM, midimachine wrote: I dunno. Maybe I'm just too used to how the various trackers sound, but when I hear stuff like what Gario does I'm rarely impressed by the 8-bit imitations (and in Gario's case impressed by just about everything else, wow!)

Aww shucks, thanks :)

I must say that Nick's little bit there sounds pretty damned authentic - done in a DAW, done right. Technically better than what I do, in terms of 8-bit emulation.

In all honesty, it's entirely possible to make 8-bit music using normal DAWs and proper synths. However, unless you really know older hardware inside and out (the limitations, the waveforms, the underlying techniques and why these things were done) then it's not going to sound 8-bit, at all. Trackers force these limitations on you, so while it's a little tougher to make sounds, once you can it's far easier to make 8-bit music that feels like it came from an older game.

I mean, virtually all of my 8-bit music / 8-bit effects are made in Reason with Subtracktor, so it's entirely possible to be convincing using regular DAWs. It's just more difficult than people think it is, since the limitations are where the unique 8-bit soundscape develops from.

Have you read the bill, djack? I haven't, and I'm not shouting in horror until I do, but unless you have then aren't you technically on the same boat as anyone who's proclaiming doomsday on it?

The only thing that I heard about the act (it's not a 'bill' or a law, it's an international treaty) that makes it different than 'looking at cookies' is that ISP providers are to retain a history of information packets that have passed through their servers for up to 18 months. I have absolutely no clue how that's even feasible, but whatever.

If someone could clarify where people are getting these numbers to satiate my own curiosity I would appreciate it - otherwise I have better things to do than to freak out about something that we have no power to change since it's already gone through President.

A compo where you need to compose what you can in a two hour time period? This guy hosts this sort of competition every week, if anyone is still interested in doing that sort of thing.

Oh hey look, Destructoid made an article about the site's illegal activity.

It seems to be getting a more and more notoriety on the internet, by the day.

At 1/24/12 05:59 PM, Special-Ed wrote: Gario, which song was it that was stolen? I listened to most of your songs but didn't come across the one they're selling.
(your music is great btw)

It's a track that's unpublished on NG. It's an OverClocked Remix album track released a month ago (Wild Arms - Armed and Dangerous; you can look it up, if you'd like), and it's a part of the deal that I'm not going to go publishing my individual track elsewhere. Just type in 'Wild Arms' in the search and look for my name on the legalsounds place... don't buy it, though, because it's a free album you can download on OCR.

And thanks - glad you like my music :)

As said before, SOPA would not have affected this site - it only would have blocked it from USA's domain, so we wouldn't be able to view it.

While I could expect SOPA to be brought up in this thread, I'd rather people take an honest look and see what else they've stolen and act on it, if possible.

Oh, poor xkore...

I know xkore has had his stuff stolen before, but these guys are taking music from all sorts of people. I mean hell, they're selling some of my music and selling it back for nine cents more than it's worth. It seems that they like taking free music and selling it to people who don't know any better, so check them out and see if they're stealing your music, as well.

I've seen legalsounds take music down before when attacked with angry letters, so go shout them down if you don't want them making a profit off your hard work. They might take your stuff down on request, but overall it seems the whole site is based off of stealing other people's music and charging for it, which is really pretty fucked up, in general.

At 1/23/12 02:07 PM, SolInvictus wrote: well i'm glad no one here is having a censorship fit that megaupload is down, but the rest of the world's (or maybe just its loudest and lulziest) position that this is an example of evil gov censorship has me befuddled.

In all honesty, it just makes me want to ask why they needed SOPA if they had the power to extradite a foreign company. The one thing SOPA was trying to address (and that I thought needed to be addressed, though not as they did in that bill) was foreign infringement sites because they were out of our jurisdiction. If they can shut down websites like that then I see SOPA as pointless. :/

Call me crazy, but I don't see the big deal, here. Would I do it to my kid? Probably not, as it's very inconvenient, but I don't think it's the life-scarring event that everyone thinks it is.

The most damage that will happen to the kid is how people will try to overcompensate while teaching the kid that he is, in fact, a boy in some form or another, if that happens. Other than that, the kid is five, the kid really won't know too much better in a few years (when he's been interacting with other boys his age for a considerable amount of time). Odd childhood, but it wasn't really a psyche damaging one.

I think it's a very strange thing to do with a kid, but I don't think it'll cause as much damage in the long run as people are saying it will. Just leave it be and let the people live their lives, they'll all be fine. :\

At 1/19/12 09:25 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 1/19/12 03:07 PM, Malachy wrote: Consider this a warning.

It's hard to argue alone against so much people. Now I know why Cellar and Musician were the way they were...

It's a road hard travel'd, admittedly. I empathize, as a person who takes less popular stances on most issues. Save for this one, and since you're starting where we left (which was because of MAG, I admit) then I'll just continue as it was.

Actually, there are numerous pieces of due process that work exactly like this. We haven't seen a flood of arrests and search warrants, have we? Just because due process occurs after the fact in some cases, does not automatically equall massive abuse of the system.

The clause that people are pretty unambiguously arguing for is this one "... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law[.]". Taking down a website prior to informing the owner is not currently an allowed practice, and so is retrospectively a violation. Technically if this were to pass, then it would actually be proper due process to take a site down without warning because it's now written into law. However, that is only correct after the fact (that is, if the people allow this to become law), and is therefore moot, for now.

In a way, I agree with you... but now it's simply a matter of the fact that people don't want that to be written into law, in the first place. I guess the more accurate way of putting this is that people don't want due process to be a case where they can't confront the opposing party until after the assumption of guilt is applied.

Where in the Bill does it say that the sites that are shut down are eradicated?

It doesn't need to say it in the bill. What do you think happens when Tom can't pay for a server to hold his information? The bill cuts funding, and without funding Tom can't keep the servers running, and they remove the material so they can support the next paying customer. It's not explicitly in the bill - I'm running a number crunch with logic and coming to this conclusion myself (and if you want to verify this, ask Tom if this would be the case - if he says otherwise then I'll retract my statement).

First off, you don't go to jail for copyright infringement unless it's egregious. And guess what? That has ZERO to do with this bill. if someone believed he was commiting flagrant and wanton piracy as such to trigger already existing stautes they could arrest him. We don't need SOPA or PIPA to do what you fear here. Also, this is a perfect example of after the fact due process.

Jail and/or paying the companies back. It was an inclusive 'or' function - he might not go to jail, but he does become liable for all possible damages from uploaders on his site. I get this conclusion when the bill states that the target is...

(Sec. 102. b. 1. B) an owner or operator of a foreign infringing site.

That makes him personally liable, and since action is taken before due process, that means he's going to be suffering the consequences before he has the chance to act. Also, because the action is 'In Personam', that means that whatever action is taken, it's not only against the site (that is, material being taken down), but also against the person (the offender in question is to pay restitution according to what the law requires - that's not specific to this bill, so I cannot say specifically what that entails; assumingly restitution for damages at least, though).

The only way to be thrown in jail during any civil proceeding is to commit contempt of court.

Jail is jumping to conclusions. I HEARD that it'd be on the level of felony, but I haven't found that yet so I'm not going to assume. If someone could kindly point out where in the bill it states that it would be appreciated.

I retract that statement.

First, I am pretty damn sure Tom has enough money to afford attorneys.

I disagree with that, outright - in a war of attrition (which is what court cases - and especially civil cases - are about), Tom doesn't have nearly the resources that the companies he'd be counter suing would have :/

Again, due process isn't as static as you think it is. The shutting down of a site with a hearing after the fact is well within the definition of due process.

Read above - in short, it's not within the current mindset of due process, as it stands, though if it passes then it technically will be.

By asking for an up front due process you are essentially claiming that the liberty to operate a website is more important that the liberty of movement (not being incarcerated).

I'm claiming that property (and possibly liberty, if the claims that it'll be a felony hold out to be true) shouldn't be taken away until proven guilty in court. Which isn't possible for some foreign websites... and yeah, that is objectively a problem with the current system. I don't think most anti-SOPA/PIPA people deny that, though - they just think that this isn't the answer.

Seriously, when is the last time you have seen a law that was abused so much?

When my former sister-in-law buttfucked my brother in court through perjury, fraud and parental kidnapping (I'm not kidding) and hid behind an emotional performance to evade the regular enforcement of the law. The legal system ignored her felonies (of which she has committed a few) because there is no money to pursue them.

Well, you asked.

above that, when was the last time you have seen a law that so directly could harm a fundamental Constitutional right that has been abused?

NDAA, if people are correct on it. Though I haven't investigated it myself, so it may or may not be a valid concern. A debate for another time.

I argue this position more out of a distate for how the other side is run (just like my opposition to OWS) than out of support for it.

Eh, I feel you - personally I wasn't much for that movement myself for similar reasons. I did, however, agree with many points that they made and wish they approached the whole thing a little differently.

...When only 3-6% of your group can make a cogent argument to support their side, the group really needs to rethink itself.

Arguing that a position is wrong because most of the people are stupid is an ad hominum. If only 1% could make a coherent argument and everyone else followed, if that argument was absolutely perfect then I don't think that the position would need to rethink anything.

At 1/18/12 10:30 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 1/18/12 11:42 AM, VenomKing666 wrote: SOPA and PIPA are dangerous, and the amount of shit you can pull out of your ass won't change that.

And you have connected any of your claims yo exactly what text in either of the bills?

Seriously. I see so many people going against this bill and I KNOW none of them have read it.

I think I pretty systematically showed where in the SOPA bill the shit hits the fan earlier in this thread that you're choosing to ignore at this time (namely the ambiguity of the bill, the sites that would be collateral damage and the bypassing of due process - in which the exceptions made to it are covered in the 5th amendment and SOPA does not qualify for). So far your response was 'Yeah, that is going to happen, but that's not that big of a deal'. These things are dangerous for many, many people whom commit no online crime (including myself), and to me you've simply downplayed them and said 'No, that's not a big deal'.

When people read the bill and expressed what was wrong in clear detail using the bill's own language, you simply said it's not really a problem when based on people's reactions it obviously is. You lost your 'SOPA supporters are idiots' edge when people actually HAVE pulled it up and reinvented the wheel for you, so just quit your 'anti-SOPA people are stupid and can't read the bill' rhetoric; you don't have that leg to stand on anymore.

Interestingly, at MAGfest the Extra Credits folks said to keep an eye on OPEN (in a good way) and see if people can shape that one up to being a decent anti-piracy law that people can agree on. It's supposedly more open to suggestions at this stage, so it might be wise to give it an honest look before lumping it with PIPA and SOPA.

I don't think they needed to. The assumption that there was nothing before the beginning of time is actually a religious one, not a scientific one. Needless to say this is breaking the thread, though, so I'll leave it alone, from here.

I didn't see a thread about this up here, so here's a MAGfest thread for everyone.

http://magfest.org/

Read up. Nobuo Uematsu. James Rolfe. A slew of arcades & VGM concerts. It will be the shit for all of us VG + VGM fans out there.

If you're in the DC area, come on down. If you come, share your experiences here.

At 1/3/12 06:52 PM, adrshepard wrote:
Let me know when scientists figure out how to recreate the beginning of existence.

Big Bang? Hadron Collider? I think they're working pretty hard (and pretty successfully, might I add) at that.

At 1/2/12 09:57 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:
If you bothered to read through my replies, instead of just getting huffy about some vague statement I made in the initial post, you'd see I linked an article that has scientists arguing from both sides of the coin that I found informative and thought could be informative for the rest of the class.

Huffy? That's needlessly rude. My question was set in a neutral tone, there, as I was honestly curious if science finally had an answer to that question. You made it sound like it was medical fact, the way you were bringing it up. If that link earlier was seriously your proof that it is now scientific fact that the fetus is not human at conception, then... well, according to that link, it's not a fact, yet. It's still under debate.

The single sentence you provided from that link only shows the disposition of the writer of that one scientific article. That's not a proof that it is or isn't human at conception any more than the quote "Scientific and medical discoveries over the past three decades have only verified [that it's a human at conception]" is. You're making things out to be more than they are, with the link provided.

Also, keep your head screwed on - not everyone is out to get you, even if they disagree with you on something. If you're pissing on people that have an honest question you're just going to make enemies out of people, which is never beneficial.

At 12/28/11 03:53 PM, djack wrote:

At 12/28/11 03:26 PM, Gario wrote:

At 12/28/11 01:44 PM, Camarohusky wrote:
Now on Parody, NG is very safe. Parody has never been outright protected, but the fair use cases of the early 1990s (2LiveCrew) put parody in a very safe position in terms of fair use. Parody has a very large leeway in using copyrighted material in terms of parodying it. It's rare that a parody even come close to the line, so NG is well in the clear.

See, there's the problem, right there. That's precedent, not law, and that sort of thing would need to be argued in court in order to be heard, which this bill bypasses completely. Frankly, if the bill didn't bypass the court like it does I wouldn't be nearly as offended by it as I am, at the moment. The bill revokes due process by the way that it's written. You don't have the opportunity to discuss matters like precedent and fair use because due process is revoked by the way the bill's written.

Despite what you may think judges and lawyers are quite knowledgeable about the law including case law (what you call precedent) and they would be well aware that parodies are in fact protected. Furthermore if someone did try to abuse this like Tom believes is possible you can still appeal the decision and sue over lost income if you're unfairly attacked through this bill. For example lets assume Tom is right and some company tries to BS Newgrounds out of business, it wouldn't take long to get the decision overturned and get back advertisers. Furthermore Tom could sue the company or individual that made the false claim to get back all lost income from the site as could all of the advertisers and the sites that upload games onto Newgrounds to spread word about their own website and products. At this point a single lie has made them the target of several lawsuits and failed to take Newgrounds off the internet.

Oh derp, forgot to look at this one. Haaahaha, I think you miss the point entirely. The magic words are...

DUE PROCESS

You're assuming that to be the case in your statement, when the bill explicitly makes it clear that this will NOT be the case. Again, if I'm wrong, bring the section that brings due process to the table and I will admit that I am wrong and worry a whole lot less about this bill. In the meantime, though...

Alright, let's take the hypothetical case that someone in a court doesn't know about the rights people normally have on the internet (this is not as unrealistic as you'd like to believe - judges are humans, and humans are prone to mistakes). It would not be very hard for a good lawyer to make a case against sites like Newgrounds that they're infringing on intellectual property by dedicating entire sections on IP that isn't released to the public. Sure, it'd be easy to make an argument that it's parody and should fall under fair use... but no one is there to make that argument, and not all judiciaries are familiar with how internet copyright works. Without due process, only one side of an argument is heard, and it's a lawyer's job to make their case sound very reasonable.

You claim that Tom could make an appeal and claim damages. Tom does not have an option to appeal until the damages have already occurred, since there is no due process. Damages, in this case, is not income, but the loss of information; if the site is shut down for long enough - while DNS removal doesn't rid Tom of the site, the lack of funding could easily starve him of the means to pay the price of his servers if the companies stalled the case long enough - then it's entirely possible that the flash movies + audio + art from this portal will disappear. How would you expect the company at fault to repay that loss? There is no price on free material, so that would simply be a loss on Toms part. No repayment, since there is no price on it. Even if Tom could get money out of the deal, what good does that do most of us? The material is gone - it's not coming back. How could it?

That's assuming Tom isn't in jail and/or paying back companies for copyright infringement. In the bill, not only is the attorney general to act 'in REM' (that is, against the property involved, as stated in Sec. 102) B) 2) ), but also 'in Personam' (that is, against the actual owner of the site, as stated in Sec. 102) A) 1) ). It's kind of hard to appeal when you're in jail, isn't it? Yes, this all happens before you even know what the fuck you're being accused of, because of the lack of due process.

Can Tom sue? Sure, assuming he's not in jail/bankrupt, and he'd be able to get those that attacked him in the first place to pay for the legal fees, even (that's all in the bill, fortunately). That is, if he could afford the retainer for the lawyer in the first place (for a member of my family, a simple divorce case retainer was 5000$, and the case due to stalling has so far soared to over 40k$ without an end in sight... fighting against a larger company with stalling tactics would be astronomically more expensive). See, suing someone is not a financial option for many people, simply because that initial cost is prohibitive - even if they can get the money back if they win (not a guarantee, mind you), most people can't financially last to the end of the legal battle. I can't say for sure, but I don't think Tom is a rich person (if he is, correct me - this is just a guess). You need a lot of money to be able to pull off such a maneuver, and most people will not have the money to do so.

Finally, you make the statement that they would 'fail to remove Newgrounds from the internet'. Tom would not have a chance to respond until after Newgrounds was removed from the internet and actions were taken against him. While he might have a chance to bring Newgrounds back from the blacklist with a lot of work & money after the site was removed, it doesn't change the fact that with a simple, irrefutable claim a company could easily remove Tom's site from the internet. I don't think you understand how powerful a tool the lack of due process is - while everything you say about Tom's site is true, if one foolish judge can be convinced otherwise, and if no one is there to refute the claim, then none of that matters, since no one will hear your side of the argument.

At that point, it doesn't matter who's wrong or right. It doesn't matter what's legal or not. Fuck, it doesn't even matter if the site is pirating anything. Without due process,there is no voice for Tom's site. Due process is a fucking important piece of the court system - without it, there's no voice from opposition, so the law moves forward without silly things like people explaining their position to the courts.

Due process - it's that important. By the way, I would love to be convinced that I'm wrong. Seriously, I would love to see that I'm blowing this out of proportion, as that would make me much, much less worried about this bill. It would be a relief, in fact. Unfortunately, no one has been able to properly address my issues with the bill. People have sidestepped my issues - Camarohusky has mentioned why due process helps pirates do their thing, for example - but failed to actually address them, as of yet. PLEASE give me reason to stop worrying about this, as I would love to be able to stop thinking about this.

Alright, I have oa few guilty chord progression pleasures that I love to use in my music (though it makes no sense writing it in roman numerals, so here's a sample chord progression).

cm-BM-ebm-DM-f#m-FM-am-AbM-cm-BM...

Or another progression, which is quite fun:

I-V6-bVII-IV6-bVI-German+6-V-I