Arturia’s V collection includes a Buchla emulation. Personally I find it (the Buchla) impenetrable but YMMV. If you’ve got some MIDI controls lying around already you could have some moderately inexpensive fun.
You do you. I backup and install once the RC goes live. Have done for years. Only problem I recall was a few years ago Homebrew got in a tizzy for a day.
One exception maybe is for music producers. For some reason AU/VST/DAW developers don't seem to take part in the beta programs and their software can take a while to get updated. But I've happily been playing with Bitwig (with some Arturia VSTs) over the weekend on Golden Gate without issue.
I keep the studio computer OS a full version behind.
My impression from audio developers is that the audio infrastructure is very badly documented (like so much of MacOS nowadays) and using it properly requires a combination of luck, WWDC videos, and devrel threads. Also, Apple introduces changes that are genuine improvements in theory, but break undocumented assumptions.
The lack of rigor is a bit surprising given that audio is probably the only mission-critical hard-real-time thing MacOS does. People routinely run an entire live concert on a Mac and an audio glitch is not OK! (Yes, if it’s Taylor Swift budget then there are at least two machines in sync with a big red button to switch over…)
But given what they’re dealing with, I understand why it’s more involved than just “the developers didn’t try the betas”.
Their point was more that, if every 'weekly download count after a new release' (or whatever record) is consistently being broken on each new release due to generally increasing popularity, then it doesn't make sense to imply causality between the messaging around this particular release and its already-expected record-breaking status.
But that is perfectly consistent with the downloads incrementally going up all the time. It doesn't say anything about whether the recent policy changes increased that rate.
Excuse you? What I originally said was "I don't understand your comment". They posted a clarification, and the clarification still doesn't make sense. No, I haven't read the download numbers. How is that going "well akshually"?
No, it doesn't. If the claim is just that download numbers are not consistently trending upwards, they should have just said that. I would have no trouble understanding that. What they actually said is "Libreoffice didn't say the numbers were going up, they claimed a specific record." Well, so what? Nobody said Libreoffice said that! The OP said that, because if it's true, then it's not surprising that the latest stat (release or not) is the highest ever. Nobody in the thread so far has said anything that contradicts "the numbers were going up anyway, therefore the record might not be to do with the AI policy".
The numbers graph is spiky and I can imagine you could argue either way that they are generally trending up or not. But that's irrelevant!
This objection is completely meaningless unless the download numbers follow a consistent upwards trend. You are simplifying the new record to a boolean, but most people still find meaning in extraordinary events happening, even if they follow a general trend.
So I fail to see this discussion as anything but sophistry until anyone demonstrates that the download numbers are totally ordinary. It's typical HN contrarianism without any value, because it's enough to argue for the possibility of something, even when the data for checking it is easily accessible.
I think the confusion is that robrain somehow understood smokel's objection as being "all-time total downloads obviously increase over time, so this is meaningless", rather than what smokel actually said which was "the number of weekly downloads has simply been increasing over time". Which is why robrain quoted LibreOffice's "This is the highest number of downloads in the first week”, to counter the idea (which nobody suggested) that the record was just about all-time cumulative downloads going up.
That's then what tempfile was questioning how it contradicted smokel's claim (because it doesn't, just an imagined claim). Your points, that if the number of weekly downloads isn't actually consistently increasing then this could still be meaningful, are valid - but irrelevant to tempfile who was wasn't arguing that this is meaningless; you should argue that to smokel instead.
This is genuine news report covering remarks made in July 2026 by Robyn Cahill, the Northern Territory (NT) Minister for Trade and Business in Australia.
Statement Background
Cahill made the comments leading into the NT Investment Summit in Darwin while pitching an economic plan to make the Northern Territory the "data centre capital of the globe". Addressing the significant water requirements for proposed projects—such as Energy North's Project Ares data center—she argued that extracting subterranean water was necessary for planetary stability:
"There’s scientific evidence to suggest that we have so much water underground in the Northern Territory that it actually impacts the axis of the Earth when we have a really bad wet season. So we need to use some of it, otherwise we might find ourselves flipping the poles again."
Also have floaters, but I suspect that if you’re the sort of person who notices and is annoyed by tinnitus (like I have been in the past) then you’re possibly also more likely to notice other body sensations, like floaters, audible heartbeats, tics, etc.
I know I go through phases of noticing stuff. When I just get on with living I no longer notice them, unless I go looking for them.
It's possible to be opposed to excessive copyright and also be opposed to the mass theft of media for profit and subsequent abuse of copyright that the scrapers are guilty of. The AI pillagers are taking everything in, then gatekeeping access. And as they acknowledge with their "nothing after 2022" preferences, they (or their users at least) are salting the earth for future seekers of knowledge.
There's a substantial economic literature on this topic.
Among other factors: time value of money and future-value discounting mean that economically ever-expanding copyright terms offer virtually no present-value benefit.
Most works see virtually all of their economic value in the first few years of publication. There are some (rare) long-tailed exceptions. The original US copyright term of 14 years, with extensions, actually fits the economics pretty well.
What extreme copyright duration does do is:
1. Create vast copyright-holding monopolies, often of works for which authors were poorly compensated if at all. (For the latter: academic publishing.)
2. Create a vast category of "orphan works" which aren't or cannot be published, in the latter case because rights simply cannot be clearly established, or competing claims (survivors, estates, publishers) exist.
Grab BBC Basic manual (supplied with the computer) off the shelf, switch my Model B on (later Master). Within milliseconds a fresh working environment is created (ie a cursor starts flashing next to a “>”) and I’m off to the races.
Hope the tape recorder works to save my work every hour or so. Switch on my Epson fx80 to dump hard copy.
Those manuals were fantastic. I was still coding on our Beeb in the early 90s and I wanted the assembly manual. My dad ordered it from Acorn but it never arrived. Ended up going to the small claims court to get our money back.
In the late 90s, I wanted to learn x86 assembly and sent an email to Intel asking for their reference manuals. They sent four huge volumes to me for free. I've no idea whether that was a mistake, but I was very grateful.
I still can't believe any of us were able to write programs just from reading books, and I'm not sure to what extent that's even possible today. Even online documentation now seems really crappy compared to those old manuals.
Apples are kept in cold storage to extend “the season” across the year. No guarantee you’ll get fresh apples in a supermarket even if you see workers harvesting them as you drive to the store.
We’re just finishing a two month Norway-focused motorhome jaunt. We planned the ferry from UK to Rotterdam (both directions) and two campsites in the Netherlands and Germany. After that it was two campsites ahead at most. Ended up visiting 21 campsites with no wild camping needed.
We’re both somewhere on some spectrum (and in our fifties) and it has been occasionally stressful for my partner. But we more often want to stretch a visit somewhere than curtail it, so flexibility has been pivotal to getting the most out of the trip.
We’ve identified five or so camps that we’ll definitely revisit next year or 2028, but they’ll be part of another freewheeling trip, I hope.
In general I’m a planner, a contingency-identifier and a worrier, but when we’re on the open road most of that goes out the window.
reply