@quid i didn't bother making sure you / amwhy would see them by tagging because I assumed they were mistakes and had already forgiven this (at least perceived?) mistake, ill decide if i should comment on the post to this effect later. BTW hillarious room name and sorry for the disagreement

@CalvinKhor You said nothing offensive there on meta. I'm glad you spoke up there, and that you came here. And I apologize for (intentionally) misspelling your name; as @quid suggested, I was merely trying to "prove a point" in the debate there on meta. That is, I doubt you'd be terribly fond of another user choosing the name Calvin Knor.

oh, so it was intentional! haha. Its really no big deal. If you didn't tell me, that would have been lost on me. I don't know why the universe has decided that a lot of people misspell my name, but I reckon I wouldn't be able to function normally if I felt the need to correct every single one of them. So I let it pass as a rule

In any case, @CalvinKhor, no need to apologize for disagreeing on meta. It can be a "disagreeable" site, in general, and most folks come to know that. But your contributions are valuable, because they are clearly well intentioned.

@CalvinKhor Yes, my misspelling was intentional, but not quid's (@quid is known for occasional typos :P to quid!).

@amWhy Maybe because it would be my first, but I think there would be quite a lot of novelty in that. Extra points if they answer abstract algebraic questions which I can't do. But I can accept that it would affect you differently

@CalvinKhor :-) You're a good sport!

:-)

@amWhy I still feel the need to apologise, I really don't like disagreement, it takes a lot of conscious effort for me to not agree with the person I'm talking to (the one exception is logical errors e.g. in maths)

But just for historical purposes, @CalvinKhor, I've had my username hijacked a number of times: AmWhy, amwhy, etc. etc. In all fairness, the mods did not act until after I brought the most recent username to their attention.

@CalvinKhor I'm glad you posted here, because as a rule, I do not relish disagreements. I think people would disagree a lot less often if we take the time to get to know each other. I mean, there would still be disagreements, but not as many heated arguments.

that's not something I knew, so thanks for pointing that out @amWhy

@CalvinKhor Not a problem. You are clearly a reflective person, and I'm glad you stopped in! Indeed, this room can be fun, too! So keep on checking in!

@amWhy i think so too. and I might :) need to get some food now...

@CalvinKhor Go eat, but come back when you can! :)

:) bye for now

Hi there @quid!

Hello @CalvinKhor Thanks for stopping by. Thanks for the explanation. At first I was quite puzzled what you meant. But checking the comments I indeed found the typo.

hello @amWhy

@quid I left you a message or two elsewhere. But I know you are busy, and it is well past your bedtime! Time to sleep!

@amWhy yes I am going through everything

@quid Nothing catastrophic. Everything can wait until after you get some sleep. :-)

But if you feel I've stepped out of line, feel free to let me know. But first you must get some sleep!

@amWhy I'll try to do that soon. See you!

@quid I'm getting sleepy myself, and your seven hours later than me!! :-) G'night!

@amWhy , :-)

if I type @q , who gets pinged?

@quid , I love it

@XanderHenderson ,I got

@quid I was compelled to message here because your comment response was quite long, so I was afraid that I left too much in between the lines. I think I'll leave that comment thread as-is

@q has @Qwid first in the list for autocomplete, maybe that's it

@XanderHenderson It can happen in chat that you ping several users at the same time. For example, it's mentioned here Avoid pinging multiple users in chat

Or here: Disable three-letter pings from chat to save Oliver, Olivier and Olive from Oli's pings. Probably you can find many similar posts.

I recall something about minimum of three characters, but that's probably only in comments not in chat...? It is mentioned here: How do comment @replies work?

> If the first word in the display name is at least three characters long, then there must be a starts-with, case-insensitive match of at least three characters in the display name. This means @a and @ab will never match anyone, unless a user uses a first word that is only two characters.

@MartinSleziak Yes, I was rather hoping to annoy @Qwid and @quid with that ping. I wasn't actually asking a genuine, good faith question about the functioning of chat. :)

But now I have roped you into my shenanigans!

lol

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Well, as I said I am not sure whether that rule about three characters is only about comments, or whether it holds in chat too.

holds pinky to mouth

(Dr Evil and I even have the same haircut!)

What I'm really waiting for is the day that I get a professorship. My students will be required to call me Professor X.

@XanderHenderson I'd be waiting for that day too! (You could change your username here to let me know about it :p)

@XanderHenderson ,I remember you got a professorship post?

@XanderHenderson ,hoping that you are much less frighting than him ^_^

@Qwid No. I do not, as of yet, have a job for next year. I have another interview tomorrow for a 1 year CC gig (which could, potentially, be extended to a permanent contract, the equivalent of tenure in that particular location).

@sai-kartik , feel free to do so

@Qwid okay!

@XanderHenderson ,good luck!, Wear a good perfume and hairstyle😂

@Qwid @XanderHenderson doesn't have to do much to maintain a hairstyle xD

@sai-kartik , that's the joke :-)

@Qwid I would actually recommend strongly against wearing perfume or cologne to an interview; many people have chemical sensitivities, and will react quite poorly to such.

In any event, it is a virtual interview, via Zoom.

@XanderHenderson ,as you wish

As to hairstyles, I only have the one.

@XanderHenderson make sure you're nice and shiny.. especially at the top xD

Oh, wait... the interview is Thursday. Today is only Tuesday. Tomorrow does not equal Thursday.

@XanderHenderson , I am imagining you as Dwane Johnson

No, not even a little bit.

@Qwid 😂😂😂😂

@XanderHenderson ,get some muscles, u should be fine

@Qwid Meh.

@Qwid yeah hit the gym like twice a week

@sai-kartik Ugh... that sounds like hell.

Or maybe all 7 days..

@sai-kartik ,get some equipment at home, works out better

True that

If I want exercise, I'll walk down to the bottom of the hill to get groceries, or walk to the top of a mountain.

Gyms are awful, loud, smelly places.

@XanderHenderson ,cardio is best

@XanderHenderson ,I have never been to a gym, just go for a jog and rest at home

@Qwid My knees got destroyed fencing, so jogging is pretty much out for me.

I have a boxing bag and some skipping ropes,works out well

But I can manage 5-8 miles on level ground, or 3-4 miles on trails, without feeling too much pain.

Try boxing

Last year, my sister and I went on a hike which was meant to be 6 miles, but stretched to 13. I couldn't feel my legs by the time we got back to the car.

And I have little to no interest in boxing.

Again, it is loud and smelly.

I'd rather go for a walk.

See this

And go for it!

This is better than most of the stuff

Made me laugh like helll

@sai-kartik,hi

@Qwid hey!

@XanderHenderson just to confirm the @q did not ping.

@Xan

@Xand

@Xande

@Xander

Yes @Xander is the name.

:-)

@XanderHenderson, I also later realised that it pinged because I had turned the notifications on for this room on

ping! ping!

ping ping ping!

so many ping!

YAY!

pong! pong!

@quid Sad face emoji

:'(

Ping! Pong! Pang! Pung! Peng! Pyng!

@XanderHenderson At least you don't cheat like @quid cheats!

(Recalling the Dang! exchange!)

@amWhy Heh

Pøng!

Pång!

Püng!

Cheater!! ;D

Just did some reminiscing about music of the sixties, which I first became acquainted with in the mid to later seventies. This was from the 1984 Grammy's:

It's more than just those two songs, and ends with Let the Sunshine in! (So it is on topic in this room, right @quid?)

Joan Baez is the cousin of one of my committee members.

Trivia: Who can name the largest number of artists that join John Denver and Joan Baez on stage in the above medley?

Oof...

@XanderHenderson Wow! Small world!

I'm really bad at faces and names, so I would likely not be able to name very many

@XanderHenderson In response to my trivia question? I know I can name at least five or six. Hint: one is a comedian, most are musicians.

@amWhy Yes, indeed.

I'm watching it now.

Apparently it was the 1984 Grammy's 25th anniversary closing.

John Denver... at 2:45 is a youngish Joan Baez.

@amWhy yes certainly. I'll be back later. See you all!

So much better than Dylan's version. :)

@quid You gotta promise to view the you-tube link I just posted, when you come back!

okay... at 4:45 there are too many people...

and I don't seem to recognize any of them

EDDIE MURPHY!

okay, I got one...

Ray Charles

Little Richard, maybe?

Oh, my goodness! Bill Curtis sounds so young!

@XanderHenderson Maybe...

Oh, shoot... I know who that is in the funny tophat...

Also Stevie Wonder...

Yeah, that's all I got.

Dionne Warwick, possibly James Taylor (not sure on that one).

And I think Linda Rhonstadt (spelling?) But not sure on that, either.

@amWhy I didn't notice her, but I don't think that I could pick her up out of a lineup.

And Lionel Richie is there too, @Xander.

@amWhy Man, I feel like I should have noticed him.

It's sort of humorous to see all the people (in the audience) dressed in formal dresses and tuxedos, clapping along (and not all of them clapping in rhythm!)

@amWhy Which is sad, considering that it is the Grammys.

@XanderHenderson Seriously!!

I was an early fan of John Denver's: Went to three of his concerts when I was 13/14. His life ended too early, but he was doing one of the things he very much loved to do immediately prior to his death: piloting a plane.

Indeed.

John Denver was never a favorite of mine, but he had an obvious talent.

@XanderHenderson I was drawn to folk music (in the sixties and seventies sense of the term), though that music preceded me, in time. John Denver, Peter, Paul, and Mary, Harry Chapin, Cat Stevens, Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Neil Young, Crosby, Nash, and Young... Simon and Garfunkel. Hard to nail down the genre.

I think John Denver got wrongly cast, earlier on, at least for a while, as a "country singer", but I'm sure "Thank God I'm a Country Boy" (Early on) contributed to that.

I like Simon and Garfunkel quite a bit, I find the Guthries interesting, and there is some folk-adjacent stuff which I like, but folk is not something that I typically choose to listen to.

And, for whatever reason, I really don't like Peter, Paul, and Mary. :)

Oh, and: Dylan is a descent poet, but I can't stand listening to him "sing".

@XanderHenderson I'm not sure that "folk music", as previously defined, exists anymore.

@amWhy Likely not.

@XanderHenderson Oh, I agree with you there! He was a fine poet and song-writer, but not much to rave about wrt his singing!

At least, not on the popular landscape.

There are quite a few acoustically-driven singers and groups around producing folk music (whatever, precisely, that means), but they perform mostly at smaller venues and festivals, and don't have much mainstream exposure.

I think Peter, Paul, and Mary got more traffic when singing Blowin' in the Wind, than he ever did!

@amWhy No doubt.

@XanderHenderson Yes, I think you're right on that. What do you think of Cat Stevens? (his songwriting and music, not his religious shifts, per se).

@amWhy I don't know a lot about him---I probably wouldn't recognize him if I heard him.

@XanderHenderson Morning Has Broken, perhaps? I'll link two of some of my favorites.

Listening to Crosby Stills and Nash at the moment.

I like quite a lot of their work.

@XanderHenderson I very much do too.

And don't forget Kansas. Their considered folk-adjacent, right?

Dust in the Wind is a favorite, if for no other reason than the fiddle solo in the middle.

@XanderHenderson Absolutely: wonderful song.

@amWhy He's got a nice voice, but I'm not, in general, a huge fan of solo voice---I wanna hear more harmonizing.

@XanderHenderson I understand. I like solos, but also harmonizing, depends. I'm pretty eclectic. I think one of the reasons I love Simon and Garfunkel, was because of their spectacular harmony.

@amWhy Yeah, those guys could sing.

Too bad they ended up hating each other.

And that Art Garfunkel was so useless on his own. :\

@amWhy That is more enjoyable than the previous. He actually seems to be enjoying himself.

@XanderHenderson Indeed! He seems to be having so much fun!

@XanderHenderson I know. That was an unfortunate outcome. I continued to enjoy Paul Simon after the split.

YouTube recommended the following along with Cat Stevens:

I've always liked her.

Oh, me too, @Xander!

One last music video for the day. k.d.lang, singing Leonard Cohen's Hallelujah: absolutely amazing, @Xander.

@amWhy,@XanderHenderson, here's my Beatles favourite, youtu.be/m8LbJfC0SYM

@amWhy Interesting... Leonard Cohen's Hallelujah is iconic... I wonder how one might top it...

@XanderHenderson Leonard Cohen actually credited k.d. lang for outperforming him. They'd performed it together a few times, too.

@amWhy It isn't Cohen, but it is not bad. What I like about Cohen's version is that it feels very raw and spontaneous, whereas this version by KD Lang feels much more practiced and polished; it doesn't carry the emotional weight for me.

KD Lang is a much better singer, I think, but I prefer Cohen's version.

A duet, however, might work.

@XanderHenderson I hear you. I think no one can duplicate Cohen, so anyone to succeed with the song would need to do so via their own variation.

@Xander, you seem rather eclectic yourself, wrt music. I'm impressed.

@amWhy I comes from growing up in the family that I grew up in. There was a lot of vinyl running around, which encapsulated my mother's taste in popular music from the 60s, and my father's love of Cream.

As well as my grandfather's taste in classical music and early Jazz.

And I've sung in a number of choirs, which have introduced me to all kinds of stuff (as well as a bunch of Anglican liturgical music).

And I listened to a lot of house, trance, and west coast hip-hop through college.

I generally try to keep an open mind when people recommend music which they like, because you never know what you might enjoy.

@XanderHenderson I agree with that open-mindedness. I've come to appreciate world-music (at least once named that)... There's little I do not like. But I am not inclined to like heavy meta. But that might be because of over-exposure from my siblings to heavy-metal in my teens. My sister dragged me to a RUSH concert, and I swear I didn't regain my hearing until two days later. And the behavior in the crowd seemed ruthless, compared to my peaceful and loving experience at John Denver's concerts.

@amWhy I hate metal concerts. Hate hate hate. Too loud, too many people, etc. But there's a lot of music which falls under the umbrella of metal which I rather like. Rush included.

But metalheads suck.

Or should it be Mëtälhëäds?

Diareses are metal, right?

@XanderHenderson Yes, I believe so.

@XanderHenderson Perhaps the rush concern I went to was poorly carried out. I didn't mind hearing my siblings playing Rush albums, but the concert was over the top (not in a good way).

I don't know the distinction between metallica (sp?) and metal and heavy metal. I think the terms/genres may have changed over time.

@amWhy I find most live music to be pretty hard to take, but metal audiences are the absolute worst.

@amWhy I don't get all of the fine distinctions, but I have a couple of friends who listen to metal, and will lecture for hours on the differences between black metal, death metal, heavy metal, kitten metal, etc.

@XanderHenderson Oh my gosh! I don't think I need all the fine details!

Though I'm absolutely sure I would not open anyone's link to a group in the death metal genre!

Heh.

@Xander I sometimes that the extreme metal appeals to folks with anger issues. I don't know. Perhaps they find extreme metal cathartic, which helps them deal with their anger. It would be fun to conduct a study to see if their is any correlation between music genre preferences, and personality ;D

@amWhy One of the guys who I work with listens to metal while working. He claims that it is relaxing, and helps him focus.

He is also one of the least angry people I know.

Super laid back.

@XanderHenderson Wow! Who knows? I think everyone must find what they need with respect to the music they prefer.

@amWhy thumbs up emoji

@Xander But there is noting worse than repetitive elevator music when put on hold!!! They may think it to be calming, but I can understand broken phones due the the one waiting on hold throwing the incessant elevator music-receiving phone across a room!

@amWhy Heh. This is why I like what many organizations are starting to do: instead of putting you on hold, they call you back when someone is free.

@XanderHenderson Applause. Loud Applause!! ;D

@amWhy , that's another song on my favourite list!

@Qwid :-) Also, what follows is one of my favorite Beatle's song:

@amWhy ,this just made me a bigger fan of their work ^_^

Oh this is much better: Live in concert

@amWhy ,I wish I could attend one of them😔

@amWhy, btw do u know an indian firm has made a medication with 100% recovery rate in just two weeks

Patanjali is the firm

@Qwid what does it cure?

@amWhy ,covid virus

Time to celebrate🎉🎉

@Qwid I am quite dubious. Do you have a link to the peer reviewed research?

tribuneindia.com/news/nation/…

@XanderHenderson ,in processing. The government is re testing the medication, but the history of the firm is very impressive

google.com/…

@amWhy , legal troubles :-( , never understood them

Hope is the best I can offer

(θ‿θ)

@Qwid Hope is fine, but this man appears to be a charlatan, attempting to profit off of the fears of others.

It's not just legal troubles, it's about the authenticity of the claims being made, @Qwid. At this point in time, false hope is worse than waiting for legitimate hope. False hope can cost peoples' lives.

@amWhy , agreed, patient's life is the prime concern

@FakeMod In short, where is the peer reviewed research?

We are, in all probability, at least 9 months out from a viable vaccine, and I don't see any viable "cures" on the horizon, though there are some treatments which may have some effect, e.g. convalescent plasma.

@FakeMod Probably. Which is a little frightening in-and-of itself.

@XanderHenderson ,9 months! ಥ‿ಥ

@FakeMod , I saw this just a few minutes ago

@FakeMod ,this is our part of identity now

@FakeMod But they haven't been done on the claim Qwid makes. I mean there have been no clinical trials on this, of any kind. Sounds like the claim was being made based on testimonials only.

@FakeMod Yes, and that's the risk we must all guard against: overlooking and misinterpreting data due to desperation. And that's not just a risk in India, it's a risk everywhere.

Another risky and expensive cure Might be gene editing

Never done in history

@FakeMod You may have a point: Well, case in point: U.S. citizens voting Trump to be president!! :-(

@FakeMod , neither am I :-)

Modern problems require modern solutions

@Qwid Minimum. I would honestly be surprised if there were a major breakthrough before next summer.

But I am kind of pessimistic by nature.

:54750882, @FakeMod I was agreeing with you in this comment, given the nature of the most recent US presidential election.

@XanderHenderson ,hope is a strange word. Loo less, u lose, too much u fall :-)

@FakeMod Good! Just wanted to make sure!

@FakeMod I can't blame you. That's one of the most recent failures, historically, of public sentiments.

@amWhy, I am not sure but is there a policy that a person cannot be elected as the president for more than 2 times in US?

@Qwid Yes, you are correct. But some don't want Trump to have a second term. And Trump has already called into question the constitutional limit of president to two terms. :(

This was initiated after Roosevelt, am I correct?

@amWhy ,I am shocked to even see u worriing about that, he has practically no chance this time

@Qwid Yes. FDR is the only American president to serve more than two terms.

He was quite controversial, and term limits were enacted almost entirely to prevent a future FDR.

@Qwid Never say never, given he pulled off his last "win". In any case, as much as I could go on, it's probably best that we not continue discussing US politics, or any nation's politics.

@XanderHenderson But he accomplished a lot! We owe Social Security to him, and other Federal Safety nets.

@XanderHenderson , wasn't he incharge?, he could have prevented it

@XanderHenderson But I agree in term limits. It helps keep the US from becoming a Dictatorship, or Monarchy or Oligarchy.

@Qwid First off, he was dead. Second off, the president does not have absolute power.

@amWhy , good idea

@FakeMod "Impeachment" means that the House of Representatives believes Trump to be guilty of "high crimes and/or misdemeanors", and that he ought to be removed from office. The Senate is then responsible for trying the president and potentially removing him from office.

@Qwid No: The US has separation of powers: Executive Branch, Legislative Branch, and the Judicial Branch (ideally). Checks and Balances, (Ideally).

Trump was impeached by the House, but not convicted nor removed from office by the Senate.

@XanderHenderson Largely explained by partisanship (i.e., more politics).

In the US legal system, this is kind of analogous to the grand jury (which looks at the evidence and decides whether or not there is enough to proceed with a trial), and the actual trial, in which guilt is determined and (if necessary) sentencing takes place.

The House is the grand jury, the Senate is trial.

@FakeMod I don't see what you are suggesting. The House impeached the president, essentially saying "We believe that there is sufficient reason to remove the president from office."

The Senate disagreed, and Trump was acquitted.

@XanderHenderson But no trial was allowed to take place. Due to partisanship. The Senate refused testimony. The Senate's majority is the same party as the newly acquired party of Donny Trump, and the House's majority is Democrat.

Of course, as @amWhy points out, the votes (both in the House and Senate) were along party lines.

Let's add some humour, I got to know about senate system by watching Ironman 2

And the Senate basically abdicated in its responsibility to hold a meaningful trial.

@amWhy , looks like Mr President is a personal friend of yours :-)

@Qwid >8[

@FakeMod It depends on who you ask.

Is it wrong for a jury to acquit a defendant who they believe to be innocent?

While I feel very strongly that the Senate did not behave appropriately, I can also understand the opposing point of view, which asserts that the impeachment was entirely political in the first place, and that the House messed up in bringing charges at all.

I disagree, but that point of view exists, and is hard to refute.

@XanderHenderson It is when they are fearful of the defendant and risk losing political support and financial support from the party representing the defendant.

In many ways, it is similar to the Clinton impeachment in the 90s.

The Dems accused the Republicans of politicizing the process.

The least confusing judicial system is of Saudi Arabia, person is guilty, do the job, no nonsense

@XanderHenderson Not at all similar. One case was a moral impropriety that Trump himself is guilty of many times over. The other was a quid pro quo threat/bribe to another sovereign power. Those are not at all equivalent.

@amWhy I don't disagree, but I also acknowledge that impeachment has always been a political procedure. It was a lost cause from the start.

The job here refers to punishment

@FakeMod To truly represent the true Trump (without hair transplantation, one needs an orange face, white circles around the eyes, and a bald head.

@FakeMod So that's pretty close.

@amWhy I don't disagree. I am merely trying to present the other side. I would also note that the Republicans in the 90s argued that the reason for impeachment was not the moral impropriety, but the lying about it while under oath.

I think that is b******t, but that is the argument made by the Republicans.

@XanderHenderson Lying about one's moral failings in a marriage isn't the same as lying about, and actually subjecting another sovereign state to threats and bribes. Sorry, The cases aren't comparable. And for Repukelicans to try to compare them, is outrageous. And it was Repukelicans who condemned the cheating husband who lied about it, but not they lying president who tried to strong arm the leader of another sovereign nation.

@FakeMod The democrats have a small majority in the US (there are more democrats than republicans) but the election is not by popular vote. If it were, Trump would not have been elected. Instead, the vote proceeds state by state, and based on the election result within the state each state submits their electoral votes. Trump got the most electoral votes.

Admittedly I made a few typos in my last comment. :)

@MattSamuel Indeed. And I'd like this opportunity to remind folks that there was, in fact, election interference on the part of a leader from another nation and his compatriots who sought to sway the election in favor of Trump.

@amWhy I'm not arguing that the cases are equivalent. I am pointing out that a very large number of people feel that the cases are similar enough to make the same kinds of arguments which were made in the 90s.

@XanderHenderson And that only happened because Republicans sought to deflect the real differences in the impeachments.

And, to be fair, the fact that Trump is almost certainly the worst president in American history (beating out even Hoover!) does not mean that the Democrats aren't out to get him.

@XanderHenderson Indeed. But I should really stop my contributions to this discussion, lest I risk my chat privileges. I don't want to make some incoming user outraged.

@amWhy Of course that's what the republicans did. Impeachment is, and has always been, a political process. The republicans are still behind Trump, so they are going to do whatever they can to keep him in power.

@FakeMod I'll see you, and raise you an Into the Light.

@FakeMod It was close even in the electoral votes. If the people who voted for useless third party candidates, which is a very small number of people, had voted for Hillary Clinton, she would've won.

@XanderHenderson I've talked a lot with my brother about this, who used to be a staunch republican (as were my parents), and we both long for something other than the two party system which has dominated US politics for generations. It wasn't always this way. Big Sigh. Alas, I shall depart from the topic of US politics, for now!

@XanderHenderson Not comparable to "let the sunshine it", nor any of the songs I previously posted.

@amWhy Oh, I wasn't trying to convince you. I was sharing with @FakeMod. If I were going to try to get you to listen to something more electronic, I would probably start you off with some early Delerium.

Firefly, maybe...?

@XanderHenderson That's not entirely unintended; it was intended by international interference, disenfranchisement due to republican gerrymandering of voting districts, and voting election criteria requiring excessive documentation. The will of many democrats and liberals was not absent, but obstacles were placed in their way.

Silence, perhaps...?

@amWhy Oh, absolutely. There are serious structural problems, too. Again, that it was even close is a testament to the unpopularity of Trump.

@FakeMod Do you want to recommend a track?

@XanderHenderson Not bad at all! Quite enjoyable, in fact. But If I saw it performed by humans, I'd be more impressed! :P

@FakeMod Pandora found a bunch of synthwave for me a while back. I'm a fan. I am also into chiptunes.

trash80.com

@Xander That's Sarah McLachlan singing, plus electronic music? I love her. Mesmerized by her Angel song.

@amWhy Yup, I thought you might like McLauchlan.

@FakeMod Fair enough. I think one has to be of a particular age to enjoy chiptunes.

@XanderHenderson Oops, sorry for the missplelling.

I put a lot of effort learning how to program my calculator to play primitive chiptunes in the 90s.

@amWhy Might have been my misspelllling...

@FakeMod To be fair, chiptunes are driven by nostalgia. The genre didn't really exist until 20 years after the required hardware was obsolete. ;)

@XanderHenderson I love a lot of the soundtrack from City of Angels, including Uninvited

Chiptunes are driven by nostalgia for 80s era video gaming (and synthwave is driven by nostalgia for 80s sci-fi and action flicks).

@amWhy I really like Alanis Morrisette. She is pretentious as f***, but I still really like her music.

@XanderHenderson I don't know much about her. I was first moved by this song!

@amWhy It is a good song.

Her most famous song is the rather un-ironic "Ironic"

Oh this is great, too: Woodstock 99

Which has a video that I really like... just Alanis roadtripping with herself.

@FakeMod 'night.

@FakeMod 'night

@amWhy Oh my gawd! I had forgotten that Woodstock 99 was a thing.

@XanderHenderson Wow!! Huge huge audience!!

youtube.com/watch?v=iGpU3DicbLQ I love how happy folk are with themselves. The joy of discovering how to make a computer do a thing is palpable.