8 ms·

What is going on with SoundCloud?

129 points by fwdbureau 11y ago

stefantalpalaru 11y ago
The root of all evil is blind trust in algorithms, usually by people that don't write algorithms themselves - people in charge. We can't be both watched over by machines of loving grace and at the same time deal fairly and respectfully with each human user. I hope SoundCloud is not too big to fully pay the price of its arrogance and fade into oblivion.
Kenji 11y ago
SoundCloud got big enough to get a good slice of attention from copyright bullies, that's what happened. It's a pattern you see everywhere. If it's on a small scale, nobody really seems to care, but then the service grows and if it fails to deal with copyright infringement properly, it's going down.
deng 11y ago
It's a shame, really. SoundCloud used to be good service for independent musicians, and I really liked the social aspects of it and the integration into Ableton. But next thing you know, you read about deals with Warner and 100M funding and whatnot. Let's just hope Bandcamp keeps its focus; it's currently my favourite site for discovering new music.
- ChrisArgyle 11y ago
  SoundCloud's take-down algorithms are only targeting musicians who rely on sampling copyrighted works. This, clearly, is a large chunk of SoundCloud's current user base but I honestly think this will result in a net increase in quality.
  - cauthon 11y ago
    > Paradoxically, the takedowns are often hurting the artists that they’re meant to be protecting. On August 12, London DJ Plastician had a track he produced, owned and released on his own label blocked by SoundCloud’s copyright detection algorithm.
    - FilterSweep 11y ago
      As a plastician fan, I'm not surprised if this ends up happening to even more producers of in his scope of genre. Theirs is a completely different culture than the DMCA/Mainstream Commercial American Pop Music - their community is very tightly-knit, and they freely pass around unreleased tracks, samples, and song stems for each other to remix. They will often hold onto a track for years before putting it on an independent label release. More underground UK artists will sadly stray away from the app altogether.
  - deng 11y ago
    But they want to make deals with the majors, and they already have one with Warner. Which is fine, of course, but it no longer interests me personally. Instead of being a platform for indie musicians, it seems they are more interested in becoming a streaming platform for music from major labels, and that no longer interests me at all. Besides, I don't think their funding will be enough to compete in that area...
    - ChrisArgyle 11y ago
      Fair point about the focus on majors. I would argue, though, that they're not completely abandoning indies, just raising the bar for entry. Like going from hypem.com to pitchfork.com
      - FilterSweep 11y ago
        What sort of bar are you referring to? The fact that one could just use additional processing plugins on their samples to make them unrecognizable by algorithm doesn't correlate well to the quality of the track in question.
        ChrisArgyle 11y ago
        There are large swaths of the SoundCloud user base that rely so heavily on sampling that they contribute very little creatively. A great example is "nightcore". Though the result is quite enjoyable it really doesn't take a lot of skill to create (wholesale copy a trance song, pitch up the vocals, speed up the track a bit, done)
        FilterSweep 11y ago
        To ChrisArgyle: Oh yes, I understand that. Even worse are the wannabe rap artists who will use the entire artist name and title of a track to "trojan horse" their own rap rendition and trick people into playing their music to drive up play counts. They're still getting away with this somehow. But the commercial trance songs themselves are sampling other tracks (although doing it much better), and also licensing issues down to the one-shot drum samples they're using. One of my tracks takes a Beyonce vocal stab and it processes it so much you won't recognize who the singer was - unless you knew the steps to reverse engineer it - and, you'd be surprised to find many talented audio engineers who are much better than I can do this easily. When I hear songs on the radio which use a similar technique, I can pick this up instantly. AFAIK, my track hasn't been pulled off SC yet. Did you also know that many companies (Verizon and TMobile have been known to do this) have audio engineers who will "reverse engineer" a song their marketing team likes from an indie artist to recreate it so they don't have to pay royalties? Its not hard to trick these algorithms, and in many cases they come up with false positives anyways. Most of the (commercial) "Industry" itself is running off uncredited samples, many of which have been cut from 1960-1980s Jazz/Blues tracks. These tracks still are technically copyrighted[0], but the artists are often not knowledgable over who is sampling their tracks, or in many cases they don't care / want people to sample their stuff. Most of their record labels have also long since died off which would have tried to protect their works as well. You would be shocked to find how wide the range of genres are of producers that are doing this. In sum, it stinks of a moneygrab. Soundcloud became big enough to get into DMCA's non-artistic crosshairs. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries%27_copyright_lengths#Table https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries%27_copyright...
  - wishinghand 11y ago
    I made a completely sample free demo song for a friend to jam to and got stopped by the algorithm. I was referred to a song that was from a musical number with lots of chord and time changes. My sound was a single verse that was straight-ahead 4 chord rock. So while I wasn't hit with a takedown notice, I was prevented from posting until someone could listen to both songs (also it was really hard to listen to the song they quoted due to it's rarity).
    - drzaiusapelord 11y ago
      This is a great example of how badly configured these systems are and how ultimately, they do more harm than good. It also brings up an interesting question. After a couple hundred years of recorded music, eventually everything will have some historical basis. If copyright law is to be enforced this harshly, then how do new works get created without hitting some automated censor firewall? The elephant in the room, of course, is how strong copyright laws are. Unfortunately, Congress has shown little interest in reforming them.
  - thuuuomas 11y ago
    What is it about sample-based music that makes it so inferior to acoustic music (on average) that culling it en masse "will result in a net increase in quality"? edit: of order words out
    - ChrisArgyle 11y ago
      Don't mistake me, there is no comparison to acoustic music. I use SoundCloud daily to discover new electronic music (which I do with great success) I'm speaking from my frustration with the sea of unimaginative "remixes" that barely diverge from the original mix.
    - nosuchthing 11y ago
      Derivative work can be great, sadly lazy derivative work comes off more as theft but in the art world it's a blurry line. [1] [2] [3] Lazy (creative) work seems of no higher quality than lazy work utilizing premade bits. Bad code made from scratch, a bad song written from scratch, or a bad sample based song... Examples of pure sample based musicians: Kleptones: http://www.kleptones.com/pages/downloads.html http://www.kleptones.com/pages/downloads.html Girltalk: http://illegalart.net/girltalk/shop/index.html http://illegalart.net/girltalk/shop/index.html [1] http://99designs.com/designer-blog/2013/04/19/5-famous-copyright-infringement-cases/ http://99designs.com/designer-blog/2013/04/19/5-famous-copyr... [2] http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/feb/09/art http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/feb/09/art [3] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-17/richard-prince-instagram-and-authorship-in-a-digital-world http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-17/richard-pr...
mrottenkolber 11y ago
So I upload a DJ mix and it gets rejected because of "Copyright blah blah". Then I fill out the form and tell them "Guys, it's a DJ mix, not the song you claim it to be". I never received a response. So I guess SoundCloud is no longer for me.
- globuous 11y ago
  What are the laws on using copyrighted material in mixes do you know ? I know Sound of Monte Carlo's soundcloud (they uplaod monthly mixes or w/e) is about to be taken down, they do use copyrighted material in their mixes though.
  - DrJokepu 11y ago
    In the US, if you use someone else's work or recording in your work, it's derivative work and unless the original work was in the public domain or your usage constitutes "fair use" (e.g. parody), you need to get their permission. In the UK, where Soundcloud is based, it's very similar, except the equivalent of "fair use" is called "fair dealing" and it's much more restrictive in scope.
    - chefkoch 11y ago
      I thought soundcloud is based in Berlin?
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - DrJokepu 11y ago
        They're registered in the United Kingdom (England and Wales): https://soundcloud.com/imprint https://soundcloud.com/imprint
  - mrottenkolber 11y ago
    No idea about the legal situation. And to be frank I don't care. I have no economic incentive for my hobby. I consider it an art and a means of expression along the lines of singing and dancing. For all I care I am doing commercial musicians a favor for promoting their work, but really that's just an unintended side effect. SoundCloud was profiting of me giving away free content. Its people like me that enabled its business in the first place. So in the end its their loss, and they will fail because of the laws. I personally don't mourn the loss of SoundCloud as a viable publishing platform. I have many choices and it was never my primary platform to begin with (which is an independent pirate radio). My point is that the laws don't stop the people doing the "infringing". We don't care. Its the businesses that could profit from the human need for creativity that are hurt by the absurd situation.
Sir_Cmpwn 11y ago
Self hosting your stuff is the only reasonable way to publish these days. Everyone who could host it FOR you is falling prey to the DMCA, one after another. Either that, or work to fix this broken system.
- prodmerc 11y ago
  And then they send DMCAs to your hosting company and you get your hosting account suspended. Yeah, gotta fix the system...
  - Sir_Cmpwn 11y ago
    In my experience, it's easier to explain to your hosting company than to a company with no meaningful mechanism for appeal. The system definitely needs to be fixed - I'm just proposing practical solutions in the interim. It seems unlikely to me that these problems will be fixed any time soon since fixing them would run counter to the agenda of those with the resources to lobby politicians.
- deng 11y ago
  Self-hosting is a huge PITA, especially if you don't want to give away your music for free: setting up and maintaining a streaming server and payment system is not trivial at all. Also, if you're not already a big name, self-hosting will make it unlikely for people to discover your music. This was the big thing about SoundCloud: you followed people you like and saw what they liked. The solution is what Bandcamp does: only host stuff where the copyright situation is clear. Which means: people selling the music they themselves created. This of course excludes mixes/remixes of copyrighted music.
  - tel 11y ago
    So you're saying there's space for a "DIY self-hosting" product which integrates with a promotion network?
    - deng 11y ago
haywirez 11y ago
Regarding self-hosting, could anyone share some technical links related to streaming? Are there good/easy ways to interactively 'chunk-stream' audio without giving away the entire file (without Flash...)?
- coldpie 11y ago
  I think the new(-ish) MediaStream APIs are designed precisely for this. https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/audio/raw-file/tip/streams/StreamProcessing.html https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/audio/raw-file/tip/streams/StreamProc... The simple audio element itself might be sufficient.
  - haywirez 11y ago
    Thank you, looking into this!
jcadam 11y ago
Every time a new idea for a site/app/etc. involving 'music' and the 'internet' occurs to me (or is suggested to me), I immediately reject it out of hand: "Nope, DMCA/RIAA/ASCAP/etc. -- too risky." P.S. Take a look sometime at ASCAP's requirements and fees/rates for digital music services -- it's insane. I don't know how any service could keep ASCAP placated and turn a profit.
- jshap70 11y ago
  They're not supposed to turn a profit while complying with their rates. It's a way to make sure they stay in control of who is selling the music.
- jszymborski 11y ago
  That's why we need something decentralised as torrents and as flexible and intuitive as Soundcloud.
theseatoms 11y ago
Doesn't the fact that they're based in Germany protect them from DMCA takedowns? I always figured that locating there was a calculated move, giving them a strategic advantage on this front.
- kuschku 11y ago
  Thanks to recent international treaties and safe-harbor regulations, they are forced to comply with DMCA. Even if a song is legal in Germany, if any of the parties involved (in this case, Warner Music) is in the US, US right, with DMCA, applies. The US is quite literally forcing its laws on the rest of the world, and it gets worse every day. This is also why so many are against TTIP. Trade treaty with China? No problem. With Japan? No problem. With the US? Fuck it.
- _pmf_ 11y ago
  Germany has Abmahnanwälte; you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. The DMCA is downright reasonable and consumer friendly when compared to our system.
sp4ke 11y ago
Goodbye soundcloud, I really enjoyed discovering music on their service but I cannot support this kind of behaviours. It was made me quit Deezer, and now quitting SoundCloud.
bitL 11y ago
Basically there is no way a new "The KLF" could spawn nowadays...
rocky1138 11y ago
I've felt for the past few months that SoundCloud is just too good to be true. It feels like it's only a matter of time until they get bought out or shut down.
pinaceae 11y ago
the funny thing is that nearly every musician learns through playing covers. be it stumbling through a riff or trying to make a mashup in FTL. some progress into soemthing the audience likes, eventually start making their own music. which the industry then makes their profits from. kids like Kygo - start with DJ mixes, add a bit of their flavor, get noticed by Diplo+Friends, now doing his own thing. all documented through his soundcloud account. the way to become a master is through imitation, then refinement. from music to code to sports, does not matter.
ldarby 11y ago
Reminds me of this: https://xkcd.com/743/ https://xkcd.com/743/. What's sad is that was 5 years ago, and nothing has changed since then.

129 points by fwdbureau 11y ago

The root of all evil is blind trust in algorithms, usually by people that don't write algorithms themselves - people in charge. We can't be both watched over by machines of loving grace and at the same time deal fairly and respectfully with each human user. I hope SoundCloud is not too big to fully pay the price of its arrogance and fade into oblivion.

Kenji 11y ago

SoundCloud got big enough to get a good slice of attention from copyright bullies, that's what happened. It's a pattern you see everywhere. If it's on a small scale, nobody really seems to care, but then the service grows and if it fails to deal with copyright infringement properly, it's going down.

deng 11y ago

It's a shame, really. SoundCloud used to be good service for independent musicians, and I really liked the social aspects of it and the integration into Ableton. But next thing you know, you read about deals with Warner and 100M funding and whatnot. Let's just hope Bandcamp keeps its focus; it's currently my favourite site for discovering new music.

ChrisArgyle 11y ago
SoundCloud's take-down algorithms are only targeting musicians who rely on sampling copyrighted works. This, clearly, is a large chunk of SoundCloud's current user base but I honestly think this will result in a net increase in quality.
- cauthon 11y ago
  > Paradoxically, the takedowns are often hurting the artists that they’re meant to be protecting. On August 12, London DJ Plastician had a track he produced, owned and released on his own label blocked by SoundCloud’s copyright detection algorithm.
  - FilterSweep 11y ago
    As a plastician fan, I'm not surprised if this ends up happening to even more producers of in his scope of genre. Theirs is a completely different culture than the DMCA/Mainstream Commercial American Pop Music - their community is very tightly-knit, and they freely pass around unreleased tracks, samples, and song stems for each other to remix. They will often hold onto a track for years before putting it on an independent label release. More underground UK artists will sadly stray away from the app altogether.
- deng 11y ago
  But they want to make deals with the majors, and they already have one with Warner. Which is fine, of course, but it no longer interests me personally. Instead of being a platform for indie musicians, it seems they are more interested in becoming a streaming platform for music from major labels, and that no longer interests me at all. Besides, I don't think their funding will be enough to compete in that area...
  - ChrisArgyle 11y ago
    Fair point about the focus on majors. I would argue, though, that they're not completely abandoning indies, just raising the bar for entry. Like going from hypem.com to pitchfork.com
    - FilterSweep 11y ago
      What sort of bar are you referring to? The fact that one could just use additional processing plugins on their samples to make them unrecognizable by algorithm doesn't correlate well to the quality of the track in question.
      - ChrisArgyle 11y ago
        There are large swaths of the SoundCloud user base that rely so heavily on sampling that they contribute very little creatively. A great example is "nightcore". Though the result is quite enjoyable it really doesn't take a lot of skill to create (wholesale copy a trance song, pitch up the vocals, speed up the track a bit, done)
      - FilterSweep 11y ago
        To ChrisArgyle: Oh yes, I understand that. Even worse are the wannabe rap artists who will use the entire artist name and title of a track to "trojan horse" their own rap rendition and trick people into playing their music to drive up play counts. They're still getting away with this somehow. But the commercial trance songs themselves are sampling other tracks (although doing it much better), and also licensing issues down to the one-shot drum samples they're using. One of my tracks takes a Beyonce vocal stab and it processes it so much you won't recognize who the singer was - unless you knew the steps to reverse engineer it - and, you'd be surprised to find many talented audio engineers who are much better than I can do this easily. When I hear songs on the radio which use a similar technique, I can pick this up instantly. AFAIK, my track hasn't been pulled off SC yet. Did you also know that many companies (Verizon and TMobile have been known to do this) have audio engineers who will "reverse engineer" a song their marketing team likes from an indie artist to recreate it so they don't have to pay royalties? Its not hard to trick these algorithms, and in many cases they come up with false positives anyways. Most of the (commercial) "Industry" itself is running off uncredited samples, many of which have been cut from 1960-1980s Jazz/Blues tracks. These tracks still are technically copyrighted[0], but the artists are often not knowledgable over who is sampling their tracks, or in many cases they don't care / want people to sample their stuff. Most of their record labels have also long since died off which would have tried to protect their works as well. You would be shocked to find how wide the range of genres are of producers that are doing this. In sum, it stinks of a moneygrab. Soundcloud became big enough to get into DMCA's non-artistic crosshairs. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries%27_copyright_lengths#Table https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries%27_copyright...
- wishinghand 11y ago
  I made a completely sample free demo song for a friend to jam to and got stopped by the algorithm. I was referred to a song that was from a musical number with lots of chord and time changes. My sound was a single verse that was straight-ahead 4 chord rock. So while I wasn't hit with a takedown notice, I was prevented from posting until someone could listen to both songs (also it was really hard to listen to the song they quoted due to it's rarity).
  - drzaiusapelord 11y ago
    This is a great example of how badly configured these systems are and how ultimately, they do more harm than good. It also brings up an interesting question. After a couple hundred years of recorded music, eventually everything will have some historical basis. If copyright law is to be enforced this harshly, then how do new works get created without hitting some automated censor firewall? The elephant in the room, of course, is how strong copyright laws are. Unfortunately, Congress has shown little interest in reforming them.
- thuuuomas 11y ago
  What is it about sample-based music that makes it so inferior to acoustic music (on average) that culling it en masse "will result in a net increase in quality"? edit: of order words out
  - ChrisArgyle 11y ago
    Don't mistake me, there is no comparison to acoustic music. I use SoundCloud daily to discover new electronic music (which I do with great success) I'm speaking from my frustration with the sea of unimaginative "remixes" that barely diverge from the original mix.
  - nosuchthing 11y ago
    Derivative work can be great, sadly lazy derivative work comes off more as theft but in the art world it's a blurry line. [1] [2] [3] Lazy (creative) work seems of no higher quality than lazy work utilizing premade bits. Bad code made from scratch, a bad song written from scratch, or a bad sample based song... Examples of pure sample based musicians: Kleptones: http://www.kleptones.com/pages/downloads.html http://www.kleptones.com/pages/downloads.html Girltalk: http://illegalart.net/girltalk/shop/index.html http://illegalart.net/girltalk/shop/index.html [1] http://99designs.com/designer-blog/2013/04/19/5-famous-copyright-infringement-cases/ http://99designs.com/designer-blog/2013/04/19/5-famous-copyr... [2] http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/feb/09/art http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/feb/09/art [3] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-17/richard-prince-instagram-and-authorship-in-a-digital-world http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-17/richard-pr...

mrottenkolber 11y ago

So I upload a DJ mix and it gets rejected because of "Copyright blah blah". Then I fill out the form and tell them "Guys, it's a DJ mix, not the song you claim it to be". I never received a response. So I guess SoundCloud is no longer for me.

globuous 11y ago
What are the laws on using copyrighted material in mixes do you know ? I know Sound of Monte Carlo's soundcloud (they uplaod monthly mixes or w/e) is about to be taken down, they do use copyrighted material in their mixes though.
- DrJokepu 11y ago
  In the US, if you use someone else's work or recording in your work, it's derivative work and unless the original work was in the public domain or your usage constitutes "fair use" (e.g. parody), you need to get their permission. In the UK, where Soundcloud is based, it's very similar, except the equivalent of "fair use" is called "fair dealing" and it's much more restrictive in scope.
  - chefkoch 11y ago
    I thought soundcloud is based in Berlin?
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - DrJokepu 11y ago
      They're registered in the United Kingdom (England and Wales): https://soundcloud.com/imprint https://soundcloud.com/imprint
- mrottenkolber 11y ago
  No idea about the legal situation. And to be frank I don't care. I have no economic incentive for my hobby. I consider it an art and a means of expression along the lines of singing and dancing. For all I care I am doing commercial musicians a favor for promoting their work, but really that's just an unintended side effect. SoundCloud was profiting of me giving away free content. Its people like me that enabled its business in the first place. So in the end its their loss, and they will fail because of the laws. I personally don't mourn the loss of SoundCloud as a viable publishing platform. I have many choices and it was never my primary platform to begin with (which is an independent pirate radio). My point is that the laws don't stop the people doing the "infringing". We don't care. Its the businesses that could profit from the human need for creativity that are hurt by the absurd situation.

Sir_Cmpwn 11y ago

Self hosting your stuff is the only reasonable way to publish these days. Everyone who could host it FOR you is falling prey to the DMCA, one after another. Either that, or work to fix this broken system.

prodmerc 11y ago
And then they send DMCAs to your hosting company and you get your hosting account suspended. Yeah, gotta fix the system...
- Sir_Cmpwn 11y ago
  In my experience, it's easier to explain to your hosting company than to a company with no meaningful mechanism for appeal. The system definitely needs to be fixed - I'm just proposing practical solutions in the interim. It seems unlikely to me that these problems will be fixed any time soon since fixing them would run counter to the agenda of those with the resources to lobby politicians.
deng 11y ago
Self-hosting is a huge PITA, especially if you don't want to give away your music for free: setting up and maintaining a streaming server and payment system is not trivial at all. Also, if you're not already a big name, self-hosting will make it unlikely for people to discover your music. This was the big thing about SoundCloud: you followed people you like and saw what they liked. The solution is what Bandcamp does: only host stuff where the copyright situation is clear. Which means: people selling the music they themselves created. This of course excludes mixes/remixes of copyrighted music.
- tel 11y ago
  So you're saying there's space for a "DIY self-hosting" product which integrates with a promotion network?
  - deng 11y ago

haywirez 11y ago

Regarding self-hosting, could anyone share some technical links related to streaming? Are there good/easy ways to interactively 'chunk-stream' audio without giving away the entire file (without Flash...)?

coldpie 11y ago
I think the new(-ish) MediaStream APIs are designed precisely for this. https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/audio/raw-file/tip/streams/StreamProcessing.html https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/audio/raw-file/tip/streams/StreamProc... The simple audio element itself might be sufficient.
- haywirez 11y ago
  Thank you, looking into this!

jcadam 11y ago

Every time a new idea for a site/app/etc. involving 'music' and the 'internet' occurs to me (or is suggested to me), I immediately reject it out of hand: "Nope, DMCA/RIAA/ASCAP/etc. -- too risky." P.S. Take a look sometime at ASCAP's requirements and fees/rates for digital music services -- it's insane. I don't know how any service could keep ASCAP placated and turn a profit.

jshap70 11y ago
They're not supposed to turn a profit while complying with their rates. It's a way to make sure they stay in control of who is selling the music.
jszymborski 11y ago
That's why we need something decentralised as torrents and as flexible and intuitive as Soundcloud.

theseatoms 11y ago

Doesn't the fact that they're based in Germany protect them from DMCA takedowns? I always figured that locating there was a calculated move, giving them a strategic advantage on this front.

kuschku 11y ago
Thanks to recent international treaties and safe-harbor regulations, they are forced to comply with DMCA. Even if a song is legal in Germany, if any of the parties involved (in this case, Warner Music) is in the US, US right, with DMCA, applies. The US is quite literally forcing its laws on the rest of the world, and it gets worse every day. This is also why so many are against TTIP. Trade treaty with China? No problem. With Japan? No problem. With the US? Fuck it.
_pmf_ 11y ago
Germany has Abmahnanwälte; you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. The DMCA is downright reasonable and consumer friendly when compared to our system.

sp4ke 11y ago

Goodbye soundcloud, I really enjoyed discovering music on their service but I cannot support this kind of behaviours. It was made me quit Deezer, and now quitting SoundCloud.

bitL 11y ago

Basically there is no way a new "The KLF" could spawn nowadays...

rocky1138 11y ago

I've felt for the past few months that SoundCloud is just too good to be true. It feels like it's only a matter of time until they get bought out or shut down.

pinaceae 11y ago

the funny thing is that nearly every musician learns through playing covers. be it stumbling through a riff or trying to make a mashup in FTL. some progress into soemthing the audience likes, eventually start making their own music. which the industry then makes their profits from. kids like Kygo - start with DJ mixes, add a bit of their flavor, get noticed by Diplo+Friends, now doing his own thing. all documented through his soundcloud account. the way to become a master is through imitation, then refinement. from music to code to sports, does not matter.

ldarby 11y ago

Reminds me of this: https://xkcd.com/743/ https://xkcd.com/743/. What's sad is that was 5 years ago, and nothing has changed since then.