So tell me

So tell me why this is not ok (and I agree — it’s terrible and misogynistic and appalling), and why I should be ok with the implied and actual real subjugation of niqabs, hijabs, burqas, etc.?

I don’t really see the difference.

Much like many things that are supposed to be so very different, the primary distinction lies in who is supposed to be favored and disfavored (with a huge heap of white guilt), and I refuse to buy it.

I believe in equality for everyone.

Tuned

Autotune is a tool, just like any other. It’s neither good nor bad.

I like it when it’s used deliberately and thoughtfully — like in Charli XCX’s songs (yeah, that is the official video). I dislike it when it’s used to conceal an atrocious singer. I can hear autotune use when I’ve been told it’s not possible that I could do so, despite it being quite easy for anyone who has any sort of musical training.

This article I also linked to on my other blog is good, but this bit is a complete exaggeration.

When we asked him to provide a simple explanation of what happens, computationally, when a voice signal enters his software, he opened his desk and pulled out thick stacks of folders, each stuffed with hundreds of pages of mathematical equations.

โ€œIn my mind itโ€™s not very complex,โ€ he says, sheepishly, โ€œbut I havenโ€™t yet found anyone I can explain it to who understands it. I usually just say, โ€˜Itโ€™s magic.โ€™โ€

The math is actually not that hard. I understand most of it conceptually and I’m completely terrible at anything in the mathematical realm. Combination of journalistic non-understanding and reputation-burnishing, I suspect.

It’s pretty standard signal processing. The innovation was applying it to voice, and especially doing it in a computationally cheap way.

And, just as importantly, the product having a good GUI interface. If a Linux person had designed this (or a Mozilla developer), no one would’ve ever used it.