Ask HN: Where are all the parties?

I'm not sure whether the risk of real sexual assault increased (or whether it's just being reported more), but with tech and social media the fallout of false accusations (or other, non-assault-related smear campaigns) is definitely worse.

I don't believe this risk is high enough to dissuade people from partying, but let's not pretend it doesn't exist.

I think you and the poster above are talking past each other. He doesn't seem upset, and as someone who agrees with him I can say I'm not either.

Having said that, of course I can get upset when society changes! It would be very silly to think otherwise. I bet we would be very hard pressed to find a single human being who doesn't get upset when society changes (in ways they don't like). My being upset doesn't obligate anyone to do anything about it of course, but I'm free to observe changes I see happening and offer my opinion on them. The reason I'm not upset is that I have plenty of people in my life who are not difficult to get together and spend time with, and it sounds like the poster above you does too.

The question in the OP was about what happened to parties, and are there any trends causing them to be happening less. "Motohagiography" identified a trend that he believes is responsible. As best I can tell, you aren't even arguing that he's wrong. You're arguing that the trend he identified is a net good. That's a perfectly valid opinion to have, but I think his point is both clear and correct.

I agree with you in spirit but I’ve found as I’ve gotten older, I actually have more fun doing things with people whose life views I agree with. It’s hard to bury feelings if someone else is against immigrants (my parents are one), are against techies (that’s me!), anti-abortion, and many other current things I care about.

I’m not the type to raise a stink but I usually won’t have as much fun there either. I guess it’s more that my desire to avoid unpleasantries and making a ruckus than leaving my feelings at home.

> How is this "milking" anything? The last few years have proved that lots of white collar jobs don't need to be done from an office building.

I strongly agree with you that a lot of white collar jobs don't necessarily need to be done from an office building. I'm referring to people who playact at being terrified of Covid as a justification for working from home while in their personal lives they go out and live life normally. The fear that some people exhibit is an act for personal gain: based on their actions they don't believe it.

> This is a false dichotomy. The science is clear on this one. Continue wearing masks in public places, physical distancing, practicing basic hygiene, and continue requiring vaccinations. Yes, all of those things are proven to reduce transmission of COVID as well as other airborne viruses like the flu. Society doesn't need to shut down or enter a "death spiral" to do any of them. Leaders just caved to political pressure and stopped enforcing them.

I've written responses to this kind of argument on HN many times. In a nutshell my position is the following:

1) I honestly don't think too many people are having major science disagreements: they're having risk-management disagreements. Your risk-tolerance and values are different than others, and you're disagreeing about what's worth doing, you're not actually disagreeing all that much about data. Pretend it's 60 degrees F out: a Canadian might say that it's a scorcher and an Australian might say it's freezing. Same exact science (60 degrees to both), just a different way of looking at things. Neither is scientifically wrong.

2) For what it's worth, suggesting a human action is never the outcome of any science experiment. The science is NOT clear on wearing masks or doing any of those other things because that is not the domain of science. All science can do is provide objective data (to the limits of human ability to measure) and humans decide what to do in light of that data outside of the domain of science.

> Yes, and they probably still have to wear masks and avoid certain places that are likely to carry an increased risk of infection. "Not being a slave to the illness" doesn't mean you go out and take stupid risks.

I honestly don't know the statistics on how immunocompromised people actually live, but anecdotally I've seen that it depends on the person. I knew somebody that died of his illness that wanted to live his life completely normally for as long as he possibly could and was willing to risk being knocked out by Covid.

> Yes, COVID is significantly more contagious than influenza, and causes more severe illness than influenza.

The phrase I used was "qualitatively" changed.

As far as your use of the word "significantly", what does that word actually mean here? I'm curious what the actual stats are. How many immunocompromised people were around in say 2018? What percentage of them died due to a random respiratory illness then? Compare that to Covid time-period as best as possible. How much does that death rate actually change? Does it go from 5% risk of random death to 6%? or from 7% to 88%? I am not sure, but I suspect that the actual difference wouldn't be jaw-dropping to anybody here, but I'd like to learn those stats from you so I can appreciate your situation better.

All those examples you mentioned while you may find some good friends, they cannot entirely replace the purpose of a religious community. Religion and spirituality are far more than a social club or hobbyist group. Maybe you did not make friends at a mosque for some ever reason, but it is more than just a place for friendship. Religious buildings serve communities, promote unity, educate children, and it is all based on belief and practicing these beliefs. True brotherhood in faith far outweighs most any other type of relationship between people.