Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Who killed the rave?

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 854 posts

Re: Who killed the rave?

#241

Post by Aphataeros »

Vampiero wrote: post #142
tombert wrote: post #141

I haven't been to a club in a long time, but I am quite confident that if there's a hell for me, it's being forced to be in a club+rave for eternity. I've never done any kind of "party drug" [1], and I think that party drugs have to be a requirement for me to enjoy something like that (at least for someone as awkward as me). Repetitive music that's so loud it hurts, not being able to talk to people, close contact to…

Yeah no wonder you don't like raves. You might be the first person who went to one without taking drugs. Same for clubs tbh. That kind of music is made by people on particular drugs and it's meant to be listened to by people on those same drugs. And dancing is just a way to shake off the stimulants.

I actually enjoy the music without taking any drugs, but my default state is quite hyperactive. The loud bass, the energy of the crowd, the people feeling comfortable and enjoying themselves makes me feel energized and allows me to relax and dance in an enjoyable anonymity. To your point, when I was photographing concerts (&clubs/raves) regularly I did quickly realize I'm an outlier, and most people and performers were in fact consuming copious amounts of drugs... The least enjoyable events were those where everybody was escaping something - consuming drugs, over-drinking alcohol, destroying property – while the best events had a tight-knit community, proper security, pop-up drug labs ( https://drugfoundation.org.nz/articles/checkit-out ) and most importantly a mature audience.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#242

Post by Der_Einzige »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #170
jamestimmins wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's shocking how often the answer to "How come X changed?" is either the creation of the internet or the cost of real estate. Surprisingly often, it's both.

It's interesting how the creation of the internet still hasn't caused real estate prices to plummet. Even two years of covid couldn't do it.

What's interesting is how high interest rates couldn't do it.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#243

Post by watwut »

yieldcrv wrote: post #22
hmcq6 wrote: post #6

On the one hand millennials are getting older so it's totally reasonable to expect they wouldn't want to party into the early AM anymore. On the other hand real raves don't happen in legal venues. I've partied in warehouses, upscale restaurants, artist studios, roller skating rinks, movie theaters, hotels, apartments. I threw parties on the lightship Nantucket (LV-112), although those were day parties. But none of th…

The article also mentions that earlier ending events made to accommodate aging millennials have seen an unexpected and huge interest from Gen Z But yeah, the decline of the nightlife and hospitality sector is what this article is about, as the regulated rave experience is very mainstream and has been for a long time now The production value is quite high now and still improving so I don't see why the illicit rave exp…

> The article also mentions that earlier ending events made to accommodate aging millennials have seen an unexpected and huge interest from Gen Z

I do not find it surprising. When I was younger (college age and soon after), I wanted events to start sooner and late events oftentimes discouraged me. It sucked even at that age. It is one thing to start dancing at 8pm and have endurance till the early morning, because you feel like it and have nothing to do the next day. And something completely different if you have to wait till 1am till the event starts. You get tired and dumber the next day, but the amount of dancing you got in exchange is just lower.

I was not using stimulants or anything like that and frankly, dropping amount of stimulants use among young people would explain larger younger crowd at earlier events.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#244

Post by ninetyninenine »

saberience wrote: post #227

I find it really hard to believe this and am questioning the data. I raved back in the early 2000s and I still rave now and the popularity is absolutely booming in a way I've never seen before and in more parts of the world. 15 years ago there was zero electronic music events in Dubai, now there are huge electronic music festivals there and it's clear a ton of people at those events are taking "something" that isn't…

The UAE is a microcosm and not representative of general trends imo.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#245

Post by technothrasher »

tombert wrote: post #141

I haven't been to a club in a long time, but I am quite confident that if there's a hell for me, it's being forced to be in a club+rave for eternity. I've never done any kind of "party drug" [1], and I think that party drugs have to be a requirement for me to enjoy something like that (at least for someone as awkward as me). Repetitive music that's so loud it hurts, not being able to talk to people, close contact to…

> people like me who are finally being honest with themselves and acknowledging that they don't actually enjoy the entire club scene.

What was it that was keeping you from being honest with yourself about that? I figured out pretty quickly that the whole club/dance/nightlife scene was just not compatible with my particular personality and haven't had any trouble simply avoiding it.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#246

Post by hello_moto »

throw5959 wrote: post #219
apwell23 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why doesn't someone introduce a legislation to tax vacant second homes at astronomical rates

Do you know who owns most real estate either directly or indirectly? Pension funds. And who wants to shake up their pension? Nobody. It's the most democratized form of asset ownership, literally everybody is going to get angry. And secondly... Are the second vacation homes really the problem? I'd guess the problem begins around 3rd or 5th, not the second one, which is a fairly common and usually also a good thing to…

Second vacation homes (plus Airbnb) become a problem for locals of that area. The young ones can't survive there and eventually have to rent (or provided as comp package) from established businesses (B&B/hotel).

Re: Who killed the rave?

#247

Post by Der_Einzige »

apwell23 wrote: post #209
UltraSane wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't a hypothesis. It is a well known fact. The more expensive a property is the more time it will be spent vacant because a lot of the very expensive properties are just uses as investments.

why doesn't someone introduce a legislation to tax vacant second homes at astronomical rates

Do you like all your Capital fleeing to other countries? Because that's how you enrich Canada, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Lichenstein, etc at the USA's expense.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#248

Post by jjulius »

gonzobonzo wrote: post #234
jjulius wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Howdy! I've been huge into electronic music since I was 12 (currently 38). Literally fell in love with the music for the sake of the music. Started going out at 18, didn't try drugs until my mid-20's. Enjoy drugs, sometimes I'll take them, but most of the time I'm either sober or just a bit stoned. But even the weed isn't a requirement for me. I can be out until 5AM, loving the whole experience, because the music is…

For what it's worth - I enjoy electronic music. I enjoy dancing. I absolutely hated the club scene every time I went. All the ones I went to were in dark and fairly disgusting venues, where people spent hours moving back and forth between sitting around getting drunk with music blasting so loud you couldn't have a conversation, and awkwardly moving around a crowded dance for floor. As the other person said, it was ha…

Yeah, that's the unfortunate part, the spaces are never comfortable and certainly unappealing to a lot of people.

For me personally, I've always found it kinda funny how much I love those spaces. I generally have a strong dislike of crowds, large masses of people, yadda yadda. My primary happy places are at home all cozy with my family, and out in the mountains backpacking in the wilderness far away from a single soul.

But my third happy place is something akin to a dilapidated warehouse or building that is being used as an unlicensed venue for incredibly loud, repetitive music. The room is packed, with just enough room for cutting a rug, there's sweat on the walls, it's pitch dark save for a single red light over the DJ booth and there's not a snowball's chance in hell that you'll be able to chat with the person next to you. You're stepping in something wet and sticky, who the fuck knows what's on your shoes.

Get the music just right and I'll lose myself in that crowd and cathartically dance my ass off all night long.

Edit: I think part of it is that I've always found the existence of such underground spaces to be super cool. I like to experience things like that that are just below the surface of "normal society".

Re: Who killed the rave?

#249

Post by nico »

apwell23 wrote: post #209
UltraSane wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't a hypothesis. It is a well known fact. The more expensive a property is the more time it will be spent vacant because a lot of the very expensive properties are just uses as investments.

why doesn't someone introduce a legislation to tax vacant second homes at astronomical rates

They did this in the UK. A quick lookup says that a home that is vacant for over 1 year could be taxed 4x

Additionally, since 2004, there’s a law that allows local authorities to take over empty homes and sell them, to make sure they are used for housing

Not sure what the effects have been of either

Re: Who killed the rave?

#250

Post by seanmcdirmid »

zamfi wrote: post #222
Tade0 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supply can't possibly keep up when real estate is used as an investment. As an analogy to the dead internet hypothesis I present the dead real estate market hypothesis. Increasingly it's just investors buying and selling properties from each other. And it's not just a hypothesis. China built enough homes to house its population twice over, yet it's not reflected in the prices. All because everyone and their grandma i…

> China built enough homes to house its population twice over, yet it's not reflected in the prices. All because everyone and their grandma is investing in real estate. Yes, but this is reflected in China's vacancy rate: 22% by some estimates. In the US, home vacancy rates are sub-1%. Not saying people aren't treating homes as investments, but it seems clear we also have a supply issue. "Real Estate is Investment" sh…

The methodology is to take a hot city like Shanghai or Beijing, and count the number of windows lit up at night on a standard 30 story concrete apartment building. You'll find something like 25% of the units never light up. Now, those are in cities where people want to live, it is much worse in lower tier cities and new districts without services or jobs of lower tier cities.

Property taxes in the US mean you can't speculate so easily on property (you lose ~1% value a year). But they have 99 year leases instead, but everyone thinks the government will let you renew those with minimal fees.

Post reply on HN