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

551–560 of 854 posts

Re: Who killed the rave?

#551

Post by bratwurst3000 »

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.

yeah i think the internet is helping speculators to increase prices. I think they manipulate prices by using their market power to increase prices by asking high price for example online for 1/3 of their houses so price inflates.

in my opinion is the same with every price augmentation in the last 20 years. The Internet helped make fake offers that drove price high.

snd yes blablabla the invisible hand of the market…

the invisible hand of the markt is if all speculators work for the same goal on a market with scarcity they dont compete. See prices of Art. its all fake

Re: Who killed the rave?

#552

Post by drdec »

geodel wrote: post #415
daedrdev wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many cities effectively ban or heavily restrict new housing developments that increase density. I'm really not surprised real estate prices continue to rise when building new units is often an extremely expensive, risky process that in some areas can be stopped at any time with literally no reason required

Huh, why is college getting expensive, healthcare getting expensive, day care getting expensive, hell even streaming services getting expensive, none of these are heavily restricted that no development is happening there. And in many cities breakneck construction activity is happening still real estate is getting very expensive. This seems rather simplistic reason to me.

> why is college getting expensive

Because of government subsidies. (If you were willing to pay $100k for college and the government will give you $50k, now the college can charge $150k. Yes that's simplistic but it's the crux.)

> healthcare getting expensive

Healthcare is doubly removed from price feedbacks - patients don't pay for doctors, insurance companies do. Patients don't even pay for insurance, employers do.

Not too mention that the number of new doctors in the US is artificially constrained.

> day care getting expensive

can't help you on this one

> streaming services getting expensive

Streaming services started out undercutting cable prices. That's no longer necessary so the price is stabilizing. Plus now they are expected to produce their own content.

Expecting everything to have the same root cause is unrealistic.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#553

Post by tigefiz »

puddnutz wrote: post #215
PhunkyPhil wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This rings in Minneapolis. The midwest definitely has a solid, consistent scene for house/techno/electronic with DJs bouncing between Minneapolis, Madison, Milwaukee, Chicago for sets. The demographic is definitely millennial, with maybe ~25% being Gen Z. It's also definitely not... popular. The biggest nights have a _way_ smaller turnout than college bars or city clubs. I'm not sure how strong the crowd actually was…

Created an HN account just to ask... what are the entry ways to know what sets are going on in Minneapolis? The person you replied to mentioned Drop Bass Network and Chicago Redline, both of which have easily follow-able accounts. Anything like that in this area?

I'd recommend Backyard Boombox or House Proud for shows in Minneapolis.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#554

Post by ethbr1 »

zetalyrae wrote: post #506
mindcrime wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and television (Which enabled entertainment as a passive indirect consumption) Absolutely. There were periods of time in history when there was significant opposition to television. Hence the coining of terms like "boob tube", "idiot box", "idiot's lantern", "cultural wasteland", etc. You can see a bit more of some of that (although not with a primarily historical focus) here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_a…

And they were right. Television created nothing of value.

It broke movie studios as gatekeepers for mass distribution.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#555

Post by sitharus »

ethbr1 wrote: post #457
brabel wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When my mom was teen, she says the way they had the most fun was to go to dancing parties in people's houses and sometimes in some special venue for younger people. That was in the 60's. As I grew up in the 80's we had nothing like that, we just went to night clubs or some street full of bars/restaurants. Dancing was mostly a thing you did by yourself, like in most night clubs still these days, not like she describes…

Imho, the internet / mobile apps have drastically atrophied younger generations' face-to-face social interaction skills. And specifically their appetite for the risk/discomfort that goes along with living in realtime physical moments with other people. Human beings are awkward as hell, but that's what laughter and tolerance are the bridges for.

There’s an unspoken phrase here, it’s “in the way I think it should be done”.

Just because the younger generation are doing things differently it doesn’t make them wrong, in my generation it was sending text messages that was wrong because we weren’t talking on the phone. Before that it was talking on the phone rather than going to people’s houses.

I’ll also add what my psychologist told me.

Social skills aren’t innate in humans, we have to be taught them. Smaller family sizes and greater distances from extended family mean these aren’t taught by older siblings/cousins/etc like the used to and parents aren’t filling the gap, which means standards of social interaction are changing much more rapidly.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#556

Post by 9rx »

jdgoesmarching wrote: post #530
9rx wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anecdotally, most people I know who love actual raves generally didn't go to clubs, for one. In a similar vein, most people I know who love watching sports do not play the sport they enjoy watching. However, like the parent, I suspect that the numbers watching a sport strongly correlates with the numbers playing the sport. There need not be overlap between the watchers and the players for the correlation to stand.…

> Raves and clubs are different expressions of what is essentially the same fashion. This is a very efficient way to communicate that you don’t have experience with raves and/or clubs.

Efficient communication of lacking said experience would be met with details provided by someone with experience, not a commentary on efficiency itself. It turns out it is highly inefficient.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#558

Post by ethbr1 »

znpy wrote: post #525
ethbr1 wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imho, the internet / mobile apps have drastically atrophied younger generations' face-to-face social interaction skills. And specifically their appetite for the risk/discomfort that goes along with living in realtime physical moments with other people. Human beings are awkward as hell, but that's what laughter and tolerance are the bridges for.

> And specifically their appetite for the risk/discomfort that goes along with living in realtime physical moments with other people. The risk/discomfort lasted just that night. Nowadays everyone is posting everything everywhere. No wonder youngsters don’t want to risk it. This is a form of social cooling in my opinion.

When Facebook first took off, I had an inkling radical transparency was going to be a societal outcome.

With everyone posting everything, and everyone's digital history recorded (if anyone cares to archive or dig it up), everyone would have skeletons in their closet.

I was hoping that would make society more tolerant and willing to accept faults in people.

In actuality, it just seems to have produced an industry of digital cleaners that the wealthy can afford, while everyone else gets fucked.

But then, that's why I limit my posting on social media outside of HN.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#559

Post by spamizbad »

steveBK123 wrote: post #118

Probably a bunch of factors... Tier 1 city RE prices have made live entertainment venues harder to run profitably. GenZ studies have found a lower participation in "risky behavior" which late night clubbing may or not be considered. Mobile internet & smartphones seem to be killing all forms of live in person interaction. And finally electronic music of various forms used to be a niche, and now it's mainstream. In the…

> GenZ studies have found a lower participation in "risky behavior" which late night clubbing may or not be considered.

I think they just do different risk-taking behavior. Sports betting seems way more prevalent, and Gamblers Anonymous is reporting way more younger people attending meetings.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#560

Post by kstrauser »

flocciput wrote: post #510
kstrauser wrote: post #120

One big change is that they got better and much more organized. I go to an annual event with a few hundred of my friends and family. We rent a lodge in a national forest, set up an enormous sound system, and dance for 3 days around some very confused deer. There are food trucks and coffee bars and dozens of portapotties scattered around, plus daytime poolside sets while we swim around and listen to 100dB house. We gr…

How much does it cost (not to organize, but for someone to attend)?

There’s a wide range, but the specific one I described is around $200 for a 3 day weekend.
Post reply on HN