Live data from Hacker News

Who killed the rave?

ft.com

621–630 of 854 posts

Re: Who killed the rave?

#621
post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All government interference—significantly restricting supply and then doling out free money/tax-breaks to pay for whats left. As if govt leaders never took an econ 101 class.

Perhaps economic issues at the scale of a modern country can be more complicated than would be covered by an econ 101 lesson.

Perhaps not, to a first approximation.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#622

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…

I’m confused. You say that you “go to” an annual event, but then you describe it at a massive private festival that you’re self organizing. Which is it?

The best festivals are co-creative experiences.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My fantasy solution is that ALL businesses near expensive areas must pay a minimum wage high enough to rent a place (or a room) there. If the barista must be paid $109k to afford to live there, then let Starbucks jack the price of a plain black coffee to $17 for a small. Fewer people will be willing to pay this, Starbucks will go out of business and virtually nothing will fill its place. Suddenly these multimillion d…

Not sure I understand - is your goal to live in a barren wasteland? Because you can do that today, very cheaply.

The goal is to avoid having the working poor subsiding the property values of the rich. One reason some property is more "desirable" than others is its proximity to amenities. I'm pointing out an inefficiency in the market, and that the amenities shouldn't exist at subsidized rates.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#624

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…

I imagine it's more than just the deer who are affected by 100dB sound pollution and "confused" is probably quite an understatement.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One, I hated the term "raving" Completely agreed on the terminology. When I got into the scene (late 90s, Philly and Baltimore), everyone legit totally avoided saying "rave" or "raving" when talking with other folks in the scene. We all just said "party", and it was clear what you were talking about based on context (and, for better or worse, clothing style). No one said "ravers" either, it was always "party kids"…

>No one said "ravers" either, it was always "party kids" instead, at least among the younger end of the crowd. Over in Japan the term was party people which slurred into pary people and finally paripi which is the term today. Just some interesting culture from the other side of the pond.

That's especially interesting since Joi Ito is often credited with introducing the scene to Japan, and prior to that he was very involved in the US scene in Chicago. I wonder if he brought the terminology over too!

Re: Who killed the rave?

#627
post #580
post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is because the internet is what largely has made real estate more valuable. In pre-internet times, people shared real estate. Bars, restaurants, church, etc. Their discretionary income went into the fees, offerings, etc. to make these places comfortable. With the rise of the internet, people started preferring to stay home to use the internet. All that discretionary income once spent on fuelling those third plac…

The pin that pokes a hole in this theory is that commercial rents, at least in my part of the world in an expensive city, have risen faster than residential. Presumably this wouldn’t be the case if those third places were in such rapid decline. Also, I’m pretty tightly involved in the local bar and hospitality scene, and most places are doing just fine — not quite pre-COVID levels at a number of places, but some are…

> not quite pre-COVID levels at a number of places, but some are busier than ever.

The real estate bubble, if we are to call it that, goes back to the early 2000s at least. Pre-COVID, implying somewhere around 2019, isn't telling. For what it is worth, the housing price data I have in front of me shows that prices have come back down to nearly pre-COVID levels as well, so that more or less tracks anyway.

How does it compare to the 1990s? The landscape has definitely changed here. A couple of decades ago there were three busy bars mere steps from my place. Now, there isn't a single bar in town. Those closures brought consolidation to bars found in the next town over, which saw them thrive there, but now the decline is staring to become visible there too. The next, next town over is probably busier than ever as a result with even more consolidation slowly starting to take place, I can believe you there, but that doesn't imply general strength of the industry.

The media regularly reports on the dying death of the third place. Your local experience may not be providing an accurate picture.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#628

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…

I imagine it's more than just the deer who are affected by 100dB sound pollution and "confused" is probably quite an understatement.

Hmmm

Raves died in the 90s for a few reasons.

1. They made dancing illegal (look it up before rage comments).

2. Corporate sponsors moved in.

3. Glow sticks / candy ravers

4. Drugs

5. Police tactics and not being able to be paid off by promoters.

6. The internet (remember map points and info lines?)

7. Models, actresses, famous types going and demanding special service / VIP.

8. DJ as GOD sick gross

9. OG promoters cashing out and not caring. Think Drop Bass and Daft Punk (google it).

10. Techno mainstream / a la hip hop. (DRUGS/S&M)

Re: Who killed the rave?

#629
post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Online dating. I guarantee that only about one in five male clubbers were truly "only there for the music". Maybe fewer than that. Women went along with it because, well, what was the alternative, and the contemporary culture encouraged it. Online dating has its problems, certainly, but the risks people took in the 70s, 80s, 90s were kind of insane by today's standards. And also the amount of unwanted attention women…

[flagged]

If this is sarcastic and you mean the opposite, then I think that you don't have empathy for women receiving unwanted attention because you yourself never received unwanted attention and that is sad and I empathize with that feeling of sadness and shame. I think you should reconsider some parts of your belief system if it prompts such a thought that breaks through to be written in a comment for others to consume.
Post reply on HN