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

811–820 of 854 posts

Re: Who killed the rave?

#811

Post by mixmastamyk »

cyberax wrote: post #715
mixmastamyk wrote: post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said nothing about "densification." This whole diatribe is in your mind. My original point was about there being a well-documented shortage of housing across the country. You can argue against it if you like but just look foolish. You point at few absolute price decreases which is true but don't take into account multiple variables (like population increases, inflation, tax policy) or understand higher order deriva…

> My original point was about there being a well-documented shortage of housing across the country. Can you point out the shortage on this graph: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1koDH ? We do NOT have a housing crisis. Not even close. Housing is more affordable and of better quality than ever. We have a DENSITY crisis. People are forced by economic forces to move to relatively few unaffordable locations. > You p…

Yes, black is white, ignorance is strength. Freedom is slavery.

Just stop. I’m not gonna “research” 1+1 for you.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#812

Post by mixmastamyk »

watwut wrote: post #741
mixmastamyk wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps not, to a first approximation.

They certainly are. This is a case of people with little knowledge and a lot of confidence being the most dangerous.

If you don’t understand the basics, you don’t understand anything.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#813

Post by watwut »

forgetfreeman wrote: post #790
watwut wrote: post #745

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All of which is available to people that don't live in the city. We have various forms of transportation options. Not really. It is a big difference between having mat 30 min to gym, school, whatever or whatever and not even needing a car and having to drive almost an hour to get anywhere. It is difference between "I can and will actually do it" vs "nope, cant do it". > Hell I once flew halfway across the country j…

> Not really. It is a big difference between having mat 30 min to gym, school, whatever or whatever and not even needing a car and having to drive almost an hour to get anywhere. It is difference between "I can and will actually do it" vs "nope, cant do it". Man if you think adult humans are that helpless I really don't know what to tell you. They aren't, but apparently you'd need some convincing. > That is definitel…

> Man if you think adult humans are that helpless I really don't know what to tell you. They aren't, but apparently you'd need some convincing.

It is not about being helpless. It is about day having certain amount of hours, you needing minimum 8 of them for work, another 8 for sleep and showering, then another time for cooking, cleaning, putting kids to sleep, ensuring they do homework and simply being at home supervising them. If your kids cant engage in hobbies without you driving them there and back, then congratulation, you just spent 3 hours driving and waiting.

Additional 3 hours a day needed to get to work, back from work, to gym and from gym are a time you simply cant use for anything else.

> none of the entertainment and cultural experiences that folks who are stuck in major urban areas use to tout the experience are denied to folks who don't live in the city.

Sure, it is just that they require more effort, time and money to get there and back. So much, that you just wont do it on the regular.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#814

Post by riehwvfbk »

yoyohello13 wrote: post #694
riehwvfbk wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Upvoted you, because opinions should be safe to voice even if one disagrees with them. This does appear to be a common concern. I also happen to know many families that vote Republican where the woman also happens to "wear the pants".

100% of modern misogynistic rhetoric and all the new erosion of women’s rights is coming from the right. Ignoring that fact is just stupid. “Wearing the pants” doesn’t mean shit when they also vote a rapist into office.

Let's say that's true: all misogynistic rhetoric is coming from the right. This does not also mean that anyone on the right is automatically a misogynist.

I know, you'll have a knee-jerk reaction to the above. Let me illustrate the point. 100% of "white people are oppressors" rhetoric comes from the left. By your logic, no white person should vote Democrat. Ah, but you'll say that not everyone on the left is hung up on this, not everyone is actually an oppressor, and we can all get along. Well, the same point applies to the right and misogynists then, doesn't it?

Re: Who killed the rave?

#815

Post by monocasa »

9rx wrote: post #588
monocasa wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least near me I've seen a resurgence the last couple years.

The so-called dead cat bounce is oft seen in a decline.

It doesn't feel like that. More that people had a slight preference for above board shows, but with increasing prices, low trust environments from general popularity, and staff that treats you like cattle, more people looking for and enjoying more underground events.

It's sort of like the pressures that lead people to pirate versus streaming service.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#816

Post by quchen »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #680
quchen wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Putting stickers onto phones, kicking out violators and fostering a culture around that does miracles to that kind of behavior. Once a majority enjoyes the moment and is very openly pissed off by any kind of filming we go back to being ourselves.

Do they put them on both sides of the phone, front and back?

Sometimes, yes. Depends on the venue. Taking a sticker off is a zero discussion throwing out reason in some places (filming or not), and an overhead phone filming is hard to hide. The sticker is a clear sign that it's not just words on some code of conduct poster.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#817

Post by thom »

geden wrote: post #785
thom wrote: post #757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still going strong. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-647769...

Simultaneously delighted and appalled.

You know you're old when you find yourself grumbling while using a decibel meter on your phone at 2pm in the morning, but I respect that they got away with it.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#818

Post by saberience »

tayo42 wrote: post #286
ninetyninenine wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I believe that, 15 years ago was peak deadmau5, skrillex, dubstep explosion, EDC expanding everywhere. No way globally its more popular now then it was in the 2010s

It's definitely more popular now. Unless you're still deeply in the scene you wouldn't see it, but there are so many massive acts now, far more than there were back then, and niche genres have become much more massive. E.g. techno artists can draw massive crowds and they never were doing that in the 2010s.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#819

Post by saberience »

SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #70

> The proportion of club nights running beyond 3am fell in 12 of 15 global cities between 2014 and 2024, according to a Financial Times analysis of events on listings website Resident Advisor. Club nights are not raves. Raves are (usually) not posted on RA. The underground scene is doing just fine.

The definition of "rave" is in question here, what it means depends on what country you're from, and even in given countries the idea of "rave" means different things to different people.

For me it means people dancing to electronic music and most likely taking drugs too. It can mean raving in a club or a festival or on the beach in Thailand or in a forest in the UK or in a warehouse in Brooklyn, if there's electronic dance music and drugs, then it's a rave.

Here is what Claude says: "A rave is a large dance party or festival typically featuring electronic dance music (EDM), characterized by: Extended duration - often running late into the night or through early morning hours Electronic music - featuring DJs playing various genres like house, techno, trance, and drum & bass Distinctive atmosphere - using elements like elaborate light shows, lasers, fog machines, and visual projections Communal experience - bringing together large groups of people dancing in a shared space"

Re: Who killed the rave?

#820

Post by saberience »

tensor wrote: post #434
in-pursuit wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assert this without evidence, but I would highly suspect club attendance numbers and rave attendance numbers to be strongly correlated.

That doesn't make sense to me. Anecdotally, most people I know who love actual raves generally didn't go to clubs, for one. But also more broadly, I've heard from multiple local venues that one big change is that EDM crowds don't drink as much. This means venues make A LOT less money, and that means fewer venues. If I had to guess, another factor is that younger crowds don't have the buying power older generations ha…

What is an "actual" rave? Are you gatekeeping an English word which means many different things to different people based on where they grew up and their socioeconomic background.

I've been "raving" since 2002 and for me it means dancing to electronic dance music and taking drugs, and it can be in a legit nightclub, or someones house, or a festival, or indeed an illegal warehouse rave. Everyone I have "raved" with, used the term interchangably.

If I told my friend, "I was raving at Tomorrowland last year", they would never say, "you can't say you were raving because that's not an illegal event."

Raving is not a scientific or mathematical term that has some precise definition. Don't try and make it that way, that's not what raving is about dude.

Post reply on HN