scoobdog

Honestly... a whole lot of confusing emotions there.

Well, suburban sprawl is explicitly a consequence of rapid migration. It indicates a large influx of people without any real connection to each other or the community as a whole in the sense that it maximizes the amount of land apportioning at the cost of creating a cohesive infrastructure. I would actually suggest that cul-de-sacs are the opposite of waste since they usually end up in creating an additional plot on the street, and, given a typical subdivision, that could result in 4-5 additional sellable properties for the developer. But, the greater point is that urban sprawl is a reaction to special demographic conditions and could be best described as temporary solution rather than a permanent one.

How great photos are made.

But did he swallow?

Anything by Taika Watiti would be of immense interest.

It's not exactly that, though. Reminds me of a myth about Los Angeles that get perpetuated - that freeways got built because tire or oil companies (depending on the telling) were looking to build business. To be fair, it's less a myth than a fantasy that's part of the Hollywood Noir vision of early LA, a greater analog on the folly of men bending arid and flat California to its will and paying a price for it, but it has some basis in the true genesis of the massive petroleum industry in SoCal. The problem is that the fantasy of man's vanity perhaps overlooks larger demographic patterns that actually drove the rapid expansion of the LA Basin. To be blunt, America in general and the American West in particular expanded at an extremely rapid pace. The huge expansion of the LA Metro region coincides with several large migration events over the latter half of the nineteenth century and the early twentieth century, such as the Industrial Revolution, economic upheavals in Western Europe, the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl, and both World Wars. It's not so much as we didn't want to build in a traditional compacted centers as much as we simply couldn't. Places like Los Angeles were ripe for expansion because they had the natural resources and the space to accommodate the influx. By comparison, places like Japan built up over a very long period of time. They cities in Japan didn't experience the massive and rapid emigration that a lot of American cities experienced. They were, in fact, protected from such events because of their limited space.

I'm a little worried that Seagram's even makes a Gin.

Good... because all i know how to make is pancakes.

America already sort of does it. Any city with historic downtown quarters that are more than 100 years old has been incorporated some form of a modified access plan for the down town that emphasizes open spaces with pedestrian corridors, rehabilitated and repurposed spaced, and some form of off-boulevard parking. Obviously, the purpose is explicitly to encourage business traffic (usually dining) with social benefits directly tied to economic indicators or an afterthought. A good example of the problem can be seen in most European cities. Florence, for instance, has more recently shut off traffic to it's city center, and it has certainly boosted foot traffic into that area...but most of those pedestrians are tourists. It highlights a point that often gets lost on those that are proponents of it: the cities that developed a compact town center did so explicitly as commercial districts. Nostalgia might paint these areas as an ideal that Walt Disney pioneered, but doing so counters their social purpose.

Replace childish with "scaring the other discord users." Pat was rather specific about that.

Especially when the characters can't keep their own arcs straight.

Oh good. This got more confusing. This is what makes the UEMB so great.

The other part is that you can more easily host a server on a local network than on internet platform. That includes even creating a browser site that is entirely contained on that server and can't be linked once the VPN is shut down. It will cost quite a bit in IT equipment, but, if you're thinking on Burning Man scales, it's certainly not that costly.

To start, you probably have to create a closed circuit environment (such as, say, a virtual private network ) that exists solely as a virtual venue.

I think it's an ambitious idea that could be extremely rewarding. The problem I see is that trying to present this creation over the internet means that it's impossible to delete the source material itself completely.

Right. Extending that thought, what makes such a project really special is that the original performance or piece is completely lost to time. The only way anyone can vicariously experience it is by piecing it together through multiple recountings by those people that witnessed it first hand.

I'm just focused on the delete part. There wouldn't be a point of creating something just to delete it... unless the point was to create a lasting impression of that creation in those who viewed it: an impression that outlasts and, perhaps, eventually replaces the original creation.

OK, Cool. Making sure I'm not persona non grata or anything.

You know, I was on the Discord and then I didn't log on for a few months, and now I'm booted again. Feelsbadman.

Join the club.

Church's is so much better.

Of course not. What I’m getting at is that Burning Man performances aren’t intended to exist without audience participation, and that’s difficult when the performance starts out as a recording. That’s one of the specific conditions of your OP.

You already got one predictable vote.

I don't think that's what she's talking about. I don't think it's possible simply because there is a fundamental flaw to the medium. Theoretically, events such as Burning Man are perpetuated through a lens - as in the performances are transitory but the representation of these performances persist through the perspective of the attendees either through a photographic or videographic lens. There is separation between those lenses and the performers that is typically filled by other attendees, the natural setting, or even other performances in the periphery. In a virtual space, the lens is explicitly the domain of the performer instead of the audience and there is, consequently no separation. Furthermore, there is the issue of the inherent permanence of everything that exists on the internet; even assuming a recording of the event is saved by the virtual attendee, thus becoming the property (not in the legal sense) of his or her perspective, and promptly deleted from the performers space, the recoding continues to exist in near perpetuity in some form devoid of any additional lens space.

Do I have COVID?