There are multiple utilitarian reasons the Rock City is better since it's clean, safe, and well-equipped for a new era of cultural evolution. That's all very nice, very nice but it sounds like advertising for practical shoes and those don't pump up the libido much.
We also have the pitch about Things To Do in the Rock City but these are attractions rather than reasons I will be able to flop on the couch in my pad and think, yah, life is good.
The pad is safe when no-one can break through a window to cause mayhem because, well, there are no windows. The temperature is comfortable since it's much easier and consumes less energy to maintain a stable temperature in an environment which doesn't change. Huge TV screens serve as windows to landscapes or whatever I want on my walls.
That's got a whole lot of stoner cool but whomever in the cast wants to play the femme role isn't going to find it cozy, now isn't that right. Stoners don't care about cozy but someone will be playing the femme part and that one will not be pleased.
Lotho asked earlier, "Why would I want to live there?"
Why indeed so I wonder. There are all kinds of utilitarian reasons I can list as above but they probably won't alone be enough to get anyone all sexed-up over living there.
The economy is already starting to get jacked as was tentatively described earlier in a Guaranteed Universal Income so that means there will be an economic benefit to those living there insofar as the Rock City is dealing with the No Jobs Available circumstance of the new age while other nexuses do not. That means the Rock City will look like a 'good deal' to people but that's still not sexy. People don't fall in love with a place just because they got a better shake on the rent.
The Rock City will have parks with lovely trees and animals because our ability is quite high in making artificial light which mimics natural frequencies.
Ed: if you put an artificial sky over this artificial park then I'm genuinely walking the fuck out.
Not so fast, Hopalong Cassidy. How about if we take the image of the sky from the ground level and 'cast it on the ceiling of the Rock City park. We will holodeck the hell out of the parts of the park you can't touch anyway.
Ed: I will know the difference.
I'm not so sure of that but the bigger question is will you mind. You know that sky is actually a rock ceiling regardless of whether it's visually detectable. I see the bigger question as whether that will bug you.
The biggest variable I'm seeing is whether your pad has windows. In traditional places, we have windows but we don't usually look out of them all that much and often there are shades or coverings in front of them which restrict the view anyway. The question is even when we don't use them all that much in any functional way, do they need to be there for a sense of space for, you know, the spaceness of things.
Ed: wtf?
That's for some kind of feng shui or however that goes.
An important thing to people is security and part of the need for windows is to reassure ourselves no threat is approaching. In the Rock City, no threat can approach that way so, in that context, the windows become irrelevant. The aesthetic is important for the spaceness of things but I do believe we can do better than that with projection since we can do major magic with holograms, projected virtual images, etc, etc. I'm not convinced windows will be such a loss since we don't really use them all that much.
I'm highly confident I can make this so damn cool you will want to be there and not simply for practical reasons. This theme will likely continue with whatever other hare-brained idea pops into my head.
Ed: you're just building The Matrix but making it out of stone.
Well, we do have a rule of No Electronic Plugs in the Head since we prefer to create our own delusions.
Ed: so what if there are no electronic plugs in the head when you will just do it by WiFi instead.
Well, that's not the Future since the world is doing that now.
Maestro, rim shot, please.
We also have the pitch about Things To Do in the Rock City but these are attractions rather than reasons I will be able to flop on the couch in my pad and think, yah, life is good.
The pad is safe when no-one can break through a window to cause mayhem because, well, there are no windows. The temperature is comfortable since it's much easier and consumes less energy to maintain a stable temperature in an environment which doesn't change. Huge TV screens serve as windows to landscapes or whatever I want on my walls.
That's got a whole lot of stoner cool but whomever in the cast wants to play the femme role isn't going to find it cozy, now isn't that right. Stoners don't care about cozy but someone will be playing the femme part and that one will not be pleased.
Lotho asked earlier, "Why would I want to live there?"
Why indeed so I wonder. There are all kinds of utilitarian reasons I can list as above but they probably won't alone be enough to get anyone all sexed-up over living there.
The economy is already starting to get jacked as was tentatively described earlier in a Guaranteed Universal Income so that means there will be an economic benefit to those living there insofar as the Rock City is dealing with the No Jobs Available circumstance of the new age while other nexuses do not. That means the Rock City will look like a 'good deal' to people but that's still not sexy. People don't fall in love with a place just because they got a better shake on the rent.
The Rock City will have parks with lovely trees and animals because our ability is quite high in making artificial light which mimics natural frequencies.
Ed: if you put an artificial sky over this artificial park then I'm genuinely walking the fuck out.
Not so fast, Hopalong Cassidy. How about if we take the image of the sky from the ground level and 'cast it on the ceiling of the Rock City park. We will holodeck the hell out of the parts of the park you can't touch anyway.
Ed: I will know the difference.
I'm not so sure of that but the bigger question is will you mind. You know that sky is actually a rock ceiling regardless of whether it's visually detectable. I see the bigger question as whether that will bug you.
The biggest variable I'm seeing is whether your pad has windows. In traditional places, we have windows but we don't usually look out of them all that much and often there are shades or coverings in front of them which restrict the view anyway. The question is even when we don't use them all that much in any functional way, do they need to be there for a sense of space for, you know, the spaceness of things.
Ed: wtf?
That's for some kind of feng shui or however that goes.
An important thing to people is security and part of the need for windows is to reassure ourselves no threat is approaching. In the Rock City, no threat can approach that way so, in that context, the windows become irrelevant. The aesthetic is important for the spaceness of things but I do believe we can do better than that with projection since we can do major magic with holograms, projected virtual images, etc, etc. I'm not convinced windows will be such a loss since we don't really use them all that much.
I'm highly confident I can make this so damn cool you will want to be there and not simply for practical reasons. This theme will likely continue with whatever other hare-brained idea pops into my head.
Ed: you're just building The Matrix but making it out of stone.
Well, we do have a rule of No Electronic Plugs in the Head since we prefer to create our own delusions.
Ed: so what if there are no electronic plugs in the head when you will just do it by WiFi instead.
Well, that's not the Future since the world is doing that now.
Maestro, rim shot, please.
13 comments:
I contest your reasoning for windows. What type of world do you live in that the purpose is to act as early warning system fir some imminent utside threat.
Mine are to look at the lake, allow fresh air to circulate, to look at the turkeys and deer in the yard and to watch the kids play.
To take care of that imminent threat, I walk out the door, fire one into the air that usually ends the threat. But out here the reintroduction of wolves and the inhumane dumping of pitbulls are about the only threat we see
I seriously doubt you can recreate the feeling of walking in my backyard. You could probably create a reasonale facsimile of it but it would never feel the same
Just as a computer can recreate your guitar but it would never feel the same
I'm just thinking of windows for threat analysis as kind of a primal thing. We don't even think about it but deep we know we would see any approaching threat even if that's not why we're looking. I do think there's some fair dinkum psychology in that.
The what's realer than real is kind of a computer plague since CGI can make such incredible things happen in movies but we know it's all total bullshit and we scoff at them. I do think these robo windows will give more realism rather than less but that may be a problem in itself. I made it so well people don't believe it.
The vibe we want is feeling cozy, whatever that is for feeling at home rather than freakshow hotel room in Manhattan. In fact, that would be a good example since it doesn't matter if the view of Times Square is real since there's no way to verify it from your room. It's just an image on that end of the room. I know it's real because that's the current state of technology but there's no actual basis since I can't touch anything.
I will just have to let you live in your bunker in the ground. No matter the CGI you develop it will still be an antiseptic well lit cave. Enjoy your dream it would be horrific to me
You're representing a group of people which likely includes people in Bavarian villages who are highly in touch with the Earth but I suspect the reaction will be different in others, confirmed city dwellers, for example.
I'll make another pitch because I like doing it and I'm clear it's a dream but the fascination is how closely it can follow reality. So far I think the biggest liability in the concept is my pitch rather than actual limitations in the Rock City environment.
I think it is filling the housing areas
There's nothing to stop moving your current homey furniture in there or go all-out Swedish metal and glass if you like. Maybe some people just like to have a cuckoo clock on the wall because it's the symbol of home for them or some such.
The description so far has probably sounded too pragmatic as if it's construction of a prison or some such but I really don't see a huge difference on the interior except for some spaced-out upgrades plus the absence of windows. It's a bitch to chuck out an older couch because that's the best for watching NASCAR. If you spill something, pfft, the stain will come out, you know, when I get around to trying to get it out. Pristine is not comfortable to me.
I am someone who hated apartment living. I dont like it if you shout and your neighbors can hear you.
I have never understood living in a city. Now you want me to live in a cramped underground city.
There is not enough lipstick to to make that pig pretty
A tremendous number of people do live in apartments whether by choice or by circumstance. Unknown what percentage prefers that but it's an enormous number regardless.
No telling what percentage of people would opt for the Rock City as one quick evaluation is which one is easier and an apartment will always win on that. There is no intention to build crumby tenement flats but rather living areas with enough room to move.
Some people are in touch with the land and they won't leave that nor should they. That thinking isn't universal, tho. For my own thinking, how much of a hassle is it rates high along with can I play without bugging anyone. The Rock City should win both of those since stone won't pass much noise, if any.
I would need real data to believe most people live in tbe city because they love that lifestyle.
Atlanta has ugly traffic almost 24/7. Dallas isnt that bad but has its moments of ugliness. Even Nashville has terrible traffic. People live in that crap because they have to live and work there. Noone sits in traffic 3 hours a day because they like living in the middle of a city. I would also need to see the percentage of apartment dwellers who live there by choice over necessity.
I think you far oversell any desire of the general masses to live in RockCity
The I Heart New York vibe looks good on promo stickers but only the high rollers can live the fast life in a city that never sleeps. Most are likely there, at least originally, for the same reason the hilljacks came out of the mountains, that's where the jobs are.
I know the suburban life where the dream is to live on a farm and be 'truly free' but all the while you know you don't really want to do all the things necessary to take care of the farm so I put up with the shit of the city to get at least minimal calm in the 'burbs. That's different from the closer approaches in, say, Clifton where the people are generally happy to be there.
Either in the 'burbs or Clifton, there's a great deal of apartment living and usually from people on their way up. If they can afford it then they get a house but in a bigger city you may never be able to afford one and even more so each day as it seems California has a peach of a real estate bubble growing right now.
I do think most, given current and growing population levels, are destined for apartments so the question I see is where can I get the best one.
Stats show you are correct. Apartment dwellers are mostly young lower income. As the age and income increase they buy houses.
As long as interest rates are artificially low, real estsate prices will increase.
California is ugly especially San Franciso because of all the Google millionaire's and the texh money
Really no telling how many prefer any apartment because less hassle or whatever. If you're not planning on kids or anything which needs to be in a house, the apt is probably a better deal.
Unless it makes explosions, I doubt Clinton will pay for anything.
Post a Comment