| ▲ | tcdent 2 hours ago |
| You're rejecting the behavior of both human nature and earthly nature in a naively idealistic manner. From the moment an object is constructed it is being pulled into the ground. Maintenance has a far higher cost than initial construction. Relative perfection is inversely proportionate to complexity. This is the exact same mentality that drives suburban lawn guys crazy when their grass has a brown spot. You are not fully in control. |
|
| ▲ | matheusmoreira 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > You're rejecting the behavior of both human nature and earthly nature Absolutely. The whole point of a city is to reject all that. > You are not fully in control. I know, which is why I don't bother with lawns. I'd rather fill the entire area with solar panels instead. |
| |
| ▲ | JoshTriplett 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > I know, which is why I don't bother with lawns. I'd rather fill the entire area with solar panels instead. Agreed. Or xeriscaping, or something better than grass (which is a really low bar to be better than). | |
| ▲ | HWR_14 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The whole point of a city is to allow large numbers of people to live in close proximity to each other. Everything else is a choice. | | |
| ▲ | matheusmoreira 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Who would choose to live in a decaying city? Broken down buildings, screwed up roads? This is stuff you grit your teeth and put up with because it can't be helped. Who would choose to design a city with this decay literally built into it? That's mind boggling. | | |
| ▲ | 9dev 13 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Literal millions of people live in New York, Athens, London, Berlin, Rome, and tons of other places with various grades of decay visible everywhere. That’s what we usually call a place having a soul. | |
| ▲ | kelseyfrog an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I just don't let it bother me that much, but to each their own. A city with rounded down corners feels lived in, comfortable even. | |
| ▲ | karmakurtisaani 18 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Choosing a decaying city might mean lower taxes. Or better health care. Or tax breaks for the elites. You know, things we choose as a collective. | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | lovich an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Absolutely. The whole point of a city is to reject all that. I didn’t realize cities were made with a point to reject entropy and weren’t mostly organic congregations of people for economic reasons | | |
| ▲ | matheusmoreira 23 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Every single building is a rejection of entropy. We're literally carving out a secure and comfortable space for ourselves to exist inside. It's literally built to withstand and reject the elements, the chaos of the outside universe. Even the stereotypical jungle survivalists create structures to bend the surrounding environment to their benefit instead of allowing them environment to bend them. Structure is the antithesis of entropy. This is entirely orthogonal to economically efficient concentration. In fact, cities are an extension of it. We want to be safe and comfortable when we leave the buildings too. We don't want the cities to just look nice, we want architecture that makes our very souls feel safe and protected. We want facilities like well maintained sidewalks and roads so we can walk and drive with ease. This leads to economic efficiency. | | |
| ▲ | lovich 22 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > Every single building is a rejection of entropy. No? It’s just a building. I’d doubt there’s more than a handful of buildings that were made by hands that were explicitly rejecting entropy and just doing what they needed/wanted in the moment. |
|
| |
| ▲ | bgun an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | You seem like you’re on your way to becoming a billionaire, which is one of the worst things I can imagine saying about someone. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | ndriscoll an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Speaking of naivete, you can actually live in a city where the sidewalks are maintained, not sinking into the ground, and where the buildings are washed/painted, where cables are buried, where there is no trash on the street, no graffiti, and where there aren't derelict boarded up buildings with overgrown weeds. Nice areas do exist. |
|
| ▲ | RobRivera 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| >naive Opinions be like "You disagree with me so I can label you in a negative light" |
| |
| ▲ | tcdent 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Since when is naivety negative? You are born without knowledge. You acquire knowledge throughout existence. Seems pretty natural to me. | | |
| ▲ | JoshTriplett 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's unpleasant to accuse someone of being naive in a paternalistic fashion that implies "you're wrong, because you don't know any better, but if you knew better you'd agree with me". The post you replied to embodied a preference. You responded that they were wrong and naive for not wanting to depict cities constantly "being pulled into the ground". Some people playing a simulator do not want the simulator to force unavoidable decay everywhere. This is something for which there is room for a breadth of preferences, not something for which there is a correct and incorrect answer. | | | |
| ▲ | margalabargala an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | The state of being naive is not negative. The presumption of someone assuming "I think I am right and you are wrong and therefore I declare you to be naive" is a negative one. There are many traits that is perfectly fine to possess, but extremely rude/arrogant/negative/etc to declare as existing in someone else. |
|
|
