3 ms·
You can't base world travel on the Atacama desert. I mean, I'd love to go there, but it's one of the most hostile places for life on the planet. I'm all for avo
by auxbuss 16y ago
You can't base world travel on the Atacama desert. I mean, I'd love to go there, but it's one of the most hostile places for life on the planet. I'm all for avoiding people for a break, but there are places with a bit more life and colour without being party town.
No disrespect meant to your preferred lifestyle. Just saying that when you do next pop out you might try somewhere less hostile like the Galapagos or Easter Islands. Kind of a moot point, as the next place more hostile than the Atacama is probably the Moon.
- m0nastic 16y agoI wasn't mentioning that as an example of world travel, I was mentioning it as an "experience", which the article suggests are more useful than possessions. My point (which I didn't convey properly) was that by most accounts, that expedition was quite an "experience". I certainly don't regret going (The gallery show when I returned was pretty well-received), and it was nice to traipse around South America with my friends, but I'd have been just as happy sitting at home by myself for a couple months (and would have saved myself a lot of money). As to Galapagos or Easter Island, I have zero desire to visit either. I find nothing interesting about the natural world (which sounds awful, and I don't mean it to). I just got back last week from taking my girlfriend to the Dominican Republic for her birthday (which was a much more traditional vacation). I didn't take my laptop (something she was keen to require); but our hotel had Wifi. I found myself using my iPhone 4 to keep up on things as much as I was able. If it had been up to me, I'd have sat in the hotel bar reading RSS feeds all day.