Live data from Hacker News

Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

bbc.com

261–270 of 383 posts

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> construction of new condos is focused on the luxury kind Supply is supply. Harlem is largely former luxury units. Anecdotally, the luxury building opening down the street let me negotiate down my rent. It sucked the highest earners out of my building (and renter pool), which reduced my landlord's leverage. And it let me compare perks ( e.g. included gym offsetting a membership), which increased mine. End result was…

Sure, and in most cities incredible amounts of condos have been built and prices of rent for low-income individuals have increased massively. It does not work in the real world. Supply is not supply. For one, these condos being built can essentially not be rented, and that means that they are not supply for low and middle income individuals.

This is incorrect. Those homes are expensive because the land beneath them is expensive. The finishes are largely irrelevant.

And the land is expensive because there are not enough places like them.

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#262
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Building Luxury condos does create affordable housing. Where do you think those people move from? interesting thought from this link: If you destroy 10,000 luxury condo's in Toronto tomorrow, will your prices go down? https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/8/1/how-luxury-hous...

People who buy luxury condos are probably not vacating affordable housing to do so. Why would you think that to be the case? The Strong Towns link you provided gives two examples of apartments build approximately a century ago. Trickle-down economics at its best. Build luxury apartments, fine. Probably not exclusively though, as in many cities the need is more pressing than that.

The fit and finish of apartments and houses is largely irrelevant. The cost of the housing increase over the past 20 years is the cost of the land beneath it. Largely because we have not built transit and housing and jobs elsewhere.

Based on your logic we should ban all new market-rate construction and magically prices will come down. That is nonsense.

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But... condo neighborhoods are exactly that medium density housing. Every city does need more condos in their existing neighborhoods if populations are able to grow. (Unless Covid-19 will reshape the trajectory of urbanization, and major cities will mostly shrink for the next several decades. That actually seems somewhat plausible). But writing off all the sidewalk labs ideas as gimmicky smartphone integrations is pr…

Condos are too expensive in general to fulfill the needs of most cities. In general construction of new condos is focused on the luxury kind of condos Google was undoubtedly looking at, which are absolutely not what cities need right now. We need affordable housing.

No thanks. Government subsidized units are a mess, and have been tried before.

Plop someone into an "affordable" unit and you are basically locking them there forever, as they cannot afford to move. That is a very bad situation to be in.

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonprofits are bogus in a lot of cases. They make tons of profit and make their founders/ceos rich.

Non profit CEOs make a fraction of what they’d make at a comparably sized for profit company.

that may be true, but it doesnt mean they cant be corrupt or inept (just look at mother teresa for example)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Mother_Teresa

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#265
post #251
post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democratically elected governments exist to make the world a better place, at least in the views of those who vote in their leaders. Businesses exist to make money. That's the distinction being drawn. Pretending there's not a fundamental distinction between the two types of entities is disingenuous.

If you start from "democratically elected governments exist to make the world a better place," then you're going to end up somewhere wrong. Even in the best of times, democratically elected governments exist to give the majority power over the minority. This is considered an improvement over other forms of government, where often a minority had power over a majority and treated them poorly. There are actually some "f…

> Most businesses do not have tax and police authority and must face the market test on a daily basis.

they would if they could...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#266

I know there's gonna be a lot of people here that are happy about this for various reasons (anti-Google, anti-"smart cities", etc), but this is really disappointing for me. It's true that the concept of "cities" (or even just "gatherings of people") predates the Internet by thousands of years, and that cities themselves haven't adapted much to the Internet and what it enables in the 40ish years it's been around. This…

The entire idea of a "smart city" is pure anathema to how vibrant cities function. It's a technocratic wet dream, the digital version of Robert Moses and Corbusier making a comeback. The people preoccupied with this should read some Alain Bertaud and learn how markets work and then go do more productive things with their time than trying to micromanage cities.

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#267
post #251
post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democratically elected governments exist to make the world a better place, at least in the views of those who vote in their leaders. Businesses exist to make money. That's the distinction being drawn. Pretending there's not a fundamental distinction between the two types of entities is disingenuous.

If you start from "democratically elected governments exist to make the world a better place," then you're going to end up somewhere wrong. Even in the best of times, democratically elected governments exist to give the majority power over the minority. This is considered an improvement over other forms of government, where often a minority had power over a majority and treated them poorly. There are actually some "f…

> Most businesses do not have tax and police authority and must face the market test on a daily basis.

The only thing that keeps businesses from claiming tax and police authority is the government monopoly on violence; they'd happily take if they could. Same goes for having to face the "market test": businesses certainly don't want to that and would happily get rid of it if governments allowed them to (or did not exist).

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#268
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you still exist?!

https://municipal.systems/ :)

FYI your website completely fails to render with cookies (and thus localStorage) off. Detailed explanation: https://sneak.berlin/20200211/your-website/

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#269

I know there's gonna be a lot of people here that are happy about this for various reasons (anti-Google, anti-"smart cities", etc), but this is really disappointing for me. It's true that the concept of "cities" (or even just "gatherings of people") predates the Internet by thousands of years, and that cities themselves haven't adapted much to the Internet and what it enables in the 40ish years it's been around. This…

> got shut down by the locals That's not what happened though. Google was free to continue the project but decided not too, using Covid-19 as a fig leaf. I agree with the thrust of your comment (we need more experimentation with cities, not less) but this is Google doing what Google does: changing it's mind and abandoning projects.

Google abandons projects when they don't make business sense. Or perhaps you think Google is a charity that just keeps randoms apps running on servers? Maybe it should be funded with tax-dollars then.

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#270

I know there's gonna be a lot of people here that are happy about this for various reasons (anti-Google, anti-"smart cities", etc), but this is really disappointing for me. It's true that the concept of "cities" (or even just "gatherings of people") predates the Internet by thousands of years, and that cities themselves haven't adapted much to the Internet and what it enables in the 40ish years it's been around. This…

I don't think a "smart city" is our answer; I think actually looking to the past is a better plan for a good city, such as what Strong Towns advocates. https://www.strongtowns.org/ (I have no affiliation with the organization)

Absolutely. We know perfectly well what works in cities and it's got nothing to do with smart tech.
Post reply on HN