Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 383 posts

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#351

Post by WalterBright »

sudosysgen wrote: post #329
WalterBright wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> empty statement Sorry, it's your cite. > explain Simple. People sharing living arrangements deciding to not share anymore. Fewer families with children, more single professionals. Confusing Detroit the city with Detroit the metropolitan area.

Both the detroit city and detroit metropolitan areas have decreasing populations and drastically increasing rent prices. The share of unoccupied housing exploded from 2010 to 2018, to 23%, according to the census. This is a sure-fire indicator that supply is far, far superior to demand. And yet, the price of rent increased. This means that supply and demand simply does not explain the rising price of rent. I don't se…

Again, your own cite contradicts your thesis:

"Despite the increases in Detroit, the city's average rent is still among the lowest in the nation at $610. But that's quickly changing in and near downtown and Midtown, where the flow of new residents is creating a greater demand for housing."

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#352

Post by TheCapeGreek »

KerryJones wrote: post #336
Barrin92 wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Anathema: "someone or something intensely disliked or loathed", I don't think this word means what you think it means? Perhaps antithesis? Also, I don't know much about the smart-city idea, though I do know that you can design spaces, homes, blocks, etc. in a way that creates natural interaction -- which is something that Google has excelled at (possibly more than any other company). This is also discussed heavily in…

Anathema is Greek for damnation, or accused/accursed from Latin (shortening the etymology I read on it)[1]. Makes more sense as damnation in modern usage, so I think it stands.

[1] https://www.etymonline.com/word/anathema

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#353

Post by forgotmylogin2 »

scarface74 wrote: post #339
dodobirdlord wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s impossible to take seriously that some 2-inch deep trenches and some stray cables are “ruining” streets.

https://www.wdrb.com/news/belknap-neighborhood-residents-con... https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/google-fiber-to-pay-nearly-4-m... Google Fiber prepares to pull the plug on Louisville customers tonight, the tech company has agreed to pay Metro government $3.84 million to fix damage to city streets, Mayor Greg Fischer’s said Monday. The payments, to be made over 20 months, will cover removing fiber cables and sealant fro…

This makes your original complaint that they were ruining streets look even sillier. They've agreed to reverse all the damage they've done. I'm not sure how you're angry about this.

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#354

Post by nefitty »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #274
netcan wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like us to be more forward looking, ambitious and experimental with our cities as well, especially in the west. But... I think there's an institutional aspect here that needs resolution before we can. The internet is worryingly centralised. A small number of extremely profitable companies monopolise huge markets. Google tends to do this with data. I think the reticence was justified: " Who owns the data? What kin…

I, for one, would like us to stop experimenting with re-inventing the wheel. We had functional cities for centuries now. We can make adjustments to match the century, but I do not think it is helpful to revamp the way we have lived until now to satisfy this odd new personality that pervades the web that needs to change UI every so often to feel relevant. Geez. I feel old now.

Progress is inevitable, even necessary, especially when systemic problems like climate change are consequences of the current paradigm. This seems to happen throughout history, ie industrialization, abolishment of slavery, new forms of government, etc.

We need deep changes now to get ahead of the looming consequences of the patterns we've held as a society up until now.

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#355

Post by vvs29 »

netcan wrote: post #213
drusepth wrote: post #118

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'd like us to be more forward looking, ambitious and experimental with our cities as well, especially in the west. But... I think there's an institutional aspect here that needs resolution before we can. The internet is worryingly centralised. A small number of extremely profitable companies monopolise huge markets. Google tends to do this with data. I think the reticence was justified: " Who owns the data? What kin…

>> A financial success case for google is some sort of data-centric monopoly. They don't really do business another way. It's fair to be dubious of their endgame.

Reminds me of a board game called Risk that I like playing where you have to capture territories by attacking owners of other territories. The moment any one player looks like they are gaining a good lead over others, the rest of the players gang up against that player to prevent him from getting too powerful.

The goal is to be the single largest player in the game and everyone is trying to do that. But the moment anyone is too ahead of the curve in doing that we don't like it. I guess we as a society are wired to hate a single large player. Maybe the last couple of centuries left a bad taste in our mouth.

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#356

Post by CaptainZapp »

sandworm101 wrote: post #158
ehsankia wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just tax empty places, isn't that what Vancouver does? Leaving a place empty/inhabited should be very expensive.

>> Leaving a place empty/inhabited should be very expensive. Vancouver is finding that difficult to enforce. How do you tell if a unit is "occupied" or not? At the moment it is largely voluntary. The city cannot tell whether someone is living in a unit or it living overseas ten months out of the year. They aren't going to be sending inspectors to knock on doors. I'm a good example of the difficulties. I was away on t…

> They aren't going to be sending inspectors to knock on doors.

Well, why not? Arguably they would pay for themselves in a short time if implemented correctly.

Combine that with criminal tax fraud charges for cheats.

Oh, They can't really get hold of Vlad Q Oligarch because he's sailing his 100M yacht somewhere in the carribeans?

Expropriate the property.

Drastic? Maybe. I don't think unreasonable, however, for people gaming the system and cheating on their tax obligations.

Edited to add: Of course there should be exceptions for inhabitants with a good reason not to live in their home for a certain amount of time. I.e military, guest professorships, etc

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#357

Post by jacquesm »

KerryJones wrote: post #337
jacquesm wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hubris of Google is just incredible. Half-baked commitments and then to tell someone who is actually dedicated to the mission that they will run them into the ground. It's really nasty. I've seen the same behavior from the first CEO of 'Spotlife', exactly the same tone of voice, exactly the same ending.

I think it's important to remember that Google is made up of people, as are their sub-companies. I would argue that you get any large group and at some point you get people making stupid, hateful, & hurtful comments. It is equally important to look at whether the organization as a whole is to blame or just pieces of it, and can pieces of it be addressed.

I think it is equally important to remember that those people were hired by other people who ultimately were hired by the people at the very top who set an example for the corporate culture they want to create. Companies being made up of people is no excuse for them doing these incredibly dumb, stupid and toxic things. That's what policies, mission statements and guidelines are for.

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#358

Post by LunaSea »

sneak wrote: post #268
neom wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://municipal.systems/ :)

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

If you're not using cookies or localstorage on a per session basis you are not doing the "bare minimum' to be qualified as an HTTP client.

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#359

Post by HlessClaudesman »

Barrin92 wrote: post #266
drusepth wrote: post #118

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.

I agree that top-down solutions / edicts rarely work, unless the grassroots organic growth is already there.

When I see the word "smart" applied to anything I just think of the big junket of smart conferences and and smart workshops that all these middle-management types go to, that's the real industry here: middle sized fish eating all the investment dollars before the little fish, innovative startups, can get a taste.

The bad news is that next few buzzwords are already starting to build their own money pit conference circuit if "smart" things become passé. I know this because my wife presents at one such, in the pre-CoV world we got to fly around and eat fancy food once or twice a year presenting buzzword laden solutions to other middle-management types.

Maybe all this will junketing will go away now, will the world be any poorer because of it?

Re: Google ends plans for smart city in Toronto

#360

Post by bergstromm466 »

alexashka wrote: post #285
sudosysgen wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your idea is that the current system is so broken that there is nothing we can do to avoid 40% of the population in major production hubs to have to spend ridiculous fractions of their income on housing, with other that simply can't, then maybe indeed a refactor isn't enough, and we should start thinking about a complete rewrite. This isn't even a question of competition. Prices are increasing purely because the m…

I am all for a complete re-write, but not on the level of society, but on the level of you and me. If you could see into the future and know for a fact that you couldn't change a thing about it, would your concerns cease to have meaning? If the answer is yes, then it is a matter of determining what in your short lifetime, you can realistically change and what you cannot. For me, I've determined that the things I cann…

> I've determined that the things I cannot change are human nature

This line of argument scares me, because we are so unaware of how human made our problems are.

"Money is like an iron ring we've put through our noses. We've forgotten that we designed it, and it's now leading us around. I think it's time to figure out where we want to go - in my opinion toward sustainability and community - and then design a money system that gets us there."

http://archive.is/nxKTO

Post reply on HN