171–180 of 264 posts
There would be a constantly advancing head region that pushed ever forward as new structures were needed.
It would prevent NIMBY because once constructed, changes would be minimal, yet there would always be a place where new projects were welcome.
As the snake wound its way forward, anything in it's path would be trampled or assimilated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you would be the designer of this thing, how soon would you want the gig to be up ? The purpose of this thing is not economical, or political, or social - the purpose is to satisfy the ego of an autocrat, and as long as that ego is getting stroked, the money will continue to flow.
Oh, so the purpose of this thing is political.
They have many already, all of them unfinished and unpractical. And then the money moves on the a new city of the future.
I think is basically just a status competition 'my city is gone be a revolutionary design'.
The guy after MBS will likely try a city in a spiral or something.
A lot of skepticism in this thread, even some form of jealousy It's better than the soviet union like buildings they are promoting everywhere in the world, including in the US We need to optimize cities as much as possible, that's for sure, this project is a step in the right direction
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think transport would be infinitely worse in a linear city. In a traditional street network, there are many ways to get from A to B and one link being unavailable is not the end of the world. Forcing everyone onto essentially the same street is guaranteed to cause both high fragility and high congestion, since everyone has to squeeze into the same line.
Most people in Hong Kong don't own a car, it's just not necessary due to the high density. This city is expected to to be ~15 times as dense as Hong Kong.
The idea that car-free or very limited car is only possible if you have absurd density is false.
Its totally possible to have nice suburbs that are totally walkable and don't require a car for 90% of the population.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A friend of mine works on the NEOM project, and it really is like winning the lottery. Remote work with an occasional field trip to look at the place. But Google level salary to tell them how to save some data. The scale of the feeding trough is unimaginable. I saw an advert for NEOM on Piccadilly Circus, the whole entire e-wall, and the place isn't even built yet, so I'm not sure if they're using it to recruit. It's…
People can’t seem to get enough of science fiction, but every time something is presented that would move the needle in that direction, the detractors line up in droves. With attitudes like this, it really will be the 25th century before humanity does do anything of significance (if we even live that long).
A lot of skepticism in this thread, even some form of jealousy It's better than the soviet union like buildings they are promoting everywhere in the world, including in the US We need to optimize cities as much as possible, that's for sure, this project is a step in the right direction
Maybe not jealousy, but you don't think skepticism is valid when Cities are (relatively) easy to build but ensuring they are livable populated is hard?
If on earth we can't manage to build ultra optimized cities, then how do you expect we be able to build ultra optimized space stations, or bases on the moon/mars?
We need to experiment yesterday so we are ready today
It's better to invest our money in the next random Web3.0 project, that's for sure, why trying to optimize a whole city anyways? /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> up-front design like this will never come to be Paris [1] and D.C.’s cores were engineered. Several cities after WWII were bombed to a blank slate. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann%27s_renovation_of_...
Canals of Amsterdam was the one of the first centrally planned city development in 17th century and it still stands (and it quite enjoyable to live in) today. They did run out of money in the middle of building it though so the eastern part of the plan didn't happen. Smart money is on something similar happening to this as well.
You really compared it.
Maybe something like Brasília or something is a better comparison.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. Cities evolve organically, over decades and centuries. An up-front design like this will never come to be. Something may come from it, but it will be much more similar to a regular city than this.
>Cities evolve organically, over decades and centuries. An up-front design like this will never come to be. Is it really different from what the communists did, except with a more modern design? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_planning_in_communist_...
265,000 people per sqkm, that's some nice population density. Cool concept, but I wonder what they mean by "equitable views". I presume not all housing units will be on the edges given that it's 200m wide.