Dilapidated urban landscapes == internet catnip.
The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
31–40 of 55 posts
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it will be small multi-generational houses. Outside of a few overpopulated cities, most of the land, even in NY, is farmlands or just undeveloped. Living in hives isn't really in human nature.
More than half of the global human population (and growing) lives in urban areas, so _by definition_ it is human nature. The artificial restrictions artificially limiting the number of new apartment blocks, causing lack of affordable housing is what's forcing younger people to move back in with their parents increasing the number of multi-generational houses. It's pretty hard for me to see this as an unalloyed good t…
If humans use electricity, is it by nature? Is doom scrolling by nature? Or just abusing our instincts?
Same applies to urban living.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it will be small multi-generational houses. Outside of a few overpopulated cities, most of the land, even in NY, is farmlands or just undeveloped. Living in hives isn't really in human nature.
It sure seems that humans have tried to build and live in such hives for an awfully long time—Wikipedia calls it 7000 BCE [0]. Sure, a drop in the bucket in evolutionary time—but neither is it purely a skyscraper-era phenomenon. Even to this day, all that undeveloped farmland is dirt cheap compared to the hive life, and yet people vote with their feet and their money for the hive. For a substantial proportion of them…
A small portion of humans lived in cities in 7000 BCE. And many of those cities were closer to what we consider a village by modern standards.
Mass urbanization into megapolies is 200 years old at best. With very few exceptions in older eras that didn’t house a big portion of humans in given eras.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it will be small multi-generational houses. Outside of a few overpopulated cities, most of the land, even in NY, is farmlands or just undeveloped. Living in hives isn't really in human nature.
It sure seems that humans have tried to build and live in such hives for an awfully long time—Wikipedia calls it 7000 BCE [0]. Sure, a drop in the bucket in evolutionary time—but neither is it purely a skyscraper-era phenomenon. Even to this day, all that undeveloped farmland is dirt cheap compared to the hive life, and yet people vote with their feet and their money for the hive. For a substantial proportion of them…
and for most of history, most people had to live where most of the jobs were - a large % of people no longer need to do that. If you had to work in the city, buying dirt cheap land a hundred miles away didn't work - now it can for some/many, and if enough people with some money can do it, it will then have the effect of diversifying that local economy, such that now a few builders, landscapers, restaurants and other amenities and the loop feed itself.
I imagine in the future only the very rich will choose to live in some cities, the very poor will mostly have no choice and have to live there and large swathes of the middle class will love to get out into the country/small villages if their jobs allow it.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
More than half of the global human population (and growing) lives in urban areas, so _by definition_ it is human nature. The artificial restrictions artificially limiting the number of new apartment blocks, causing lack of affordable housing is what's forcing younger people to move back in with their parents increasing the number of multi-generational houses. It's pretty hard for me to see this as an unalloyed good t…
If humans use electricity, is it by nature? Is doom scrolling by nature? Or just abusing our instincts? Same applies to urban living.
Human nature? Of freaking course! Using tools, seeking amusement? Yes, it's human nature.
Banding together to improve our chances of survival? Yeah. In the past it was a few dozen, now it's a few hundred thousand. I don't understand this notion that living in the woods or something is human nature. Working together to grow beyond that is human nature.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#36> Unfortunately, there was still a problem–the city couldn’t overlook the building codes. But Casagrande found a loophole: He declared that since the houses had been handmade, they were a form of art. “The city commissioned me to make a public artwork, and Treasure Hill is the artwork. That’s where [people] live now,” he said. “That’s how they rationalized it.” That ignores the purpose of the building codes even arti…
Good to see a Hacker is now being a bureaucrat reading books of city codes over Neuromancer. These are peoples homes, the danger is probably less than many US ghettos or homeless encampments, how about we start bulldozing those which are unsafe and ugly if people homes have no meaning. There's no reason you cant make communities not up to spec with current building codes safe. This is normal for historic buildings wh…
In general I agree with your sentiment, but I think one can do alternative living without building codes, that is safe and clean unlike the ghost ship apparently was, and also:
"The Ghost Ship fire was a concert, I don't believe any killed were residents."
"One victim of the fire was a building resident."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Ship_warehouse_fire
They knew they had faulty electricity and they had a small fire before.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect we're both arguing the same thing - that some level of regulation is important. Clearly if you are in an earthquake zone then earthquake protection are high on the list. If you are on a flood plain, then flooding needs to be managed send so on. Now for my next part, I run the risk of being flippant. That's not my goal. Clearly the building code failed those 115 people, and their loss is 115 families in mour…
If we know the building was not up to code, we already learned those lessons. Didn’t we? The only lesson left is to, maybe, enforce the code?
That's one interpretation. The other is that the building predated to code, and it was impossible, or too expensive, to retrofit the building.
Alas I do not live in Christchurch so I can't comment to this specific case. However, in general new buildings are subject to new codes, where old buildings may not be.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#38The city of the future has abundant energy from solar.
Especially during sunny days, when no storage is needed, it will be extremely cheap to air condition and desalinate seawater.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd go even further and say the heresy that "urban living" is not the future, so making it sustainable is like scaling horse-riding to 10 billion riders.
You can say that, but without the cities overpaying their share of support, suburbs simply cannot exist. If we required suburbs to support themselves economically, the suburbs would vanish.
I think it comes to question of what type suburbs we are talking about.
Cities build of multiple well connected cores with high density going to lower with all needed services and sufficient workplaces available in each make lot of sense and is probably most self sustainable model.
The endless detached houses with minimal spacing and no services on other hand.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#40The article doesn't say anything about what makes it actually the city of the future, apart from them recycling and filtering water.
Looks cool though, and has a nice backstory.