An inaccessible favela? Really? What is up with this apocalyptic view of the future?
The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
41–50 of 55 posts
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#42An inaccessible favela? Really? What is up with this apocalyptic view of the future?
greens and environmentalists write shit like this and then wonder why none of us elect them to flush our prosperity down the drain
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you think is the alternative? More sprawl? All global billions living in idyllic farms? On what land?
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.
I think there’s possibly a fundamental preference disconnect here. Some people like being around people. I’d never even consider living in an isolated house in the middle of nowhere; I like being able to walk places and have people around.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#44> 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…
This is a controversial take. As an example, compare apartment buildings in the US, (2 stairwells required for exit in case of fire) vice in Europe.
The tradeoff: The US apartments are theoretically easier to evacuate in case of fire. They are also consequently poorly laid out of use, with ugly central hallways, and only one side of windows on most apartments.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#45An inaccessible favela? Really? What is up with this apocalyptic view of the future?
greens and environmentalists write shit like this and then wonder why none of us elect them to flush our prosperity down the drain
Meanwhile, what you call our prosperity is quickly becoming one dude’s prosperity.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#46> 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…
I don't really think your comment contradicts the comment you reply to - as you point out one way of addressing the failure to meet building codes is to make those communities safe.
But just defining their around the lack of safety is a poor option. It's hard to tell from the article whether they just worked around the bureaucracy without fixing the issues or if they made it safe in non-standard ways too. And so everyone would probably be better served if there was a process for handling exceptions that actually assessed and documented that a non-standard method was used and that someone signed it off as safe enough, so that ambiguity wasn't there.
(And the world of Neuromancer isn't one I'd like to live in, as much as I loved reading about it)
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
It’s not living solo in the woods vs multi million megapolies. IMO Dunbar number gives a rough idea what may be the sweet number for a community size.
And you don’t need to live in a single city. Banding together includes communities sticking together.
Birth rates in cities suggest there may be issues with dense cities too. Mouse paradise experiments and all that jazz.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
In that case there are no lessons to learn. Aside from GTFO from such grandfathered buildings if you can.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
greens and environmentalists write shit like this and then wonder why none of us elect them to flush our prosperity down the drain
Meanwhile, what you call our prosperity is quickly becoming one dude’s prosperity.
Sure we're gonna get the inaccessible favela anyway, but that doesn't mean we have to vote for it.
Re: The city of the future looks like a former military bunker in Taipei (2016)
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
greens and environmentalists write shit like this and then wonder why none of us elect them to flush our prosperity down the drain
Meanwhile, what you call our prosperity is quickly becoming one dude’s prosperity.
One dude’s prosperity, and a whole lot of other people’s still comfortably living.
And for what it’s worth, other options don’t change the “one dude’s prosperity” part.