
The Future of Cities - Parbeyjr
https://medium.com/@oscarboyson/the-future-of-cities-ba4e26c807fe#.7sst95ui4
======
Synroc
While I'm glad that this topic is getting addressed, that video was pretty
difficult to watch. I know it would be unwise to spend extensive amounts of
time on each topic in the video, but the way it was cut made it hard to think
about the topic before moving on to the next part.

Otherwise, this topic is likely what I want to focus my career in at some
point, understanding how to improve the ways cities run, given how they are
more and more the drivers of not only the economy, but a lot of the culture
and thinking generated in the world. (As someone who grew up in global cities
such as Singapore, Paris, etc., I always felt that these cities had more in
common with each other than with other cities in the countries they are in.)

I'm making my way through Jane Jacob's Life and Death of American Cities right
now, and it has definitely changed a lot of my thinkings of how cities should
be designed (more mixed-used, parks are not necessarily ideal, etc).

I wonder how a company could be created to tackle the issues cities are facing
these days, working with local governments (or without if need be).

~~~
rm_-rf_slash
Philadelphia was the best-designed city, basically ever. Perfect grid, even
spacing between residences, businesses, and parks, and you know what ended up
happening? Nearly everybody piled up along the waterfronts, because that's
where the action was.

London, meanwhile, had never really been planned at all, and even well-
intentioned planning often ended up straddling the line between disaster and
farce.

If you want to laugh a lot and learn about ways that London has been
"developed" over the years, check out this guy's videos:

[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yUEHWhO_HdY](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yUEHWhO_HdY)

~~~
saeranv
I agree in spirit with you, but we should strive not to be reductive about the
role of planning in cities. Slums are also unplanned.

~~~
rm_-rf_slash
I guess I wasn't clear. My point is that planning isn't perfect, and will
never solve all problems.

An example from my hometown of Ithaca NY: this tiny valley was never built
with cars in mind, and because there is a lake to the north and steep hills in
every other direction, there are only about 6 ways in and out of Ithaca.
Usually this isn't a problem but certain times of day the traffic comes to a
complete stop as there is no physical way to relieve the congestion. If major
charges to roadways were made, it could fix some of the congestion issues, but
since nearly all travel through Ithaca revolves around The Commons (literally:
one-way streets move traffic counterclockwise around the popular pedestrian
mall), it could have a devastating effect on local businesses.

I am convinced that no single entity is capable of creating and executing a
plan that improves an urban area in any more than a limited portion without
significant and unforeseen consequences.

Speaking of slums: the original plans for public housing projects in big
cities like New York failed to account for the lack of maintenance or the
effects of drugs being sold or used on the premises, which matters a lot
because one prolific drug dealer can drastically reduce quality of life for
everybody in the building, especially if they are smart or small-time enough
to avoid police interference, thus allowing dealers to become de facto
authorities in the projects. That is an example of a planned (but unexpected)
slum.

~~~
labster
There might be a company to fix Ithaca's traffic, but it would be Boring.

~~~
rm_-rf_slash
Boooo

/s Actually the solution could come from another EM company in the form of
self-driving cars, as it would alleviate congestion just enough for it to stop
being a problem anymore. The traffic issue really only focuses on certain
chokepoints in and out of the city.

You know the deal: everybody stopped at a series of red lights. Light at the
front goes green, first car moves, second car behind it has space to move, and
so on. If all the cars were able to start and stop in unison based on the
state of the traffic lights then the congestion problems in Ithaca would
disappear overnight. We aren't big enough to need (or be able to afford)
massive infrastructure projects, and as I alluded to earlier, it probably
wouldn't be worth the unforeseen consequences. Not to mention the downtown
retailers are still reeling from the Commons reconstruction, which put way too
many of my favorite stores out of business.

------
baron816
"We do damage to nature...and we do less damage to nature when we occupy less
of it." Edward Glaeser is the man.

~~~
1_2__3
I have to admit this line of thinking never really resonated with me, and it
resonates even less as I get older. My goal in life is _not_ to have minimum
impact on my environment, and yes, that includes _nature_.

I think the nuance of the middle gets lost in these conversations. The right
tends to think humans should have dominion over all (while ignoring the fact
that we haven't "conquered" nature, and we have ample evidence of the carnage
we cause when we think we have), and the left seems to take an Agent Smith
view that we're a plague upon the planet and need to be contained,
quarantined, and engineered until we no longer impact anything (while ignoring
the fact that this flatly isn't possible, or even desirable).

So no, I do not believe that "we do damage to nature", because besides it
being a nonsense statement, even the kernel of truth in it is wrong-headed in
my opinion.

~~~
lg
everything from our pets to our lawns to our roads and farms does damage to
biodiversity though, which ultimately makes all life less resilient.

~~~
Ericson2314
Yay I'm not the only one! Preserving biodiversity is oft-unstated most
important goal of environmentalism. It's our meta-darwinian imperative.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Why would we care about biodiversity? There are only two reasons that come to
my mind, and both IMO should be addressed directly:

\- because it's cool and fun to have all those cute plants and animals around

\- because biodiversity reduces the chance of sudden ecological collapse that
would leave _us_ without food

~~~
Ericson2314
\- Ecological fortitude as you say. Good for food but cleaning up our other
messes which can harm us.

\- Biodiversity helps us understand life better by providing exceptions to
dogmas

\- Biodiversity is the crowning achievement of this earth and would take along
time to recover. We can colonize other planets more easily than we can
replicate our biodiversity on them.

------
schreiaj
> To a family in Detroit, it could mean having non-toxic drinking water.

Wait, did I miss when Detroit had toxic water now too?

~~~
snrplfth
Well, they have Faygo.

~~~
fokinsean
whoop whoop

------
rhapsodic
_> For a rich white dude up in a 50th floor penthouse, “the future of cities”
might mean zipping around in a flying car while a robot jerks you off and a
drone delivers your pizza._

The guy must think people of color are incapable of attaining that level of
wealth.

Unintentional racism, but racism all the same.

~~~
enraged_camel
Well, if you want to go there, it's also sexism. He said "dude". Does that
mean he thinks women are also incapable of attaining that level of wealth?

I think he simply wanted to rely on a common stereotype to refer to ultra-
wealthy people who live completely different lives and are generally out of
touch with reality.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Well, had the author said "black gal", half of the Internet would be on
Twitter with pitchforks right now. I do believe that people breaking symmetry
inherent in racism and sexism are creating a problem in the society. For any
statement containing $race and $gender, it's either racist/sexist or it's not,
regardless of the actual values of $race and $gender.

------
iammyIP
I agree, could not watch it past 3 mins - too many editing gimmicks, looks
like edutainment nonsense with many fluffy short statements and low actual
information density. This video editing talent is wasted for such a topic,
would be better used in a music video. Also the author really must hate music.

------
esyechka
Great concept, but no mention of winter, or poor weather. Would be difficult
to grocery shop or go far distances in snow or rain. Cities would have to be
as compact as possible for public transport to reach everywhere, and that
would be difficult to achieve in already existing cities with a lot of legacy
infrastructure.

~~~
_jahh
I guess you missed the part where he talks about Copenhagen and how people
bike extensively there despite the fact it certainly doesn't have what anyone
would call nice weather.

------
501startups
Fascinating!

