
Designing cities to counter loneliness? Let's explore the possibilities - wallflower
https://theconversation.com/designing-cities-to-counter-loneliness-lets-explore-the-possibilities-104853
======
joe_the_user
Okay, I have hosted adult Dungeons and Dragons games for many years, a pursuit
that's as close to individuals common together again loneliness as one gets.
Trying to find areas for small groups to use for this and other things peaked
my interest in the organization of cities to encourage or discourage
individuals coming together.

Effectively, I think the structure of American cities have always been
designed fundamentally to decrease togetherness outside of churches and hence
today increase loneliness. The basic principle since the puritan arrived has
been that an idle people gathered together were a danger. Hence laws against
vagrancy and idleness, the non-existence of anything like the promenades of
European cities, the prohibition of alcohol and later marijuana and so-forth.
The Occupy movement of several years ago, for a further example, was ended
merely by enforcing all of the existing against camping, loitering, disorderly
conduct and so-forth [1].

Today, rent is so high and homelessness so prevalent that any location that
allows people to mill about freely is going entice homeless to sleep and hence
will attract repression.

There are locations calling themselves "community centers". They only rent
their common rooms for $25/hour or more, an amount that makes it impossible
for most informal, average individual to afford.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disorderly_conduct](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disorderly_conduct)

~~~
jniedrauer
So, slightly unrelated, but how does one go about finding a D&D group in a new
city?

~~~
tomcam
Game stores

~~~
joe_the_user
Either local games store or meetup.com

------
jniedrauer
As an adult, I've only really ever had an active social life for one short
period where I was barely surviving as a retail wage slave. My coworkers were
all in the same situation, but we found solace in our shared misery, and I
made a lot of really good friends.

As a programmer, I sometimes make friends with my coworkers, but it's a very
sanitized sort of interaction. Genuine exchanges of ideas is a dangerous
proposition when it means risking our livelihood.

The only place where I can freely exchange conversation with strangers is,
ironically, on wild backcountry trails. Out there, information is very
important. How much snow is there on the ridgeline? Where is the next water
source? Any good campsites? And so on.

I've come to believe over the years that friendship can essentially be
distilled down to proximity + a common interest + time. Unfortunately, we
spend most of our time working, and these three things are very difficult to
find outside of the workplace.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
I commute between New York and the Bay Area. It is so hard to strike up a
meaningful conversation with a stranger out west.

And it’s not just New York. In most big cities, I can reliably find an
acquaintance after a few hours at a restaurant, bar or museum. But the Bay
Area is so reticent. The closest comparison to it I can think of is the Middle
East.

~~~
crushcrashcrush
I 100% agree with you. I've lived in the Bay Area 31 years, and I usually drum
up this scenario:

Sitting alone, at a nice bar, anywhere in the Bay Area - I could sit there all
day, and no one would say a word to me.

Any other city? Even New York? Boston? Austin? Atlanta? Denver? Paris? Berlin?
Seattle? No problem. Someone will chat, I'll meet a group, whatever.

Also, I'm extremely social. It's "not me."

Disclaimer: Just an unscientific observation.

~~~
losteric
In SF, I feel people have moved to the city with their own clique that they
try to stay within - people will show up to meet their group as part of their
evening plans, not to meet new people. They're open to it, but never
proactive.

However, the odds improve if you avoid "nice" bars - destination bars are a
thing, people show up with their group for a few drinks never intending to
visit again. They never socialize so locals go elsewhere.

------
sideshowb
Shameless self plug, but relevant: a few years ago I did a test of the
association between spatial layout and community cohesion which came back
positive for a number of network analysis measures on two different data sets.

[https://ij-healthgeographics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1...](https://ij-
healthgeographics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1476-072X-13-11)

tldr (refined and simplified with a few years hindsight): more walkable
neighbourhoods = better

~~~
jniedrauer
What are your thoughts on cities which outlaw cars entirely?

~~~
sideshowb
My (non researched) opinion on this one is that most westerners find cars
useful, hence car free development risks creating a district populated only by
people who can't afford cars. Segregating people in that way that is going to
cause other problems, it happened before in the uk when planners decided it
was a great idea to knock down aging buildings and replace with tower blocks
of cheap flats.

That said I do think we need to challenge our assumptions about the role cars
play in society. It is assumed that highways are for cars primarily and this
needs to be reined in somewhat.

Car free development might work in places where there is already a sizable
wealthy demographic choosing to live car free e.g. London.

As to whole cities going car free, are there any? Not something I've looked
into, would be interested to know.

~~~
luckydata
Has nothing to do with wealth and everything with zoning laws. If there's
mixed use, enough density to justify good public transport then cities without
cars thrive (just like they did before cars were invented).

Your "observation" outs you as someone that spent most of his life in the US
where most cities were designed around cars. US cities are awful, by the way.

Imagine this: a bunch of folks come to a completely unexploited continent,
rape and pillage until they ran out of land and then proceeded to create one
of the most unhealthy societies ever.

It's easy to be economically successful when there's tons of resources and
nobody to share them with, the true measure of a society it's how most of
their people live: without public healthcare, no welfare protections, lonely,
stressed out, sicker than their european counterparts.

~~~
sideshowb
You're right that Euro style compact cities are better than urban sprawl,
though plenty of people still own cars in them, and those who don't still
benefit from the option of doing so should they choose. I'm not saying it
can't work at all, I'm saying there is a risk of unintended consequences if
you take that option away, and that risk should be considered/managed.

Your rant against the US, while it has some merits, is misdirected at me; I
have lived in Europe all my life and cycled to work for around 20 years (alas
no longer). Perhaps my post outs me as someone who grew up in a rural area in
a country that invests poorly in public transport (1 bus per day to the
village, how's that supposed to work for shopping?) and as an adult I have
hobbies which require transporting equipment to remote locations (e.g.
mountain biking, mountaineering, performing musician). I can't see myself
enjoying the well being benefits those things bring me and my family without
regular ability to drive a car to our door.

------
tfha
I think a lot of colleges do a good job of fighting lonliness. Colleges have
to worry about stressed students, overworked students, mental health issues,
suicide rates, because parents pay a ton of attention to these things.

As a result, I think a lot of elements of campus life are things that adults
could borrow from to improve their own quality of life.

~~~
adjkant
I'm curious what would happen if municipalities tried to become like
universities:

\- City sponsored interest clubs (over 300 and it only takes 10 people and a
sponsor to start one!!!)

\- City created dining halls in every neighborhood within a 10 minute walk
where one pays a reasonable rate to eat there - heck even do a privatized
model so cooks can consider creating one where they get subsidies per person,
some sort of revenue split, and one of the only requirements being to have a
"dining hall" style eating area that encourages social interaction. This could
even be folded into food assistance programs where people can go and eat at
these for a reduced price.

\- City government health clinics for easy referral and access (Boston
actually has a somewhat comparable model to this, I'm sure others do too, but
listing it because it feels like a college thing)

Let's go with those three for now. The questions:

How many people would live here? What percentage local tax would they accept
to fund this?

I think this is actually a really interesting road to go down.

~~~
whatshisface
> _City created dining halls in every neighborhood within a 10 minute walk
> where one pays a reasonable rate to eat there._

Why would the city do this? It sounds like you're describing the Golden
Corral. In any case, if you can demonstrate that people will regularly show up
to an open-plan cafeteria to socialize then let's forget about changing local
government (which is corrupt and inefficient) and start this restaurant
ourselves.

~~~
adjkant
Eh I'm not saying it's perfect but I think a few pieces are missing from your
version:

\- The government subsidized price to make it a low enough cost because it's
certainly can't be as expensive as a golden corral

\- The incentive for a private restaurateur to want to open one of these

This is where the government can actually help make something, which could be
funded by a reasonably modest tax if people were willing to pay it.

> changing local government (which is corrupt and inefficient)

All the more reason to work to change it IMO. I bet part of the reason it gets
corrupt so easily is because few actually care given how little it really does
for them (when the essentials like trash are on autopilot and many other
issues don't affect the average resident that directly). While not without its
risks and complications, a more involved local government can also mean a more
politically aware and involved base of citizens. If a city actually did all
these things, local policy changes would actually have a bigger effect that
residents would care about.

This is all a very rough draft, I'm sure there are plenty more holes in this.
But I think it would be interesting to spend some more time ironing it out.

~~~
chillacy
so the restaurant will be funded mainly on taxes of the people living in this
city instead of the food itself? Like some sort of all inclusive resort or
cruise?

Will citizens take out loans to live in the city just like college?

~~~
jddj
Admittedly I'm not from the US , but regardless I get the feeling that you
might be seeing government subsidies for public services as more bizarre and
infrequent than they actually are.

Does public transport ever get subsidized at the local government level in the
US? Would this make the idea of catching a subway or bus as bizarre to you as
the idea of taxpayer-subsidized community food halls?

~~~
whatshisface
Depending on which city you live in, catching public transportation can be
pretty bizarre.

------
newman8r
One interesting thing I noticed when I was living in the middle of nowhere on
a 5 acre parcel: I knew all of my neighbors. I'd encounter them on a regular
basis and would have meaningful conversations with them. People would help out
when needed, I had all their emails and phone numbers.

When I'm living in the suburbs or in a big city, meaningful contact with
neighbors is fairly nonexistent.

~~~
kasey_junk
Great. One of the things I noticed when living in the country is I had
virtually no interaction with my neighbors. Now in the city I interact with my
neighbors all the time (maybe to the point of irritation).

Perhaps the difference in our experience is explained by small sample size &
not systematic differences...

~~~
jniedrauer
There is a threshold beyond which you have to know your neighbors in order to
survive. Some of my earliest memories are riding my neighbor's snowmobile down
the side of a mountain with my parents to buy groceries.

Obviously this is not a situation which most rural dwellers will find
themselves in.

------
factsaresacred
> “sensory experience cabins”.

Wut? Just move life (back) to the streets.

Loosen regulation of street food, introduce outdoor stalls where you're
encouraged to eat with strangers by design, grant licences to allow places
stay open later and pedestrianize all the things.

Try spending time in Bangkok or Ho Chi Minh city/Saigon and feeling lonely.
It's near impossible. Day and night is a sea of mostly friendly humanity
because life is primarily lived outdoors.

Sadly, in the West we've made this abnormal (although the climate doesn't
help). Our real-life is atomised. There is no third place†. And the online
world we retreat to is increasingly drenched in pointless conflict. Kinda
bleak.

Lawrence Osborne puts it nicely:

> _Anyway, I think that’s one of the attractions of Bangkok. It’s not just
> f—king. It’s just the fact that you’re in contact with other people...the
> street makes you feel like you’re back in the human race, and alive again.
> Last night I went for the first time to the store called Whole Foods in
> Union Square. And there was this enormous line and it was like 1984. Every
> line was being called out by number in this soft automated female voice. It
> felt like being squeezed through a tube of toothpaste. It was so
> horrifyingly anonymous. And I was standing in this line thinking, I don’t
> like this. I wish I could be back in Bangkok and be treated like a human
> being._

†
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place)

------
crimsonalucard
IMO it's not the issue of the city. It's the issue of the living space. Humans
were originally hunter-gatherers that lived in tight knit tribal communities
with intimate shared spaces. Any living style that deviates from this will
induce loneliness.

To eliminate loneliness you must form tribes. To form tribes you must produce
settings that promote tribal gatherings. In essence this means intimate shared
living spaces with medium sized groups of people. The keyword is "medium-
sized" humans are not use to living with huge urban shared spaces where the
people you see on the street everyday are different.

~~~
briandear
I prefer lonely than forced interactions upon which I have no choice but to
depend on for survival.

~~~
crimsonalucard
Gotta choose the right tribe. Bonds are usually formed through forced
interactions. You have some choice but it's limited.

Few people have the power to be friends with anyone they want. I wish i could
be friends with Bill Gates or Elon Musk, unfortunately it's outside of my
abilities.

------
acd
Block social media, people would look up from their cell phones. Block map
sites, people would ask others for directions. Block movie streaming sites and
people would get to the cinema more often.

The thought is that technology replaces human interactions and that is not
always good because it might lead to less people to people communication.

Religious services also made people come together in the community but
nowadays people are less religious.

~~~
CM30
[https://imgur.com/gallery/WkHHpZ1](https://imgur.com/gallery/WkHHpZ1)

But seriously, even if you consider phones as more distracting than papers,
well keep in mind that many people in cities just don't want to be talked to,
especially not on their daily commute or what not. I mean, try striking up a
conversation with someone on the Tube when in London. They'll probably look at
you as if you're mad, and that's been the case for decades.

Hell, they even tried that recently, and people weren't having any of it:

[https://www.citylab.com/life/2016/09/tube-chat-no-thanks-
say...](https://www.citylab.com/life/2016/09/tube-chat-no-thanks-says-
london/502247/)

Makes me wonder if large cities/groups in general kill conversations and
people's interest in being social more than anything else.

~~~
liveoneggs
this is funny because chit chat is generally very welcomed on the nyc subway
(and practically everywhere else), especially on the weekends when you can
talk to tourists and give directions and have nice exchanges. Obviously rush
hour isn't a great time to chat but otherwise tons of people just love to talk
about anything, anytime. It's highly contrasted to how very very reserved
everyone is in Atlanta (my current home) and almost every other US city
outside of new york.

~~~
istorical
I have lived in NYC for more than three years and feel like I've probably only
seen a conversation between strangers maybe 5-15 times ever? I take the L and
NQRW the most, perhaps this is a hyper-local phenomenon with your line?

I do see the 'tourist asks if they can get to ___ on this train' conversation
but don't really consider that in the context of the OP.

~~~
liveoneggs
It's up to you to make a pithy observation + smile or comment on the weather
or give up your seat + say hello. Make the subway you want! I rode the A/C &
1/2/3 mostly, fwiw. West side manhattan is just friendlier I guess ;)

------
alan_wade
For me, practicing pick up was an amazing way to find friends and develop new
relationships. After watching a bunch of RSD videos I started regularly going
out to clubs and approaching girls. As a nerdy and socially awkward guy I
didn't end up being a very successful "pick up artist" in terms of getting
laid a lot, but I've met some amazing women who ended up introducing me to
their friend groups, and that helped me to meet a lot of really cool people
and find friends.

Besides, RSD community itself has local meetup groups, so you can find wingman
buddies to go out with, and I've met a few great guy friends that way, I know
pick up community gets a horrible reputation in modern culture, but the people
I met were really smart, cool, and were, like me, into personal development
and practicing social skills.

If you can look past the stigma, pick up is an amazing way to meet new people
proactively, it's challenging (approaching new people is scary), but fun,
free, can be done at any time, and the results depend on how much you
practice. I highly recommend it.

Also, I have found a local Go club, and found many awesome people there. It's
a fun relaxing game, community is friendly, and it's natural to have
conversations and form friendships there.

~~~
afarrell
Do you have any tips for finding local pickup groups where the reputation is
undeserved? that is, how can I find groups which avoid the misogyny I’ve seen
in many online pickup groups and where they’re focused on the skills to start
and build mutually satisfying enthusiastically consensual interactions?

I ask partly because I’ve long wanted to learn to be a wingman, partly to nerd
out about the study of social skills, and partly because my wife and I happen
to have built ourselves a social circle with a couple of women who have talked
to us about the frustrations of dating and it would be nice to help them find
someone.

~~~
lawnchair_larry
I don’t think you are doing women any favors by introducing them to these
people.

~~~
afarrell
Hence my concern for avoiding the mysogyny and lack of respect for consent.

But there’s nothing inherently wrong with being a guy who wants to better-
understand how dating works and how to navigate it. Given that we still live
in a world with patriarchy and where men are still more expected to play the
active/seeking role ( _someone_ has to initiate), it is perfectly reasonable
for men to ask “how do I dating?”. I keep hoping that there will be a
community of folks building each other up in this set of skills.

But the groups that I’ve seen are just...sigh...

I suppose one sign of a healthy group might be that it has a diversity of
gender and sexual orientations (or is at least branding itself for that) and
has discussions which follow from that. Another might be one which has lots of
discussions about emotional/relationship skills in general. Like:

\- How to ‘hold space’ for someone in emotional distress.

\- How to listen to someone else in a way that helps them organize their
thoughts/feelings

\- How to generate sexual tension on a date, either in new relationship or a
longstanding one.

\- How to psych yourself up to have tough conversations or set boundaries
despite discomfort.

\- How to check if you’ve violated someone else’s boundaries in a way that
leads to them feeling respected, while still being confident and not falling
into scrupulousity.

\- How to tackle scrupulousity head-on or overcome feelings that you should
make yourself small in social interactions.

\- How to notice when someone is feeling excluded from a group or doesn’t know
how to engage and then draw them into conversation in a way that makes them
feel welcomed

etc.

Having members with longstanding relationships is probably particularly
important as a sign that the advice that circles around in the group is
actually effective and promotes healthy relationships. It also would allow it
to be an actual community rather than something that people cycle in and out
of.

------
kanox
I have the exact opposite problem: it's too difficult to politely exclude
myself from potential social situations.

Seeing that some people consider "loneliness" as a problem to be fixed is a
nightmare. I know I am very much part of the problem and I don't want to be
fixed: I want to stay the fuck away from you.

~~~
icebraining
Loneliness is a problem, it's just that too many people confused being alone
with being lonely.

 _Our language has wisely sensed these two sides of man’s being alone. It has
created the word "loneliness" to express the pain of being alone. And it has
created the word "solitude" to express the glory of being alone. (...) We are
alone, perhaps in the midst of multitudes, but we are not lonely. Solitude
protects us without isolating us. But life calls us back to its empty talk and
the unavoidable demands of daily routine. It calls us back to its loneliness
and the cover that it, in turn, spreads over our loneliness._

\-- Paul Tillich, "The Eternal Now"

------
drivingmenuts
Things must be very different in Australia. I can't even wrap my head around
the concept of borrowing 2K from my neighbor or loaning him/her 2K.

I can't believe that's a criteria for loneliness.

~~~
CM30
I can't believe it either. Heck, even most (all?) family members and friends
would probably balk at the idea of lending 2K for whatever reason.

Do most people's friends/families have the ability to just give out 2K in cash
at the drop of a hat? Maybe yes if they're upper middle class or upper class
and can just plonk thousands on a random whim, but I suspect someone making
less than 40-50,000K a year would be hesitant, even more so if they're not
super close.

~~~
templenderthrow
I make less than 50k and I've lent ~20k to my brother within maybe 2 years.

Probably a combination of trust and me having no real big commitments that
require using my money for myself. I think I put away ~1.5k USD per month in
savings, maybe a bit less or a bit more.

------
MrTonyD
Over the years I've sometimes found groups arranging drop-in tennis or drop-in
ping-pong. I made friends there, and it was a major part of my life. But none
of those ever seem to last for more than a couple of years. Whoever controls
the tennis courts eventually bans the group or intentionally schedules other
things at their regular time. They always tend to view somebody scheduling
things on "their courts" as an intrusion. The ping-pong meets a similar fate,
especially since it is already hard to find places with more than one table,
so as more people start to show up the drop-ins are told that they are no
longer welcome. Private clubs are the same way - they monetize their
resources, so they don't want "bursts" of activity that would inconvenience
the regular flow of resource availability. I know this from experience (I've
belonged to probably a dozen tennis clubs over the years.)

------
squish78
Here's my unpopular opinion, and I'm making some assumptions for the sake of
discussion.

For most of the history of civilization, people would stay in the same place,
with their extended family and interact with the community through a church,
temple, market, etc.

In the past 100 or so years, 2 things have happened. 1\. Career and capital
have become prime directive for most people, supplanting family, community,
church, etc 2\. Transportation is cheap and easy to move away from the few
acres you lived in your whole life.

Note that I'm not saying that there is any greater virtue or value to any way
of life, and the modern world is certainly more comfortable. But we evolved
for millennia in these small (overwhelmingly rural) community units and
perhaps our minds still crave that.

------
Simulacra
Japan could do with reducing the salary man hour requirements. Give people the
time to make friends!!

~~~
mikekchar
The family oriented people would go home and spend time with their families,
but the non-family oriented people would go back to work -- that's where their
friends are. Which would cause the family oriented people to go back to work
because they don't want to miss out on the work opportunities. And you're back
where you started.

Japanese culture is very different. All through their life Japanese people are
part of a group and identify with that group. You are in a particular home
room at school and they try not to mix change the home rooms all through
junior high school and high school. You are a member of a _single_ club all
the way through junior high school and then a _single_ club all the way
through high school (and possibly a single club in University if you decide to
join a club).

When Japanese people get a professional job, they _all start on the same day_
\-- The first Monday of April after they graduate from university.
Professionals _never_ change companies. They work for the same company for the
rest of their life. They work with the same people for the rest of their life.

The western media portrays the Japanese salary man as being lonely, but I
don't think this is generally the case. If you don't fit into your group you
are going to be lonely because you won't get another one. _That 's_ why there
are some super lonely people. However, the majority of people are not lonely
and have lots and lots of friends at work. It's just completely different than
how it works in the west.

~~~
ttty
I wonder what is their salary if they stay in the same company forever. 1%
increase early? This would make the job market really low paying.

~~~
mikekchar
It's really complicated. Basically salaries are quite low in comparison to
many other countries. However, there is a "bonus" which is usually paid 3 or 4
times a year. Different companies have different schemes, but often the salary
is based on position and the bonus is based on position and seniority. The
overall compensation is lower than the US probably, but higher than many
European companies. There are cost of living increases, but you don't
generally get a raise without a change in position.

However, there are some other things that are important to realise. Generally
the company looks after you for your entire life. When you retire, they will
give you a lump sum retirement amount. I work for my own company in Japan and
my accountant was very quick to point out the need for the company to save for
my retirement. Additionally, you often get other "perks". For example, my
wife's uncle lives in a house that used to be on land owned by the company he
worked for. They sold him some land so he could build a house close to work.
They even sold him some extra land so that he could have a garden (in a
different location) -- and he made a tidy profit on that when we got too old
to garden any more. This kind of thing (maybe not exactly, but similar) was
expected before 1998. It's falling out of fashion these days, but for
"permanent employees" (not on yearly contracts) it's still the norm.

The total compensation package is quite good in most companies, I think. Of
course, there is a lot of competition to get into the best companies and once
you are in, there is a sense that you've "made it". It's extremely difficult
to get fired from a permanent position and companies will rather pay you a
salary to do nothing rather than to fire you if things really don't work out.
So, there is a lot of give and take. On the other hand, don't quit your job!
Anybody who sees you were stupid enough to give up a permanent placement
somewhere will not be interested in hiring you -- you'll be stuck on contract
positions (and _much_ less security) for your whole life.

One of the things that westerners have difficulty with when comparing their
situation with the situation in Japan (and probably some other SE Asian
countries like Korea, though I have no direct experience with that) is that
the companies treat their workers completely differently. In the west, there
is no loyalty to workers. In Japan, anyway, the company is completely
responsible for their workers' well being. It even enters into what would be
considered private matters in the west like if you are overweight the company
will feel compelled to do something about it because in the long term it's
bad. Even for things like being single -- the company usually doesn't like it
and will help you find someone to marry if you are having trouble in that
department. It's just such a totally different experience that you can't
compare it.

On a personal note, I worked on contract for a school division in Japan and
even though I was on contract, the school looked after me. I needed surgery
and for some bureaucratic reason the hospital needed someone to co-sign a loan
guarantee in case something went wrong. The school took care of it. The
principal was also worried that at the time I was over 40 and not married and
assigned the school nurse to lecture me about the dangers of not getting my
personal life in order (and even arranged for me to attend some gokon --
parties where you meet people who are interested in getting married... though
I explained to them that my girlfriend wouldn't like it if I went :-) ). My
case is pretty weird for a foreigner on contract, but for whatever reason the
school decided to treat me like an employee.

Anyway, I'm kind of droning on and you may not be interested in all of this.
I'm sure a lot of it is really weird to you and you may be thinking, "I
wouldn't want that!", but I guess the point is that it's really hard to
compare the situations. It's just so different here for full time employees.
For someone like me, it works well because I tend to bury myself in work
(which I enjoy) and I need someone to look out for me. That's probably why the
school decided to take on that role. I'm bad at negotiating contracts and I
like it when the opposite side takes a moral position to look out for my
interests. It would be almost impossible to negotiate as good a position as
you might get in the west, but it's also really difficult to get into as bad a
position (as long as you are a permanent employee with a reputable company).
As time goes by, this situation has gone from expected for almost every
worker, to only being common for professionals. It's slowly moving towards the
same situation as in the west and I, for one, feel a lot is being lost along
the way.

It's funny because since I own my own consulting company now, I insist that I
treat myself well. However, the expense of that is actually quite high and you
would not believe how low my salary is :-)

~~~
njwi332
FWIW I highly value your posts about life in Japan! I've been studying the
language two years now and intend to move there, and the Japan posts in your
comment history have given me a lens into life there that I cannot find
elsewhere.

So thanks :)

------
ajcodez
It’s a lovely idea to design spaces for interaction, but I think there could
be something said for quiet and privacy too. We probably need a balance.

I believe loneliness is an epidemic. I felt lonely recently for the first
time. I’m mid 20s and in a relationship, lots of friends in my city, many in
walking distance, but even so a few months ago I felt intensely lonely. I
can’t imagine what it must be like for someone who moved cities. What worked
for me is writing down a list of people I want to see more and then reaching
out and planning activities. I find if I have one date night and see one
friend a week it’s enough to keep me going and feel good. More is better of
course.

------
brokenmachine
Nothing against lonely people, but personally I would prefer my city designed
so I have as _little_ interaction with strangers as possible.

I meet enough people when I'm doing my hobbies/sports, and they are people
with whom I share a common interest.

There's not enough personal space in the City as it is. I don't want to have a
thousand meaningless interactions with strangers forced upon me when I'm
trying to just get from home to work or whatever.

------
viburnum
Medium density seems to cultivate human connections the best (close enough to
be near people, not so close as to need to protect your privacy). Basically
walkable townhomes density.

[https://www.fastcompany.com/3021478/how-urban-design-
influen...](https://www.fastcompany.com/3021478/how-urban-design-influences-
how-many-friends-you-have)

------
mothsonasloth
When I moved to London from Scotland I immediately felt more isolated than
before.

I put it down to there being more people and more stress meaning a polite
hello on bus or in a coffee shop is interpreted more as a hostile act.

After 3 years in London I decided to move back up north, sure my pay is not as
great but I relish the moments when I can talk with a commuter or fellow
patron in the local pub.

------
forkLding
More in-depth article on loneliness and impact on health, I can see loneliness
having a direct impact in the future on people's health:

[https://www.webmd.com/balance/news/20180504/loneliness-
rival...](https://www.webmd.com/balance/news/20180504/loneliness-rivals-
obesity-smoking-as-health-risk)

------
gymshoes
In the locality where I lived, families had been living for years in the same
house as they own the houses. Everybody in the neighbourhood knew each other.

Now most of those families have sold off their homes and they were turned into
apartments by the builders.

Now people don't even know the people who live in the floor above theirs.

------
frankturtle
I saw this thread and made a youtube video about it:
[https://youtu.be/GtqnQcDT9dQ](https://youtu.be/GtqnQcDT9dQ)

------
snvzz
An introvert's nightmare. I do hope this goes nowhere. I like my personal
space, and peace. That's why I chose to live in a city in the first place.

~~~
brokenmachine
_> I like my personal space, and peace. That's why I chose to live in a city
in the first place._

wut

~~~
snvzz
Yes, seriously. Less populated places tend to be less individualistic.

~~~
brokenmachine
The pseudonymity that comes as a result of being part of a flock is not my
idea of personal space and peace.

~~~
snvzz
It is mine. Way more unlikely that somebody'll interrupt my thoughts to talk
to me.

~~~
brokenmachine
Possibly, but much more likely to be near somebody at all.

------
buboard
Make cities dysfunctional. Make things difficult, and hard to work out. Make
the doors stuck , so that people have to ask strangers for help to open them .
Write code with bad comments , so people have to ask each other what it means.
Asking for small favors makes people more likeable to each other (Ben franklin
effect). activities like cooking and tending and garden are great ways to
engage with others fluidly, the problem is how you get people to do these
activities in the first place without self-selection.

------
dominotw
This assumes that loneliness is from inablity to meet ppl. Ins't loneliness
the inablity to connect ppl on genuine level. Meeting ppl problem is already
solved by meetup.com

~~~
wenc
I think loneliness is the inability to meet people _with whom_ you can have a
connection with. And the design of spaces can help or hinder that.

The deepest sources of connection come from shared adversity, shared
goals/interest or shared stage of life. To meet people with these qualities,
you have to first congregate them in time and space, and then give them
opportunities for repeated exposure to each other [1]. (studies have shown
that repeated exposure creates the necessary conditions for building rapport
-- humans by default are evolutionarily guarded against unfamiliarity i.e.
strangers, and repeated exposure lowers that guardedness)

That's why parents at a playground are able to, if they desire, connect with
someone and to potentially grow that connection. They have shared adversity,
shared goals/interests, shared stage of life and repeated exposure.

I have personally experienced how bad building designs hinder connection. At
my workplace, the cubicles are high and large pillars block views, essentially
creating a maze-like layout. One can walk directly to one's cubicle each
morning without saying "good morning" to anyone on the way. My entire whole
floor is oddly cold and introverted, and no one takes notice of what anyone
else is doing. Most days folks don't even know if a co-worker is at his/her
desk. In theory one can walk up to each person and say "hi", but it's weird
and awkward, and people tend not to do it.

Whereas in my old workplace, the layout was much more conducive to nonchalant
interactions, and we were much closer as colleagues and shared many funny and
interesting conversations -- not everyone did of course -- but appreciably
more did than at my current workplace. Having a bunch of co-workers that
you're friendly with can immensely improve your mood throughout the day.

[1] I go to a lot of Meetup groups. Most are extraordinarily bad when it comes
to repeated exposure, because in a big city, there isn't a common core group
that consistently shows up -- it's different people every time, and it's hard
to form community when your population is always in flux.

~~~
sidibe
When I was younger being in the same neighborhood was the main way to make
close friends. This wasn't just for kids, it seemed like my parents' close
friends also tended to be neighbors. Now it seems like people's friends are
more far-flung (as in 15 minute drive radius vs walking distance), and people
who aren't able to maintain those kinds of connections as well also don't get
the automatic friend opportunity of neighbors because their neighbors' social
lives aren't as local. I think the internet and especially cell phones
contributed to this by allowing some people to maintain friendships easier
with people further away.

Don't know if that's generally true or just nostalgia + what I've seen.

------
InGodsName
One way is:

Loneliness is solved by solving the inequality issue.

If others have fancy cars and silk suits.

How can a poor person fit in?

If we make everyone equal by taking wealth from Rich and giving it to the
poors, we solve loneliness.

~~~
wenc
Some people who are in financial poverty have more community than more well-
to-do people.

I live close to a refugee/immigrant neighborhood and despite their fears and
worries, many are more connected to their families, friends and neighbors than
I am. They seem to have more celebrations and get-togethers than I do with my
friends. I regularly eat at restaurants there, and there's a warmth even for
strangers like me that I don't experience in higher end places.

On the other hand, there's palpable loneliness among transplants to relatively
affluent places like Minnesota, where despite surface politeness, is a society
that is very insular and does not (and does not know how to) integrate
outsiders.

Culture has something to do with it?

~~~
eeZah7Ux
It's not culture, it's inequality.

For example, statistics from dating sites show how most people don't exclude
potential partners based on ethnicity, nationality, religion, line of work etc
but big differences in wealth is the line that people won't cross.

The same goes for socialization and architecture is affected by it: gated
communities, single-family houses, gentrification, and so on. The word
"exclusive", used in real estate, is telling.

All of this is meant to allow people that belong to the same social
circles/companies/church to socialize and prevent mingling with people from
other walks of life.

~~~
wenc
I believe I understand what you're saying. I'm curious though, how would that
correlate with loneliness?

Loneliness arises from the gap between one's desired connections vs one's
actual connections.

It is true that social class is a barrier and less mixing leads to less
dynamism in society. This is a themed explored in Tyler Cowen's "The
Complacent Class". But it seems to me that does not in itself produce
loneliness, because there's still a tremendous number of connections made
_within_ the same social classes. My working class friends are the least
lonely people I know. They seem to have tons of buddies and tend not to be
that selective when it comes to making friends. But except in specific
instances, they have no explicit desire to make connections across classes.

I see inequality being a problem in general, but just not with respect to the
specific topic of loneliness. It seems to me there's something else at play.

------
INTPenis
Pretty stupid article imo.

City planning has little to do with loneliness.

If a city council wants to combat loneliness they should provide its citizens
with public spaces where they can organize non-profit meetups for free.

That's what we have where I live. Meetups.com is full of stuff from just
social gatherings to nerdy stuff like programming and linguistics.

It's great for new arrivals who have no contacts yet.

With those facilities in place, the only thing feeding your loneliness is
yourself.

Edit: Misspelled the domain but you can figure it out yourselves so I'm not
guilty of plugging a service.

~~~
ruytlm
>City planning has little to do with loneliness.

>If a city council wants to combat loneliness they should provide its citizens
with public spaces where they can organize non-profit meetups for free.

For those spaces to be provided, they need to be incorporated into the
council's city/urban planning.

~~~
INTPenis
But that has nothing to do with design. This article is about design concepts.

A city merely has to earmark or promote the use of locations as public spaces.
The design has little to do with it.

Yes it is city planning but it's not designing.

~~~
ruytlm
Form and function here are fundamentally interrelated. How you design your
public spaces affects how effectively they can be used. A good public space
should not only be well planned, but also appealingly designed, in order to
attract users.

Consider a library.

If designed well, it can use its street frontage to give views in through
windows to show activities taking place, and make it clear to passers-by that
they are welcome to come in and use the space.

If designed poorly, it could have a sheer concrete street frontage with no
views inside, that obscures what the space can be used for, or even what
spaces may exist inside.

------
sudosteph
This probably doesn't scale up as nicely for density, but one aspect of my
home town that I think was a strong anti-loneliness feature was the frequent
presence of inviting front porch spaces and a culture of waving at people as
you pass them by. It is nice to acknowledge each other in a positive way and
you can strike up a convo if you're in the mood. There is a particular old man
near my town who lives on a busyish road and literally sits on his porch all
day and waves at each car that passes by. He himself said he started doing it
because he was lonely, and members of community have said in interviews how
they will go out of their way to drive past and greet him because that 1-1
genuine human interaction is sometimes the only one they get too.

~~~
andrewem
That's great. It's only a shame that instead of driving by people don't walk
or bicycle by, because that would allow for easier stopping and deeper
interactions. Perhaps there are changes to the street design which would
facilitate that, while preserving the car movement.

------
MrTonyD
I think people have forgotten about all the things learned from cohousing. I
once lived in a condo complex originally designed to be cohousing and I knew
lots and lots of my neighbors. Shared parking with a common path and kitchens
facing the path with gardening areas goes a long way. Add in the shared common
areas which were designed to force everybody to pass by, and it was routine to
meet and get to know neighbors. (Then there are all the Christoper Alexander
ideas that could be tried too.)

~~~
briandear
I would hate that. Being forced to be social isn’t my idea of fun. I want to
choose who I socialize with not have it foisted upon me. You can pick your
friends, but rarely your neighbors. I am as social as I want to be. If people
are lonely, that’s on them.

~~~
fjsolwmv
If you don't want to live in a society than you should be the one to leave.

~~~
MrTonyD
I think you're being a bit harsh on the guy. I'd like to see a society that
embraces as many people as possible. It should be possible to support both
hyper-social and anti-social types - as long as they are willing to encourage
a society that embraces those who are different.

~~~
nf05papsjfVbc
I agree with your point.

If I may, however, make a suggestion, consider using 'asocial' instead of
'anti-social'.

