13 ms·
Opposition to Sidewalk Labs in Toronto
- njepa 7y agoIt looks like every (mostly useless) waterfront, science city or business park I have ever been to. Is there something new here, or is it like with many things these days that people's perception have diverged from reality?
- notatoad 7y agothe most innovative thing i've seen talked about is an a hidden utility corridor running to all the buildings for trash pickup. Which can't actually be an original idea, can it?
- underdown 7y agoIn a sense isn't that what every alleyway in the world is?
- notatoad 7y agoonly in the sense that ignores all the ways it's different to an alley.
- njepa 7y agoYou can probably find it in some '60s future somewhere. Why would you build a perfectly fine tunnel and use that for irregular traffic, when you can hide the traffic and have the street for mixed use [-1]? We have had trash chutes [0] and AVAC [1] for centuries in Sweden (not always connected unfortunately). My local garbage truck have one of those robotic arms, and I don't live anywhere fancy. So I can't say I get it. [-1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_street https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_street [0] https://translate.google.com/translate?langpair=en&sl=sv&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fsv.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSopnedkast https://translate.google.com/translate?langpair=en&sl=sv&tl=... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_vacuum_collection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_vacuum_collection [2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sopbil_skelleftea.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sopbil_skelleftea.jp...
- dade_ 7y agoNope, Roosevelt Island in New York: https://www.wired.com/2010/08/trash-sucking-island/ https://www.wired.com/2010/08/trash-sucking-island/
- sergiomattei 7y agoDisney does it. https://www.waste360.com/waste-reduction/look-walt-disney-world-s-underground-trash-tubes https://www.waste360.com/waste-reduction/look-walt-disney-wo...
- reaperducer 7y agoChicago used to do it.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- PorterDuff 7y agoI think that Google should build company housing at their main facilities, give their people somewhere to live, and watch them 24/7 like lab rats. You could accomplish an interesting experiment plus deal with the problem of giving new hires a place to live.
- 908087 7y agoThat's pretty much what Google wants to do to the people they envision living in Panopticon Village, which makes the downvotes you're receiving kind of funny. Maybe it was the suggestion that Google turn the cameras and sensors inward that triggered people?
- luckylion 7y agoMovie recommendation: We Live In Public
- hammock 7y agoThat works if the only places you visit are work and home.
- ilaksh 7y agoTo me the most of the ways that I can think of a city being smart are not related to surveillance. If there is some system that is supposed to benefit the public then its designs should be public and subject to public approval. What would be reasonable would be something like open source designs and protocols and maybe an electronic bidding system for projects. But it sounds like its one company embedding whatever spy-tech they want and controlling everything over a large area behind closed doors. I actually am really looking forward to smart cities. But smart as in high tech and advanced, not smart as in monopolistic surveillance dystopia.
- toufka 7y agoPretty harsh: > Last year, the firm's own privacy adviser Dr Ann Cavoukian resigned. "I imagined us creating a smart city of privacy, as opposed to a smart city of surveillance", she said bluntly in her resignation letter.
- swozey 7y agoHer background is impressive. It's refreshing to see ethics. Also, this quote; > Former Blackberry co-CEO Jim Balsillie called the project “a colonizing experiment in surveillance capitalism.” https://globalnews.ca/news/4579265/ann-cavoukian-resigns-sidewalk-labs/ https://globalnews.ca/news/4579265/ann-cavoukian-resigns-sid...
- njepa 7y agoI think surveillance could be part of a smart city. But for that to be smart it would have to solve the inherent problems with surveillance. An actual smart city project would proudly announce what it did to solve these challenges. I don't see anything on their website that does this, rather it talks about how developers can enjoy access to ubiquitous connectivity [0]. This is in stark contrast to other successful initiatives like Vision Zero that started with trying to define the fundamental problems. [0] https://sidewalktoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Sidewalk-Labs-Approach-to-Privacy.pdf https://sidewalktoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Sidewa... [1] https://www.monash.edu/muarc/archive/our-publications/papers/visionzero https://www.monash.edu/muarc/archive/our-publications/papers...
- mabbo 7y ago> Sidewalk Labs, a sister company to Google, had acquired disused land in Toronto, Canada for this bold urban experiment "Disused land" is a bit disingenuous. Toronto real estate prices are very high right now and this is waterfront property. It's former industrial land we're hoping to revitalize. As far as I can tell, Google isn't doing us a favor here. They're just another developer trying to make a bunch of money off of our huge need for additional housing. They choose to make this money via surveillance and advertising, and increasing demand by promising some neat tech benefits. But if they weren't here, that land would still be developed. Probably sooner. (And probably by a developer making money by cutting every corner in the build).
- sonnyblarney 7y ago" Google isn't doing us a favor here. They're just another developer trying to make a bunch of money off of our huge need for additional housing." Though I don't like the prospects of Google doing this, there are two issues with the comment: - Google is probably 'doing the city a favour'. Google has a gadgillion dollars we've handed to them, and their de-facto cost of capital (internally at least) is very cheap. The project probably won't make them a dime, it's borderline one of those 'moonshot' things, a speculative project that they can maybe learn from, get some PR, a giant branding exercise. They could easily lose a lot of money. They are definitely not doing this is a regular 'real estate play'. - Toronto 'desperately needs housing'? Then why is Toronto very aggressively bringing in 100K people per year into the city? That seems like a dumb thing to do with a 'lack of housing'? Housing prices are a function of market demand, interest rates, and distorted somewhat by small amounts of inelastic demand from elsewhere. But your original comment i.e. disusland is apt: the land is very valuable. The city should ideally zone it for whatever purpose we think is best, and then sell it. Then it will very actively 'used' for the purposes in which we have zoned it, and we don't need to worry at all about managing it. Surely there are some strategic things we could to, but again that has a lot to do with zoning: maybe we want a big park, maybe a huge shopping mall, maybe 10000 identical homes, maybe 10000 entirely unique homes, maybe giant factories, maybe tiny factories - we can mostly zone and regulate for what we want.
- dade_ 7y ago
- 60654 7y agoThe opposition to this is not just from the privacy perspective, there's also the issue of data ownership, and giving all this data away to Google for free. And once it's owned, both cities and citizens lose all control and oversight - you can't get yourself removed from the dataset, impose restrictions on how this personal data will be used, etc. There are some good quotes in this older Reuters story (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-cities-privacy-feature/green-paradise-or-data-stealing-dystopia-toronto-smart-city-sparks-debate-idUSKBN1QS25E https://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-cities-privacy-fea...): > The proposal amounts to “permanent surveillance” and “massive data scraping” under the guise of fighting climate change, he said. “They are conducting an experiment in real time, in the real world: the privatization of our cities on a large scale. They will have intellectual property rights over all of this (data).” > “We live in a system that values property rights,” Orasch told the Thomson Reuters Foundation. “In that system, data is a valuable asset for an individual to have.” And the developer asking for investment money and a cut of property taxes, on top of gathering all this private data and owning it forever without oversight, is just icing on the cake. :)
- rory096 7y agoThis article has poor fact-checking. For example, the quote by the Queen's University professor is not accurate (or, charitably, outdated as of the time of publishing). >The proposal amounts to “permanent surveillance” and “massive data scraping” under the guise of fighting climate change, he said. >“They are conducting an experiment in real time, in the real world: the privatization of our cities on a large scale. They will have intellectual property rights over all of this (data).” In October 2018 Sidewalk proposed a third party "Civic Data Trust" that would own and maintain the data. Its blog post on the subject reiterates repeatedly that the data cannot and should not be owned by Sidewalk: >No one has a right to own information collected from Quayside’s physical environment — including Sidewalk Labs. Instead, this “urban data” should be under the control of an independent Civic Data Trust. >No one should own urban data — it should be made freely and publicly available. >We believe all data needs protection, but the extent to which urban data specifically may be collected in Quayside is what’s new and different here. Existing laws on urban data do not address ownership. And urban data is only regulated when it contains personally identifiable information. Even then, these rules are often not followed in the public realm. We seek to build on them. https://www.sidewalklabs.com/blog/an-update-on-data-governance-for-sidewalk-toronto/ https://www.sidewalklabs.com/blog/an-update-on-data-governan...
- Waterluvian 7y agoCanada is like this little brother always in America's big shadow. One thing we don't talk about as much is how we have this recurring fear that big American corporations think, "oh this won't fly in the U.S. but just use Canada. They're simple and slow and will tolerate it." I guess put simply, the little brother is worried he'll get exploited. It's partly why the fight for NAFTA and tariffs got so bitter.
- sonnyblarney 7y ago"a smart city built from the internet up " I really don't understand the appeal of statement.
- pxue 7y agowhere every sidewalk garbage-bin will have its own instagram fan page!
- alxmdev 7y agoAnd record who throws what out, and issue ads or fines accordingly! So much room for innovation.
- scarejunba 7y ago* Real time additional self-driving buses responding to demand spikes. * Rubbish bins full? The city knows and sends help. * Demand pricing parking in a region I can think of a dozen ideas in seconds.
- sunir 7y agoNone of them are happening. What is happening is a vague statement that left a void where futurists like yourself have filled in with hype fueled imaginings of their own. The basic economics deny all 3 of your suggestions. The TTC doesn’t have smart buses. Garbage collection is regulated through citywide contracts to private collectors who are not going to waste their own margin on off schedule collection. Same with parking, which is run through a city agency Green P that would have to adapt its systems for one neighbourhood? While all are theoretically possible it would require a lot more economic infrastructure than one corporate neighbourhood. So set your expectations to more mundane levels. Public wifi and surveillance cameras like in Beijing.
- 8note 7y agoI don't think you need smart buses to be able to add/remove capacity to a route as it fills. the data collection/aggregation/analysis sound like the fast part of getting a bus to a route, even if it's bus drivers calling in to report a busy route. the slow part would be getting the bus to the route
- notatoad 7y agoI actually hope this project goes through, just because if it's google doing it everybody will be watching closely and there might actually be some privacy regulations that come out of it. The data they'll want to collect is valuable, and sooner or later somebody is going to try to collect it. Kicking google out of the city doesn't change that, it just means somebody you're less likely to suspect and more likely to sell raw data to the highest bidder will come in in their place.
- overkill28 7y agoPutting aside privacy for a moment, does anyone know what they're actually building? As far as I know they've sold the city on a bunch of vague "smart tech" promises without any concrete details. I have no idea what Sidewalk Labs business plan is, but it seems like a traditional business executive (Dan Doctoroff) is trying to use Google's brand to get access to cities so he can build large developments without actually knowing anything about technology.
- sunir 7y agoBecause it has been a smokescreen and a chaotic mess, there is no trustworthy source of information of what the plan is or the agenda. For that reason alone it should be axed.
- Fricken 7y agoPeople are very superstitious, and quite hysterical. Google isn't building a city, they're building a neighbourhood in one small section of Toronto that most Torontonians never went to anyhow, and are under no obligation to go to after it has been rebuilt. Postwar Urban development is fucking monotonous and largely the same everywhere. We should experiment and try different things. If you don't like it, fine. Get together with a few thousand like-minded people and build your own neighbourhood, the way you like it.
- dade_ 7y agoIt's the public waterfront and one of the busiest recreation trails in the city pass through it, so actually it really does matter. Google, rather Sidewalk labs, screwed up royally, but what they learned is invaluable. No idea if this particular project can be salvaged, but anyone wanting to build a smart city should study the lessons.
- Fricken 7y agoWill you no longer be able to pass through it recreationally after Google builds there? I was out this morning in Edmonton riding my bike through the urban blight and stopping to climb at my favorite buildering spots, on retaining walls and bridge abutments, sound barricades and shuttered buildings where no one will bother me, but I would much prefer it if that whole section of my city was actually a functional, aestheticly appealing and economically productive neighbourhood.
- selimthegrim 7y agoInquiring minds wonder which section?
- Fricken 7y agoVarious spots along the Northeast LRT corridor, between 115 Ave and Station Point Park.
- 7y ago
- wendyshu 7y agoNeedless to say, Sidewalk Labs has not angered "Toronto", it has angered activists who don't live in the neighborhood and never will but apparently have veto power over what goes on there.
- dade_ 7y agoI do live here, not an activist, and Sidewalk lab can take a long walk off my short pier. They have a lot of work to do to repair/rebuild their reputation.
- wendyshu 7y agoYou live on Sidewalk Labs' property?
- AzzieElbab 7y agoYeah. Toronto waterfront project dates back to city's bid for 2008 olimpics. As far as I can tell, all that city managed to build is a small university campus
- v7p1Qbt1im 7y agoCould it be possible that Sidewalk could make money off this project and still advance city building significantly for the first time in forever? Would you rather see the the project go to another boring developer without vision? Another darb apartment park. There is not even an actual complete proposal yet. And still, there is FUD coming in from all sides. I for one would like to see cities made for pedestrians with smart waste disposal and more interesting architecture than glass blocks.
- alexashka 7y agoI really wish there was a middle-way between 'let them do whatever they want' and 'let's protest and raise hysteria'. Let's look at Downtown Toronto development over the past 10 years - condominiums built on every square inch of land that could be bought? In large part owned by people who don't plan to stay there long or even owned by a third party and rented out? Ok, so that's what's been happening. What can Google possibly do, that is worse? They're planning to try new things - go ahead and discuss the details you are not happy with. Just be aware of the alternative - cheap 30-40 story condominiums with 500 sq foot units, built to make a quick buck.
- wolco 7y agoCollect privacy related data.
- netwanderer3 7y agoMore and more people will just move away from city once these tech are deployed on a bigger scale. Life is too short to be subjected to this type of bullshit.
- martincmartin 7y agoIt must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out nor more doubtful of success nor more dangerous to handle than to initiate a new order of things; for the reformer has enemies in all those who profit by the old order, and only lukewarm defenders in all those who would profit by the new order; this lukewarmness arising partly from the incredulity of mankind who does not truly believe in anything new until they actually have experience of it. -- Nicolo Machiavelli (1469 - 1527)
- Apocryphon 7y agoThere is really very little of Machiavelli's one can accept or use in the contemporary world. - Henry Kissinger
- martincmartin 7y agoWell, that quote is really very little of Machiavelli. ;)
- Element_ 7y agoAside from the privacy concerns, condos in this area are currently selling for $1000+/sqft. All renderings I have viewed from Google's proposal show some assortment of low rise buildings. You will need to be a multimillionaire to live in a low rise style building if the units are sold at market rates. That type of development doesn't represent the interest of the majority of the citizens (the avg salary in the city is ~45k USD). The city should only be approving 100+ story structures in the downtown core until there is enough supply to meet demand and bring RE prices down to reflect local salaries.
- breitling 7y agoAbsolutely. One of the reasons the real estate prices are so detached from local salaries is that there is a lot of suspected money laundering and Chinese speculators buying up properties and leaving them empty.
- AzzieElbab 7y agoHow is this Alphabet's fault?
- baudehlo 7y agoIt’s not, but Google/A came in with great fanfare and seemed to get more leeway than other constructions do due to their name and their sci fi promises. But it’s important for people outside of Toronto to understand that this isn’t what most people would call “downtown” either. It’s in one of the least accessible parts of the city, that for that reason has historically only been used by industry. Transit is improving there, but it’s not somewhere I’d want to live. So maybe low rise is all that can be sold there? I don’t know but there are other high rises going up now in that area. How are their sales?
- wolco 7y agoThis is a jewel by the waterfront. Transit will be built with condo development in time.
- droithomme 7y agoInteresting they were hoping to collect property taxes and other fees. If Google wants to have a private company run utopian town to run experiments in, they should do like Disney did in Florida. Buy some swamp land, develop it, incorporate it privately, and have absolute control. This plan in Toronto seems to be corporate colonization of a public city, through stealth.
- MDWolinski 7y agoExcept, of course, Google doesn't want that because much like 95% of their projects, they'll abandon it within 5 years anyways. Google wants the rewards, but not the risks, which with this project, they'll give the city to deal with after they lose interest in the project.
- collective-intl 7y agoI'm truly saddened to see the reaction people are having to Sidewalk Labs' project. The current feeling in the air is to distrust and hate any project touched by a large tech company and be suspicious of any amount of data collected. The environment today is such that both journalists and readers just want to pile on and make their points speaking out against privacy intrusions and the greed of big companies. No one's bothered to understand the actual proposals of Sidewalk Labs and give them a fair chance. For example, in contrast to what this article says, Sidewalk Labs would not own and profit from resident's data -- instead they are trying to be as careful as possible and leaving it to an independent organization (https://www.sidewalklabs.com/blog/an-update-on-data-governance-for-sidewalk-toronto/ https://www.sidewalklabs.com/blog/an-update-on-data-governan...). Many cool ideas comprise Sidewalk Labs' vision, from the layout of a walkable community to convenient autonomous transport to pushing the leading edge of power conservation, waste management, and other eco-friendly tech. In the age of dysfunctional cities like San Francisco, I had hope that a project bringing together a broad array of talented experts with real technical competence and letting them envision a model for cities of the future was a winning combination with huge potential for humanity. Tragically, it has been doomed by the caprice of political fashion.
- TAForObvReasons 7y agoGoogle Fiber in Louisville is a great case study. Google thought there was a business wherein they could cheaply provide connectivity to users. Then there were problems, like exposed lines, and it became clear that fixing those problems would cost money. In that moment, they abruptly decided to bail, essentially leaving the city with the burden of fixing the mess Google created and leaving the early customers who committed to multi-year contracts only a few months to switch providers. Politicians have to think longer term than what the current players in tech have demonstrated. This is 100% a self-created problem