3 ms·
> If you were an architect with those kinds of clients you would have a list of potential builders with track records of successfully completing similar work.
by elihu 6y ago
> If you were an architect with those kinds of clients you would have a list of potential builders with track records of successfully completing similar work.
My point is that you don't have to have this knowledge, and you don't have to hire expert craftspeople and pay them expert wages if you can have a machine do the difficult work.
> And most importantly you would know that right angles are almost always the right answer...
Not necessarily. Box-shaped rooms work nicely, but the most important thing is to not have acute angles between walls. (IIRC Christopher Alexander goes into this in A Pattern Language in defense of right-angle walls, but for some reason neglects to consider rooms with more than 4 sides as an option.) Greater than 90 degrees is fine as long as it doesn't present a problem for the intended use (i.e. client expects furniture to fit at right angles). Also, if you're printing a whole house you can design benches, shelves, desks, and so forth into the design. Or maybe contract out to some service that will make the furniture based on a 3D model.
A big part of why walls are straight and meet at right angles is that building materials are generally straight and expect to be joined at right angles. Anything else turns into a complicated geometry problem that takes a lot longer to build. With a 3D printer, though, that's not a limitation. It doesn't matter how simple or complicated a design is, it takes about the same amount of time to print and uses about the same amount of material. The main constraints then just become what's strongest, nicest-looking, and most functional. Most people will probably prefer box-shaped rooms, but the point is that they'll have options if a box-shaped room isn't optimal.
One could imagine if house-design software becomes sufficiently advanced, you could dispense with the architect as well. Someone who wants a house could just log onto a website, identify the site where the house is to be built, and specify a bunch of constraints and preferences, and then the backend software generates a bunch of house plans. The customer choses the one they like and pay the money, then a building permit is applied for and a printing machine and work crew show up on site and assemble a house that's unique and exactly suited to its site.
- brudgers 6y ago“Not using an architect” can have benefits. Among them not having to deal with an architect. However, improved aesthetics is often not among them. Same for functionality. The advantage of an architect is that you won’t get what you think you want.
- elihu 6y agoIn the comment you're replying to, I was thinking of the "architect" being basically replaced by a software package that designs the whole house based on the required criteria. Any aesthetic judgments are encoded in the software's heuristics, and the range of available styles are basically part of the brand of the company responsible for this house-designing-and-building service. Allowing people to directly design their own house using CAD software is also an option. I think on average it would turn out okay most of the time. People have a pretty good incentive to design the spaces they live in well for they way they intend to use them.
- alexvoda 6y agoThis is as misguided as every iteration of no-code through programming history. All such tools promised to allow people without coding knowledge to create software. The result is the tools are used by disgruntled programmers who are now faced with a tool that is not friendly to other tools like version control. It has happened several times before and it is happening again now. You can not automate problem solving until someone creates GAI. Thinking that all a programmer does is write code or all an architect does is draw walls is an insult to each profession. The primary attribution of both is to decipher what the client actually wants from limited descriptions and to problem solve.
- alexvoda 6y agoWhat you propose is a recipe for cookie-cutter buildings. But we already have those with no software and no effort needed.
- brudgers 6y agoThere's a subplot of that in Kirk Vonnegut's novel Timequake...though it involves a parking garage in the style of Thomas Jefferson.
- elihu 6y agoHuh, I started that book once and never finished it. Maybe I should.