3 ms·

I think what you will see is not a "detroitification", but a seeding, where every important city in the world has some footprint in software. Detroit's problem

by AJ007 13y ago

I think what you will see is not a "detroitification", but a seeding, where every important city in the world has some footprint in software. Detroit's problem was it was a single industry: automobiles. Software is now all industries. This is such a relevant topic, where as in the past migration was triggered by where the jobs where, now an individual (typically unmarried and without children) can choose where to go based almost just on quality of life. There are some very interesting concepts around what you are talking about: What are the most desirable places to live? Are there cities that are somewhat broken that could fixed? Are there cities that are totally broken that could flourish? Should we take cities that will survive massive climate change more seriously than those that will vanish beneath the ocean? How critical is the cities' level of individual freedom? Then there are questions regarding software and technology's impact on the very nature of the city - Will better remote work diminish the networking advantages of a place like NYC or SF? Will self-driving cars spread cities out? Will people if want to live in a densely populated area after all of these changes?

malandrew 13y ago
Most cities are broken IMHO since they value automobiles over people. I want to see more cities that put the commons where you actually can interact with others first and foremost: * walking and biking are valued over cars * vehicles within city limits are only used for delivery of goods. * instead of a network of roads, we have a network of greenspaces[0] * more plazas and parks (Medellin has done a pretty good job here) * one massive park in the center of the city (e.g. NYC and Munchen) * located where precipitation is not a problem * cars are only for inter-city travel and stay outside the city (Freiburg) * Lots of sports in the city (Rio de Janeiro and Sydney, Australia) * People that need to move bulky things often live/work at the city periphery. [0] This idea taken to its logical conclusion: http://www.cidadedemocratica.org.br/topico/2755-ecos-na-paisagem http://www.cidadedemocratica.org.br/topico/2755-ecos-na-pais... [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_car-free_places http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_car-free_places
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

by AJ007 13y ago

malandrew 13y ago

Most cities are broken IMHO since they value automobiles over people. I want to see more cities that put the commons where you actually can interact with others first and foremost: * walking and biking are valued over cars * vehicles within city limits are only used for delivery of goods. * instead of a network of roads, we have a network of greenspaces[0] * more plazas and parks (Medellin has done a pretty good job here) * one massive park in the center of the city (e.g. NYC and Munchen) * located where precipitation is not a problem * cars are only for inter-city travel and stay outside the city (Freiburg) * Lots of sports in the city (Rio de Janeiro and Sydney, Australia) * People that need to move bulky things often live/work at the city periphery. [0] This idea taken to its logical conclusion: http://www.cidadedemocratica.org.br/topico/2755-ecos-na-paisagem http://www.cidadedemocratica.org.br/topico/2755-ecos-na-pais... [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_car-free_places http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_car-free_places

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]