“Smart cities and the politics of urban data”
- As the author mentioned in this book, “the fear for some commentators is the creation of highly vulnerable and costly urban systems, rather than robust systems that create efficiencies and resilience.” The author said “hackable”. Does that mean after smart city is hacked, it could not “smart” again or just say it is not under control anymore? Will the infrastructures also can not regulating-self or say crashing, if we do not consider the cost of smart city before making it?
- “…a fact is never simply a fact.Facts are produced, not simply measured.” The indicator, benchmarking, and dashboard all can not be a fact, but they could help measure a fact. When they all have been changing with the different time and space, does fact change along with them? But if fact is changing, why call it fact? Does Smart City need a fact?
“Digital Infrastructures of Witness: Constructing a Speculative City”
- The author mentioned three witnesses here – measurement, automatism and contingency. Three of them, from my perspective, the hardest and easiest part is “contingency”. Because the most factors of contingency are citizens( sensing citizens & citizen sensing), the big data come from citizens and change along with citizens daily life and their routines. To say contingency is so hard to measure, manage and unpredictable, but why the author said contingency is a key way in which the concretization of digital infrastructure can be understood?