Author: Sandra

Alternative Futures – Sandra

Owning the City: New Media and Citizen Engagement in Urban Design – Michiel de Lange and Martijn de Waal

– Smart city projects typically consist of a ‘triple helix’ of government, knowledge production (e.g., universities) and industry. Such consortia often ignore the role of citizens as equally important agents.” The ‘helix’ may not name ‘citizen’ as one of its main strategies, but is it not assumed that these concentrations are chosen and being designed for the citizen? Of course a successful project should include the general public in as many aspects of the development as possible, but perhaps naming them as necessary initiators might be intimidating for citizens, even smart ones. A ‘smart citizen’ might be willing to take collective ownership of the city, but not everyone has the means or desire to author the initiative. If only few are willing, there runs a risk of systems that only represent a small number of loud, too-similar voices.

– “In her (Jane Jacobs’) view cities offer citizens the advantage to escape narrow social control of the small village, and obtain the freedom to choose their own lifestyles.” Don’t cities offer their own kind of social interdependence? Not everyone knows each other as in a small village, but there is still a great deal of mutual trust needed. If one chooses to move to a large city with a heavy overlap of people, is it not understood that although invisibility is more or less possible, participation is required?

– It seems as though projects that visualize the general feeling of the city, like the D-Tower are quite popular.

http://www.designboom.com/art/feel-o-meter-smiley-face-reflects-city-mood/ 

‘Happy Barometer’ Monitors the Mood of a Gloomy City

– “Architects adopt the roles of commissioner and executor at once. …they actively seek out an issue…and try to organize publics that take ownership.” How can architects and planners convince the public to take ownership and care? How hard should/ do they push?

 

Reframing, reimagining and remaking smart cities – Rob Kitchin

– Some of the perils listed alongside the promises in Table 2 seem to be reaching. For instance, how is it bad that “technologies deployed are objective, commonsensical pragmatic and politically benign?” As an example: an overburdened subway line is identified and additional bus/tram lines are put in place or rerouted to more equally distribute the passengers. This seems to be objective, pragmatic and not at all a peril.

– “Moreover, no two cities hold the same qualities, having different histories, populations, cultures, economies, politics, legacy infrastructures and systems, political and administrative geographies, modes of governance, sense of place, hinterlands, interconnections and interdependencies with other places, and so on.”(pp. 8) For these reasons, a one-size-fits-all approach to smart city initiatives should be avoided at all costs. But it also begs the question of how smart cities being built from the ground up can hope to be truly successful if they do not yet know what the tides and general feeling of the city will be. There is only so much than can be planned and predicted.

– “Failing to tackle these issues (of security and ethics) will undermine and curtail smart city initiatives and public support for them.”(pp.12) If administrations and designers assume that citizens will be comfortable with a certain level of surveillance and privacy when they are not, would an active refusal in participation be feasible? What would the consequences of that be? 

Crashing and Hacking the Smart City – Sandra

Buggy, Brittle and Bugged – Anthony Townsend

– In the case of a blackout or crisis (like the 2007 Washington Metro rail fire, pp. 255) caused by buggy software, how can we ensure that a failsafe is in place without further burdening the system? Is a manual switch too inefficient? How long should previous models be kept in dormant, but functioning order incase the current system fails? How is the economic toll of a shutdown calculated?

– “Today, netizens everywhere believe that the Internet began as a military effort to design a communications network that could survive a nuclear attack.” (pp. 259) Especially in the US, where the budget for military and defense is so immense, it seems as though many huge technical leaps were derived from military research and efforts. It would be interesting to know what percentage this is, or a list of modern tech that was developed as a martial consequent.

– “…power outages and power quality disturbances cost the US economy between $80 billion and $188 billion a year.” (pp. 264) Again, how is this calculated? By simple ‘time is money’ reasoning, or does it also account for the cost of repairs, etc.?

– ” It’s one thing for your e-mail to go down for a few hours, but it’s another thing when everyone in your neighborhood gets locked out of their homes.” (pp. 265) If a buggy or brittle software means people might get locked out of their homes, it also stands to reason that people could be accidentally locked in or that the software could be hacked. Would this inspire a new system of robberies, where the thieves can simply unlock your door remotely and stroll into your residence? Even more threatening than a home robbery, what happens when government or large infrastructural networks are hacked maliciously?

– “In November 2010, without public objection, the city of Chongqing launched an effort…to install some five hundred thousand video cameras…” (pp. 273) Was the public really asked in the first place, and if so, was there really even a realistic option for objection?

– As Townsend asks in the last paragraph, could we have predicted the consequences of sprawl and new technologies? Just as importantly, would it have mattered if we did? Would the public have believed these possibilities, and would they have cared? Would the technology of the time have allowed us to avoid these consequences by going about motorization in a different way?

 

An Emerging US (and World) Threat – Cesar Cerrudo

– In contrast to Townsend, who states several times that a buggy, brittle smart city is “unimaginable,” Cerrudo seems to have thought about and imagined just that in great detail. What exactly, is his target audience? I’d imagine everyone, but is his goal for the public, the private sector, or municipalities to read this paper and take the listed risks seriously? Is he worried that once they know the risks, they still won’t be taken seriously? Especially with the state of the world now, I do not think these threats are at all hard to imagine.

– Cerrudo offers a brief list of recommendations for the reduction of hacking problems. If it is not already happening, what can be done to make sure that a city introducing ‘smart’ initiatives is robust and protected as a priority from the outset? Are there already examples of this?

– In terms of smart waste management and smell sensors which may not be seen as a priority, is there a risk of the public becoming more and more aggravated knowing that a sensor is picking up the disturbance but nothing is happening? (As seen in the FixMyStreet issues brought up in the Gabrys reading.)

DIY and Participatory Urbanism – Sandra

Tinkering Toward Utopia – Anthony Townsend

– “…They merely imitate the appearance of the old, its concrete substance: they fail to unearth its inner nature.” This makes me think of information I was given on a walking tour in Budapest. The guide told us that Budapest looked like it had existed in its current state for centuries, but it was all a false facade. The buildings and infrastructure were all relatively new, at least by European standards. The city had been taken over and had changed hands time and time again. When it finally had a chance to choose an identity, it tried to express a history that it never had. What is the mobile/online equivalent of this? Can it be a significant advantage to make an app or website seem older or more established than it is? What advantages do ‘traditional, reputable and reliable’ have over ‘innovative, fresh and novel?’

– “The Web… was becoming a lattice of its own.” Unlike a natural city, which breathes and exudes its history as part of its charm, the web covers and buries its layers. It’s mines data from the past, but doesn’t display it. Are there instances where this is not the case? Where efficiency and evolution move aside to allow room for digital nostalgia and reminiscence?

– “DIYcity was a totally bottom up organization… there was nobody giving orders… it was driven by people showing up, looking at what needed to be done, and doing it.” This only happens when there are people in the community who care enough to recognize what needs to be changed, believe that they have the power to make any kind of difference and are motivated enough to do what it takes to change it. What happens when for one reason or another, these people don’t exist in a given area? Are they left to the devices of their municipalities? What would the reception be to outsiders who swoop in trying to help?

 

Engaging the Idiot in Participatory Digital Urbanism – Jennifer Gabrys

– “ Who will control the city: Team Architecture or Team Computing?” (pp.219) Is it possible for one to advance in a smart city without the other? Should they not be collaborating instead of competing? Ubiquitous computing relies on architecture to implement its practices, and the architecture of a smart city should aim to integrate computing to best serve its users.

– “Guattari, together with his electronic card, is participating in the sensor based city, but if he does not have access he can become idiotic through the same technologies that would ordinarily make him a smart and participating citizen.” In an example such as this, surely not many people would have cards that allowed them to access everything. Is a teacher idiotic because he cannot open the services door in his building, even though he might be able to fix the problem? The card system thinks it is preventing inappropriate access, but it may actually delay a solution. Surely someone controls the access and availabilities of these cards. What are the dangers of those with those with both influence and prejudice alienating those they see as undesirable?

– “…unwired humans will come across as singularly unintelligent, non- conversant and incomprehensible.” Will it be impossible to refuse participation, if one wishes to exist with any amount of freedom or fluidity?

– Is there a way to support a complaint in the case of FixMyStreet? As if to say, yes, this also annoys me or inhibits me from doing xyz. Though the same person reporting the same issue again and again should not be encouraged, it would be interesting to see if multiple inputs on the same issue made a difference and could be recorded in terms of locations/concentrations of community involvement. Do unaddressed complaints bother citizens more than complete lack of this service? It may make them question why they have this website/app in the first place, if their needs are not being addressed and they have a voice no louder than before FixMyStreet was introduced.

Urban Data Infrastructures – Sandra

Smart cities and the politics of urban data – Kitchin, Lauriault, McArdle

– “…these new systems lead to the discontinuation of analogue alternatives, meaning that if they fail there are no alternatives until the system is fixed/rebooted.” Certainly in early implementation, there are bound to be glitches, failures and hacks on new “smart” systems. Should we leave a skeleton of older analogue systems to default back to when/if this happens? How much of the prior infrastructure should we leave behind as a failsafe, and for how long?

– “Reducing the city to a collection of facts decontextualizes it from its history, its political economy, the wider set of social, economic and environmental relations that frame its development and its interconnections and interdependencies that stretch out over space and time.” Can the same not be said for the people living in the cities? Reducing people down to a collection of statistics diminishes their expression, culture and individualism. If the consequences of corporate interests mean that cities are reduced to facts and citizens are represented by statistics in the name of efficiency and market growth, what kind of societal loss will we meet?

– “Dashboards facilitate the illusion that it is possible to ‘picture the totality of the urban domain’, to translate the messiness and complexities of cities into rational, detailed, systematic, ordered forms of knowledge.” They also have a hierarchy. Information can be highlighted or hidden from the public/figureheads depending on what the person/group presenting the information wants shown. It can be that a viewer is overwhelmed with information, and therefore does not see a statistic hidden in plain sight. Will municipalities claim transparency while burying unpleasant information in more positive material?

 

Digital Infrastructure of Withness: Constructing a Speculative City – Gabrys

– ” The city also never sleeps, as it efficiently and automatically activates, restocks, recharges, and recycles during the night.” Why, exactly, does the city need to rest and recharge at all? Can a smart city, made up of machines not be continuously working?

– “Those that can speak to it, in its language, stand a better chance of counting and being taken into account as a relevant node in its networks. Those who do not may find they cannot get a foothold in the world the smart city has made and possessed.” What happens to those who either cannot or will not accept and join a “smart” society? Do they get left behind? Is the population eased into a new, smart lifestyle or forced into it?

Sensing The Smart Citizen – Sandra

Citizen Sensing in the Smart and Sustainable City – Gabrys

– “…the term “smart cities” derives from “smart growth,” a concept used in urban planning in the late 1990s to describe strategies for curtailing sprawl and inefficient resource use…” In some cities, even those who have “smart” initiatives, physical growth and expansion is necessary and already occurring (not suburbs, actual growth of the city) in order to keep up with a growing population. In what ways can we learn from sprawl, and manage a swelling city in a smart way?

– “The primary way in which sustainability is to be achieved within smart cities is through more efficient processes and responsive urban citizens participating in computational sensing and monitoring practices. Urban citizens become sensing nodes- or citizen sensors- within smart city proposals.” In both passive and active descriptions of citizens as sensors, people are viewed as data inputs to be mined, monitored and analyzed so much so that the “smart city” might forget that they are just that- people. Even if the citizens are willing to participate, is there a way to make them feel like they are more than just an instrument after the planning and development stages are complete? We have become accustomed to instant gratification, is this something to play into? In what ways can individuals and groups see immediate benefits (and consequences) for the city, themselves and others through their choices?

What’s so smart about the Smart Citizen? – Shepard, Simeti

– A control room for a smart city or dumb citizens; which is more of a risk? With the Smart City in a Box idea, there are many possibilies for something to go wrong. It may be hacked, it may fail after a power surge or natural distaster, it could be tampered with or damaged physically. If the whole brain of the smart city is in one box, what happens when that box is compromised? On the other hand, what happens if a smart city relies mainly on smart citizens to function and the citizens do not comply as they should?

– “Does leveraging social media and networked information systems really broaden participation, or merely provide another platform for proactive citizens already more likely to engage within the community?” Just how easy do we have to make it for people to participate? Is it constructive to offer participation to the idlest and ‘dumbest’ of citizens, or does the lack of an easy means of contribution and feedback further polarize and silence those who already do not have voices within their communities?

Quantified Community: Hudson Yards – Sandra

The Quantified Community and Neighborhood Labs – Kontokosta

– The QC approach seems to be an initiative that starts from the ground up, with input from citizens (both actively and passively), as opposed to a planner’s creation of a Smart City.  How likely is it that residents will be willing to share and divulge details of their lives enough for fruitful data collection on a community scale?  While “signals emanating from mobile communication devices and other personal electronics” (p. 6) seem to be the most effective means of collecting passive data, an “opt-in approach” is certainly needed if the motivations behind QC’s are truly for the community.

– Is there already an example of a QC that has successfully evolved and contributed to a greater urban space? It seems as though collection of data over a long period of time, evaluation of data, comparisons with nearby QC’s and finally interconnectivity on a large scale would require a huge amount of sustained interest and long term vision.

 

Instrumental City: The View from Hudson Yards – Mattern

– “This is Hudson Yards, the largest private real-estate development in United States history and the test ground for the world’s most ambitious experiment in “smart city” urbanism.” (p. 1) It is interesting that after every proposal for this site that fell through, the Hudson Yards project is what succeeded and is moving forward. In New York City, nothing in real estate is done without considerable planning and study. Is this, then, an indicator of what the biggest of cities values?

– Is an “out-of-sight, out-of-mind” (p. 5) approach really the best idea when it comes to environmental/ecological concerns in a “smart” setting? I like the author’s idea of something like a chute for a peek into trash collection systems, because I feel that without it, the idea that the built environment does everything for you is harmful for a sense of responsibility in regards to the natural environment.

Tabula Rasa: New Songdo – Sandra

 

$100 Billion Dollar Jackpot – Townsend

 – In some ways, Songdo is a scaled up continuation of Price’s “Generator,” in the sense that the 60’s project was one of the first to conceptualize a built environment that “could learn, remember and develop an intelligent awareness of their needs.” (p. 22) On the other hand, Songdo has gone in a completely different direction. Generator was described as “a computerized leisure facility” while every description of Songdo that I have seen has failed to mention or consider the happiness of its inhabitants. It may be efficient, and it may be “smart,” but will it be enjoyable? “Intuitive, mobile, and effortless, high definition video keeps the cities residents in near-lifelike contact at a distance and on the go.” (p. 48) Near-lifelike contact is still not actual human contact, and it seems like Songdo is giving its citizens every excuse to stay in their apartments, away from real contact to other people.

– Though we don’t think about it, “cellular” and “mobile” are missing the mark when it comes to how we describe our untethered devices. Maybe the German term “Handy” is the most accurate current expression.

 

Test Bed as Urban Epistemology – Calvillo, Halpern, LeCavalier, Pietsch

 – If Songdo is “the experimental prototype community of tomorrow,” why is it already being exported to other parts of the world? According to the authors, the city is still “both literally and conceptually incomplete.” Should they not wait at least a few years, evaluate, and then learn from their mistakes before transplanting a replica?

– Living in an environment built on data mining sounds like it could be incredibly helpful and efficient in some ways, but one can imagine it quickly becoming an episode of Black Mirror. What is the need for home genetic-testing kits and blood-work labs in every home?

Smart Cities vs. Smart Citizens – Sandra

What is a City that it Would be “Smart”? – Haque

“…smart cities are somehow conceived apart from humans. They are simply to be inhabited and connected to as necessary, not created by citizens but their progenitors – developers, master planners, and investors.” If that is true, is the statement really so different if we take the “smart” out of it? Every day inhabitants also have little say over “dumb” aspects of the city. New buildings, street signage, etc. are also conceived by progenitors. Citizens’ concerns and wishes are consulted occasionally, and in any functioning democracy inhabitants should be encouraged to voice hesitations, needs and desires – but they are ultimately not the designers. A smart city, like any city, should of course be cultivated and evolved for the people, and with the best interests of the people in mind, but that doesn’t necessarily mean by the people. This is not to say that we should be ever trusting of investors and designers, as history shows us that they do not always know best. Then again, recent events may tell us that the masses also might not know best. Smart, informed citizens in conjunction with smart, transparent municipalities are key.

 

Essay: On the smart city; Or, a ‘manifesto’ for a smart citizens instead – Hill

“…there is a further tendency to ‘make these technologies, and hence put them in command rather than in dialogue with users.'” Do we really want them to be invisible? Maybe, but not in the way Hill and Sassen are implying. Ubiquitous, and therefore blending? Perhaps. But invisible?

“…but at its most basic level, sustainability necessitates a selflessness, a scaling of empathy beyond one’s immediate concerns…” A collective compassion and therefore betterment on a city-wide/state-wide/country-wide scale is honestly a bit easier to imagine in places where public welfare systems do not have a negative connotation. Places where people already see the benefits of giving something up (taxes, for example) for the good of the whole, with the knowledge that the whole will benefit them at some point. Can the US become somewhere like this? Smart city initiatives, like investments in the infrastructure of any kind require funds, and the funds need to come from somewhere.

 

Smart Cities – Townsend

“Looking smart, perhaps even more than actually being smart, is crucial to competing in today’s global economy.” (pg. 10) This is an interesting notion. Is it enough for governments and municipalities to make their cities seem just smart enough to attract the best minds that will actually make the city smart? Would this hands-off, yet responsive approach be enough incentive, or do the brightest want to be somewhere with more of a foundation from which to jump forward.