Topic: "Cities of the future," built from scratch (Read 409 times)

I also wonder if this project is built and put into operation, what will make it a model of nature conservation as the crown prince of Saudi Arabia has stated.

Once money is no longer an issue for them, people often develop thoughts that are said to be crazy, overly paranoid. Like the kings of the past, they were so greedy for power that they wanted to find the elixir of immortality like Qin Shi Huang, trying to prolong their life to protect their property.
A 170km long mirror wall, I'm really overwhelmed with their playability and I wouldn't believe it was real without seeing these pictures. This will be our current technology challenge project.


https://www.dezeen.com/2022/08/08/sustainability-liveability-the-line-saudi-170km-city-naive/

They say that the city will be powered by 100% renewable energy, from one end to the other it will be possible to get there in just 20 minutes by superfast train. Given that money is not a problem for those who build the project, neither will it be for those who will live there - after all, it is a project of the rich, in which rich people will live.

As for the shape, it is still something that is probably the best according to the opinion of those who are experts in such things, and what would be a better solution in your opinion? I don't see any alternative except the classic construction of today's cities, or directly to the height, which is completely impossible for such a long building.

On top of that, how is such a city deemed eco-friendly? They are literally building a huge tall wall, stretching over 170 kilometres in the desert. I fully understand their desire to build something "magnificent" and technologically advanced, but why build such an eyesore? Most importantly, it will take ages to get from one side to the other, unless you use a ridiculously expensive means of transport, such as a train. What's ecological about that?

Couldn't they, at the very least, settle for a different shape? This thing will be visible from hundreds of kilometres away.

If someone starts such a megaproject at a time when everyone is looking to save money, then it is obvious that they have so much money that they can set the whole desert on fire with it if they want to. What you see as "waste of money" is certainly not for them, and their current ruler, like many before him, is obsessed with leaving something spectacular behind.

It just strikes me that they are building the city of the future, and at the same time, they are behaving like barbarians from the Middle Ages because they are condemning to death the members of the local tribe who protested the project. A lot of money combined with very strange laws and the lack of respect for human rights put that country at the very bottom of those I would ever visit.

I know it's been a while, but I found something really interesting today. Saudi Arabia has actually started building their futuristic eco-friendly city, "The Line". Am I the only one who thinks that it's too exaggerated and a waste of money? While I'm supportive of eco-friendly cities, this looks like way too much. Drone photos have captured huge excavation and construction sites. Shouldn't a part of this city be built first for testing purposes? What if it doesn't work out? Then we'll have 170 kilometres of wasted structures and land.

https://www.dezeen.com/2022/10/19/line-megacity-under-construction-saudi-arabia-drone/

If villages can exist far from civilization and turn into communities later on, why should it be impossible to build cities from scratch?
Future cities are already emerging, I don't have to state examples because many of these cities are in countries we all know.  The technological resources will have to be in abundance because so many variables ought to be tested.
Wars and most natural disasters and diseases have rendered most persons homeless, thereby turning them into refugees. If these future cities are with the aim, to improve life and living conditions of humanity, also to help incorporate a trading system that supports both a decentralized and still upholds the tenets of centralized commerce, I consent.

Maybe because despite being the desert , that's no desert made out of endless sand dunes and you have a lake as big as the city fed by the Colorada river just 20 miles away from the city?




Singapore is built in the desert...omg!
Never heard of a desert with those characteristics:


Restricted mining to only selected few, closed borders, capped share and equal distribution, total control in the hands of a few.
I already have the best name for the city and the coin, with such characteristics they can be only called Pyongyang and Kimcoin, are those taken by

Las Vegas was built in a desert. They turned a wasteland into a casino/competitive sports hub. I don't have the specifics on how they're able to import water to supply the city, but it can be done.

The housing problem wouldn't be an issue as long as the infrastructure is built. There are housing shortages and an influx of folks leaving California for states more Eastern. Whether this "Marc Lore" character ends up building this thing in Utah, Arizona, or Nevada, they might attract some fleeing California residents.

I think a hundred years ago there was a chance that a secret enclave like the "Galt's Gulch" from Ayn Rand's “Atlas Shrugged" could exist for a few years before it was found by an armed criminal gang mightier than Ragnar Danneskjöld's, but today, with all those Google Maps, Google Earth and stuff, I would give it a few months at best.

It's kinda sad, I admit, but it's the reality we are living in: a group of prosperous people can't gather together, build a a city in a remote location and peacefully live there. Without a strong army they will be robbed soon.

In a major emergency. Even armies might have nothing to eat. If you have an army, you need extra food to feed them.

In some scenarios, it could be better to have a city in a remote location, there are no roads too. Where no one would think to look. Than to have a big army. With a small population that is easy to feed and sustain over the long term. That would make it easier to survive disasters.

Rising cost of oil and fossil fuels carry a potential to render armies useless. Much of modern war is built upon oil. Even nuclear powered submarines and aircraft carriers need massive amounts of oil to grease the moving parts.

I think russia vs ukraine is showing the limited capability of modern war. Militaries of today may not be able to fully mobilize without incurring costs in the trillions of dollars range. It may not be affordable to launch $400,000 missiles at each other over the long term. High tech weapons are expensive.

In my opinion, the first thing you need to survive under apocalyptic conditions is a good army equipped with heavy weapons. I don't think there is any futuristic city designed with that in mind (CMIIW). Unfortunately, there are still organized military groups acting like weare living in the Stone Age. They end up miserably when confronted with serious force, but you have to have that force.

Building smart cities is the trend for the coming years. It is not impossible, but it contains many complications.
In the previous comments, many of these obstacles were mentioned. But in my opinion, one of the most important problems is the lack of architects capable of designing these cities, because they must be specialized in technology in addition to the specialization of architecture.
I don't think the cities mentioned will be 100 percent successful examples. But it will certainly help develop the concept of "the smart city" .

If anyone wonders why future cities are gaining attention at the moment. It is possible that apocalypse bunkers are boring concepts to many of the rich and famous. People may not be well adapted to living a solitary existence locked inside a survival bunker for prolonged periods of time. They would prefer to have apocalypse cities where they could retain a vestige of social life and have others to interact with in a catastrophic scenario. It is also possible that having access to a panel of experts inside of a community would increase their chances of survival.

Its possible these futuristic city plans are designed and structured along an avenue of organizing a community of survivors under apocalyptic conditions.




What if a techno city of the future forked bitcoin. Then limited mining exclusively to the city district. Allowing only city residents to mine it. That could be one path to recreating the early adopter days of crypto mining while reserving control of a crypto token inside a city or specific region's borders. The number of miner's a single party can own could also be capped in an effort to prevent it from becoming too monopolized and centralized. Having many independent miners in the same local district could also encourage commerce and transactions using the local coin. Such an arrangement could help to prevent crypto tokens from being pump and dumped or manipulated. It might also reduce volatility.

First off, I agree regarding Mao, he was as evil as Hitler and Stalin, in my opinion today, although I almost worshiped the guy when I was a teenager. But I must say, I disagree with the rest. I think when a project at cost of billions is on, many thousands of poor families benefit from it. They are getting jobs that wouldn't be there otherwise. And when such a city is built and construction jobs are mostly over, it is still good, economically-wise, for the people around to have such a city in their vicinity.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Bitcoin City, in El Salvador:


What I like from this design is that while futurist, it looks structurally quite similar to an "natural-grown" South American or European city, with dense neighborhood centers instead of a single downtown area. But yeah, the probability that we'll see this city in this specific layout is quite low. Maybe a smaller version.

Best "planned" cities are probably those who don't want to make everything different, but improve small details like "walkable" neighborhoods and above all the distribution of green spaces. So Brasília and Abuja (and probably The Line) did everything wrong, but St. Petersburg, Karlsruhe, La Plata and Washington D.C. did at least something right (all older planned cities, so the bad reputation planned cities have is very much affiliated with the 1950s-1980s car-friendly design trope). I have some hope for the Egyptian planned capital, seems to have a reasonable design.

For Eko Atlantic, this is more of a "business" neighborhood than a full city. Very similar to something like Puerto Madero in Buenos Aires. Seems also to develop very slow.

I'm wondering if a city design can effectively benefit Bitcoin usage. Besides of fast Internet, a government facilitating tax payments in BTC, I can't find much. Maybe citizen-owned mining facilities powered by renewable energy?

They had to put 10 million square meters, to make it sound so big, they couldn't have simply said 10 square km , it stopped being sensationalist, right?


Yeah bs, there is no such thing, for a city with that high density it's impossible to be self-sufficient, where do you grow all the food, all do you get all the energy from? Look in their brochure, the final stage claims 1.2 MW (again spelled in 1200 KW) of solar panels, like this is going to power a city? NYC uses 11 000 MWh a day!  You can barely power an antspace miner box with that power.


Mao had good intentions too and probably truly believed in them, but everyone knows what some of the consequences have been.
Building a futuristic city at cost of billions for a few hundred thousand people when millions don't have water and electricity from my point of view it's not a good idea, it's not even a good plan, it's straight from the books on machiavellianism.

In Lagos Nigeria, there's a new city of the future called Eko Atlantic City being built from scratch -  10 million square metres of land reclaimed from the ocean and protected by an 8.5 kilometre long sea wall. According to the developers, the city will be the size of Manhattan’s skyscraper district. Self-sufficient and sustainable, it includes state-of-the-art urban design, its own power generation, clean water, advanced telecommunications, spacious roads, and tree-lined streets. This is the first of its kind.

I personally feel sorry that this project has failed. I don't think the organizers were planning to scam investors, or something. I think they really had good intentions, but, like so many others, they were a bit ahead of their time. Maybe in 20 years cities like Akon City will be successfully built. I certainly hope so, anyway.

You can go to http://akon.com/, his own website and you can see the links to
https://www.akoin.io/
https://akoncity.com/

Your result says that Akon city is a project launched by Akon, it doesn't deny that is related to akoin anywhere and if would have clicked on the Wikipedia age that is highlighted in your result you would have also see this:


And those Recaths that would be inserted into your urethra and anus to collect and recycle water and waste.
Well, everyone has their own taste and pleasures but I could live a beautiful life even without them.

In the illustration of the desert city. There are towers which appear to be condensation towers. They can passively generate water by cooling air through natural wind motion. Dune Sea farmers in star wars have a similar water evaporation technology used by moisture farmers.

Heat can be mitigated by building portions of a city underground. Or having good insulation and cooling. Either measure greatly reduces the amount of heating and cooling energy needed to stabilize living spaces. Resulting in living quarters that are more carbon neutral and green. As well as reducing electricity consumption.

Being located in a desert miles from civilization makes it less likely for randoms to pass through. It could make it easier to screen troublemakers and unwanteds from entering the area, engaging in crime, vandalism, theft and other undesirable activity. It could also make it easier to retain a sense of privacy. Entry to the city could be by invitation only.

They would likely cater to high end clientale with money to burn. Try to reorganize the shape of cities and civilization to produce various types of benefits.

Infrastructure these days isn't a major concern, I think. It all comes down to funding. Starting from scratch makes it easier to transition to solar, wind, hydrogen or any other form of energy. Its easier than ever with megawatt hour grid tied lithium batteries. Which were the main missing link as far as technologies like solar energy go.