Yes, the word “smart” is definitely overused, especially for cities and buildings. When at all needed, the technology aspect should actually be there to make us smarter, collecting data to help in making better decisions. That being said, there are quite a few good ideas in the article another frontier for the digital revolution about “smart buildings.” Like printed sensors and antennas to monitor problems and failures.
The question asked in the title of this article, Fab Labs Or Gigafactories? Or Both? might be a bit of a weird one, as it’s obviously not simply one or the other but rather a spectrum of solutions with these two at opposing ends. Still, a useful framing since there is the possibility, through innovative forms of organizations and licensing, to make complex products locally instead of making them exclusively in large factories.
The Fab City is, of course, a lot more than technology in the city. It’s about a future-forward vision of the urban landscape that creates and produces locally while connected and collaborating globally. That being said, it’s no surprise that technology occupies a big space in that vision and that it also now overlaps with more “classical” visions of urbanism and architecture.
Though it is unnecessary to frequently update terms to highlight a potential area of interest, it is still highly useful to explore different perspectives. In this short article, the authors consider that the “Smart City” should rather be termed a “Deep Learning City”.
A better urban future There are a lot of great directions to ponder
