Living closer together
This is PURE FOLLY. Really. Cities always have problems but in the past they also have many advantages, being dense means having sewers problems, who led to health problems, but also being many skilled in different things, able to defend against enemies, able to communicate in a world without powerful transportation means etc.<p>Nowadays cities are needed:<p>- by dictatorships since very few can control very many, making them dependent on city services and so unable to revolt;<p>- by surveillance capitalism to keep people surveilled and as above dependent from ton of services since there is not enough space to be autonomous in any case.<p>MARGINALLY cities are needed for having enough people together to meet interesting people from any cohort of interests, but that&#x27;s now marginal thanks to TLCs and IT development, not from today in the era of the anti-social networks, but already in the past in the usenet&#x2F;BBS era.<p>MARGINALLY cities are needed by certain cohorts like elder people to being able to live well while being not able anymore to travel and not interested anymore in different activities in nature.<p>To being able to evolve, just toward the flying cars McKinsey want [1], just toward a retail-delivery economy, just toward renewables, just toward resilience we damn need FAR LESS dense areas. Single family homes mixed with small buildings for various working&#x2F;service purposes with enough space to evolve, to have room for p.v., drone landing, delivery of large stuff etc. Modern smart-cities are just old capitalism factories fusioned with their old slums to keep a handful of slaves ready to work in slavery condition.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.easa.europa.eu&#x2F;sites&#x2F;default&#x2F;files&#x2F;dfu&#x2F;uam-full-report.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.easa.europa.eu&#x2F;sites&#x2F;default&#x2F;files&#x2F;dfu&#x2F;uam-full-...</a> and