THE CRITICAL MASS MODEL
Imagine mobile cities that transgressed fixed locations, moving en mass like locus, morphing populations of electronically connected fleets. Of course I imagine a mass of cyclists, but this should not exclude vans, backpackers, and similar light movement. One lives on a ``station'' -- located only by domain name, whether moving or static a webserver-in-a-box (WIB) need never go down within wireless broadband range. A temporary village is possible to establish within hours of settlement with a well refined method of dividing heavier loads, and bringing the pieces back together. A village layout can be pre-ordained (for variable locations) and core elements gps tagged to co-ordinate members of the transit flock into position for hassle free establishment. There are already modular tents, and others that can easily be made modular with connecting walkways that double as routes for cabled power. Masses of lightweight folding solar panels and collapsible wind turbines recharge the batteries of dormant electric bikes which, wired into banks by special cables, provide a veritable store of power for infrastructure needs. Central wifi for internet (location dependant) connected to a media server that holds music, videos, ebooks, etc.
Similar set-ups like the above exist at festivals, but I see no reason why it cannot be viable as a way of life as long as safe guards for dealing with hazards of nature, low environmental impact and community safety are always kept in mind.
By this model it is possible for cities to divide and reform, to merge with other cities strengthening this teeming organism by shared experience and knowledge. There may be central organisation, but an even more curious experiment would be to adopt the bittorrent model whereby the organisation is mostly autonomous, decentralised, and without official organisers. The principle of this is entirely for legal reasons -- for responsibility to be shared by all members rather than a select few who are the first to be locked up. This does not mean such a city is without individuals who take on responsibility, but the title is formed by shared consent rather than contrived formalities. It cannot be stressed enough that the failure or incarceration of key people should not bring down the whole city.
It means that its members failed to grasp why communities thrive -- shared responsibility.
(Just an idea)
Similar set-ups like the above exist at festivals, but I see no reason why it cannot be viable as a way of life as long as safe guards for dealing with hazards of nature, low environmental impact and community safety are always kept in mind.
By this model it is possible for cities to divide and reform, to merge with other cities strengthening this teeming organism by shared experience and knowledge. There may be central organisation, but an even more curious experiment would be to adopt the bittorrent model whereby the organisation is mostly autonomous, decentralised, and without official organisers. The principle of this is entirely for legal reasons -- for responsibility to be shared by all members rather than a select few who are the first to be locked up. This does not mean such a city is without individuals who take on responsibility, but the title is formed by shared consent rather than contrived formalities. It cannot be stressed enough that the failure or incarceration of key people should not bring down the whole city.
It means that its members failed to grasp why communities thrive -- shared responsibility.
(Just an idea)