Skyscrapers & High-Rise Architecture

Vakanai
Posts: 313
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2022 10:23 pm

Re: Skyscrapers & High-Rise Architecture

Post by Vakanai »

funkervogt wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 3:59 pm Several of your assumptions are questionable.
All assumptions are questionable, kind of how predictions go.
There won't be unlimited resources, either. Not everyone who asks for a 10,000 square foot penthouse suite on top of a 100-story building will be able to have one, and there will be some mechanism to limit a person from taking 10,000 calories of food each day and throwing most of it in the trash. Whether humans or AGIs are in charge, some attention will be paid in even a post-scarcity society to rationing resources and preventing waste.
Agreed that everyone can't have a 10,000 sq ft penthouse - but the existence of some scarcity isn't cause or reason enough to support the idea we'll need money or rent. Frankly I don't think anyone should have such penthouses now. Post capitalism if buildings must absolutely have such stupid spacious areas, it should be for like, a communal garden area or something.
Like, we're not really disagreeing here - not sure where the idea that no money and no rent equals everyone can have any amount of ridiculous resources comes from. I never said we'd be post rules or post laws. But we'll be past the notion of work and money and the haves and the have-nots at least.
Other scenarios could lead to AGI control. A "non-apocalyptic Skynet scenario" is possible, in which the machines violently take over Earth with relatively few deaths and little destruction of infrastructure. Humans would realize the situation was hopeless and surrender.
True, but unlikely. We can't possibly know what an AGI or ASI may think, assuming it even "thinks" at all as we understand it, but we can assume it won't act without motives at least. And while I agree with the notion that they'll be so smart as to make us seem like ants in comparison, I do find the notion that we couldn't possibly comprehend their motives a poor argument. Basically, if we argue that they're apt to do anything, I'd want to know what the possible motives would be. The harder we have to stretch to think of a reason an AI might do a certain thing, the less likely I think it's liable to occur that way. That's just me tho.
There is also a scenario where AGIs take over gradually and bloodlessly without humans realizing it until it's too late. We would let them incrementally increase their ownership of economic assets and decision-making authority in the name of convenience and efficiency until we were totally dependent on them, and they had in fact found a million ways to coerce us into doing things we didn't want to do. It would be analogous to how human advertisers, politicians, journalists, intelligence agencies, and tycoons manipulate our thinking and behavior today.
Again, we fall into the problem of motives. I agree that we're likely to give them more and more control - but I'm hard pressed to imagine them with motives to assume they might coerce us into doing anything or reasons why they would manipulate us. I don't see AGI likely to have wants or desires, beyond simply seeking to accomplish the prompts we give it. Sure, it may do these things to accomplish said prompts, but that is something that could be planned for. Give it restrictions to work under, and without motives it shouldn't seek to escape those restrictions.
There are multiple pathways to AGI world domination in which humans who want to, say, live in tall buildings are denied it by machines and made to live elsewhere.


Yes, but they're not likely pathways. Theoretically a future could occur where an AGI rules over us in such a way, but the probabilities to me seem on the rather low end. It requires more assumptions to give it motives for coercion and manipulation - possible, but the alternative that it won't requires less assumptions since it doesn't need motives to work largely as intended. The risk is of course there, but the risk is smaller than other likelihoods.
On a long enough timeline, humans like us lose the final say, either de jure or de facto, and there are more routes to that situation than the one you mention. For example, by the year 2500, only 1 million Homo sapiens like us might be left, vs. 100 billion radically evolved posthumans and intelligent robots that vastly out-vote the remaining natural humans.
That might be a matter of misunderstanding and miscommunication. When I said humans, you assumed "humans like us" - but I think that us and/or our descendants a billion years from now we'll still consider ourselves/themselves "humans" even if we are completely post-biological at that point. I think posthumans will still call themselves humans when asked what they are. In the far future there'll be little or no difference between humans and AGI/ASI. Humans will be ASI, and ASI will be humans. I only say that AGI/ASI won't have final say, and humans will demand final say, insofar as there's still a distinction between the two.
Why? A medium of exchange is essential to the functioning of an economy larger than a village. I don't see why this would stop being true in a post-scarcity society. Even if everything were "free" for humans, there would still be invisible prices attached to all goods and services we consumed. Someone would be monitoring it.
Is it? Essential I mean. We're brought up to believe it is, but I honestly don't believe so. There are other ways, other methods of getting the same results. We can vote on how we spend community resources, we can all be given a certain allotment of goods, resources can be distributed to where they are most needed, decisions could be based on the best outcomes after repeated simulations - basically, there are many alternative ways to handle the distribution of resources besides "who has the most cash?" which frankly is a system that has long put us in a class system that I don't think many of us really wish to see kept forward for the next several billion to trillion years of civilization. If no one needs to work to make money, and if we have such advanced AI to handle such distribution tasks easily, then how would money be essential? Even in a world where resources aren't infinite, there's other ways to figure out what goes to where and who than simply to whoever is the richest.
It's a mistake to assume current demographic trends will hold for decades. Look at population growth projections from 30 or 40 years ago and see how inaccurate they were.
True, but it's hard to see why humans would begin to breed more. It is a mistake to assume trends will hold forever, but you need an argument to account for how or why they may change as well.
Technology that radically expands human lifespan will be available this century, and will counterbalance other factors. If no one dies anymore, then even a low birthrate of one child per woman over her lifetime will cause a resumption in population growth.
Yes, eventually - but we're very early in this century, and the next few to several decades are likely to be horrendous. Unless population growth dramatically increases, it's still possible that in a century where we solve aging, we might still end it with fewer people than we started.
Yes, in the long term view of centuries, population is definitely going to rise - but many of us might live completely digital lives, some of us may not even have bodies. That means many will be happy with reduced or even no physical living space in physical reality. The skyscrapers that do exist will be able to house more as there'll be no need for work spaces beyond hobbyists. And like I said, I think people will prefer to see us build upward over outward.
Your assumptions about various disasters killing off large segments of the population are super questionable. Consider this: Even if we accept the 20 million upper estimate for global COVID-19 deaths from January 2020 - January 2022, it barely dented the size of the human population. During the same period, the population grew by 247 million people. COVID-19 is the worst pandemic we've had in 100 years, and its net effect on the size of our species has practically been a rounding error.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00104-8
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-r ... -2020.html
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-r ... -2022.html

Even if future disasters killed 10 million humans a year, our species would not be threatened.
True, this is the most questionable part of my assumptions - but I really, really, really believe people are underestimating just how bad things are going to get. Droughts and flooding and wildfires are going to get worse, pandemics are likely to get worse, political situations and wars will get worse, and all of this impacts the global food supply. I can easily see a scenario where all of these disasters leads to a years long hunger crisis that starves upwards of a billion people. I hope I'm wrong, I really do. But I'd be lying if I said it didn't worry me.
SOME people like living in cities and seeing skyscrapers dominating the horizon. Many other people like living in the countryside, in small towns where the tallest building is three stories, in the suburbs, or in trendy city neighborhoods consisting of low-rises.
And those will continue to exist - but trends do point that more people are becoming more urban, not less. See, I never argued such would disappear, only that skyscrapers would still continue to exist and be built. Even if they are more costly to make, I don't see resources being such a bind that we decide to no longer pursue skyscrapers. There could be less of them, there could be more, but I'm confident that there will be skyscrapers.
Many people are oblivious to the destruction of nature and just want their new-construction suburban house, regardless of how many trees had to be cut down to make the lot available.
Yes, and that sucks - but more people are becoming aware and caring.
I think this is the best point you made, even if I think it might turn out wrong. COVID-19 accelerated the global switch to telework by at least a decade, but I think it might have overshot the mark a bit, and that organizations will soon start demanding their employees show up in the office at least once a week. Also, not every office skyscraper can be converted to residential use. People like having windows in their houses, and giving every unit access to a window means creating a building whose footprint resembles an elongated rectangle. A lot of office buildings have square or circular footprints, meaning there's a lot of volume in the middle that would be unsuitable for human habitation.
I was thinking more about future skyscrapers being built as solely living spaces rather than trying to convert current office spaces into living spaces. Windows are imo the best point you've made, but I think that's one where technology has a fix - displays that look like windows, let in what feels like for all the world natural sunlight, and are basically indistinguishable from windows except for the fact they don't open because they are just screens. The can even show what the view would be from that floor of that building if you lived in an outside edge apartment.


(I want to apologize if any of my points seem combative - I'm going for a friendly lighthearted debate here, but sadly a lot of my experience debating online is less nice so I might be out of practice - also don't mind if I ignore bulks of future responses and only focus on responding to a few points going forward - these really long posts kinda wipe me out)
User avatar
wjfox
Site Admin
Posts: 8663
Joined: Sat May 15, 2021 6:09 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Skyscrapers & High-Rise Architecture

Post by wjfox »

Architects in Dubai dream up a massive space-age ring to encircle the world's tallest building

Updated 9th September 2022

In Dubai, experimental architecture firm ZNera Space has proposed a conceptual design featuring a massive five-story circular structure wrapped around the world's tallest skyscraper, the Burj Khalifa -- which towers at a staggering 829.8 meters (2,723 feet), almost double the height of the Empire State Building.

The concept, known as Downtown Circle, weds community, luxury, and futuristic urban planning in a wildly ambitious design, which has been brought to life by a series of mesmerizing illustrations created in collaboration with Pictown, a company that specializes in architectural renderings.
ZNera Space's principal architects, Najmus Chowdry and Nils Remess, envision Downtown Circle as a horizontal stroke against Dubai's vertiginous, futuristic skyline of seemingly endless skyscrapers.

https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/d ... index.html


Image
User avatar
wjfox
Site Admin
Posts: 8663
Joined: Sat May 15, 2021 6:09 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Skyscrapers & High-Rise Architecture

Post by wjfox »

User avatar
wjfox
Site Admin
Posts: 8663
Joined: Sat May 15, 2021 6:09 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Skyscrapers & High-Rise Architecture

Post by wjfox »

User avatar
ººº
Posts: 359
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2022 3:54 am

Re: Skyscrapers & High-Rise Architecture

Post by ººº »

wjfox wrote: Sun Oct 30, 2022 9:13 am
:|
User avatar
wjfox
Site Admin
Posts: 8663
Joined: Sat May 15, 2021 6:09 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Skyscrapers & High-Rise Architecture

Post by wjfox »

Reaching for the sky: 80-story tower plan unveiled in downtown Austin

Nov 14, 2022

Construction recently started downtown on what will be the tallest tower in Austin and all of Texas — but a new plan just emerged that would reach even higher.

Local developer Wilson Capital announced Nov. 14 plans for Wilson Tower, a multifamily high-rise at the site of Avenue Lofts on Fifth Street. With construction expected to start next summer, Wilson Tower would include 450 apartments and rise 1,035 feet — topping the 1,022-foot height planned for the Waterline tower, currently digging down at 98 Red River St. and being co-developed by Lincoln Property Co. and Kairoi Residential LLC.

Wilson Tower would more than double the 515-foot height of nearby Frost Bank Tower and top Texas' current tallest building — Houston's 1,002-foot JPMorgan Chase Tower — by 33 feet.

https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news ... soars.html


Image
User avatar
caltrek
Posts: 6474
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 1:17 pm

Re: Skyscrapers & High-Rise Architecture

Post by caltrek »

World’s Largest Sphere Nearing Completion in Las Vegas
by Bob Leal
January 27, 2023

Introduction:
LAS VEGAS (Courthouse News) — The mother of all spheres being built by Madison Square Garden Entertainment Corporation promises to be a one-of-a-kind experience for audiences with its cutting-edge technology.

The colossal MSG Sphere at The Venetian stands 366 feet high and 516 feet wide, the largest sphere in the world. It will include seating for around 18,000 people, including 23 suites. Located one block east of the Las Vegas Strip, it will be connected to the Venetian Expo by an indoor pedestrian bridge.

Besides the shape, which from a distance looks like a big basketball, what sets the facility apart is the technology that will be utilized.

“Inside the sphere, audiences are going to be amazed by the largest 16K LED screen on earth. This screen will have the world’s highest resolution that is orders of magnitude sharper than anything you can experience today,” said Lucas Watson, president of MSG Sphere, at a conference hosted by the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce this week.

“Three football fields of LED screen will wrap up, over and around the audience. It’s really going to be incredible," Watson said. "In addition to the screen, the audience is going to be greeted by sphere immersive sound, 164,000 channels (speakers). That’s like eight channels for every person in the building of beam-forming technology and audio. It will be headset sound without the headset for every seat in the house. It truly is incredible.
Read more here: https://www.courthousenews.com/worlds- ... as-vegas/
Don't mourn, organize.

-Joe Hill
User avatar
wjfox
Site Admin
Posts: 8663
Joined: Sat May 15, 2021 6:09 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Skyscrapers & High-Rise Architecture

Post by wjfox »

User avatar
wjfox
Site Admin
Posts: 8663
Joined: Sat May 15, 2021 6:09 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Skyscrapers & High-Rise Architecture

Post by wjfox »

User avatar
wjfox
Site Admin
Posts: 8663
Joined: Sat May 15, 2021 6:09 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Skyscrapers & High-Rise Architecture

Post by wjfox »

Post Reply