Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

An interesting question is: do all factors scale at the same speed?

The experience of e.g. Hong Kong and Manhattan seems to suggest that it's easier to provide for public transport, schools etc, in ultra-dense environments. One of the core advantages of ultra-density is that less space is needed for streets and motor traffic. Ultra-density also makes logistics for basic goods and services (e.g. food and health care) more efficient. Even greenery can be more efficiently provided in ultra-dense environments, because multiplexing is possible as parks are rarely used by the majority of the population at the same time. E.g. London parks are pretty empty almost all the time.

(See also the scalability limits that high-rise buildings have w.r.t. economics of floor space, that I mention in another post.)



Geoffrey West and people at the Santa Fe Institute have long argued that cities enjoy good scaling properties which make them more efficient on net and drivers of economic growth. Economists also study these efficiencies under 'agglomeration'.


Yet on a lovely day like we’ve had this weekend, London parks will be a horrendous sea of flesh, like beaches in Benidorm (or Brighton)


Out of the circa 8760 hours of the year, what fraction is like today? (Moreover, even today, parts of e.g. Hyde Park that are away from the main walkways will not be like Benidorm central beach in the high season.)

Why overfit on rare edge cases?


The point is that people want to use the parks when it’s sunny. So they do. And it’s hideous.

I don’t care if it’s empty when it’s raining, there’s a reason why that’s the case.

Having access to Hyde Park is pointless for the purposes I like green areas (to enjoy when the weather is nice)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: