Originally by: Lance Fighter

---

This is either a troll or a noob... Ill take the noob route.

Originally by: Celeste Coeval

---

Edited by: Celeste Coeval on 16/01/2009 12:52:26
With human resource distribution wildly out of sync with global populations and needs, deforestation, rising carbon emissions, inefficient city designs and quite frankly a lack of direction and focus of humanity, I simply ask this:

Is it time to consider experimenting with arcologies?

If you do not know what an arcology is...google it.

Before you post here bear a few things in mind. Arcologies do not mean a utopian state of existance (people never change...), illuminati overlords taking control, a loss of freedoms, a loss of entrepreneurial endeavor or totalitarian conformity to any larger political or theological ideology. They are simply a restructuring of what we currently can do, know and how we live and use resources.
Leave all preconceptions of how an arcology would function in relation to the modern dynamics of urbanization at the door, as they are an evolution of modern urbanization and require you to use your imagination of what is possible based on the current depth of human knowledge. The eve player base (in my experience) has a wealth of opinions and knowledge and so I am interested to hear what they have to say on such a large, unpoliticized topic.

Disclaimer for the "But I like my car responses":

When people migrated from horses to cars for transport, people did not ask, "but what about my horse?" Why because the world would have and did leave these individuals behind.

Links provided in this thread:
1, 2

---

Originally by: 7shining7one7

---

ah but you fail to realize who is in control of the illuminati overlords, to put it into perspective for you they are pawns more than they realize.

---

Originally by: kor anon

---

Originally by: 7shining7one7

---

ah but you fail to realize who is in control of the illuminati overlords, to put it into perspective for you they are pawns more than they realize.

---

What the ****............

---

Originally by: Spaztick

---

I am Andrew Ryan, and I'm here to ask you a question. Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow? 'No!' says the man in Washington, 'It belongs to the poor.' 'No!' says the man in the Vatican, 'It belongs to God.' 'No!' says the man in Moscow, 'It belongs to everyone.' I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose... Rapture.

---

Originally by: kor anon

---

Originally by: 7shining7one7

---

ah but you fail to realize who is in control of the illuminati overlords, to put it into perspective for you they are pawns more than they realize.

---

What the ****............

---

Originally by: Micheal Dietrich

---

Originally by: kor anon

---

Originally by: 7shining7one7

---

ah but you fail to realize who is in control of the illuminati overlords, to put it into perspective for you they are pawns more than they realize.

---

What the ****............

---

I think they detailed this in season 5 of Stargate SG-1 when they realized that all the gods were really under the control of Anubis

---

Originally by: 7shining7one7

---

also global overpopulation is a common lie, don't fall for that or you'll miss the bigger picture. we could all fit in australia with each having a quarter acre of house and garden and an area the size of queensland remaining.. AND the rest of the earth's land remaining.

---

Originally by: 7shining7one7

---

Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 16/01/2009 20:56:51

Originally by: Spaztick

---

I am Andrew Ryan, and I'm here to ask you a question. Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow? 'No!' says the man in Washington, 'It belongs to the poor.' 'No!' says the man in the Vatican, 'It belongs to God.' 'No!' says the man in Moscow, 'It belongs to everyone.' I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose... Rapture.

---

hahahahaha indeed.. a quirk of selfrighteous deludedness..

don't worry.. it's all being sorted.

don't be afraid ever, you have nothing to fear regardless what occurs in the visual realm of things, you are well protected and taken care of (in a good way) your trust is your guarantee, and your self doubt is your blessing.

---

Originally by: Spaztick

---

Originally by: Spaztick

---

I am Andrew Ryan, and I'm here to ask you a question. Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow? 'No!' says the man in Washington, 'It belongs to the poor.' 'No!' says the man in the Vatican, 'It belongs to God.' 'No!' says the man in Moscow, 'It belongs to everyone.' I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose... Rapture.

---

hahahahaha indeed.. a quirk of selfrighteous deludedness..

don't worry.. it's all being sorted.

don't be afraid ever, you have nothing to fear regardless what occurs in the visual realm of things, you are well protected and taken care of (in a good way) your trust is your guarantee, and your self doubt is your blessing.

---

Originally by: 7shining7one7

---

Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 16/01/2009 20:35:33

Originally by: Celeste Coeval

---

Edited by: Celeste Coeval on 16/01/2009 12:52:26
With human resource distribution wildly out of sync with global populations and needs, deforestation, rising carbon emissions, inefficient city designs and quite frankly a lack of direction and focus of humanity, I simply ask this:

Is it time to consider experimenting with arcologies?

If you do not know what an arcology is...google it.

Before you post here bear a few things in mind. Arcologies do not mean a utopian state of existance (people never change...), illuminati overlords taking control, a loss of freedoms, a loss of entrepreneurial endeavor or totalitarian conformity to any larger political or theological ideology. They are simply a restructuring of what we currently can do, know and how we live and use resources.
Leave all preconceptions of how an arcology would function in relation to the modern dynamics of urbanization at the door, as they are an evolution of modern urbanization and require you to use your imagination of what is possible based on the current depth of human knowledge. The eve player base (in my experience) has a wealth of opinions and knowledge and so I am interested to hear what they have to say on such a large, unpoliticized topic.

Disclaimer for the "But I like my car responses":

When people migrated from horses to cars for transport, people did not ask, "but what about my horse?" Why because the world would have and did leave these individuals behind.

Links provided in this thread:
1, 2

---

ah but you fail to realize who is in control of the illuminati overlords, to put it into perspective for you they are pawns more than they realize.

not to derail but to mark the perspective as a generic attribute for alternative "meassures" in that regard.

also global overpopulation is a common lie, don't fall for that or you'll miss the bigger picture. we could all fit in australia with each having a quarter acre of house and garden and an area the size of queensland remaining.. AND the rest of the earth's land remaining.

and indeed the eve player base, be it an arbitrary internet community with link'ins to others, is a lot more aware and smart than what some people give them credit for.

also despite the fallacy, nice linkage and a well written post.

---

Originally by: mercyonman

---

i will give you a scenerio
a brand new self sustained building has been built
people love the idea and starty flooding it to move in
well later on that country goes to war. the war is not on home turf buit over seas
after a while the self sustained build has reached such a cap.
the enemy decides to attack this building with out a warning
they blow up the building
only 15% of all the people that were there lived

how would be stop THIS from happening

---

Originally by: Cmdr Sy

---

The return on monumental architecture SUCKS.

Always has, always will.

It confers no advantages to any economic activities it houses when compared to conducting it elsewhere, and the capital investment involved is far greater. No-one with the resources to fund such a thing has any reason to do so because they could obtain a better return elsewhere.

---

Originally by: HankMurphy

---

mark my words, one day man will build an arcology

mark my words, that arcology will end with HUGE casualties

we have the capability to build one that is safe, efficient and will last for decades if not centuries

but instead we will build one by contracting 32 different companies most with undocumented workers and all clocked in at the lowest bid.

---

Originally by: 7shining7one7

---

ah but you fail to realize who is in control of the illuminati overlords, to put it into perspective for you they are pawns more than they realize.

not to derail but to mark the perspective as a generic attribute for alternative "meassures" in that regard.

also global overpopulation is a common lie, don't fall for that or you'll miss the bigger picture. we could all fit in australia with each having a quarter acre of house and garden and an area the size of queensland remaining.. AND the rest of the earth's land remaining.

and indeed the eve player base, be it an arbitrary internet community with link'ins to others, is a lot more aware and smart than what some people give them credit for.

also despite the fallacy, nice linkage and a well written post.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: 7shining7one7

---

also global overpopulation is a common lie, don't fall for that or you'll miss the bigger picture. we could all fit in australia with each having a quarter acre of house and garden and an area the size of queensland remaining.. AND the rest of the earth's land remaining.

---

First off, that's the whole freaking point of an arcology - it's the logical (engineering) progression from a big city. How to fit as many people as possible on a space as small as possible while still allowing them a certain average amount of comfort.
Second, the "global overpopulation" doesn't mean we can't PHYSICALLY fit the people on the planet, it's about the lack of resources (or ways to properly exploit them) to sustain such a number of people on a certain level of "lifestyle".
Do you honestly believe 1000 m^2 of farmland would be enough to forever feed one person ? Please, don't make me laugh. Not to mention, your example (Australia) isn't exactly farmland either, but even if it was... well, hopefully you can get the point.

Now, tell me... with farmland actually shrinking damaged from overuse, with industrial and household pollution causing noticeable harm wherever cheaply dumped, with forests getting less dense and smaller in size all across the globe, with the ocean's life starting to suffer a noticeable decline, so basically with the global "able to do photosinthesis" reserves decreasing right when we're crying about carbon dioxide, with no feasable large-scale energy production methods in place, with most of the "cheap to extract" deposits of oil, metals and any other useful raw materials nearly exhausted while demand keeps going up... how can you POSSIBLY claim that "global overpopulation is a lie" ?

Yeah, sure, we COULD cram cities on just about every piece of land that's not farmland nor forrest, we could filter our waste a bit better, we could develop cheaper means of massive level energy production and even growing crops (or something edible anyway, not necessarily crops), we could increase the rate of recycling to almost 100% and even maybe start pulling raw metals from the Earth's mantle... there's a lot of things we COULD do, but we still don't, and won't any time soon.
THIS particular thread was about ONE of the many things we COULD do.

---

Originally by: David Kang

---

Edited by: David Kang on 17/01/2009 21:32:56
Edited by: David Kang on 17/01/2009 21:32:15
If were going this route then we also need to look into a meta government. this also solves the growing idiocy problem.

good post so far

I will think of some really good examples and will update later.

-Shanzem

---

Originally by: Lance Fighter

---

This is either a troll or a noob... Ill take the noob route.

Originally by: Celeste Coeval

---

Originally by: Cmdr Sy

---

The return on monumental architecture SUCKS.

Always has, always will.

It confers no advantages to any economic activities it houses when compared to conducting it elsewhere, and the capital investment involved is far greater. No-one with the resources to fund such a thing has any reason to do so because they could obtain a better return elsewhere.

---

Miniaturization confers no economic benefits? Turn your PC off please! Im sure your microprocessors would function far better laid out in a long string, or perhaps we should untangle your dna into a flat surface, like our current infrastructure? Heres an economic benefit for you, avoiding extinction.

---

Originally by: Skye Aldaris

---

Arcologies go hand in hand with transhumanism.

Though, both Transhumanist movements and Arcologies will be rather unobtainable with the current human mindset and zeitgeist. We'll need to reach a paradigm shift, because for now such extreme changes are hard to swallow for a majority of the planet, despite how good such changes would be for human society, spirituality, and destiny.

---

Originally by: Culmen

---

Originally by: Skye Aldaris

---

Arcologies go hand in hand with transhumanism.

Though, both Transhumanist movements and Arcologies will be rather unobtainable with the current human mindset and zeitgeist. We'll need to reach a paradigm shift, because for now such extreme changes are hard to swallow for a majority of the planet, despite how good such changes would be for human society, spirituality, and destiny.

---

We would also need to address the consequences of erudite vernacular utilized irrespective of necessity.

But back to the problem with arcologies. The problem of creating a system completely from scratch.
City planning as we know it is more of a guide line then a set of schematics. Planners designate some zones and then let it loose, cities like Brasilia planned only the central districts and let the rest of the city grow organically.

An arcology would not be able to do this. It has to be built in carbon nano-tubes, making major modification nigh impossible. Imagine what happens when they figure out they made a miscalculation. Given the timescale these things are meant to survive; it would not be out of the question for even our fundemental theories to change. end result would be a massive white elephant that might not even work. one that could cost trillions of dollars

---