The City is (still) a battlesuit for surviving the future.

Just watched Sir Norman Foster present at the World Design Congress in London, on cities and urbanism as a defence against climate change.

This excellent image visualises household carbon footprints – highlighting in coincidental green the extreme efficiency of NYC compared to the surrounding suburban sprawl of the emerging BAMA.

Sir Norman Foster presenting at the World Design Congress in London, discussing urbanism and climate change while a colorful map of household carbon footprints in New York City is displayed.

16 years ago this September, while at BERG, I wrote a piece at the invitation of Annalee Newitz for a science fiction focussed blog called io9 called “The City is a battlesuit for surviving the future.

It’s still there: bit-rotted, battered, and oozing dangerously-outdated memetic fluids, like a Mark 1 Jaeger.

Bruce Sterling was (obliquely) very nice about it at the time, and lots of other folks wrote interesting (and far-better written) rebuttals.

I thought as it’s a 16 year old now, I should check in on it, with some distance, and give it a new home here.

I thankfully found my original non-edited google doc that I shared with Annalee, and it’s pasted below…

My friend Nick Foster is giving the closing keynote at the event Sir Norman spoke at tomorrow. He just wrote an excellent book on our attitudes to thinking about futures called “Could Should Might Don’t” – which I heartily recommend.

My little piece of amateur futurism from 2009 has a dose of all four – but for the reasons Sir Norman pointed out, I think it’s still a ‘Could’.

And… Still a ‘Should’.

The City is (still) a battlesuit for surviving the future.

Now, 16 yrs later, we ‘Might‘ build it up from Kardashev Streets


[The following is my unedited submission to io9.com, published 20th September 2009]

The city is a battlesuit for surviving the future.

Looking at the connections between architects and science-fiction’s visions of future cities

In February of this year I gave a talk at webstock in New Zealand, entitled “The Demon-Haunted World” – which investigated past visions of future cities in order to reflect upon work being done currently in the field of ‘urban computing’.

In particular I examined the radical work of influential 60’s architecture collective Archigram, who I found through my research had coined the term ‘social software’ back in 1972, 30 years before it was on the lips of Clay Shirky and other internet gurus.

Rather than building, Archigram were perhaps proto-bloggers – publishing a sought-after ‘magazine’ of images, collage, essays and provocations regularly through the 60s which had an enormous impact on architecture and design around the world, right through to the present day. Archigram have featured before on io9 [http://io9.com/5157087/a-city-that-walks-on-giant-actuators], and I’m sure they will again.

Archigram's "Walking City" Project: An artistic depiction of a futuristic city designed to be mobile, with mechanical elements and skyscrapers in the background, representing a conceptual vision of urban living.

They referenced comics – American superhero aesthetics but also the stiff-upper-lips and cut-away precision engineering of Frank Hampson’s Dan Dare and Eagle, alongside pop-music, psychedelia, computing and pulp sci-fi and put it in a blender with a healthy dollop of Brit-eccentricity. They are perhaps most familiar from science-fictional images like their Walking City project, but at the centre of their work was a concern with cities as systems, reflecting the contemporary vogue for cybernetics and belief in automation.

Exterior view of the Pompidou Centre in Paris, showcasing its unique architectural design with exposed structural elements and colorful escalators.

Although Archigram didn’t build their visions, other architects brought aspects of them into the world. Echoes of their “Plug-in city” can undoubtedly be seen in Renzo Piano and Richard Rogers’ Pompidou Centre in Paris.

Much of the ‘hi-tech’ style of architecture (chiefly executed by British architects such as Rogers, Norman Foster and Nicholas Grimshaw) popular for corporate HQs and arts centers through the 80s and 90s can be traced back to, if not Archigram, then the same set of pop sci-fi influences that a generation of British schoolboys grew up with – into world-class architects.

Lord Rogers, as he now is, has made a second career of writing and lobbying about the future of cities worldwide. His books “Cities for a small planet” and “Cities for a small country” were based on work his architecture and urban-design practice did during the 80s and 90s, consulting on citymaking and redevelopment with national and regional governments. His work for Shanghai is heavily featured in ‘small planet’ – a plan that proposed the creation of an ecotopian mega city. This was thwarted, but he continues to campaign for renewed approaches to urban living.

Colorful graphic featuring a futuristic city skyline with the text 'People Are Walking Architecture' prominently displayed. The design includes abstract shapes and visual elements associated with urban architecture and the concept of people as integral to city structures.

Last year I saw him give a talk in London where he described the near-future of cities as one increasingly influenced by telecommunications and technology. He stated that “our cities are increasingly linked and learning” – this seemed to me a recapitulation of Archigram’s strategies, playing out not through giant walking cities but smaller, bottom-up technological interventions. The infrastructures we assemble and carry with us through the city – mobile phones, wireless nodes, computing power, sensor platforms are changing how we interact with it and how it interacts with other places on the planet. After all it was Archigram who said “people are walking architecture”

Dan Hill (a consultant on how digital technology is changing cities for global engineering group Arup) in his epic blog post “The Street as Platform” [http://www.cityofsound.com/blog/2008/02/the-street-as-p.html] says “…the way the street feels may soon be defined by what cannot be seen by the naked eye”.

He goes on to explain:

“We can’t see how the street is immersed in a twitching, pulsing cloud of data. This is over and above the well-established electromagnetic radiation, crackles of static, radio waves conveying radio and television broadcasts in digital and analogue forms, police voice traffic.  This is a new kind of data, collective and individual, aggregated and discrete, open and closed, constantly logging impossibly detailed patterns of behaviour. The behaviour of the street.”

Adam Greenfield, a design director at Nokia wrote one of the defining texts on the design and use of ubiquitous computing or ‘ubicomp’ called “Everyware” [http://www.studies-observations.com/everyware/] and is about to release a follow-up on urban environments and technology called “The city is here for you to use”.

In a recent talk he framed a number of ways in which the access to data about your surroundings that Hill describes will change our attitude towards the city. He posits that we will move from a city we browser and wander to a ‘searchable, query-able’ city that we can not only read, but write-to as a medium.

He states

“The bottom-line is a city that responds to the behaviour of its users in something close to real-time,  and in turn begins to shape that behaviour”

Again, we’re not so far away from what Archigram were examining in the 60’s. Behaviour and information as the raw material to design cities with as much as steel, glass and concrete.

The city of the future increases its role as an actor in our lives, affecting our lives.

This of course, is a recurrent theme in science-fiction and fantasy. In movies, it’s hard to get past the paradigm-defining dystopic backdrop of the city in Bladerunner, or the fin-de-siècle late-capitalism cage of the nameless, anonymous, bounded city of the Matrix.

Perhaps more resonant of the future described by Greenfield is the ever-changing stage-set of Alex Proyas’ “Dark City”.

For some of the greatest-city-as-actor stories though, it’s perhaps no surprise that we have to turn to comics as Archigram did – and the eponymous city of Warren Ellis and Darrick Robertson’s Transmetropolitan as documented and half-destroyed by gonzo future journalist-messiah Spider Jerusalem.

Transmet’s city binds together perfectly a number of future-city fiction’s favourite themes: overwhelming size (reminiscent of the BAMA, or “Boston-Atlanta Metropolitan Axis from William Gibson’s “Sprawl” trilogy),  patchworks of ‘cultural reservations’ (Stephenson’s Snowcrash with it’s three-ring-binder-governed, franchise-run-statelets) and a constant unrelenting future-shock as everyday as the weather… For which we can look to the comics-futrue-city grand-daddy of them all: Mega-City-1.

Ah – The Big Meg, where at any moment on the mile-high Zipstrips you might be flattened by a rogue Boinger, set-upon by a Futsie and thrown down onto the skedways far below, offered an illicit bag of umpty-candy or stookie-glands and find yourself instantly at the mercy of the Judges. If you grew up on 2000AD like me, then your mind is probably now filled with a vivid picture of the biggest toughest, weirdest future city there’s ever been.

This is a future city that has been lovingly-detailed, weekly, for over three decades years, as artist Matt Brooker (who goes by the psuedonym D’Israeli) points out:

Working on Lowlife, with its Mega-City One setting freed from the presence of Judge Dredd, I found myself thinking about the city and its place in the Dredd/2000AD franchise. And it occurred to me that, really, the city is the actual star of Judge Dredd. I mean, Dredd himself is a man of limited attributes and predictable reactions. His value is giving us a fixed point, a window through which to explore the endless fountain of new phenomena that is the Mega-City. It’s the Mega-City that powers Judge Dredd, and Judge Dredd that has powered 2000AD for the last 30 years.

Brooker, from his keen-eyed-viewpoint as someone currently illustrating MC-1, examines the differing visions that artists like Carlos Ezquerra and Mike McMahon have brought to the city over the years in a wonderful blogpost which I heartily recommend you read [http://disraeli-demon.blogspot.com/2009/04/lowlife-creation-part-five-all-joy-i.html]

Were Mega-City One’s creators influenced by Archigram or other radical architects?

I’d venture a “yes” on that.

Mike McMahon, seen to many, including Brooker and myself as one of the definitive portrayals of The Big Meg renders the giant, town-within-a-city Blocks as “pepperpots” organic forms reminiscent of Ken Yeang (pictured here), or (former Rogers-collaborator) Renzo Piano’s “green skyscrapers”.

While I’m unsure of the claim that MC-1 can trace it’s lineage back to radical 60’s architecture, it seems that the influence flowing the other direction, from comicbook to architect, is far clearer.

Here in the UK, the Architect’s Journal went as far as to name it the number one comic book city [http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/story.aspx?storyCode=5204830]

Echoing Brooker’s thoughts, they exclaim:

“Mega City One is the ultimate comic book city: bigger, badder, and more spectacular than its rivals. It’s underlying design principle is simple – exaggeration – which actually lends it a coherence and character unlike any other. While Batman’s Gotham City and Superman’s Metropolis largely reflect the character of the superheroes who inhabit them (Gotham is grim, Metropolis shines) Mega City One presents an exuberant, absurd foil to Dredd’s rigid, monotonous outlook.”

Back in our world, the exaggerated mega-city is going through a bit of bad patch.

The bling’d up ultraskyscraping and bespoke island-terraforming of Dubai is on hold until capitalism reboots, and changes in political fortune have nixed the futuristic, ubicomp’d-up Arup-designed ecotopia of Dongtan [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dongtan] in China.

But, these are but speedbumps on the road to the future city.

There are still ongoing efforts to create planned, model future cities such as one that Nick Durrant of design consultancy Plot is working on in Abu Dhabi: Masdar City [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masdar_City] It’s designed by another alumni of the British Hi-tech school – Sir Norman Foster. “Zero waste, carbon neutral, car free” is the slogan, and a close eye is being kept on it as a test-bed for clean-tech in cities.

We are now a predominantly urban species, with over 50% of humanity living in a city. The overwhelming majority of these are not old post-industrial world cities such as London or New York, but large chaotic sprawls of the industrialising world such as the “maximum cities” of Mumbai or Guangzhou [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guangzhou]. Here the infrastructures are layered, ad-hoc, adaptive and personal – people there really are walking architecture, as Archigram said.

Hacking post-industrial cities is becoming a necessity also. The “shrinking cities” project, http://www.shrinkingcities.com, is monitoring the trend in the west toward dwindling futures for cities such as Detroit and Liverpool.

They claim:

“In the 21st century, the historically unique epoch of growth that began with industrialization 200 years ago will come to an end. In particular, climate change, dwindling fossil sources of energy, demographic aging, and rationalization in the service industry will lead to new forms of urban shrinking and a marked increase in the number of shrinking cities.”

However, I’m optimistic about the future of cities. I’d contend cities are not just engines of invention in stories, they themselves are powerful engines of culture and re-invention.

David Byrne in the WSJ [http://is.gd/3q1Ca] as quoted by entrepreneur and co-founder of Flickr, Caterina Fake [http://caterina.net/] on her weblog recently:

“A city can’t be too small. Size guarantees anonymity—if you make an embarrassing mistake in a large city, and it’s not on the cover of the Post, you can probably try again. The generous attitude towards failure that big cities afford is invaluable—it’s how things get created. In a small town everyone knows about your failures, so you are more careful about what you might attempt.”

Patron saint of cities, Jane Jacobs, in her book “The Economy of Cities” put forward the ‘engines of invention’ argument in her theory of ‘import replacement’:

“…when a city begins to locally produce goods which it formerly imported, e.g., Tokyo bicycle factories replacing Tokyo bicycle importers in the 1800s. Jacobs claims that import replacement builds up local infrastructure, skills, and production. Jacobs also claims that the increased produce is exported to other cities, giving those other cities a new opportunity to engage in import replacement, thus producing a positive cycle of growth.”

Urban computing and gaming specialist, founder of Area/Code and ITP professor Kevin Slavin showed me a presentation by architect Dan Pitera about the scale and future of Detroit, and associated scenarios by city planners that would see the shrinking city deliberately intensify – creating urban farming zones from derelict areas so that it can feed itself locally. Import replacement writ large.

He also told me that 400 cities worldwide independently of their ‘host country’ agreed to follow the Kyoto protocol. Cities are entities that network outside of nations as their wealth often exceeds that of the rest of the nation put together – it’s natural they solve transnational, global problems.

Which leads me back to science-fiction. Warren Ellis created a character called Jack Hawksmoor in his superhero comic series The Authority.

The surname is a nice nod toward psychogeography and city-fans: Hawksmoor was an architect and progeny of Sir Christopher Wren, fictionalised into a murderous semi-mystical figure who shaped the city into a giant magical apparatus by Peter Ackroyd in an eponymous novel.

Ellis’ Hawksmoor however was abucted multiple times, seemingly by aliens, and surgically adapted to be ultimately-suited to live in cities – they speak to him and he gains nourishment from them. If you’ll excuse the spoiler, the zenith of Hawksmoor’s adventures with cities come when he finds the purpose behind the modifications – he was not altered by aliens but by future-humans in order to defend the early 21st century against a time-travelling 73rd century Cleveland gone berserk. Hawksmoor defeats the giant, monstrous sentient city by wrapping himself in Tokyo to form a massive concrete battlesuit.

Cities are the best battlesuits we have.

It seem to me that as we better learn how to design, use and live in cities – we all have a future.


Kardashev Street: Planetary Energy System Changes at Street Level – The Conference 2024

I was lucky to be invited to speak at The Conference, Malmo this year – and gave a talk entitled “Kardashev Street: Planetary Energy System Changes at Street Level” which can now be viewed here.

The Conference 2024
The Conference 2024 – DAY 1 – photo: www.jesperberg.se

Usually I’d write up the talk here, but it’s over at my new site Kardashevstreet.com, where I’ll be posting stuff related to work on solar and the energy transition from now on.

Since leaving Lunar Energy at the end of July, I’ve been trying to figure out how to keep going in the loose domain of ‘design as it relates to the energy transition’ – and have a few things in the works which will manifest there over the next few months hopefully …

On leaving Lunar orbit

I left my role as Head of Design at Lunar Energy at the end of July this year after roughly 2.5years. I originally posted this to LinkedIn at the time, but thought I would repost it here where I own the words (a bit) more.

After 2.5 action-packed years, today is my last day as head of design at Lunar Energy

I’m grateful to my colleagues for all I’ve learned during that time, and for Chris Wright, Simon Daniel and Kunal Girotra for hiring me in the first place, after I left Google back in 2021.

It was a fantastic challenge to work hands-on across every aspect of design at a startup again – from the brand identity, to the industrial design, app UX all the way to compliance labels, packaging and installer collateral. Oh and all the fun internal schwag like the ‘mission patch’ stickers you can see here on my laptop as I hand it back.

I’m really proud of the work the team have done so far – elevating great design and experience in the service of their mission to move our homes to be powered by the endless energy of our Sun.

It was fantastic to see that work recognised recently in the Fast Company Innovation by Design awards, and in 2023 when we won iF design awards in both product & UX categories.

Lunar will continue to deliver on the design and quality of end-user experience – as it ramps up installation of the Lunar System this year. I’ll be cheering them on, but as the 0-to-1 challenges have slowed, it’s time for me to move on.

Special thanks to my small but perfectly formed design team of James Jackman, Paulina Plizga and alum Ryan Pflaum – and my colleagues in design engineering on the hardware side, especially Kielan Crow and Eamon Briggs. Thank you to folks in brand and marketing –  Marissa Muller, Robert Pierce, Guste Stephens and Mara Casadio for taking chances on helping tell a different, more hopeful story around clean energy.

Finally, a deep deep bow and thanks to colleagues in product and engineering – Sam Wevers, Sophie Yates, Katherine Dick, Yosi Kwaw, Sebastian Wolf for caring about the customer experience in a sector that.. well, hasn’t very much. And the same to those in our engineering and front-end design teams – Charlotte Zhang, Xian (Amber) Tang, Christian Møller Takle, Ruby Rosenthal, Louis Edwards João Bernardo Dias da Costa Chris Ablitt amongst others for all the inspiring conversations and work to make it real. I can’t wait to see what you all do next.

What’s next for me?

Well, a bit of a break through August and hanging out with the family – I think it’s the first time in a couple of decades I don’t have something new immediately lined up, so I’m going to enjoy that feeling for now!

I have some speaking and teaching lined up which I’ll be able to speak about soon – but very up for a chat about the near-future if you think that there’s something matt-shaped there I should know about.

Aside from clean energy hardware, software and services – I’m keen to get back into the fray of AI, especially personal AI experiences across hw & sw such as I’d been working on prior to leaving Google.

But for now, deleting slack (phew) from my phone… and onwards!

Well – August is over, and now I’m actively looking around for those Jones-shaped jobs.

Get in touch if you would like to chat to me about teaching, consultancy, project work or even full-time opportunities in the realms of AI across HW&SW, design for the energy transition or anything else that you think my be up my (Kardashev) street.

Donuts and Dyson Spheres

Part 1

No Miracles Necessary in the Chobani Cinematic Universe

I realise I’ve had a set of beliefs.

Some which are (unfortunately, probably) somewhere on the spectrum toward the extreme techno-optimist views espoused since by those with various dubious political views. 

That is – despite the patient explanations of various far-cleverer friends of mine – I find I cannot become comfortable with even the most cosy narratives of what has become called “degrowth“.

Perhaps it is easier for me to imagine the end of the world rather than the end of capitalism, but it does rather seem that we missed that already.

We have gone beyond the end of capitalism into techno-feudalism and the beginning era of the Klepts – and are very much in the foothills of The Jackpot – so maybe Mark Fisher’s phrase gets updated with an “and” instead of the “rather than”…

I’m no PPE grad, and my discomfort with degrowth is not all that articulate (and subsequently it will be deconstructed articulately by those who hold it as a TINA of the left) but simply put, the root of my ill-ease with the term is “who does it hurt”.

It just doesn’t feel like the pursuit of degrowth would be any more equitable globally than untrammelled hyper-capitalist growth. 

Maybe I’m very wrong – but globally-managed, distributed, equitable degrowth just doesn’t seem plausible.

And the more likely ‘degrowth for me, no growth for thee’ also doesn’t seem like it will fly (or take the train). I guess most of all when I hear the term degrowth I flinch from the point of view of the privilege (including mine) it requires to imagine it.

Why am I putting this lengthy and awkward disclaimer here? 

I guess because I am a shamefaced technoptimist – the name of the blog gives that away – but of the fully-automated luxury communism variety (actually I’d plump for semi-automated convivial social democracy, but then I’m also a bit of a centrist dad to add to my sins) and also that I’m not in the DAC/micronukes/fusion camp of extreme VC-led technoptimism around climate.

To be clear before you start an intervention, I’m certainly not in Marc Andreesen’s camp – I think / hope I’m sat at the bar somewhere in between Dave Karpf and Noah Smith.

If anything – I’m in the “No Miracles Needed” camp – by which I refer to Mark Jacobson’s exhaustive book proposing we have everything we need in solar, wind and storage technology to get us through the great filter.

Don’t get me wrong – I’d love fusion to happen – but I’ve been thinking that for about 40 years or more.

Was I the only one to rip the press cuttings of Fleischman and Pons from my teenage bedroom wall with a tear in my eye?

I recently read Arthur Turrell’s “The Star Builders” – and though it protests we are closer than we have ever been – it still seems asymptotically out of reach.

I’m also not waving away the extractive toll off the ‘no miracles necessary’ on the planet, or the regimes and injustices that can be supported by it – though it’s always worth posting this as a reminder.

The recent work by Superflux for the WEF underlines the importance of addressing the many other planetary boundaries and negative impacts on the Earth’s systems that our current Standard Operating Procedures are causing.

And this recent piece in Vice debunking superficial “green growth” (via Dan Hill) is worth a read too

Adam recently reminded me over lunch – even the “No Miracles Necessary” future depends on the not-insubstantial miracle of having a complex world economy and industrial base to manufacture the PV panels, batteries, and turbines.

Again – the first minutes of James Burke’s “Connections” springs to mind in terms of the vertiginous tangle of systems we rely on.

Climate/Earth-System breakdown could put paid to that too.

But ultimately – I am is a designer in the technology sector, latterly for the past two years in the energy tech sector – and my view of the designer in that world is to help imagine, illustrate, conceive and communicate the ‘protopia’ or anti-anti-utopia that the ‘no miracles needed’ prescription could lead to (more on this later).

As I said in Oslo, and before/since – my measure of state of that art is not from Hollywood or Cupertino – but a yoghurt company based in New York State.

AHEM.

Yep.

Ultimately, I’m a middle-aged, middle-class white man in the global north clinging on to the fictional technologically-advanced long term futures for humanity that he grew up with – whether they are The Federation, The Culture, The various KSR Mondragonian world-lines or Fully Automated Luxury Communism.

So maybe read the rest of this with that and a pinch of sustainably-sourced salt in mind…

Part 2: I can’t see the other side of the donut from Earth.

I’m sure many of you reading this will have read Kate Raworth’s excellent “Donut Economics” – or at least have a passing acquaintance with the central idea.

That is – we should look to inhabit a zone between resource use to support a social floor of equity and fairness and the planetary boundaries that provide those resources – which describes the diagrammatic donut.

But – what if one of those planetary boundaries is not like the others?

What if one of those planetary boundaries is not quite the same?

If one of those planetary boundaries is not like the others…

Now it’s time to play our game…

The potential renewable energy we could harness as a civilisation is vast.

The solar potential alone is 104 more than we currently need.

That’s before we go beyond “no miracles” tech into fusion.

A Kardashev Type-1 energy system. Capturing the all the energy incident on our planet from our home star.

What happens if we extend one edge of the donut by four orders of magnitude?

What does a Type-1 Donut Economics look like? 

(Admission: I cheated a little in the title of this post – a Dyson Sphere would be a Type-2 Civilisation, capturing the entire energy output of The Sun.)

Well – it was 2023, so of course I asked a LLM.


Me: How might one reconcile donut economics and planetary boundaries to economic activity with the notion of Kardashev type one civilisation?

ChatGPT: Reconciling “donut economics” (which focuses on balancing the needs of the environment with the needs of society) and “planetary boundaries” (which identifies the environmental limits within which humanity can safely operate) with the idea of a Kardashev Type I civilization (a civilization that can harness and use all available energy resources on its home planet) is a challenge but not impossible. Here’s a brief reconciliation approach:

  • Shared Goal:
    • Recognize that both the concepts of donut economics and the Kardashev scale aim for a sustainable, thriving civilization. Donut economics seeks to meet humanity’s basic needs without overshooting our ecological ceiling, and a Type I civilization seeks to maximize energy use in a sustainable manner.
  • Redefine Energy Mastery:
    • A true Kardashev Type I civilization would not just be about harnessing all energy but doing so sustainably. This means developing energy sources that do not breach our planetary boundaries.
  • Technological Advancement:
    • Invest in technologies that allow for increased energy utilization without environmental degradation. Examples include highly efficient renewable energy, energy storage solutions, and perhaps even fusion power.
  • Circular Economy:
    • Align the principles of donut economics with the growth of civilization. This includes designing products for longevity, easy repair, and recycling; minimizing waste; and creating closed-loop systems that mimic natural processes.
  • Education & Values:
    • Cultivate societal values that prioritize sustainability and the well-being of all its members. By educating the population about the importance of planetary boundaries and sustainable growth, a Type I civilization can emerge that respects these boundaries.
  • Integrate Economic and Ecological Thinking:
    • Traditional economic models often treat environmental factors as externalities. In moving towards a Kardashev Type I civilization, it’s essential to integrate ecological factors into the very heart of economic models and decision-making processes.
  • Global Collaboration:
    • A Type I civilization implies global cooperation. This can be seen as an extension of the social foundation in donut economics, where global cooperation helps ensure everyone’s basic needs are met while respecting planetary limits.
  • Continuous Monitoring and Feedback:
    • Develop and maintain a global monitoring system to ensure that as we approach a Type I civilization status, we do not exceed planetary boundaries. Implement corrective measures when needed.

In essence, becoming a Kardashev Type I civilization while adhering to the principles of donut economics and respecting planetary boundaries means merging advanced technological capacities with deep ecological and social responsibility. It’s a future where we harness the full potential of our planet without harming it, ensuring prosperity and well-being for all.

Me: One of my questions is whether using more energy (so long as it is sustainable, renewable and zero carbon eg solar) is incompatible with donut economics

ChatGPT: Using more energy is not inherently incompatible with donut economics, as long as that energy use aligns with the principles of sustainability and social equity inherent in the donut model. 

Let’s break this down:

  • Ecological Ceiling:
    • The outer ring of the “donut” represents the ecological limits we should not surpass to avoid environmental degradation. Using sustainable, renewable, and zero-carbon energy sources like solar helps ensure we do not exceed this ecological ceiling.
  • Social Foundation:
    • The inner ring of the “donut” signifies the social basics that every individual should have access to, such as food, water, health, education, etc. Using more renewable energy can support these goals if it’s done in a way that ensures equitable distribution and accessibility. For instance, renewable energy can power schools in off-grid areas, provide clean cooking solutions, or pump clean water, thereby aiding in achieving the social foundation.
  • Growth vs. Development:
    • It’s essential to differentiate between growth for the sake of growth (which can be detrimental) and genuine development that meets human needs without compromising the environment. Using more energy is acceptable if it’s channelled towards genuine development and not just consumption for consumption’s sake.
  • Efficiency and Resilience:
    • While using more renewable energy, it’s crucial to prioritize efficiency. This means optimizing energy consumption to get the most benefit out of every unit of energy and designing systems that are resilient to potential shocks.
  • Holistic Well-being:
    • A significant point in donut economics is that endless economic growth (usually measured as GDP growth) is not the ultimate goal. Instead, the objective is holistic well-being. If using more energy contributes to holistic well-being without causing ecological harm, it aligns with the principles of donut economics.

In summary, using more energy in and of itself is not contrary to the principles of donut economics. However, it’s the how and why of that energy use that matters. If the energy is sourced sustainably, used efficiently, directed towards genuine development, and contributes to holistic well-being without overshooting ecological limits or leaving anyone behind, then it aligns with the philosophy of donut economics.

Me: But could you see a route to growth or new capabilities for a global civilisation due to energy use that is orders of magnitude higher than now, so long as it is zero carbon (eg solar, fusion) – would that be an enlarged donut?

ChatGPT: Certainly, there’s a potential route to growth and new capabilities for a global civilization through a significant increase in energy use, as long as it’s sustainable and zero-carbon. 

This could, metaphorically speaking, result in an “enlarged donut,” where the scale and capabilities of civilization expand while still maintaining the balance between ecological limits and social needs.

  • Technological Advancement:
    • A significant increase in energy availability, especially from sustainable sources like solar or fusion, can fuel technological advancements in various sectors, from transportation and infrastructure to research and space exploration. This could lead to breakthroughs we haven’t yet imagined.
  • Space Exploration and Colonization:
    • With energy availability orders of magnitude higher than now, humanity could potentially undertake large-scale space missions, colonizing other celestial bodies, mining asteroids, or even reaching for interstellar travel.
  • Global Infrastructure Projects:
    • Massive energy availability could facilitate projects that benefit humanity globally, like global transportation networks, large-scale desalination plants for potable water, or projects that counteract climate change effects.
  • Elevated Living Standards Globally:
    • A tremendous amount of sustainable energy could enable the global provision of high living standards, including universal access to healthcare, education, and other public goods, leading to an expanded social foundation in the donut.
  • New Economic Models:
    • Such energy abundance could challenge traditional economic models and give rise to new ways of value creation, distribution, and consumption, leading to more equitable and sustainable economic systems.
  • Ecological Restoration:
    • Excess energy can be employed in large-scale ecological restoration projects, actively reversing some of the damage done to the planet, from reforestation to ocean cleanup.

However, there are considerations:

  • Physical Limits:
    • Even if the energy is zero-carbon, there are still physical limits to consider, such as land use, resource extraction for technology, and potential waste from energy infrastructure.
  • Equity and Governance:
    • An abundance of energy could exacerbate inequality if not distributed equitably. Robust governance and frameworks would be necessary to ensure that the benefits of such energy abundance are shared widely.
  • Cultural and Social Adaptation:
    • Rapid technological and infrastructure changes fueled by energy abundance would require cultural and social adaptations, making it essential to consider the well-being and adaptability of communities.
  • Holistic Well-being:
    • As mentioned before, the end goal shouldn’t be growth for growth’s sake but holistic well-being. An enlarged donut should still maintain this perspective.

In essence, an “enlarged donut” resulting from significant energy growth can be envisioned, where the scale of human capabilities and infrastructure grows but remains within a sustainable and equitable framework. The key is to ensure that this growth enhances the well-being of all without compromising the planet’s ecological integrity.


I mean, that’s pretty good, right? It turns out GPT stands for “Green Plenty Technologies”?

Of course all the caveats around GenAI apply – including the confirmation bias that is baked in to such a dialog.

But!

It’s interesting to me as a starting point for some good old-fashioned human thinking around this stuff. I’m curious if the various bodies that have taken up the mantle of Donut Economics are looking at “Radically Expanded Donuts”… R.E.D. = Green???

One thing that I caught from the dialog was the idea I think I first encountered from Deb Chachra’s newsletter – that we are encouraged to think about energy efficiency over material efficiency, when in fact energy is practically infinite in supply and matter is not.

We find it very hard to think in these terms – if you’re my age, we’ve been encouraged to turn off lights, turn down the heating since our childhoods… 

Posters from Russell Davies’ collection

And it’s not that energy efficiency is a bad thing, far from it – pursuing technologies of energy efficiency in a Type-1 world will just extend the headroom of the donut – but much of it comes from a place of considering energy as something produced by the combustion of finite matter. 

We should add to that the externalities of energy use, particularly heat – and moving to a NMN world of full electrification would not remove that exhaust heat production but would hugely mitigate against it. 

I’ll also hope that acts as a bulwark against wasteful crypto bullshit… Abhorring waste and scams are not the same as imagining beyond energy penury.

Our “imaginaries” are constrained by what we imagine the planetary boundaries are – which I think partly leads to my dissatisfaction with degrowth narratives – and so, perhaps, designers can step in to help construct new ones.

I’m not sure what they might be.

I have thoughts of course (see later *)

Genres such as Solarpunk are not yet mainstream – even within the discourse of those familiar with or exploring how to enact Donut Economics (please correct me if I’m wrong here!!!). 

But –  I’m also not sure it’s for me to create those imaginaries.

Which leads me nicely to the brief I put this spring of 2024 to the students at Goldsmiths Design.

Part 3: Can you tell me how to get, how to get to Kardashev Street?

I was very pleased to be asked by Goldsmiths Design to help set an “industry brief” for the second year students in their spring term.

When I got together with the team there at the end of 2023, this obsession with the “Radically Expanded Donut” was in full flight and so it was somewhat unloaded on them at an evening at The New Cross House.

The conversation led from the notion of a Kardashev Type-1 planet, to what it would mean anchored in place and routine of daily life.

We started to flesh that out.

What would a Kardashev Type-1 Street be like to live in?

To move into? To move out of? To live in the next street along, that had not yet realised it’s Type-1 potential for whatever reason?

How do you start that process, or encourage others to do so?

What interconnections, relationships and tensions might arise?

What institutions (financial or otherwise) and services would need to be invited and sustained to support it? What might be the equivalent of the mutual institutions born out of the Industrial Revolution for an equally revolutionary equitable NMN transition?

How does it connect to the transition design thinking pursued by Cameron Tonkinwise et al. The “Planetary Civics” of Indy Johar et al?

And of course – Kate Raworth’s “Donut Economics” itself.

My mind went to the imagery of Clifford Harper in 1974’s Radical Technology – and the writing decades later of Adam Greenfield in his book “Radical technologies” and also his thoughts on the “convivial stack”.

How might the NMN technologies be procured, shared and maintained by a community in place – say the terraced houses typical in the UK?

My mind went to the story of the street in Walthamstow, London trying to create it’s own shared solar energy infrastructure– and the barriers to that created by the commercial/regulatory status quo.

In Oslo back in May 2023, we’d been made familiar with the custom of “dugnad“, where the occupants of a apartment block work together to maintain their common infrastructure and spaces. 

What rituals and expectations might be born on a Kardashev Type-1 street. How would they be transmitted both across communities, cultures and generations?

The students wrestled with the brief admirably – and I’ll post some of the outcomes here soon if I can.

* Part 4 / KardaCoda or Willfully-generative human with no undo vs GenAI

Finally – when asking ChatGPT about all this back in the autumn of 2023, it declined to create a diagram of the Radically Expanded Donut for me. 

What it did (kinda) produce was a brief:

I’m sorry, I cannot create drawings directly. However, I can describe how to visualize or design such a diagram based on the concept:

  1. Inner Circle – Social Foundation:
  • This remains as the core of the donut, representing essential human needs.
  • You might want to expand this circle to show a broader range of social amenities, reflecting the increased capabilities of a civilization with massive energy resources. This could include advanced education, universal healthcare, enhanced connectivity, etc.
  1. Outer Circle – Ecological Ceiling:
  • This circle might be farther out than in the traditional donut, reflecting the greater capabilities and infrastructure of an advanced civilization.
  • Despite the enlargement, it would still emphasize sustainability and the need to avoid overshooting ecological limits. This means not surpassing boundaries like land use change, freshwater use, or other ecological parameters.
  1. Space Between The Circles – The Safe and Just Space:
  • This area, which represents the space in which humanity can thrive sustainably, would be considerably broader.
  • You can divide this space into segments, each representing different sectors fueled by the energy abundance: technological advancements, space exploration, global infrastructure, etc.
  1. Additional Elements:
  • Consider adding visuals that represent the vast energy sources (solar arrays, fusion reactors, etc.) around the donut.
  • Depict global collaboration symbols, equity symbols, and other elements that emphasize the importance of shared benefits and governance.

To create this diagram, you could use graphic design software like Adobe Illustrator, Canva, or even simpler tools like PowerPoint. Once you have a clear mental image or sketch, you can work on refining it digitally. If you’re not comfortable creating it yourself, you might want to share the concept with a graphic designer who can bring it to life.

This set me off on the quixotic path of being the slow human illustrator of the GenAI’s “imagination”. 

I started sketching. I ordered and awaited the delivery of art materials – including the first airbrush and frisk film I’d possessed since the early 1990s.

I waited for coats of ink and acrylic to dry.

I messed things up and tried to fix them/flip them into analog, material ‘beautiful oopses’ in the absence of the undo function. 

It took time.

I got ink under my fingernails.

I had fun.

I didn’t annotate with the things I thought I might.

A technoptimist litany – fusion, air mining, atmospheric carbon removal, desalination, detoxicifcation, open source spime-like fabrication of tools and shelter, universal healthcare, universal basic income, another green food revolution via precision fermentation, soil renewal etc. 

Instead, more of an obscure mandala to magic forth the Kardashev Type 1 future. 

Instead, Kirby dots, glow-in-the dark and gold metallic acrylic detailing – and two scrawled ink numbers: 104 for the energy potential of the Radically Expanded Donut – and 107 for the 10 Billion people it would hopefully support within the equitable, convivial zone it describes.

I also kind-of ended up making a cosmic goatse, but hey.

Acknowledgments

I’m grateful for the conversations I’ve had with Carolyn and Arjun – the tutors and of course Matt Ward for inviting me in.

This post has also been greatly influenced by conversations with Adam Greenfield, Deb Chachra, Dan Hill, Celia Romaniuk and of course, Matt Webb.

The talk and workshop I was invited to give last year by Mosse Sjaastad of AHO, Fredrik Matheson and IxDA Oslo were also a big starting point.

Sketchnotes from The World Around/Future Observatory Observatory event, March 16, 2024

Notes from Indy Johar Talk
Notes from Henk Ovink talk
Notes from Feifei Zhou and Natsai Audrey Chieza talks
Notes from Adrian Lahoud… and a beginning (and end) of notes for Julia King…
Julia King
Indy Johar
Indy Johar
Henk Ovink
Justin McGuirk & Beatrice Galilee

A thought provoking and sometimes heartbreaking event. My note taking trailed off through the event, not a reflection on the presentations other than my being engrossed in them!

More on the event here

Station Identification

“We now use about eighty percent of the net primary product of land-based photosynthesis,” he said. “One hundred percent is probably impossible to reach, and our long range carrying capacity has been estimated to be thirty percent, so we are massively overshot, as they say.

We have been liquidating our natural capital as if it were disposable income, and are nearing depletion of certain capital stocks, like oil, wood, soil, metals, fresh water, fish, and animals. This makes continued economic expansion difficult.”

“Difficult!” Art wrote. “Continued?”

“We have to continue,” Fort said, with a piercing glance at Art, who unobtrusively sheltered his lectern with his arm.

“Continuous expansion is a fundamental tenet of economics. Therefore one of the fundamentals of the universe itself. Because everything is economics. Physics is cosmic economics, biology is cellular economics, the humanities are social economics, psychology is mental economics, and so on.”

His listeners nodded unhappily.

“So everything is expanding. But it can’t happen in contradiction to the law of conservation of matter-energy. No matter how efficient your throughput is, you can’t get an output larger than the input.”

“…manmade capital and natural capital are not substitutable. This is obvious, but since most economists still say they are substitutable, it has to be insisted on. Put simply, you can’t substitute more sawmills for fewer forests. If you’re building a house you can juggle the number of power saws and carpenters, which means they’re substitutable, but you can’t build it with half the amount of lumber, no matter how many saws or carpenters you have. Try it and you have a house of air. And that’s where we live now.”

No matter how efficient capital is, it can’t make something out of nothing.” “New energy sources…” Max suggested. “But we can’t make soil out of electricity. Fusion power and self-replicating machinery have given us enormous amounts of power, but we have to have basic stocks to apply that power to. And that’s where we run into a limit for which there are no substitutions possible.”

Green Mars, Kim Stanley Robinson

Playing with climate, casually

I read this story on Canary Media with interest – “Solarpunk is going mainstream. This couple’s $1M Kickstarter proves it. Canary chats with the co-creators of the forthcoming video game Loftia, set in a renewables-powered utopia that celebrates community and climate optimism.”

I think it’s a little bit of a stretch to say that Solarpunk is going mainstream – but “cosycore” meets Animal Crossing x Ghibli aesthetic seems to be attractive. I’ve talked about the ‘protopia’ I call the “Chobani Cinematic Universe” before, and it seems in that vein.

At the end of the article it mentions an existing game, Terra Nil, which is available on Netflix and steam.

I downloaded it and started playing, with headphones in as recommended by the authors.

Terra Nil Game Trailer on YT

Smash cut to… oh, 3 hours later? It had gone midnight and I hadn’t noticed at all.

It’s game mechanics will be fairly familiar to casual gamers – you are tasked with transforming a map by introducing various types of resource in turn, with constraints on your budget to do so. The choices you make encourage different biomes / ecosystems to emerge and flourish. So far so fun.

But I think the sound design is something else.

It is immensely calming. Gentle repetition and seeming evolution in the soundtrack puts one to mind of many ambient favourites of the past, and the eno-esque ‘music as furniture’ feel contributes to your occupation / immersion in making “another green world”.

Ahem.

Anyway.

This put me to thinking about the use of ‘generative music as macroscope’, i.e. using generated soundscapes to create impressionistic understanding of large scale ecologies or systems that you’re embedded in.

Could that connect you more profoundly – or just pleasurably to the energy systems around you?

Or go further to ‘sonify’ natural systems that you’re entangled with (a nod here to Superflux’s recent work giving voice to rivers and watersheds via GenAI…)

Matt Brown made the Carbon Weather Forecast last year and in the past has made some lovely lyrical maps of the shipping forecast, as well as beautiful music-oriented pieces – including Making Future Magic’s soundtrack while we were at BERG.

I imagine he could do something rather wonderful in this arena.

What’s Pokemon Go meets Bloom meets Project Sunroof?

Electrosheds workshop at AHO, May 2023

It was wonderful to be invited back to AHO after such a long time to give a talk (see separate post) and a workshop for the interaction design students.

I decided to try a “walkshop” following in the footsteps (ahem) of James Bridle, Adam Greenfield, Deb Chachra (and many others I’m sure) to investigate how the invisible networks of electricity in our everyday lives, and the environment around us.

I based it loosely on Kevin Kelly’s “Big Here” quiz – that aims to ask (tough) questions that locate you in the technical, logistical and natural ecologies we are embedded in.

If I’d thought of it i should have shown the first 30 minutes of the first episode of James Burke’s “Connections”too.

We started the day with a short talk from me (the slides of which are below) introducing the topic and how we’d examine it in the walkshop.

After that we went on a ‘local energy safari’ and then for a few hours the students prepared responses and communication pieces based on what they’d found. I’ll post some of those separately.

It was a beautiful spring day – which was perfect for a ‘walkshop’ – and the students were enthusiastic participants in what I think was a *partially* successful experiment.

I’ll write a bit about that in another post on their responses.

Huge thanks to Mosse for the invitation and all the AHO students for their energy and patience!

I’d love to try this again – or have others try it! Please do get in touch if you’d like to do it somewhere else in Europe, or better yet invite me to do it with you!

Update [September 28th 2023]: Before I did this I was sadly not aware of Jenny Odell’s fantastic 2013 project “Power Trip”, which explores this territory beautifully.

I found the project coincidentally while sending a friend Odell’s site, based on his discovery of some google maps derived artworks, which I’d associated for years with the artist.

Back at Google Creative Lab, we’d worked with her on creating giant murals on the sides of data centres – themselves places of infrastructural fascination and critique by many of the artists referenced in this workshop…


Electrosheds Intro talk

One of my favourite pieces by Kevin Kelly is this – the ‘watershed quiz’.

In this he asks a set of questions which locate you in your ‘Big Here’.

You start where you are, and begin to pull the thread out to larger and larger scales…

“You live in the big here. Wherever you live, your tiny spot is deeply intertwined within a larger place, imbedded fractal-like into a whole system called a watershed, which is itself integrated with other watersheds into a tightly interdependent biome. At the ultimate level, your home is a cell in an organism called a planet. All these levels interconnect. What do you know about the dynamics of this larger system around you? Most of us are ignorant of this matrix. But it is the biggest interactive game there is. Hacking it is both fun and vital.”

The Big Here Quiz, Kevin Kelly https://kk.org/cooltools/the-big-here-qu/
Questions from The Big Here Quiz, Kevin Kelly https://kk.org/cooltools/the-big-here-qu/
Tubes by Andrew Blum

Andrew’s book is a striking piece of “Big Here” writing – pulling on the thread of his squirrel-sabotaged internet cabling and ending up half way around the world watching divers swim ashore carrying backbone-fibre over their shoulders.

I want us to do something similar with our energy, leaving this room and following where our energy is coming from, and noting how others are embedded similarly.

We’re going to leave AHO and ‘pull on the thread of your electrons’, like Andrew Blum did with his connectivity bits…

• From the power you touch & use out to the distribution, then transmission

• Look for hints of new topologies, local production and new forms – what might be taking hold, hybrids, commercial, official, unofficial, municipal, local, improvised…

Then

• Create a journal / map / notes to record your impressions

• A piece of communication to yourself

• To others

Please remember!

It doesn’t have to be “correct” – think like an amateur naturalist… record observations, things you see and interpret.

Think about spotting phenomena: behaviour, difference and context from observation – not worrying if you have the correct names or specialist knowledge to understand the system in abstract.

This morning I tried pulling on the thread from the apartment I’m staying at…

Electrical touch points in the apartment block I stayed in Oslo.

I looked up the names I found on the various (old) bits of electrical infrastructure in the apartment. This gave me some threads to pull on.

To pull on those threads I consulted the wonderful Open Infrastructure Map.

The area around AHO on Open Infrastructure Map

Do you recognise this building?

Akersberget Substation, across the street from AHO

Yep – it’s right across the street from AHO. And it’s the first link in a big chain from this area out to where the electrons we’re using right now probably originate.

Let’s pull the thread!

Zooooooming out – we can see some next links in the chain

Zooming out from Grunerløkka on Open Infrastructure Map
Zooming out to see the electrical infrastructure of Central Oslo

Looking at this, we can make a decision to follow the thread through the Sogn Substation back to the generating sources.

Sogn Substation, Oslo
Zooming out to the area surrounding Oslo to view possible generation sources

Again, we can decide to follow the thread of our electrons to one of the nearest hydroelectric generators – Nore II around 180km away.

Nore II Hydroelectric station, ~180km NW of Oslo

We could drive there in about 3hrs – or take a very long but scenic cycle there in the extended Norwegian (summer) day…

I mean, it looks lovely there!

Nore II Power Station, image by Amit Rathore

So – just from your desktop you can explore pulling on your energy thread. But today, we’re going to go outside and walk around our area to see what we can find.

We’re going to explore the Grunerløkka area in groups

Preparing to leave for the walkshop

[We then left AHO in groups and explored the area in our “Local Energy Safari”]

We had lunch!

[After returning from the energy safari walkshop component, we attempted ‘design responses’ to what was found for about 90mins – this was in hindsight too short, but there were still some great outputs]

Now we’re going to make some designed responses to what we saw, recorded, found.

Again – these could be communications or mappings, or more generative/speculative responses. Here are some prompts from me, let’s see what we get!

Some prompts to get the students started

You might have spotted interesting new hybrids emerging – what could those lead to?

Think about new hybrid forms that are emerging as “energy on the street”

You could think about social structures that could emerge around adversity or abundance – for instance some of the energy-sharing practices that emerged around Occupy Sandy in NYC.

And for inspiration only, the work of Clifford Harper in 1970s on ‘radical technology’ reprogramming and using appropriate technology to share resources in a town

Clifford Harper, Radical Technology
Clifford Harper, Radical Technology

Again for inspiration – perhaps make a page from a future whole earth catalog documenting technology, practices, methods around your energy safari ideas.

The Whole Earth Catalog as a genre/format inspiration

The Cloud vs The Grid and Electrosheds workshop at AHO, Oslo, May 2023

It was wonderful to be invited back to AHO and Oslo in early May by my old friends and sometime colleagues there – and the opportunity to speak about past projects but also what I’m doing now at Lunar Energy.

My framing was around the two biggest human-built machines on this planet – the cloud and the grid.

The former is the (much-younger) result of emergent properties and software that has traversed boundaries of territory and nations, while the latter has been a mainly top-down, deliberate design which is very anchored to geography, regulation and legacy technology.

When you put them together you start to get some interesting new possibilities for our energy transition – e.g. virtual power plants as made possible by Lunar’s Gridshare platform.

The Cloud vs The Grid: talk for IxDA Oslo & AHO, May 2023

My talk was kindly hosted and supported by IxDA Oslo. Their extremely professional recording and transcription of the event was turned around in record time and can be found here.

Thanks to everyone who came, and your thoughtful questions and conversations afterwards. It was a lot of fun, and a delight to be back in Oslo after more than a decade.

The next day I hosted a workshop with Mosse at AHO for her students, which I entitled “Electrosheds”, after Kevin Kelly‘s “Big Here Quiz” that aims to locate you at the heart of their watersheds and local ecologies. I’ll talk about that in a separate post.

“Smaller, cuter, weirder, fluttery”: Filtered for the #Breezepunk Future

I’m stealing Matt Webb’s “filtered for” format here – for a bunch of more or less loosely connected items that I want to post, associate and log as much for myself as to share.

And – I’ll admit – to remove the friction from posting something without having a strong thread or thesis to connect them.

I’ve pre-ordered “No miracles needed” by Mark Jacobson – which I’m looking forward to reading in February. Found out about it through this Guardian post a week or so ago.

The good news below from Simon Evans seems to support Prof Jacobson’s hypothesis…

Breezepunk has been knocking around in my head since Tobias mentioned it on this podcast…

Here’s the transcript of the video (transcribed by machine, of course) of Tobias describing the invention by scientists/engineers at Nanyang Polytechnic in Singapore – of a very small scale, low power way of harnessing wind energy:

“I found this sort of approach really interesting but mostly I like the small scale of it yes I like the fact that it’s you know it’s something that you could imagine just proliferating as a standard component that’s attached to sort of Street Furniture or things around the house or whatever it is you might put them on your windowsill because they’re quite small and they just generate like enough power to make a sensor work or a light or something and yeah it’s this this alternative future to the big powerful set piece green Energy Future that’s obviously being pushed and should continue to be pushed because that’s competing against the big Power and the fossil fuel future but I like this idea of like the smaller cuter weirder fluttery imagine it’s quite fluttery yeah so yeah so this is this is Breeze Punk everybody…”

I like the idea of it being a standard component – a lego. A breezeblock?

Breezepunk breezeblock?

My sketching went from something initially much more like a bug hotel or one of those bricks that bees are meant to nest in, there’s something like a fractal Unite D’Habitation happening in the final sketch.

I also like #Breezepunk a lot – very Chobani Cinematic Universe.

I would like it to become… a thing. I suppose that’s why I’m writing this.

Used to be how you made things become things.

It’s probably not how you do it now, you need a much larger coordinated cultural footprint across various short-form streaming formats to make a dent in the embedding space of the LLMs.

Mind you, that’s not the same as making it ‘real’ or even ‘realish’ now is it.

A bit vogue-ish perhaps, to prove a point I asked ChatGPT what it knew about Breezepunk.

It took a while, but… it tried to turn into the altogether less satisfying “windpunk”

I like making the cursor blink on ChatGPT.

The longer the better. I think it means you’re onto something.

Or maybe that’s just my Bartle-type showing again.

The production design of the recent adaptation of William Gibson’s The Peripheral seemed “fluttery” – particularly in it’s depiction of the post-jackpot London timeline.

Or perhaps the aesthetic is much more one of ‘filigree‘.

There’s heaviness and lightness being expressed as power by the various factions in their architecture, fashion, gadgets.

It’s an overt expression of that power being wielded via nanotechnology – assemblers, disassemblers constructing and deconstructing huge edifices at will.

From Vincenzo Natali’s concept art for The Peripheral series

Solid melting into air.

Into the breeze.

Punk.