General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNew twist on corporate towns. Quayside Toronto, built by Google.
Google is now expanding its data driven operation into building a part of a city based on how its executives think a city should be designed and managed.
The part that makes me a bit queasy is that Google has so far succeeded by using people as its product. People arent its customers so much as they are providers of data, which is extensively gathered, packaged then sold to other companies. This is very different than the civic relationship of people with their government. How does this translate to real people who are living or working in or even just passing through a physical place?
Note: I have been watching the new season of Black Mirror so my views on this endeavor is tinged by thoughts of how technology employed by private companies to benefit them can sometimes run amok. I think there is a solid role for embracing new technology in development and in improving lives and systems. I m just skeptical that this is the way to proceed. It has too many echoes of the old company town to it, with the new dimension of everything you do being tracked and analyzed.
First, heres a statement from Eric Schmidt on Alphabet/Google/Sidewalk Labs being selected for this venture:
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/with-toronto-alphabet-looks-to-revolutionize-city-building/article36634779/
And here Is some info from a NYT article about it:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/29/world/canada/google-toronto-city-future.html
But extending the surveillance powers of one of the worlds largest technology companies from the virtual world to the real one raises privacy concerns for many residents. Others caution that, when it comes to cities, data-driven decision-making can be misguided and undemocratic.
~~~
Nothing is too prosaic to analyze: Toilets and sinks will report their water use; the garbage robots will report on trash collection. Residents and workers in the area will rely on Sidewalk-developed software to gain access to public services; the data gathered from everything will influence long-term planning and development.
~~~
While surveillance cameras and other sensors are fixtures in many cities, Pamela Robinson, an associate professor at the school of urban planning at Ryerson University in Toronto, said Quaysides data would differ in its extent and its collection method by a private company rather than by government agencies. Plans for who will own that data and who will be able to access it have not been announced.
chowder66
(9,086 posts)best and how they can "run" things but what they don't ever count on is that people get fired or get pissed off, or have issues that drive bad decisions. Influencers can change minds and misdeeds can begin to flourish. OR people don't see the big picture of someone who has ill intent. Why is it that regulations were even ever enacted? Because there are greedy, shitty people everywhere.
Women will most likely be the first to get hurt or abused by this experiment. There is going to be "that guy" who's a fucking peeping tom or something to that effect.
Crooks are everywhere especially in corporations anymore.
suffragette
(12,232 posts)practices dont translate to civic responsibility and good and spefically went after impact of actions McGavick was portraying as showing he was a good leader.
Most effective counter of the CEOs are good at the job so would be good political leaders I have seen.
Wish I could find the tv ad, but here is a description of part of it:
http://www.seattlepi.com/business/article/Former-Safeco-chief-exec-to-head-Bermuda-insurer-1267451.php
You cant just lay off or restructure out citizens the way so many companies discard employees. You cant fire a child for misbehaving in their home or in public places.
chowder66
(9,086 posts)Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)this should prove no different.