Adam Greenfield at PicNic 2007
Adam Greenfield’s talk at Pic Nic was entitled “The City is Here for You to Use: Urban Form and Experience in the Age of Ambient Informatics. His presentation is basically about the implications of ubiquitous computing on the form and experience of the city.
After “Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing” Adam is now zooming on a more specific aspect of ubicomp: its influence on the urban environment. Inspired by Jane Jacobs, Christopher Alexander or Bernard Rurdofsky, he drawn our attention to their “generosity” about the life on the street and the recent changes exemplified by this quote from Alexander: “For centuries, the street provided city dwellers with usable public space right outside their houses. Now, in a number of subtle ways, the modern city has made streets which are for “going through,” not for “staying in.“. Through various examples, Adam showed how “we killed the street” due to cars, traffic, overplanning, the “repeating module of doom” (succession of franchises) leading to what Augé calls “non-places” and Rem Koolhas refers to as “junkspace”. The city then becomes “stealthy, slippery, crusty, prickly and jittery” through defensible space elements such as the following one I spotted in Amsterdam last week:
This situation leads to various forms of “withdrawal syndromes”: ipod usage, mobile phone/blackberry digging… and the city is less “a negotiation machine between humans“. In sum, “we lost something” and instead of lamenting (”nostalgia is for suckers”), Adam highlights the challenge: to rediscover the city of Jacobs, Rudofsky and Alexander in a way that is organic to our own age. This means that ubiquitous computing can be a candidate for that matter.
He then presented how ubiquitous computing (everyware) is already affecting cities. Information processing, sensors start showing up in new places at different scale. At the body level, he cited the Nike+ipod example, at the urban level, some dynamic signs allow people to be aware of bus schedule or use contact-cards, leading to more agency in infrastructures. This enable new model of interaction and “information processing dissolving in behavior“. The upside of this might be that people can get information about cities and their pattern of use, visualized in new ways (Stamen Design’s cabspotting, crime and real estate mapping, map of cities with WiFi hotspot)… and that information can be made available locally on demand in a way that people can act upon. Would ubicomp turn cities in more efficient and sustainable places? Possibly this is meant to allow better choices and entirely new behavior might emerge, will we get a participatory urbanism? a “genuine read/write urbanism” as he mentioned?
How will it affect urban forms? Adam showed some instances of how information as output at the building envelope: living glass modified by CO2 or the Blur Building by Diller-Scofidio (from swiss expo02). Ambient information becomes addressable, scriptable and/or query-able objects such as in the Chaos Computer Club Blinkenlights project.

(Picture courtesy of Diller-Scofidio)
One of the downside he presented concerned how this can lead to new inscriptions of class. He showed a DVD rental booth in NYC that allows cash to rent DVD but needs a credit card to access it. Another problem concerns the over-legibility of things: when there is too much explicitness and not enough ambiguity on plausible deniability, when everything is made public, what happens? maybe we do not want all our friends to know where we are, of course there are special case but not all the time.


October 4th, 2007 at 12:34 am
I think the idea of purposefully blurring information (especially relating to people) really interesting. Now that it’s possible to retrieve and broadcast information about people publicly, it seems like the focus becomes on making it more appropriate.
One example is a project from researchers at Motorola (http://web.mit.edu/bentley/www/papers/paper724-bentley.pdf) where they built a prototype that would broadcast the amount of time they are in motion vs static (based on the changes in cell towers). The information can be public, but will only have meaning to those that are close to that person and can fill in the blanks.
That decision of how much information to show and to whom, in an age where the resolution of information is getting higher and higher definitely seems like rich ground for exploration.
October 4th, 2007 at 3:24 am
Thank you for posting this great summary of Adam’s argument.
October 4th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
[…] http://liftlab.com/think/nova/2007/10/03/adam-greenfield-at-picnic-2007/ […]
October 31st, 2007 at 11:14 am
[…] which reminds me of Adam Greenfield statement that “nostalgia is for suckers” in his talk at PicNic 2007 (where he expressed that lamenting about the past of cities is not an answer). - The phenomenology […]
November 5th, 2007 at 10:43 am
Vers la ville personnelle…
Andy Hudson-Smith (blog), chercheur au Centre pour l’analyse spatiale avancée vient de publier un article intitulé “le numérique urbain, la ville visuelle” (”Digital Urban, the Visual City” .pdf), dans lequel il décrit…
February 13th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
[…] See also Nicolas’ Picnic notes. […]
September 5th, 2008 at 8:53 am
[…] the Big Now… and other tales of the networked city” was the follow-up of his “The City is Here for You to Use“. Adam’s approach here was “not technical talk but affective”, about what […]
December 30th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
[…] if we get it right, light urbanism will be all the rage. Something along the lines of this or this or this. There are lots and lots of dangers to such scenarios, but a burst of new, heavy but green […]