[P2P-F] Spimed Nomad Aggregators

[Dante-Gabryell Monson]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, May 2, 2013 at 1:17 AM
Subject: Re: Spimed Nomad Aggregators
To: Eric Hunting <erichunting at gmail.com>
Cc: J


I love the way you describe it Eric ! :)

adding it to http://sharewiki.org/en/Nomad_Tribe

I wish to envision together some of the next steps to experiment with such
approaches.

I wish to ask :

in addition to existing festivals ( such as Burning Man ) , can we imagine
courses that enable such approach ?

Collaboration with http://www.gaiauniversity.org/ ?
And working with some of the people in our networks which may have some
academic credentials and interest in exploring such appropriate technology
approaches ?

Courses which themselves become festivals ? With the potential to be
financed not only through fees for courses ( which may be reduced depending
on the amount of time spent and involvement in the projects ),
but also by redevelopment support - such as re-building some abandoned
village with historical and architectural value , or intervening in
re-development contexts - also see :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles_of_Intelligent_Urbanism

To enable such step by step experimentation, an emergent approach of *creation
and assembling of modules through the learning process, *using appropriate
technologies for a temporary settlement, in a "festivalist" approach.

http://p2pfoundation.net/Festivalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appropriate_technology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Illich#Tools_for_Conviviality

Providing open source infrastructure solutions ( "male" energy - such as
open source ecology ), in support - and supported by "female" energy / *
nurturing* energy.

I see synergies between *engineering / permaculture / healing / artistic
learning environments *...  Women and men.

I can imagine at first such experimentation nearby small university towns
with available land in their surroundings and good infrastructure.

I sense that it can be "Turquoise" meme, with entrance for nomad people in
yellow meme, while interfacing with existing communities in Green memes,

and capacity for yellow and turquoise ( and coral, ... )  to bring in
solutions at the service of any other value systems, yet in support of a
holistic regeneration.

http://www.freenew.net/upload/picon/47/graves-spiral-dynamics-mba-30.gif

http://www.spiraldynamics-integral.nl/uploads/images/headers/Value_systems.jpg

For example, spreading systemic food production solutions / permaculture,
enabling transfer of practices and technology enabling, for example, large
scale land regeneration - such as http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBLZmwlPa8A
,

local manufacturing, logistics, resource allocation information systems,
re-population of abandoned villages and re-dynamization of remote regional
economics, etc

The production and logistics regarding the spimes, and also self
constructible / programmed spimes ( see :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gMCZFHv9v8 ) and other solution components
for such intentional nomadic approach  , can be facilitated by distributed
semantic information systems - one prototype for such tool being for
example http://www.netention.org/





On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 11:41 PM, Eric Hunting <erichunting at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I'd like to explore this idea of a nomadic/festivalist approach a bit
> further and try visualizing such a project in terms of structures and
> activity. In another thread you note the idea of a Spimed Nomad Aggregator.
> Let me know how close to the mark I am, but I interpret that idea as being
> a kind of communal construct based on a nomadic approach to architecture
> that serves as a socialization, information, and production nexus for a
> nomadic community implementing some kind of semantic web platform as--among
> other uses--the basis of a spime characterizing its physical construction
> and systems. I would tend to visualize this as a kind of pop-up eco-village
> built as an emergent, modular, construct reconfiguring to different local
> situations and fluctuating population, building knowledge through the spime
> it creates about its own systems and structures. It's sort of like a
> traveling exposition of neo-nomadic/mobile-Maker/deployable eco-tech
> technology and culture. It serves not only as a physical nexus of
> activity--a festival--but a 'broadcaster', physically propagating itself
> through its open spime and the more-or-less independent production of its
> vernacular architecture and systems inspired/stimulated elsewhere by its
> presence and media output. It's almost a sort of Internet-viral urbanism.
>
> The chief advantages--in theory--of a project based on this idea, compared
> to a more permanent settlement, are that it's potentially cheaper up-front
> since it needs no permanent real estate, it's more suited to distributed
> support/production, it can potentially repurpose found structures, and by
> moving around it can reach more people. But it also has one disadvantage in
> that it's a much tougher challenge to achieve any sort of subsistence
> capability. Mobile systems of production are limited to smaller scales. A
> lot of things that could really achieve some functional production in a
> more permanent setting may be limited to just demonstrations. But maybe
> that's OK in the context of exposition. You're reaching many more people
> than you could with something out in the countryside
>
> There would seem to be a lot of current relevance for this concept. We are
> entering an age where impacts of Global Warming, the general failure of
> economics, and runaway austerity psychosis are putting billions of people
> out of their homes, on the move, and into jeopardy. And the
> market/state/militarist solutions to this have typically been institutional
> violence, denigration, and disenfranchisement. New Nomadism represents a
> kind of reaction to, protest of, and spotlight on, that. A functional
> nomadic _community_ offers the prospect of not only independent
> infrastructures of life-support with the possibility of dignified
> standards-of-living but, perhaps more importantly, social infrastructures
> for political and economic empowerment.
>
> So far, though, explorations of new nomadic architecture have not produced
> functional contemporary vernaculars. Systems people can pick-up and go with
> relying on their own production or many common sources. The closest we've
> come to this is cargotecture--which, even with new flat-pack container
> modules, remains far too bulky to really be nomadic. Current design is
> mostly focused on the solitary individual or household rather than
> communities. Many variations on the theme of a Swiss Army Knife of shelter.
> It's in contexts of camping, novelty design-art, disaster relief, and very
> thoughtful and clever solutions for the homeless that never get out of a
> student designer's portfolio to actually reach them because there's no
> market to drive production and no social production as an alternative. This
> isn't to say there hasn't been a lot of really nice, useful and clever
> design in this area but if its just about one-off microshelters and
> solitary self-sufficiency it may be missing the point.
>
> As beautiful as they are, the tipi, lavvu, and yurt are artifacts of
> specific cultures and environments. Situations different from the
> contemporary, predominately urban, situation even in the developing world.
> I think we need to look beyond the Swiss Army Knife of shelter to nomadic
> _habitats_. Urban constructs with collective infrastructures and--more
> importantly--collective social/political power.
>
> So what does all that mean in terms of architecture? My first thought here
> was to imagine a very high-tech pop-up eco-village based on a sophisticated
> deployable superstructure. But then I realized there's another issue with
> this. Before we can answer this question, we need to have some clearer idea
> of the contemporary nomadic situation--it's context of location,
> environment, use, and mobility. We can seek a 'total' solution that
> physically suits a lot of situations--which was my first thought--but I
> came to realize that quickly gets very sophisticated in terms of
> fabrication and physically bulky, which challenges mobility. We start
> talking about tool-less quick-assembled multi-storey modular building
> systems mainstream industry has yet to get their act together with.
>
> I think we need to first ask, where does this Maker-Nomad we are imagining
> live (or should that be phrased, where _can_ he live) and how does he get
> around? Tipis, lavvus, and yurts were designed by cultures that lived in
> the open--on plains/tundra--and moved cargo around primarily by sledges and
> wagons with the aid of animals. If the contemporary nomad is predominately
> living in an urban environment, he's getting around and using his
> surrounding environment very differently. Where and how does he 'make camp'?
>
> Urban Alchemy:
>
> I've long had this fantasy about a Maker community that takes over an
> abandoned suburban corporate campus--a relic of a recently-collapsed
> economy--and repurposes its neglected low-rise office buildings into a
> high-tech eco-village. They tear out the asphalt to make farms, parks, and
> Living Machines, strip down and clean up the concrete and steel skeletons,
> give them new skins of architectural membranes, living walls, algaeculture
> frames, and solar walls supported with spaceframes, and then retrofit their
> interiors for tribal cohabitation. Turn them into new Hakka Houses. It
> might look something like this;
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmhdezhdez/sets/72157624731049557/
>
> I even considered developing an outquisition-theme comic book from this,
> though science fiction is surprisingly rare in comics, and 'hard' SF
> virtually non-existant. I never seem to to find artists who can get beyond
> superheroes, medieval fantasy, and porn. The theme of MacGyver-esque young
> people re-inventing the future the previous generation turned its back on
> and fixing the world with new green technology as the Industrial Age
> collapses is a bit beyond their ken...
>
> Be that as it may, if we are visualizing the contemporary nomad as
> something like this--as a sophisticated urban nomad operating predominately
> in an urban environment, getting around mostly by street travel and the
> urban transit infrastructure, and repurposing its existing architecture by
> quick retrofit--then we have defined a context that may offer us the
> easiest and lowest cost project scenario; an indoor eco-village.
>
> The indoor eco-village would be based on repurposing buildings much like
> those of the abandoned office park I described using portable 'pod
> furnitecture' and 'pod systems'. Deployable elements that you either easily
> take apart and pack-up and/or can move around on dollies, casters, and
> air-bearings. We're assuming that we're in an environment where you can
> move stuff around by hand cart and small light vehicle on relatively smooth
> streets and roads, have access to freight elevators to move through
> buildings, and where there is not a necessity for perfectly weatherproof
> structures because we're deploying mostly indoors--using existing
> structures or maybe deployable large area structures as 'skybreaks'. We're
> talking about a habitat sort of like this on a larger scale with more
> diversity of elements;
>
>
> http://www.theworkhome.com/media/images/galleries/ban-naked-house-800-web.jpg
>
> Setup in spaces like this;
>
>
> http://blog.anti-limited.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/pano_rw_l2_1500px.jpg
>
> http://www.discovery-place.co.uk/library/images/789.jpg
>
> http://guessbook.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/img_8145.jpeg
>
> http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5192/5858674582_d3cd64c0a2_z.jpg
>
> http://nursing.johnshopkins.edu/sebin/h/o/parking_garage_empty.jpg
>
>
> http://www.dowkimbrell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/miami-parking-garage.jpg
>
> Or under deployable skybreaks like this;
>
> http://s3-media1.ak.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/MG2RgygjIH1yMLkq_q6yCA/l.jpg
>
> http://us.freedomes.com/uploads/media_items/lech-wybrzeze11.900.600.1.s.jpg
>
> http://www.tensilesystems.com/images/slides/banner17.jpg
>
> http://www.e-architect.co.uk/germany/treehugger_pavilion.htm
>
> So what is 'pod furnitecture'? I invented the term 'furnitecture' to
> describe indoor structures which bridge the line between furniture and
> architecture by virtue of a more volumetric use of space or by employing
> independent enclosure.  Pod furnitecture refers more specifically to
> designs that are more enclosure-oriented, more self-contained in design,
> more 'appliance-like', and more inclined to be moved around as whole units.
>
> Ken Isaacs' legendary Living Structures are furnitecture;
>
> http://www.we-find-wildness.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/KEN-ISAACS-8.jpg
>
>
> http://www.habiter-autrement.org/08.minimaliste/im-08/urbannomadics-livingstructures1.jpg
>
> http://radio-weblogs.com/0119080/images/Gallery/livingcube1.jpg
>
> Things like Roger and Martyn Dean's Retreat Pod, Andrea Zittel's Wagon
> Stations, or the many forms of 'sleeping pods' derived from the Japanese
> Capsule Hotel unit are pod furnitecture.
>
> http://www.enthea.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/retreatpod01.jpg
>
> http://www.meganwilson.com/subtexts/ccpod1.jpg
>
>
> http://deepspacearts.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/andreaanddavid_photobyd-dodge_0577.jpeg
>
> http://www.designboom.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/sleepbox_01.jpg
>
>
> http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/wp-content/uploads//2012/04/Interxionjpg.jpg
>
>
> http://thedesigncritic.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/obsideon-airport-sleeping-concept5.jpg
>
> http://tommytoy.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f3a4072c970b0147e0ae19d2970b-550wi
>
> These things relate to the concept of 'pod living' that was often explored
> by designers in the 1960s, based on the notion of reducing the functional
> elements of homes to a set of appliance-like objects that could be freely
> repositioned in the living space. (though their origins actually go back to
> ancient times and the independently enclosed beds common to many cultures)
> It failed to catch on because, in practice, conventional urban apartment
> space is very specialized and permanently compartmentalized, didn't
> accommodate open plan living until the 'lofting' trend came along, and
> couldn't well accommodate the use of 'appliances' the size of a small car…
> But in the large-span space its very convenient. I'm very fond of the
> concept myself because it very well suits the use of pavilion
> housing--housing based on the use of physically simple free-standing
> independent roof structures creating freely-reconfigured open-plan
> environments. This can greatly economize on the cost of housing by
> radically reducing interior finishing costs, which represent most of the
> costs in a home, while allowing for different low-toxic materials. I'm
> rather obsessed with the notion of housing that's 'PC-like'.
>
> Moving In:
>
> So how would we implement this indoor eco-village? What would it be like?
> Let's assume that we have at-hand a stripped unused urban structure as I've
> imagined. Pretty much a bare concrete skeleton of several floors in height.
> There may be intact window-walls or maybe the first thing our nomads need
> to do is setup a new 'skin' for the building.
>
> Our imagined nomads have made a collection of deployable pods and other
> hardware that provide shelter and a mobile utilities infrastructure. They
> would have personal cabin pods--mostly for sleeping and storing personal
> goods--possibly some office pods for those who feel a need for a more quiet
> and isolated workspace the help concentration, and a number of systems and
> service pods. Telescoping T-slot jack-posts that compress between floor and
> ceiling would support some assembled pods and also serve for partitions,
> screens, light shelves, lamps, and many other items. QuaDror type supports
> ( http://www.quadror.com/ ) might also find many uses among pod and other
> deployable elements. All-in-one bathroom pods would use incinerating
> toilets. (the most convenient, compact, and low-impact means to handle that
> with portable hardware, but requiring venting and a lot of power or the use
> of canister fuel) Collapsable membrane water tanks reinforced by folding
> wire cages would be placed on plastic pallets to create mobile water
> storage where there is no adequate link to urban water supplies. These
> would also be used with some hydroponics systems for greywater recycling.
> There are modular kitchen pods. Various storage pods. Open/deployable or
> enclosed lounge pods with entertainment systems. There would be a power
> center pod that hosts batteries and controllers for deployable solar and
> wind systems and maybe a companion self-contained fuel cell or microturbine
> pod that runs on bio-ethenol. This is the same fuel that is now used for
> ventless low-heat indoor fireplaces and perhaps our nomads might even have
> such a symbolic 'hearth' in a mobile pod. There's a communications and data
> center pod that has server racks and provides a WiFi node while linking to
> existing telecom networks or using a WiFi/WiMax link on the roof. And, of
> course, there are various production workstation pods that fill out the
> tools and facilities of a community workshop/fab lab. With this pod concept
> we can make many of the larger tools of independent production more
> self-contained and mobile. Flat bed cutters and milling machines of various
> sorts on their own wheels. 3D printers on wheels up to 3m cubed.
>
> Rooftop area would be a precious commodity with competition for use
> between solar/wind power, rainwater catchment, solar distillation, and
> gardening. So a more efficient way to go would be to employ vertical
> farming on lower building levels. Hanging Living Wall felt panels and
> vertical hydroponics systems like ZipGrow would be easy to install along
> the south-facing edges of the structure and still allow ambient light in.
>
>
> http://www.aquaponiclynx.com/WordPress/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Planted-towers-in-evening-Medium.jpg
>
> Such systems are not only much easier to deploy than typical hydroponics,
> they would allow for the transport of hydroponics systems without removal
> of plants and the carrying of plants to market in their own means of
> attractive display.
>
> In addition to quickly deployable solar panels--possibly using roll-up
> systems based on flexcell tarps (
> http://buildaroo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/solar-tent-e1286834244609.jpg)--and deployable wind turbines (
> https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/cU9AjwGVuXKSVCnYN2xOQ6XIzg5hbg-p_jvw622pw-7xfYlgTLgpOfRuApO8Dby-rOhqE57-7QTSe5hzoxElZuQeAQZ4y-Qpm-bwPeqTFv5D5SzNCUY), the nomads may employ modular fiber optic heliostat arrays;
>
>
> http://archrecord.construction.com/tech/techbriefs/images/0705dignews5_lg.jpg
>
>
> http://media.caspianpublishing.co.uk/image/c218030aa008d72a7829ca3dcc43b710.jpg
>
>
> http://archrecord.construction.com/tech/techBriefs/images/0705dignews7_lg.jpg
>
>
> http://www.parans.com/swe/media/Mediamaterial/Parans-Receiver-exterior-roofmounted-1.jpg
>
> These would allow natural sunlight to be piped in on cable like electric
> power to illuminate the interior of the building and even plug-into
> individual pods. Fiber optic lighting systems would generally be safer,
> easier to install, and much more energy efficient (as much as 40% more
> efficient) because they eliminate discrete electric lighting fixtures and
> the electrical wiring to link them up. So the nomad's power pods might
> feature a hybrid fiber lighting center where an electric light pump is
> combined with heliostat input and then distributes light by cable to the
> rest of the complex. These would very safely combine with structures made
> of fabrics or be used outdoors or in wet areas.
>
> Fiber lighting can be placed in any orientation so by combining this
> source of piped-in sunlight with a cylindrical pod structure to hang our
> vertical hydroponics on, it would be possible to make self-contained
> farming pods that could be placed anywhere indoors for intensive farming.
>
>
> http://i01.i.aliimg.com/img/pb/915/128/268/1285035692637_hz-fileserver2_5281360.jpg
>
> This form of lighting also allows for more sculptural uses of indoor
> hydroponics.
>
>
> http://www.designbuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/hydroponic-plant-system_1_TBemw_69.jpg
>
> Solar thermal systems would be used for several different purposes using a
> hybrid heat exchange manifold. The conventional use would be for hot water
> heating. Then there would be use to drive solar air conditioning and water
> generation using adsorption coolers. And finally it would drive
> distillation to purifiy the water output from greywater Living Machines or
> rainwater catchment. This demands a pretty high-temperature system which
> may call for things like vacuum tube solar thermal collectors. These are
> not usually very portable so there would be a design challenge in their
> use. Perhaps solar concentrator heliostat heaters may be a more deployable
> and active system alternative.
>
> Algaeculture, for food or fuels, can also be produced in much the same way
> as hydroponics using similarly portable supported or hanging vertical
> systems. Special processing and bio-reactor pods would be used to convert
> algae into either food or ethanol.
>
>
> http://www.earthmagazine.org/sites/earthmagazine.org/files/1324689371/i-143-7d9-2-d.jpg
>
> http://www.e-energymarket.com/uploads/pics/Algae_production_03.jpg
>
> Not everything in the indoor village would be strictly utilitarian as the
> objective is to demonstrate a high potential standard of living and so some
> things that might seem frivolous by our usually militaristic notions of
> 'camping' would likely be included. Things like deployable art
> installations, museums, spas, multi-media entertainment pods akin to
> karaoke rooms, micro-planetariums, deployable theaters, facilities for
> pets, and so on.
>
> Organization of the nomads' indoor village would depend on the topology of
> the structure they take over but a general order might see the rooftop
> employed chiefly for the different forms of energy collection, the floor
> below that used for water storage, intensive farming, and food storage, the
> floor below that for residence and common lounge/dining spaces, then a
> floor for the collective workshop/studio space, and at the bottom would be
> the 'garage' for the nomad's alternative forms of vehicles and more storage
> for shop supplies. The village may evolve through several stage of
> development, starting out very 'lean' with private space established
> primarily by the personal cabin pods in clusters around common lounge
> centers. Over time, however, individual living space may grow to clusters
> of multiple types of personal furnitecture enclosed in partitions and
> modular storage systems increasingly better insulated for sound.
>
> Getting Around:
>
> Getting around in lean and green fashion is a big deal and would be a
> constant obsession for the nomads. Most of the elements of the indoor
> village would be designed for relatively easy transport in the manner of
> push-carts, the urban landscape offering relatively easy mobility for
> things with relatively small wheels. Some towing devices--Segway-like
> walking tractors similar to two-wheel tugs used to move light planes in
> hangars or tow luggage carts in airports--might be devised to further aid
> this.
>
> http://images.ecommetrix.com/commerce/55/Electrodrive%20TUG.jpg
>
>
> http://www.electrictug.com.au/images/products/electrictug/large/offroad-tug-eletric-tug-1.jpg
>
> Powered hand carts are also likely and not unknown on the market.
>
> http://www.lulusoso.com/upload/20120403/Power_Platform_Hand_Cart.jpg
>
> These simple mechanisms could also be integrated into the design of some
> frequently moved pods.
>
> An electric or hybrid version of the classic military mule would be ideal
> for an endless variety of uses and could host its own power charging with
> flex-cell canopies. With mecanum wheel drive, as used in some materials
> handling robots and fork lifts now, it could be the ultimate urban utility
> transport.
>
> http://www.topoutfitters.net/downloads/Mule.JPG
>
>
> http://r2.cygnuspub.com/files/cygnus/image/OOH/2012/FEB/600x400/robomate_17_720_cc_10632767.jpg
>
> But it's likely that the nomads would experiment with a large assortment
> of electric, hybrid, and human powered vehicles both for use indoors and on
> the street and this could be one of the quite fun aspect of this project.
>
> http://cargocycling.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/flatbed.jpg
>
>
> http://www.urkai.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Cargo-trike-small-1024x682.jpg
>
> http://electricbluemoon.com/cart/images/Cargo_i2_side.jpg
>
> http://www.lucenttactical.com/assets/Images/SERS/SMTT1.jpg
>
> http://meetthechaneys.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/20110609-063143.jpg
>
> http://segseat.com/SideBright2.jpg
>
>
> http://4-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.trendhunter.com/cdn.trendhunterstatic.com/thumbs/xhuman-utility-vehicle.jpeg.pagespeed.ic.euWNuOthCQ.jpg
>
>
> http://www.blogcdn.com/green.autoblog.com/media/2011/06/lit-motors-cargo-scooter-630.jpg
>
> http://www.geekosystem.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/scootercar.jpg
>
> http://nimblescooters.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/IMG_7567_3.jpg
>
>
> http://www.boxxcorp.com/uploads/asset/file/302/Introducing_BOXX-BOXXCorp.jpg
>
> http://images.gizmag.com/hero/ryno-3.jpg
>
>
> http://www.amishscooters.com/images/Amy%20on%20Amish-Scooter%20-%201-small.jpg
>
> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-p_g6FKAqi6g/Tl5d6XWhLGI/AAAAAAAADNQ/2Dp9ShX-1DY/s1600/AmishGuysOnScooters.jpg
>
> I'm rather fond of the simple tuk-tuk myself, which are now commonly
> electric.
>
> http://image.made-in-china.com/2f0j00nBeTCIuySskv/Tuk-Tuk-Tricycle.jpg
>
>
> http://image.made-in-china.com/2f0j00CSJTiBbIZEcz/1080-USD-Passenger-Tuk-Tuk-3-Wheeler-Auto-Rickshaw.jpg
>
>
> http://lrd.buffalohair-jage.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/meguru-electric-rickshaw.jpg
>
>
> http://www.towability.com/images/content/motorised/tuctuc/large-towability-rickshaw-tuk-tuk-coffee-vending-3.jpg
>
>
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_CBqJN6SQcQI/TTbGOnOFJYI/AAAAAAAAASk/b-ahtasky7c/s1600/Picture%2B8.png
>
> Future or Fantasy?:
>
> I think a demonstration of this model of nomadism is very feasible and
> could be explored on different scales, from a one-floor installation to a
> whole building and with a variety of variations in situation. But there's a
> critical question here. How realistic would this example be?
>
> My fantasy example of a Maker community taking over an office park is
> premised on the notion of a regional economic collapse that leaves both
> original property owners and municipal governments too bankrupt to oppose
> what this community does with the space. (something that might only
> actually exist in the US in Detroit…) In practice, American municipal/city
> governments always resist any activity unconventional in nature. Anything
> new, different, and lacking the stamp of approval by members of the
> upper-class is assumed wrong by default and violently attacked. I often say
> that the NYPD has probably gleefully destroyed more art than the Taliban.
> Is our nomadic scenario only possible in a somewhat dystopian future? Would
> the modern urban nomad we imagine be allowed to exist anywhere? Is he
> forced to the edge of wilderness like everything else that's different?
>
> Certainly, urban hackerspaces seem possible and so we could imagine this
> as an extension of that context. In a slumped real estate market, property
> owners would be more open to unconventional uses of their property at
> discount rates as long as it doesn't represent anything permanent in
> nature--which rationalizes the nomadic nature of this. One is always being
> evicted once the landlord finds more 'legitimate' tenants and forced to
> move on to another space. Certainly, the phenomenon of the arts community
> as agent of gentrification is well established. For a century, of not two,
> we've seen that artists, always seeking-out low-cost studio space in the
> depressed areas of cities, revitalize local real estate markets with their
> creation of a local 'arts scene'. Subsequently, they find themselves
> evicted from the communities they largely created as upper-class residents
> move in causing rents to become untenable. Could a similar phenomenon
> become a hallmark of Maker community activity, instigating entrepreneurial
> industry rather than an art scene? Perhaps it's most realistic to suggest
> that our nomads would be living in a variety of situations, sometimes
> having to deal with rural or wilderness environments. (which would
> certainly be the case when engaging in developing world outreach or
> disaster aid) In my comic book fantasy the Maker nomads use adaptive reuse
> to turn all sorts of obsolete structures into bases as they travel the
> world; shopping malls, forgotten missile silos, water and gas tanks, subway
> stations, limestone mines, cooling towers of abandoned nuclear reactors,
> amusement parks, abandoned ships--all kinds of architectural detritus of
> the Industrial Age given unusual new life.
>
> But if our imagined nomads are compelled to work on the urban periphery or
> in wilderness then they are faced with a new set of challenges and the
> requirement to create mobile superstructures that assume the roles of the
> urban superstructures they would have repurposed.
>
> Not-So-Urban Nomads:
>
> Interestingly, while the work of Ken Isaacs with his Living Structures
> strongly influenced the emergence of an Urban Nomad movement in the late
> 1960s and early '70s, it was a very brief movement largely because it's
> image of the future failed to materialize. It was premised on the notion of
> imminent Post-Industrial collapse long anticipated across the '60s and the
> vision of a more sophisticated youth culture adopting a more-or-less
> seasonally nomadic way of life repurposing the detritus of the Industrial
> Age as the civilization re-wired itself. The economic collapse was
> postponed and, frankly, that sophisticated urban youth culture never
> emerged because, through runaway gentrification, the cities became
> untenable in their mid-century role as home of young adults entering the
> workforce, the market clued-into the tactic of co-opting youth culture by
> stealing it, re-packaging it, and selling it back to them, while a
> conspiracy of academia and the banking system began indenturing the young
> with life-long debt right out of school. So what we really ended up with,
> at least in the US, was a suburban youth culture where kids stayed at home
> with parents well into adulthood or formed tribes of friends to cohabitate
> in rented inner-suburban houses or low-rise apartment complexes while
> seeking commuter jobs like their parents.
>
> So in his later work Isaacs started move away from the city too. He went
> out to the country and started experimenting with semi-nomadic microhousing
> deployed on the woods. I say 'semi-nomadic' because it was still based on
> the idea of a culture that traveled with the seasons but now they were
> leaving structures behind with the expectation that they would be intact
> when they returned. He developed a concept called 'mobilism' where, instead
> of investing in one heavily overbuilt house, people would create these
> small very minimalist dwellings in multiple places and travel between them
> with the seasons, rather like some herding folk or trappers who create
> support buildings in strategic places along their routine migration. The
> houses didn't need to be heavily insulated or equipped--they would each
> only be used in mild climate and the more valuable 'gear' would be moved
> between them. So it was sort of like urban nomadism without the city
> architecture to provide the superstructure. You were making that yourself
> and leaving it behind in a number of places.
>
> You could say this was a sort of Modernist version of a Faerie Court
> lifestyle. In Celtic folklore the Faerie Court is always on the move.
> They're nature spirits, traveling across the landscape, doing their stuff
> to drive the cycles of the seasons. So, traveling in grand processions by
> night, they go from barrow mound to glen to grotto to ruins creating
> temporary, and normally invisible, palaces of the places they stop at. So
> these various permanent features of the landscape become the markers of
> stations of the cycle of their travels. It parallels, in ways, the nature
> of seasonal royal processions and the movement of noble courts among
> different seasonal palaces.
>
> But there was one part of this idea that Isaacs never quite managed to
> make work. Originally, he described mobilism as employing minimalist
> structures as rugged as an anvil so they could survive through their unused
> seasons. He never quite managed to create that because, frankly, it meant
> heavy construction he couldn't do. For this idea to really work, your
> structures, though minimalist, need to be extremely resilient to weather
> and vandalism. (especially vandalism if they're on the suburban periphery.
> Young people there have a lot of frustration to vent and a chronic lack of
> spaces to call their own…) His experimental constructs of plywood and
> pipe-fitting systems weren't likely to survive a typical winter.
>
> Taking a much heavier structural approach, our imagined nomads might
> explore this strategy by creating a series of free-standing single-storey
> pavilion structures in strategic countryside locations that assume the same
> function of the office building structures they would use in an urban
> environment. Imagine a series of simple bare Brutalist pavilions made of
> reinforced concrete (tridipanel for easiest construction), stacked stone,
> fired brick, gabions (building stone baskets), or even boulders and
> possibly employing various forms of earth-berming.
>
>
> http://www.domusweb.it/content/dam/domusweb/en/architecture/2010/06/15/juliaan-lampens/big_254903_4547_DO100604003_big.jpg
>
>
> http://i.images.cdn.fotopedia.com/NVzlgfk-DZM-AP00r4ljfRc-ifill_1024x768/Great_Architects_of_the_World/by_firms/Herzog__de_Meuron_Switzerland/Napa_Valley_Dominus_Winery.jpg
>
> http://www.stylishclassic.com/wp-content/uploads/image210.png
>
>
> http://www.digsdigs.com/photos/Concrete-Box-House-with-Glass-Platform-on-the-Top-1.jpg
>
>
> http://assets.dornob.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/modern-minimalist-house.jpg
>
>
> http://www.digsdigs.com/photos/modern-house-of-concrete-opened-to-nature-1-554x366.jpg
>
> http://www.trendir.com/house-design/hovering-house-among-the-treetops-3.jpg
>
> http://www.paseoner.com/images/transparetn-glass-wall1.jpg
>
>
> http://inthralld.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Concrete-Constructed-Anton-House-Residing-in-Spain-3.jpg
>
> http://static.move.com/blogs/2012/1/0112mothership1.jpg
>
> Since these would be purpose-built, the structures might include a grid of
> formed-in plug-in sockets like those used for climbing form systems or
> flush-mounted T-slot rails that provide built-in attachment points for
> quick-mount elements. These might also be used to close-up the structures
> with steel shutters when not in use. They might also include some
> utilities--wells and septic tanks in particular--and inserts for gas, wood,
> or pellet stoves. Internet connections may be more difficult to establish
> with such locations but long-distance bridge links may be a serviceable
> alternative to the poor value service of contemporary satellite ISPs. One
> unusual possible feature unique to this culture might be built-in 'dead
> drops'. These are embedded digital storage devices like flash drives that
> would be used to store some spime data and residents information. Sort of a
> digital guest book. These days they can even be wireless, since we not only
> have WiFi flash drives by WiFi power recovery to charge them. (
> http://deaddrops.com/ )
>
> These pavilions would take various forms; simple rectangles and polygons,
> circles, rings, or domes sized to accommodate many people in one
> multi-function structure or a cluster/compound of smaller structures of
> more specialized use and small groups.
>
> During mild seasons, the pavilions would be inhabited just as the urban
> buildings were, using the same pod furnitecture and retrofit systems. When
> not in use, they would be stripped down and closed up, the community moving
> to other compounds with milder seasonal climate. If sufficiently secure,
> they might also serve as materials and data systems caches. This is
> actually an approach to architecture I have intended to use myself for my
> own low-toxic home--albeit with a more permanent enclosure and utilities
> installation. There is an endless variety of simple pavilion
> structures--many prefab--that can be easily turned into palatial homes with
> a little ingenuity. Relying on open-plan living and furnitecture eliminates
> the conventional interior finishing that is not only a major source of
> indoor chemical pollution but also the largest portion of housing
> construction cost.
>
> The chief drawback of this approach is that, at present, the nomad
> community would ultimately need to own the land for these locations in
> order to build such structures. The community may be mobile, but this
> property and heavy structures put on it are not. But if that issue could be
> overcome, the approach would technically work.
>
> Pop-Up Microcity:
>
> A more completely mobile approach, however, would require our nomads'
> architecture to move beyond pod-furnitecture to include the deployment of
> portable, demountable, superstructures to host them, which brings us back
> to the notion of a pop-up eco-village.
>
> As noted earlier, skybreak shelters such as deployable tension roofs and
> tent-domes can work as hosts for the indoor village, functioning much the
> same as the proposed heavy pavilion shelters only lacking a ceiling and so
> relying mostly on free-standing elements. They would need level deck
> systems, but that's a standard feature for many existing event domes and
> pavilions. Thanks to modern materials, such structures can be as durable as
> any permanent buildings, be completely transparent, can integrate their own
> photovoltaic panels using flex-cells, and recently even EL paints have
> appeared allowing us to paint-on lighting. ( http://www.lumilor.com/ )
> The critical limitation of these structures is that they are not modular
> (even though domes may have a modular framing system, their tent skins are
> not) and the larger their necessary enclosure area the larger their basic
> structural elements become, making them progressively more difficult to
> deploy. But as with the heavy pavilions, replicating multiple structures of
> a relatively large but still manageable size is a workable solution.
>
> But can we do better? These skybreaks aren't quite as versatile or durable
> as the repurposed urban buildings we imagined our nomads inhabiting at
> first. They aren't volumetric and our village would be inclined to sprawl
> and fracture--to become more suburban. Even relatively modest sized tent
> covers could take many people to deploy or remove. Can we realize a more
> modular, urban, superstructure and still have it relatively easily
> demountable and transportable?
>
> This is where the modular building systems I noted before come in; modular
> post & beam systems, space frame systems, and pavilion systems. They offer
> us two basic approaches to superstructure; a space-filling grid
> superstructure where our nomads' pod furnitecture evolves into a kind of
> plug-in architecture and a terraced superstructure that creates much the
> same kind of structure as the urban buildings. Both these things
> require--more-or-less--newly engineered modular building systems. There are
> no equivalents off-the-shelf, though some hardware that may be repurposed.
> But if kept relatively low in expected performance--let's say, limited to
> structures of about four storeys--they may be feasible near-term. Both of
> these also represent systems I've been trying to realize with the Utilihab
> project. So let me explain what these approaches are like.
>
> A space-filling grid is a superstructure that uses some kind of space
> frame structure to fill space in a more-or-less regular volumetric grid.
> This might be based on a post & beam system or a triangulated space frame
> that creates some other kind of standard volumetric unit that can host a
> sizeable unit pod structure. (like nesting polyhedra networks, fractal
> 'sponges', and the like) This grid then supports habitable structures as
> retrofit attachments to this grid--systems of cabin pods, cabin 'bay'
> modules, and deck panels. Utilities systems may run internal to the space
> frame elements or be likewise retrofit. The space frame is generally
> exposed, requiring pod elements to be independently weatherproofed, but can
> also be enclosed by an exterior skin/panel system or retrofit roofing
> systems.
>
> A simple example of this approach is illustrated by Ken Isaac's designs
> using pipe-fitting systems for his early 'mobilist' experiments.
>
> http://www.we-find-wildness.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/isaac-71.jpg
>
>
> http://projects.vanartgallery.bc.ca/publications/Hotel/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/f74a739bc5de1ce0aea445d6463c3b83-300x204.jpg
>
>
> http://www.openstructures.net/collecting_images/0000/0223/MAG_DW0507_ARCH_03_large.jpg
>
> Here he used a pipe-fitting system as an exposed post & beam space frame
> resting on small cement pads. Stressed skin plywood cabin units and deck
> pallet modules simply fit in the open space and attach to the frame. At the
> modest scale of these designs--unit ~1.5m cubed--this supposedly worked
> well though the cabin modules were not large enough to stand up in unless
> designed for vertical orientation. To overcome this limitation, whole or
> large parts of the space frame could be enclosed by an external plywood
> skin, leaving more 'headroom' in the open framing.
>
>
> http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_52IcLpIWRtQ/SEenYY6n1eI/AAAAAAAAABo/bf5mq9h2rf4/s320/microhouse3tn.jpg
>
> Others have more recently attempted the same structural approach at a
> larger scale. This example looks to be using around a 2.5m grid, which
> looks much more convenient but was probably not as sturdy.
>
>
> http://centrefortheaestheticrevolution.blogspot.com/2011/10/giles-round-living-structure-in-meadows.html
>
> Isaacs imagined this grid being incrementally expanded to fairly large
> complexes flowing over the terrain and, by the mobilism model, this frame
> hardware was intended to be left behind in seasonal migration. He
> considered his plywood constructions largely disposable. It's hard to
> imagine such very light structures as surviving well on their own. And
> pipe-fitting systems, even though a little bit improved today, rely on the
> friction of locking screws to hold everything together and so aren't the
> safest way to build things. Anything more than two levels is probably
> pushing it.    But this is a good illustration. There are many things that
> can work similarly at this modest scale; modular industrial shelving,
> stacking post pallets (
> http://www.palletower.com/images/product_images/up603p1.jpg ), plastic
> and aluminum pallets modified to attach support posts (like a giant version
> of plastic shelving
> http://www.pensito.eu/custom-made-plastic/custom-plastic-pallets/images/custom/01_CMP/cmp-custom-plastic-pallet-01.jpg), on and on. I find the market of industrial materials handing products
> endlessly fascinating, even if much of it is rather specialized.
>
> Space Grid City:
>
> But a practical system for our nomads--something large enough to be truly
> livable and functional for mobile production activity--would probably be
> much larger in scale and employ a much more substantial rigidly connected
> structural system even at the cost of higher mass. Let's say a space frame
> grid in something approximating 2.5-3m cubed. That would give us a very
> useful basic 'pod' size.
>
> http://www.homebent.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/cube_01.jpg
>
> Utilihab is intended to produce just these kinds of structures using
> extruded aluminum T-slot framing. It's intended to use a bay size of up to
> 3m height in box units up to 6m square and with a load capacity supporting
> many storeys. The catch with it has been a lack of off-the-shelf T-slot
> profiles up to the ideal size of 150-200mm square. Very recently, however,
> a Chinese company may have just begun production of a profile of this size,
> though using a propriety connector.
>
> http://www.quadranthouse.com/#/the-system/4533281076
>
> There's a possibility that this could be very competitive in cost to US
> and European T-slot products because it's intended for building, not
> applications with an 'executive premium' attached. So we can now
> potentially build box frame grid complexes of quite large size using
> components that can be handled by very few people with convenient T-slot
> attachment all over their frame surfaces for convenient retrofit. This
> would be an excellent way to create a pop-up eco-village. Everything we can
> imagine could be easily integrated to this kind of grid structure.
> Weatherproof cabins could be made to generous size using walled tent
> schemes or panelized systems could be used for enclosure. Modular roofing
> systems could be employed. No question that this would be a more expensive,
> elaborate, and labor-intensive construction than the much simpler indoor
> village, but would all be easily demountable and use very few tools. The
> drawback is that, collectively, it's still a lot of hardware to transport
> from place to place. This would be much more involved than moving portable
> pods on wheels from place to place. We're probably talking shipping
> containers and conventional trucks to move this around. And, while it would
> be potentially very weather-resilient, it would still not be something one
> would want to leave on its own in the wilderness when not in use.
>
> Pavilion City:
>
> The pavilion system approach is a more high-tech approach and at present
> no off-the-shelf structural system approximates it except, perhaps, some
> space frame systems. The basic idea is to use modular elements to create a
> deck and column system for terraced construction, producing a
> superstructure much like the conventional urban building but with much
> lighter materials and thus limited to fewer storeys. And because this is
> purpose-designed, the surface of the structure would be intended to support
> quick plug-in attachment of all the functional elements we would want to
> retrofit to it.
>
> Conventional triangulated space frame systems can accomplish this by using
> a space-filling geometry to fill-out the forms of flat decks and systems of
> columns supporting them. There are, however, some caveats with this
> approach, as I noted before. Keeping these space frames to a modest scale
> of complexity means using relatively large module sizes. This makes for
> rather bulky structures, as illustrated by the floor deck of this old
> instant house concept with a module size of something around 2m;
>
> http://radio-weblogs.com/0119080/images/MinAMax/instanthouse.jpg
>
> One could reduce the deck thickness by using shorter members, but this has
> the drawback of creating many different parts sizes. You want to keep
> things to few different strut lengths when there are so many parts. This is
> why we tend to see these used only in very large span structures, and not
> often using the space frame for support columns. But that's what we would
> want in this case. We would want to have generous free span areas to roll
> our indoor village systems into. We're making things on the scale of a
> low-rise office building. So, as bulky as this is, with a simple space
> frame system with a module size half to fourth the intend storey height and
> which we could also use for domes, it could potentially work. We can then
> use a drop-in floor system based on deck panels that mount to 'hand'
> supports plugging into the top of the space frame nodes--like like a data
> center raised floor system. Roofing would work similarly.
>
> There is, however, another way to go with space frames if we can work with
> a relatively large maximum strut length (4m) and a somewhat odd floor
> geometry. Previously I noted the Min-A-Max and Universal Node System space
> frame geometries developed by architect Peter Pierce. These have the unique
> capability of integrating, with the same set of parts, a deck truss system
> supported largely by triangulated perimeter structure and additional
> vertical internal struts. You can imagine this as being like a geodesic
> dome which has the ability to integrate a series of truss decks within and
> supported by it. To do this structures must assume a specific overall form
> that is compatible with this deck truss geometry. The deck system for
> Min-A-Max is called the 'tetrahex truss' and forms a series of hexagonal
> units with an equilateral triangle grid along its plane surfaces. To be
> stable this must integrate into a stable, triangulated, polyhedral shape
> and the largest of these is a truncated octahedron.
>
> http://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0165489611000898-gr3.jpg
>
> Imagine you divided this shape into three horizontal sections.  Here's a
> 3D puzzle toy that illustrated these sections, as well as giving you an
> idea of what this shape would be like made of triangulated struts;
>
> http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net/images/tfto002.jpg
>
> http://tonyfisherpuzzles.net/images/tfto004.jpg
>
> Thus divided you get two kinds of volumes; a large equatorial volume and a
> smaller polar volume. And you also get two kinds plane surfaces; a hexagon
> and a truncated triangle. These planes match the shapes we can make with
> the tetrahex truss.
>
> Truncated octahedrons are space-filling.
>
> http://www.f-lohmueller.de/pov/polyhedra/Truncated_Octahedron_000c_2b.jpg
>
> This is why they've been proposed as the basis of space stations and
> cluster microhouses--like N55's take on Ken Isaacs' LEM like microhouse;
>
> http://www.n55.dk/MANUALS/MICRO_DWELLINGS/londonmdfine.jpg
>
> But take any nested combination of truncated dodecahedrons and you can
> divide them by these same horizontal sections, creating a series of
> parallel planes with a tiling pattern of hexagons and truncated triangles.
> By triangulating their perimeter you make a self-stable system of decks. A
> pavilion system.
>
> We can elaborate this geometry further. The truncated tetrahedron and
> cuboctahedron derive from the same geometry and, in combination with the
> truncated octahedron form a space-filling system that likewise divides into
> the same set of horizontal planes. This is where the more complicated
> shapes of UNS structures comes from. And, again, N55 have speculated on
> microhousing uses of this.
>
> http://www.n55.dk/manuals/micro_dwellings/mangetegn.jpg
>
> But for simplicity sake, I think the truncated octahedron system alone
> suits our ends.
>
> In Min-A-Max, the truncated octahedron can be stabilized by either
> 'planar' triangulation--triangles along the plane of the faces--or
> 'domical' triangulation approximating a sphere. Consequently, the two kinds
> of tetrahex truss planes can be formed into shallow domes. So we can make
> two standard tension fabric roof shell units to cover any stacked
> tessellated combination. (assuming we can figure out how to waterproof the
> edges they meet at) These would also serve as functional solitary dome
> units.
>
> We don't need to worry about covering the whole surface of the structure
> with panels for enclosure. We just need to fit vertical panels surrounding
> a hexagonal prism volume in the center of each section unit. Theres a
> hexagonal prism volume running through each section of the truncated
> octahedron, defining the basic functional unit space.
>
> Clearly, the geometry of these structures is complex and one key drawback
> of that is floor and ceiling systems that use equilateral triangle panels.
> Many people idealize triangles and hexagons, but from a fabrication
> standpoint they're a bit cumbersome and wasteful when most stock panel
> materials are produced in rectangular sheets. Be that as it may, our
> nomad's use of pod furnitecture makes the larger topology of a structure
> largely irrelevant. They are going to use this space in an open-plan
> fashion and so as long as the space is generous enough to let them setup
> their furnitecture freely, it works.
>
> But is there yet a simpler way to go about this? Maybe, but it may require
> even more advanced fabrication than these space frame systems would.
>
> As noted before, Utilihab is intended to evolve into a more advanced
> pavilion building system. It's current incarnation as a post & beam frame &
> panel system is a compromise, relying on aluminum T-slot framing because
> the industry for its production is already established worldwide. The
> common problem with modular building systems of the past has always been
> convincing Capital of the existence of a market for something new--and so
> anything truly new is virtually impossible. This is the chief reason why no
> modular architectural building system developed in the 20th century ever
> succeeded commercially. But as I noted, I've always been obsessed with the
> idea of PC-like housing and so my dream has been to develop a 'plug & play'
> architecture based on 'smart' components with integrated sensors and
> utilities that reduced the labor and complexity of construction to as low
> as possible--short of having a house assemble itself.
>
> So imagine an open frame cube of high performance alloy, one meter cubed.
> It might be triangulated and in fabrication it might be made of multiple
> parts. Some versions might even be collapsable. Some might comprise sets of
> modules to make construction quicker. But it's engineered to function as a
> monolithic unit. Its edges are flat and flush, with the exception that
> along the faces it has an attachment system. Maybe a grid of sockets or a
> channel like T-slot framing. There may also be a formed-in volume of foam
> providing thermal, sound, and fire insulation, such as Airkrete. Each unit
> has integral mechanical connectors near the corners that are engaged with a
> hand-operated mechanism or some simple tool. They also feature integral
> utilities channels and connectors or, at least, mounts for supporting them
> and a single-chip sensor node with temperature, moisture, stress, and load
> sensors. These units are mass-produced. They are the primary building
> element for this system.
>
> To build a home with these you first install a foundation, possibly using
> concrete piers, and attach your first cubes to them and level and align
> them with a laser level tool. Then you start attaching more, place on
> against the other and engaging their integral connectors to lock them
> together. You continue until you have a complete floor deck in the outline
> of the first floor level. This functions as a two-way planar truss. It is
> the 'backplane' of the house. Some special modules may be designed with
> special features or serve to 'anti-alias' the profile of the floor deck so
> you can use rounded corners, make circular deck shapes, or have flowing
> contour-terraces.
>
> As you connect the modules you are also connecting their sensors into a
> live sensor web that is linked to a home WiFi network. So, using a modeling
> application, you can see on a PDA or tablet a model of the house as you
> assemble it. It might show the planned form of the house so as to guide
> your through assembly, but it's also showing the structural integrity of
> the building as its assembled, showing you what is safe and unsafe to add
> and where you might need temporary supports as you work.
>
> Once you complete you're first deck plane you now begin to plug-in
> supports for the upper deck. These would include temporary jack posts and
> permanent columns in various styles and designs (trust me, tikis will make
> a come-back) or they may include modular furniture (usually shelving and
> cabinet systems) or even appliances reinforced to be load-bearing elements.
> They are all designed to suit the 1m module grid so you slide these into
> place where you want them and then engage the same kind of connecting
> mechanism and lock them into deck. Some may have integral wheels or
> low-friction slides to assist their movement. These may have the same
> utilities and sensor web interfaces as the deck modules so as soon as they
> are connected, they're 'on-line' and will appear in the house modeling app.
> With enough of these in place, you can now start snapping together deck
> blocks for the next level. Repeat as needed until you get to the roof deck
> atop which you plug-in a modular flat roofing panel system. You now can
> plug in non-load-bearing window-wall and pre-finished partition panels into
> the floor grid, creating a full enclosure. Finally, you plug in outdoor
> surface and deck tiles/panels, maybe outdoor hydroponic plant bed panels
> (imagine pre-seeded polymide felt panels that grow moss instead of grass)
> and indoor floor and ceiling tiles/panels or put down a plug-in plank
> system and your building is complete. From here the building app now
> functions as a home control system and continuous monitor of the
> structure's integrity, sensing failures and tracking environmental
> performance. This could form the basis of a live spime web for the building
> and all its elements. Everything in the structure remains demountable. You
> can take it all apart as easily as it was put together, re-arrange and ad
> this in-situ, and the structural modeling app will always tell you what's
> safe to put where. It will even let you model changes before you do them so
> you could play with the architecture like building houses in The Sims and
> download models of items to try out before you buy them or have them made.
>
> Using low-profile deck modules, this system would readily retrofit into
> other structures, giving them a new backplane for the system's many modular
> parts and accessories.
>
> Can such a building system be produced today, as an open building system?
> Maybe. But it would be a very sophisticated project. The deck and column
> system would need to be exceptionally strong and capable of at least
> several storeys height. But it would probably be the greatest advance to
> housing technology since the invention of the fired brick. Buildings of
> most any relatively modest size would become one-person tasks. A simple
> cottage home could be built by one person in a matter of hours. Just like
> the PC, a whole new global industry of parts would develop, competing
> horizontally while integrating vertically just like the PC's industrial
> ecology.
>
> With such a system at-hand our imagined nomads could build--using lighter
> versions of some of these components--very sophisticated yet completely
> portable structures of most any size anywhere. Their pod furnitecture would
> evolve into plug-in load-bering elements for this system. Simply by
> arranging them on their own foundation jacks and plugging in deck modules
> around them they would create a sheltered habitat. But I fear this may be
> much too sophisticated a building technology to pursue for our immediate
> plans. Still, it's fun to imagine.
>
> So there is my attempt at visualizing what this project might be like.
> Maybe some of these ideas are of use.
>
> Eric Hunting
> erichunting at gmail.com
>
>
>
> On Apr 14, 2013, at 5:43 PM, Dante-Gabryell Monson wrote:
>
> > Thank you Eric.  - I appreciate you see different approaches. I am
> interested to see how they can create synergies between each other.
> >
> > I personally would branch in from the low threshold netroots /
> grassroots side,
> > with at first TAZ / neo nomadic potentiality ( ex : festivals - and
> festivalist self organization http://p2pfoundation.net/Festivalism )
> > yet with potentials to interface with more permanent settlements ,
> > and/or become more permanent settlements if and when context enables (
> creation of economic activity )
> >
> > Using knowledge / technology, yet minimalist - low weight infrastructure
> to start with.
> > Friends of mine looking into modular structures which can be assembled
> into a variety of ways based on needs, creating a variety of functional
> spaces or tools, while including considerations for scalability.
> >
> > Knowledge intensive, resource efficient.
> >
> > Temporary potential reduces limits for long term legal considerations,
> though with potential to conform over time if and when evolving into more
> permanent settlement.
> >
> > Yet all can be planned through online tools / collaborative planning,
> including terrain and legal considerations,
> >
> > while enabling rapid deployment on the terrain based on networked
> intelligence and computer aided ( supporting with information ) human
> assembly ( of spimed components into modules
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spime  )
> >
> > In my personal view, Existing infrastructures ( ecovillages, academic
> research projects, etc )
> > can be used as collaboration aggregators , building on overlapping
> research and/or memes,
> > interfacing and creating synergies while feeding potentials for
> experimentation.
> >
> > Its knowledge / information intensive potentials also enables to build
> on the recycling of materials and standardised components surplus from
> mainstream industrial society.
> >
> > It can also combine natural materials based on local environments,
> > and set up small scale production to self replicate its infrastructure.
> >
> > Hence it operates like seeds,
> > and individuals aggregating into ( temporary ? ) intentional tribes ,
> organizing stigmergically.
> >
> > It can use temporary strategies ( TAZ ),
> > or invest itself into more remote ( abandoned by speculation and
> capitalism ) areas,
> > and focus on healing / depollution / ecosystem retauration ( desertified
> areas, remote mountain areas  and villages which lost their populations,
> etc ),
> >
> > or former abandoned urban industrial neighborhoods, which can be
> purchased at low cost and for which non speculative property models can be
> set ( as to avoid capitalist gentrification after post industrial
> redevelopment ).
> >
> > It can also provide survival solutions for marginalized populations,
> while offering training into survival and local production solutions. (
> role as learning environment )
> >
> > Although at first, prototypes can be ( and are already ) experimented in
> relation to, for example, subcultural gatherings - such as music festivals.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20130502/769091e8/attachment.htm