influence of cyberspace and internet on architecture

jaime

Hi,
I am looking at how technology is rapidly growing and how this is having an effect on architecture. As more employees use mobile phones and emails there is less need for office space, and the space needed requires a new design process, ie. space for computers and cables, etc, and maybe more open plan. Retail is effected by cybershops and the music and movie industry is effected by easily downloaded, free options.

My argument is that face-to-face interaction is still important and instead of designing containers for technology; architecture needs to adapt to these changes and respond by encouraging technology use and human interaction together. A prime example is the internet cafe. I am designing a puplic space with a train station as the focal point for the design, I have included a train station since one of the advantages of technology is that it has relatively little pollution and infrastructure, therefore a compact, walkable city with public transport with central importance seems a logical choice.

I am thinking about narrowing down the design strategy to 'up-gradable and replaceable'

Any suggestions are greatly appreciated,
thank you

Anonymous

I guess the problem I am having is that I overthink the design too much and therefore creativity is compromised.

My main design is a central public space with the following surrounding buildings: train station, media centre, and an internet cafe that provides conference spaces for companies that conduct a lot of business outside the office.

So far I am looking at 'up-gradeable' and 'replaceable' for the design strategy to inform the shape and form of the spaces and buildings but I guess I'm not completely convinced.

I am overthinking the problem and I desperately need help from someone to take me a step back and maybe shed some light or provide some of their own experiences within this topic
Thank you

malfore

Well firstly this is weird (my alter online identity is "Jaime" and i have done research into spatial models etc. and am curious about what affect the virtual has on the physical etc. I seriosuly did a double take when i saw your post... anyways that aside...

I am now an architecture student... so i guess i am not really qualified to give you advice, as such, on the design etc... but

is this post concerned with what technology should be included or considered in your design or is it more about how can you design (or rather what should u design) so that people can use their own technology?

I am interested in this topic but i do not completly understand your task/s.

Ii would be interested in discussing further... if you need to know more abuot emergent technologies i might be able to help.

Malfore

Anonymous

Thanks for the reply.

There is a lot of information on what technology can be used to make spaces 'better'. For example glazing that turns opaque with electrical charges and human responsive ventilation systems, etc.....

What I am really interested in is providing a public space to encourage human interaction without ignoring the present desire for technology and SPEED. I read an article on how a few psychologists enclosed people within individual rooms and locked them in there for a period of months. Although they were interacting with people every day, by the end, they were showing signs of depression and loneliness.

People I know who work a lot from home, with their own personal offices find if they do go out to visit a cafe or do some shopping, dont want to go back home! Its like when your at work you're looking forward to the refuge of home, but if you are always working at home this doesnt happen.

So I come back to: What technology, systems and/or layouts can be put in place within public urban spaces, and buildings that encourage face-to-face realationships and technology.


P.S Dont downplay the fact your a student, your opinions and ideas can be just as interesting, relevant and appropriate as someone who has been working in the field for decades!

I look forward to replies.

Anonymous

Maybe some notions of ubiquitous computing might be of use in this scenario... There are some cool ideas floating round about technology and how it should almost be subliminally used and almost definately not seen...

Coming back to your initial concept of face to face interaction, and trying to foster this in new built environments, with particular reference to current trends of mobile computing and the need to have everything "now" if not sooner - I had two ideas or abstractions of the problem and its context.

1. There is an increasing lack of face to face contact? I dunno if this is correct, or even matters, more so the fact that you are trying to create a place where it can happen.
2. People dont like being talked to when they are using gadgets or talking to someone who is using a gadget.

so

Is it possible to create spaces where the technology becomes more hidden but still functional. And then aswell provokes more open to interaction, especially when our technology and ourselves are becoming increasingly more mobile...


i know this is looking at your problem from a different context and not really providing and answers... but maybe a different perspective will induce more ideas.


p.s. can u explain your notion of up-gradeable and replaceable?

Cheers
Mal

Anonymous

hi!

Yeah I had thought along those lines, someone was telling me about some invention where there is no need for cables or phone lines. I'm not sure if it used.

I think there will always be a need to have human interection no matter how advanced technology gets, public space just becomes less important.

The up-gradeable and replaceable idea was when I was getting really desperate to come up with an idea to define the form of the architecture. Going along the idea of technology constantly improving and changing, and designing architecture that is temporary in structure so when the building envelope or layout is no longer appropriate for the next tecnology it can be added to or replaced with as little cost as possible, rather than what is currently happening now with some offices becoming useless.

Jaime

malfore

yeh its a good dillemma... how do u design a space with something that hasnt even been thought of, in mind.

I mean wireless is the big trip these days but could be gone in a couple of years or found to be carcenagenic and would you be obliged to include it if it was bad for u, but people needed it to work

when i think about your problem i keep coming back to the idea that people are different and so is their own technology, while alot of technology has the same base foundation in how they communicate... everyone uses their computers, mobile phones, pda's, mp3's etc. differently. So i simply return to the thought how do people interact at a more abstract level... can you design your space so that it reduces the hinderances that the technology places on interaction... but still allows technology to be used.

When i was involved in designing technology and gadgets we had to provide interaction diagrams and story board interaction timelines...

maybe if you visualise some of the interactions that you want to occur, analyse the space required and best suited, then add some technology into the mix and see how it changes the space, and the interaction... i wonder if that would give you more insight into how the spaces could become more modular and their space more freely and diversly usable?

(i like this thread... hope its not sucking to much of your time )

p.s. are there any good australian/new zealand architecture forums?

Anonymous

Not that I know of. I also have this discussion going in the Design Community Forum, but so far you have been the most helpful. I looked through a book called '4D...something...?' It goes into quite a bit of detail relating to interactive design.

The problem I had with this is how do you provide interective design so that it becomes a personal experience and without it becoming a disneyland playworld?????

At the moment, I am designing a public space and ignoring the technology aspect so far and working through the more urban aspects of who will use the space, how will it be used: entry exits, etc....

I really liked the idea of bringing in the technology side of things because it is so real and current, yet it is becoming VERY problematic as a design tool!!!