Slashdot Mirror


Cities Without Borders

An anonymous reader writes "There is a very interesting article about Cities Without Borders in the latest issue of Mindjack. The author, Paul Hartzog, argues that we are seeing the emergency of 'global cities' concentrating command-and-control functions for the global economy. For instance, the increasing importance of certain cities such as New York, London, Tokyo, Frankfurt, Sydney or Miami shows they not only support complex webs of businesses but also participate in a global network for the production and distribution of finance and capital. This is just one example. You should read the original article to see if you agree with the author -- or not."

163 comments

  1. Pfff... please by superpulpsicle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If location doesn't matter. Then why is everyone getting ripped off from real estate cost.

    1. Re:Pfff... please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So you agree with the article that location matters. You say it in such a way as to imply that you're disagreeing with someone or something abd you don't comment at all on global cities. And this gets a +5 insightful?

  2. Rivers of Information by Meredeth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Im reminded of school history lessons as a kid, full of stories of once great cities, now deserted because the rivers or trade routes that suported them changed. This is the same sort of thing, those cities are important because of the information that flows through them. How easy these days is it for information to change where its located? In the past a river would take hundreds of years to change its course. Nowdays, that cultural river can change a great deal in mere decades. How long ago was it that Miami was just a holiday spot?

    1. Re:Rivers of Information by nic+barajas · · Score: 1

      How long ago was it that any place used to serve as just a getaway? Every aspect of life now happens everywhere.

    2. Re:Rivers of Information by Spruitje · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, if you look at the location of large internet exchanges you'll find that most are build in or near large cities.
      And sometimes something goes wrong and then a large part of the internet in that country goes down.
      We had this kind of problem a couple of times due to power outages in Amsterdam.
      The result is that a large part of the Netherlands was without internet.

    3. Re:Rivers of Information by eobanb · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I think that in many ways, Slashdot is a city. It certainly has enough viewers to otherwise be a small city in real life. There are a diversity of opinions and mindsets, and there's a system of government (moderation and administration), there's business that goes on, everyone has a place where they live (slashdot.org/~username)...and people have jobs (submitting articles, commenting on articles, moderating comments, paying subscriptions, voting in polls), some are volunteer, some you have to earn the privilege of being able to do, some actually cost money. Fascinating stuff...

      --

      Take off every sig. For great justice.

    4. Re:Rivers of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot diversity? Oh, you mean liberals, ultra-liberals, dyed-in-the-wool liberals, anti-American liberals, socialist liberals, etc.

    5. Re:Rivers of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're forgetting the "we're not liberals" libertarians! Not to mention the trolls, the only real diversity around here.

    6. Re:Rivers of Information by krymsin01 · · Score: 1

      I don't think comparing river based economies and information based economies makes much sense. Other that a loose corrolation based on the concept of "flow," the two are drasticly different.

      Ancient trading economies would dry up when the trade routes changed, true. However, that's a physical reality and/or a cultural one (dealing with alternative trade routes, not with a river changing course over centuries). When it comes to a global information based economy, the rules are a bit different. You can easily shape the flow of information if you invest in the technology. All you need is bandwidth, and you have access anywhere, anytime. You can't do that with rivers and trails.

      --
      stuff
    7. Re:Rivers of Information by brarrr · · Score: 1

      There's a large part of the Netherlands?

      fooled me, and I even strayed off the beaten path...

      Just having fun with you, it's a great country. I stepped of the train and hated my mental state immediatly. Immediatly I had Zoolander stuck in my head (stayed for 2 days) going: "everyone is rediculously good looking." Great trip though... thank's to the US gov't for paying for it.

      --
      to email me: take my /. handle and append .net preceded by charter.
    8. Re:Rivers of Information by Meredeth · · Score: 1

      Yes, of course I agree that they are not the same thing. But the idea should hold true. The idea that trade of any sort, regardless of the medium or the articles being traded, in this case the information culture, are the life blood of a city. What did the major trading cities do to become the hubs that they are? It used to be purely geographical. You built a city where people could get to it, close to everything you needed for that city.now, that may not be true. neither Sydney or Miami were close to anything at their founding, but flows of culture and information made people and trade come to them! It was thought even a few decades ago that technology would change the growing phenomena of urbanisation, but instead it seems to be accelerationg it in many ways.

    9. Re:Rivers of Information by moonbender · · Score: 1

      At the Slashdot presidental poll, 23% (last I looked) of those "liberals" votesh for Bush. So it's not as one sided as you make it out to be, there are plenty of moro^H^H^H^Hright-wing folks on Slashdot, too.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    10. Re:Rivers of Information by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      How long ago was it that Miami was just a holiday spot?

      Yeah, now it is also a waypoint in the drug trade too. I think that's about it though.

    11. Re:Rivers of Information by tmalone · · Score: 1

      Miami is geographically close to Cuba and many island nations of the sort. That has greatly affected Miami. There is show called Nip/Tuck, I think it is on FX. It takes place in Miami and during of the early episodes one of the main characters is constantly being made fun of for not speaking Spanish. The spanish speaking population has had a huge affect on Miami and that is due in part at least to its geography.

    12. Re:Rivers of Information by afd8856 · · Score: 1

      Nah.. can't be that. I bet those 23% were just the trolls :=)

      --
      I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
  3. Emergency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This emergence is an emergency!

  4. Re:Already getting slow, here's the article text. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for the article text karma whore.

  5. Quite obvious by pmc255 · · Score: 1

    I think the points made the artcile are quite intuitive and obvious. Rather, it is the context of formulation of the subject at hand that makes the way we think about cities as entities interesting. Any geographical entity, be it a city, state, or nation state, are essentially borderless. The spatial ontology of such geographical entities is predicated on the artificially constructed boundaries that are set in order to structurally delimit the start of an entity and the end of another. Such borders, however, are non-existent when it comes to social and cultural forces that span across multiple geographic entities. When the internet and the world wide web emerged, such boundaries were rendered virtually meaningless. People can transcend geographical borders and visit faraway places half way across the globe in the comfort of their homes. Like I said, most of this is already quite intuitive to all of us who participate in activities on the internet on a daily basis. The most interesting points that are highlighted by the article, however, have to do with how the globalization trend affects the global economy. It isn't farfetched to consider the internet as its own geographical entity.

    1. Re:Quite obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      context of formulation of the subject at hand [...] The spatial ontology [...] predicated on the artificially constructed boundaries [...] transcend geographical borders
      You're a liberal arts major, aren't you?
    2. Re:Quite obvious by Ba3r · · Score: 1

      When the internet and the world wide web emerged, such boundaries were rendered virtually meaningless.

      ...yet these borders were arbitrary to begin with; the frustrating part of the linked article is its author limited his scope to human history on the scale of a few centuries. The assignment of boundaries to territories by humans (and every other species) based upon social organization is nothing new, but it is a pretense that these boundaries are anything but highly dynamic and completely dependant on the fluctuations of population and resources.

      Human populations are more intuitively organized around neighborhoods, and the conglomeration of neighborhoods into city states. The idea of the nation state was only developed as communications and industry developed to the point where the range of economy extended well beyond a city-state and its neighbors (the nation not to be confused with an empire, as an empire has a far less prominent role in regional governance). However now that communications have recently bridged that adolescent stage, and are rapidly extending to the endpoint, where everyone has accessible instantaneous access to everyone else all the time and everywhere, there is an awakening to the continuity of society.

      This should be a completely natural step, as one is far more connected to those who live within walking distance; and as disconnected from people 150 miles away as people 5,000 miles away, because they rarely interact on the day to day basis. The two aspects of association, interest and proximity, are being re-aligned as the communications landscape changes. Now, the day to day habits of a man in China effect a woman in South Africa (as does the inaction of a woman in the USA effect the environment of a child in Iraq). The economical barrier between them was originally broken at the birth of the Colonial era of Europe, and later the communications barrier was significantly reduced, but now all barriers have been shattered and metaphorically the butterfly's wings are potent indeed.

      This new panhuman dynamic is likely to be troublesome as it is first established (i.e. the culture/economic clashes that drive modern conflict), and continually opposed by those who have become comfortable holding the reigns of a nation-state, but ultimately the stability and intuitive comfort of a more global, decentralized model will win. And this is heartening. Perhaps, ultimately, this will bring about a re-vitalizatoin of regional culture nuance..

  6. Re:Already getting slow, here's the article text. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you are a whore. a karma whore.

  7. Kinda Obvious to Me by Omkar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As our economy depends more and more on services, people will tend to clump together to reduce travel costs and maximize convenience. The digital outsourcing trends that we see now don't fight this: they just link the clumps (ex: Bangalore to NYC). It's easier now to get services away from the city network, but still easier to get them within the network.

  8. Civ by mirko · · Score: 4, Funny

    I first thought of Civilization (Sid Meier's) where you have to acquire city walls to protect your fellow citizens from invaders...
    Once you get a proper air defense system, these become obsolete.
    But no, it just looks to be more about the demise of ruralship and the slow disappearing of intermediate management : info no gets directly from the ground up and vice versa.

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
    1. Re:Civ by gravygraphics · · Score: 1
      I am getting sick and tired of this. I am writing my Congressman. First a whole group of Doctors banned me. They go on the radio sounding all pious about the people they are helping, when they explicitly ban me from their group. And now the Cities are on the bandwagon. This sucks.

      Sniffs under my arm to check for BO.

      ---Grady Borders

  9. Complete disagreement by digitaltraveller · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually the trend is going in reverse. Telecommuting / telepresence means you don't need to be in the city.

    Being in the city used to be useful for acquiring the extremely valuable commodity of trust. Personal relationships. Now, I can trust Larry Lessig (at least on Copyright law critique) because I know where he stands on those issues. We are on opposite sides of the planet. I also trust Warren Buffet as a source of information on investment issues. He's in Nebraska.

    Warren B. might not take my calls but Larry probably would. And they're are plenty of 'mini' Warrens around.

    I have no reason to visit Frankfurt or any of those other places.

    1. Re:Complete disagreement by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 1

      Slashdot has mentioned SATS.

      It will allow you to physically commute 400 miles each way daily for working.

    2. Re:Complete disagreement by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      But why would you want to? Telecommuting would seem to be a much more sensible solution all round, than travelling 800 miles every day to and from work.

    3. Re:Complete disagreement by Jameth · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you read the article, you would know that it was in complete disagreement as well. The article is claiming that this idea of global cities being the centralization of a command-and-control structure is failing to notice the the command-and-control structure is being inherently undermined, delegitematizing the entire idea.

      The article points to blogs, Slashdot, Kuro5hin, copyleft, Creative Commons, Wikipedia, and several other items as examples of how bottom-up creation is replacing top-down.

      The article quotes Thomas Malone in claiming that society is moving from "command-and-control to coordinate-and-cultivate." That is, rather than actually being in charge (Bill Gates setting up Microsoft) the leader only directs (Linus Torvalds leading Linux).

      Initially, it would seem that such a decentralized system would be so disorganized that it would not function effeciently, but this ignores much sociological and psychological evidence on three important issues: motivation, agreeability, and capability.

      Motivation: Intrinsic motivation is always stronger than extrinsic motivation. If the motivation is a genuine personal desire (fun), it is always more effective than a trumped up external desire (money). This results in the quality of work on volunteer projects commonly being much higher.

      Agreeability: People inherently want to agree. People will agree with something if possible, so even without a strict command structure, a good leader will be followed. This removes much of the tension from having no clear leader, because that leader does actually exist.

      Capability: Nobody is capable of handling every situation. In a strict command structure, the leader must be able to handle every situation/delegate it to someone who can. However, the direction on that issue must come from the commander, meaning that when a troublesome situation arises in a command system, it cannot be dealt with swiftly. By contrast, the open system allows the person who can deal with the problem to just come forward and do so, removing many of the failure points in a command system.

      Of course, the last bunch of what I said was my interpretation, not just what was in the article. You may get something else out of it.

    4. Re:Complete disagreement by panarch · · Score: 1

      thanks for actually reading it ;-)

      good comments too

      -paul

  10. a binary world by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This reminds me of something I've noticed with myself over the last few years, as the internet has become so much more a part of everything. My friends have also noticed this.

    I find that as I interact with people from all over the world, on forums, and newsgroups, and in online games (my EQ guild had Canadians, and Australians, and French, and a few others, for example), the notion of countries, like "The United States", just doesn't seem that relevant any more.

    I'm starting to feel that basically the world consists of here (basically, where the people I interact with outside the net are) and everywhere else. When I deal with someone who is not here, it doesn't matter to me if they are in Texas or New York or France. That the first two of those are in the same country as I and the third is not seems a silly distinction to make.

    1. Re:a binary world by Chatmag · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      We've seen basically the same thing you mention. Our site is becoming more and more popular the past few years, with people looking for discussions online.

      Would you mind contacting me directly? I'd like to do a feature piece on the future of online discussions and include your remarks. I'd need your permission to do so. My email is available through here.

      Thanks, Pete

      --
      Pete Carr Owner Chatmag.com
    2. Re:a binary world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [insert obligatory jokes about white flags, fosters beer, and the word 'eh' here]

    3. Re:a binary world by tmalone · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Did nobody on slashdot take part in the US presidential election? Geography matters more than you think. The people we interact with in person have a much greater affect on us than those we chat with. For example, my wife's parents used to be flaming liberals. All the friends they talk to on the phone are similarly inclined. Then they moved to rural Idaho to retire. The people they interact with on a daily basis are biggots. Last time we saw them they were going on about how the gays are degrading the idea of marriage and how George Bush is a great guy. Both of them voted against Bush in 2000. Idaho corrupted them.

    4. Re:a binary world by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      "I'm starting to feel that basically the world consists of here (basically, where the people I interact with outside the net are) and everywhere else. "

      You sure its not just because you're from America?

      I KEED I KEED. I'm from the US myself.

      But I totally know what you're saying. And personally, I think that once there's a critical mass of people (and more importantly people with influence) who feel the same way, we will see the governmental shift into a global economy. However, the world is still extremely fractured outside the land of the internet, and still quite frequently within it (Great Firewall of China anybody?).

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    5. Re:a binary world by Saeger · · Score: 1
      "Go along to get along" eh?

      It's just easier for some people to go with the grain than against it on principle. Similarly, a lot of people are religious soley for the socio-economic benefits of belonging to the club.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    6. Re:a binary world by Saeger · · Score: 1
      the notion of countries, like "The United States", just doesn't seem that relevant any more.

      As long as there's still real scarcity in the world, trading/fighting nation-states will matter. You can't download your food & clothing (yet), so you can't write off the government that helps to protect your selfish interests.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
  11. no borders? by Goldsmith · · Score: 1

    Like many other things in life, if it's worth trying and even if it's not, we've tried it in California. We already have a city without borders, we call it Los Angeles.

    Joking aside, even as an idea or culture, one could argue that Los Angeles is world wide.

    1. Re:no borders? by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Like many other things in life, if it's worth trying and even if it's not, we've tried it in California. We already have a city without borders, we call it Los Angeles. Joking aside, even as an idea or culture, one could argue that Los Angeles is world wide.

      You probably have no idea how much you're right on that one. If you live in a country as different from California as possible - Eastern Europe, for example - you are still somehow aware of various LA-specific cultural phenomena. For example, if you are a frustrated teenager with no clear weather forecast for the labor market, you express your frustration in terms of "South Central ghetto", even if you are actually white in a 100% white nation. It was perfectly parodied in the hilarious Ali G show. But it goes further, even if you are NOT a hip-hop music fan. Popular Dreamworks 3D cartoons like "Shark Tale" or even "Shrek 2", expect from the viewer to understand at least the basics of LA reality. Actually, many Hollywood filmmakers are just too lazy to ever move out of the city, so some popular LA (or rather "within 2 hours driving from Beverly Hills") vistas and locations are ubiquitous in Hollywood movies. Which, in turn, are ubiquitous in cinemas in such remote places as Kosice, Slovakia or Tigru Mures, Transilvania. Kids and teenagers learn how to live in a multi-racial sprawl-infested megalopolis even before they start to learn how to live in their own community. I find it scary, sometimes.

  12. Mistake? by jonasw · · Score: 0

    The author, Paul Hartzog, argues that we are seeing the emergency of 'global cities' concentrating command-and-control functions for the global economy Don't you mean "emergence"?

  13. Iconoclast! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny
    You should read the original article to see if you agree with the author -- or not.

    Have you no respect for tradition?

  14. Grammatical PSA by pdabbadabba · · Score: 0

    I really hate to post this kind of criticism, but just so everyone knows...

    Emergency: " A condition of urgent need for action or assistance."

    The word for "the act of emerging" is "Emergence"

    And no, emergency doesn't mean both things.

    Live and learn... :)

    1. Re:Grammatical PSA by Mrs.+Grundy · · Score: 2, Informative
      I really hate to respond to this sort of criticism, but just so you know...

      From the OED:
      Emergency:

      1. The rising of a submerged body above the surface of water; = EMERGENCE 1.

      2. a. The process of issuing from concealment, confinement, etc.; = EMERGENCE

    2. Re:Grammatical PSA by pdabbadabba · · Score: 1

      Evidently, I need a better dictionary. Sorry guys.

  15. nonsense by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

    Nonsense. This is an age-old concept. Rome and Alexandria were both large hubs of commerce, setting the value of the $currency, and trade went on between the cities. London and Paris in centuries past traded. This is the same damned thing that's been going on for millenia: people congregate into larger groups of habitating individuals, and they become a "city". Having a larger wealth of human resources, they naturally become a focal point in all trade. People in outlying communities around these cities use the city culture and economy to suppliment their livelyhood in various manners, getting goods from "far off" places (whether it's the tribe 100 miles to the north that has the nice beads, or Hong Kong's finest... whatever) through proxy of their local city.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    1. Re:nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you say is true, but the author was trying to say that these global cities are becoming closer to each other than the surrounding area. Small cities and rural areas will identify more with large regional cities, like Indianapolis, Nashville and Columbus and not global cities like New York, LA, Paris or Hong Kong. In the same vein smaller global cities, ie Miami, Chicago, Frankfurt, and Sydney, will identify not with their surrounding rural area, but rather they will look to New York, LA, London, Paris, Hong Kong and other large global cities for inspriation and direction.

    2. Re:nonsense by tmalone · · Score: 1

      At the same time you have a competing effect known as suburbanization. Cities are becoming geographically bigger and therefore are being affected by the whims of the rural. The suburbs have changed the geography of this country at least in a very substantial way. Look at the LA area which is being pulled and stretched in all directions by the suburbs. There is something like 4 downtowns in LA.
      The global city argument doesn't really seem at all new. Paris and New York have always been linked. They are centers of culture and have always dealt in this currency. We are simply changing the way they do it. Instead of people going back and forth on boats, they do it over the internet.

  16. Why NYC and Hollywood Hate the Rest of US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll
    By contrast, Sassen notes that global cities take on a distinct identity as they disconnect from their regional geography. If this is reflected in cultural reproduction then we can expect to see changes in people's sense of identity. We might find individuals thinking of themselves as New Yorkers first and Americans second...

    Marvelous! This explains in part why the elites of New York City and Hollywood regard the rest of us as primitives living in "fly over country," and why the more loud-mouthed among them keep threating to leave the country. It also explains their love affair for the French-reared Kerry with his six homes scattered around the globe.

    More disturbingly, it explains their scarcely concealed anti-Semitism. Arabs have many billions to channel through these money-obsessed "Cities without Borders." Israel is not only poor and small, Israelis love their troubled little land, something these people never understand.

    But notice the post-election commentary from this elite group. They're already taking about how they'll package their candidate in 2008. No more "war hero" and fake hunter charades. He'll look religious and talk incessantly about "our shared moral values." But it'll be a sham to trick those they consider fools and rubes.

    By then America will have alternatives to the Grey Lady (the NY Times) and the three weird sisters, ABC, CBS and NBC. We saw the beginnings of that in this election with the SwiftVets and Rather's bogus memos. In the 2008 election, a few dozen people in Manhattan will no longer dictate to us what is and is not news. We will decide for ourselves. In an increasingly decentralized world, centralized new gathering has no place.

    Chances are their schemes won't work anyway. They pulled out all the stops for this election, spinning the news in Kerry's favor more than in any election since researchers began to keep tabs on such things in the 1960s. And yet Kerry not only lost by lawyer-proof margins, Bush became the first President since FDR (1936) to win reelection and increase his party's power in both the House and Senate.

    --Mike Perry, Inkling blog , Seattle

    1. Re:Why NYC and Hollywood Hate the Rest of US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel is poor? last i checked their GDP was in the 50-something ranking for the world which is pretty good for a country of their size considering there are 230+ countries in the world.

    2. Re:Why NYC and Hollywood Hate the Rest of US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel's GDP is higher than Singapore, New Zealand, or Kuwait. If that's poor, I won't mind living in poverty.

      obtw- Israel's GDP is in the 36 in the world as of 2003

      http://www.worldbank.org/data/databytopic/GDP.pd f

    3. Re:Why NYC and Hollywood Hate the Rest of US by pyrotic · · Score: 1

      Israel, small and poor? Compared to who? Israeli GDP per head is about $19,800, Palestine $830. Who are you trying to kid?

    4. Re:Why NYC and Hollywood Hate the Rest of US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How much is left when you don't count US aid?

    5. Re:Why NYC and Hollywood Hate the Rest of US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > Israel, small and poor? Compared to who? Israeli GDP per head is about $19,800, Palestine $830. Who are you trying to kid?

      Hmm. Maybe it has something to do with the type of government and economic system.

      Israel: Parliamentary democracy, capitalism.
      "Palestine": Tinpot dictatorship, kleptocracy.

      Naaaaaw, that's got nothing to do with it. It's all the fault of teh 3vil J00Z!

      Fun exercise: Divide the subsidies from the US to Israel, and from the UN and European states to "Palestine" by the respective populations the two countries.

      I suppose I can accept that "Palestine" isn't subsidized by the EU or the UN on the grounds that all the money ends up in Switzerland under the control of some French chick. Unless you believe Yasser's AIDS-wracked corpse underwent a last-minute conversion to Judaism last week, you're gonna have a hard time convincing me that teh 3vil j00z are behind it.

    6. Re:Why NYC and Hollywood Hate the Rest of US by Tackhead · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      > Israel, small and poor? Compared to who? Israeli GDP per head is about $19,800, Palestine $830. Who are you trying to kid?

      Hmm. Maybe it has something to do with the type of government and economic system.

      Israel: Parliamentary democracy, capitalism.
      "Palestine": Tinpot terrorist dictatorship, kleptocracy.

      Naaaaaw, that's got nothing to do with it. It's all the fault of teh 3vil J00Z!

      But they live in "refugee camps"! Yeah, yeah, what-the-fuck-ever. I know we westerners are supposed to think of tents and mud when we see the term "refugee camp", but take your green goggles off and just look at the damn place. "Refugee camps" of 100,000 people, featuring roads, water, brick and mortar construction, and that have been there for 30 years... anywhere else on the planet, those are called cities. (Of course, in states with functioning market economies - as opposed to terrorist kleptocracies - there's something to do in those cities other than figure out new ways to kill the Jews, but there we go on the GDP per capita front again. Guess when Saddam stopped paying $25K per suicide bomber, the only economic activity in "Palestine" really crashed.)

      Fun exercise: Divide the subsidies from the US to Israel, and from the UN and European states to "Palestine" by the respective populations the two countries.

      OK, so I suppose "Palestine" isn't subsidized by the EU or the UN on the grounds that all the money ends up in Switzerland under the control of some French chick. But unless you believe Yasser's AIDS-wracked corpse underwent a last-minute conversion to Judaism last week, you're gonna have a hard time convincing anyone (except possibly the Muslims) that teh 3vil j00z are behind it.

      And to stay on topic. I love NYC, but... fuck Hollywood.

    7. Re:Why NYC and Hollywood Hate the Rest of US by pyrotic · · Score: 1

      Yo Tackhead! Are we trying to start a flamewar now? I've spent more than a few months over the past few years in Israel/Palestine, and I'm guessing you haven't. Ignorance hasn't stopped Americans speaking their minds in the past, and there's no reason why it should now. Thanks for that. While it's possible to get work as a refugee camp dweller in the West Bank (unlike in Lebanon where refugees are barred by the government from being doctors for example) it's pretty unlikely. If you have brains, 5 years ago you'd work construction or catering or tourism in Israel (the Jordanian economy is pretty closed to West Bankers these days). Now Israel is closed to "undesirables" those jobs have gone to Philipinos, and the smart refugee is trying to find job security any place they can. In practice, this means NGOs, local government, healthcare, education. All that needs education, and if you have it, your chances of getting a US visa go right up.

      If you read my original post you might notice that I didn't mention "jews" or "J00Z" anywhere. Antisemitism is becoming a serious problem on my continent, and fuckwits like you screaming antisemitism at the drop of the hat are not improving matters.

    8. Re:Why NYC and Hollywood Hate the Rest of US by etheriel · · Score: 1
      And yet Kerry not only lost by lawyer-proof margins, Bush became the first President since FDR (1936) to win reelection and increase his party's power in both the House and Senate.


      Also the first President since 1916 (Woodrow Wilson) to win by such a small margin.

    9. Re:Why NYC and Hollywood Hate the Rest of US by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > While it's possible to get work as a refugee camp dweller in the West Bank (unlike in Lebanon where refugees are barred by the government from being doctors for example) it's pretty unlikely. If you have brains, 5 years ago you'd work construction or catering or tourism in Israel (the Jordanian economy is pretty closed to West Bankers these days).

      Hey, yeah, somethine else to ponder...

      ...how come none of the other nearby Arab nations will take these folks in? Ethnically, they're the same people. So why the closed borders?

      Closed borders make sense today - you're not gonna get many doctors out of a population raised to see itself as nothing more than delivery mechanisms for suicide bombs - but why have they always been closed?

      (Or is it that even if you're a relatively progressive monarchy, it's also politically advantageous to have not just one, but two scapegoats nearby?)

    10. Re:Why NYC and Hollywood Hate the Rest of US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jordan's population is 60% of Palestinian descent, not bedouin. The king is bedouin, as is much of the government. And they are scared of another Palestinian revolt, as happened in 1971.

      RE taking in refugees, even though the costs are now bourne by the UN, the responisibility is of the occupying power - Israel. That's the theory anyway, and why refugees in Lebanon have no civil rights. In Jordan the refugees are in a much better positionn than Lebanon, even though the government is scared of them.

  17. Re:Already getting slow, here's the article text. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Umm... I didn't get the impression of slowness. As a matter of fact, it's still loading at a perfectly acceptable speed right now.
    You could've at least made some effort to format it properly.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Whore.

  18. Collapse of the countryside by davejenkins · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As economies move more and more toward services and not manufacturing, the countryside-- with scattered factory towns, resource locations (coal, iron), and certainly agrarian regions atrophe their youth to the capital metropolis.

    I have seen this firsthand in London, where real estate prices continue to climb, while the Northern England and certainly Scotland prices are stable or slightly falling.

    I saw this happen in Seoul, where there is currently a property bubble on the south side of the Han river, while villages south toward Pusan are growing more empty every year.

    I am currently watching this happen in Tokyo, where every new building is full of "one room" apts catering to newcomers draining out of the countryside, and the towns on the far side of the island are nothing but grandmas and grandpas growing rice.

    My point: Tokyo, London, Seoul, Paris, New York, and perhaps Sydney will continue to see strong local economies, while their surrounding areas stagnate. Meanwhile, manufacturing-based economies like China, Taiwan, Malaysia, Germany, Brasil, and perhaps Vietnam will see distributed development as factories seek cheap land and cheap raw materials.

    1. Re:Collapse of the countryside by l-ascorbic · · Score: 1
      I have seen this firsthand in London, where real estate prices continue to climb, while the Northern England and certainly Scotland prices are stable or slightly falling.
      This was the case until recently, but as the UK property boom started in London the south-east, so has the slow-down. While prices continue to rise in areas where the bubble was late in arriving, the areas where the bubble is already inflated have started to slow or deflate.
    2. Re:Collapse of the countryside by tmalone · · Score: 2, Informative

      The exact opposite is true in the US. The death of many US cities occured between the 50s and the 80s. Look at Philadelphia, a city that lost 500,000 people between the late 1950s and today. Where did they go? New York? Baltimore? yes, some did, but most went to the suburbs. This is happening all over the US. Just as our cars and waist lines are expanding, so are our cities.

  19. An aside on Saskia Sassen by UnderScan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Saskia Sassen, professor of Sociology & author of "The Global City" is used as an authority in TFA. This post is not a slam but more of a critique of her as a lecturer.
    As a graduate of RIT, it was mandatory to take Senior Seminar which is RIT's attempt to enrich the student with timely lectures from authorities in a field. The topic of Senior Seminar is on globalization, human rights, and citizenship.

    You can find all the lectures online at http://www.rit.edu/~gannett/Archived.html (might I add that there are some really great lectures available) and you can specifically you can find Professor Saskia Sassen's lecture from December 13, 2001 Globalization or Denationalization? Economy of Policy in a Digital Global Age. ( .RAM file - Real Player required) Yes I attended this as it was mandatory but I was there with an open mind. We were required to attend and then discuss it at the next class meeting with our fellow students and our Senior Sem. professor.

    The class, including the professor, agreeded that she is too far out into the fringes of her studies of sociology and thus is unable to effectivly communicate her thoughts to those in attendance. Our professor, he too a professor in the field of sociology, was both disgusted and outraged in regards to her lecture. Disgusted that she can not reach students and perhaps make them question why & how globalization changes our lives. Outraged that we had to listen to over an hour of uninterpretable socio-politic-economic mishmash of ideas. I came away from that lecture with nothing. I will wholly admit that I am not a peer of hers nor am I well versed in any social science. Perhaps I am way out of my element and all of us students in attendance are not the pinnacle of sociology & research like she is, but I was dumbfounded that I could walk away from a lecture and gain nothing.

    Maybe she is a great authority on the topic of globalization, but her delivery on that topic left us feeling ill. Since we suffered through her lecture, I wonder if she really is an authority on globalization since many educated students and some of her peers were unable to discover it for themselves. If Sassen's lecture is measured against Marshall McLuhan's quote "The Medium is the Message", then Sassen's message becomes bunk.

    For a critique of her book, see Amazon.com customer reviews.

    1. Re:An aside on Saskia Sassen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you should have taken a basic grammar class so we could better understand what you are saying.

  20. Globalization is bunk by br00tus · · Score: 0
    The idea of globalization is overblown. The global economy was more globalized during the days of the British empire than it is today. The telegraph was a major breakthrough for globalization, but there hasn't been anything beyond that that revolutionized globalization, globalization meaning a production and trade of commodities in a more far-flung manner.

    It's true that American jobs are going to India and China. This is correct and it's a bad thing. But it is not the only reason, the corporate press reports stresses that for ideological reasons. Jobs, from factory jobs to computer jobs are automated out of existence. Jobs also disappear when profit rates fall and capital investment falls (that's cyclical though). Supposedly jobs automated out of existence magically reappear as new jobs paying the same or higher wage. Keynes didn't think so, and despite the rhetoric, the US government and "business community" doesn't think so either. Nor do they act different than their thinking, whatever they say. US business has benefited from massive government subsidies, usually with the words military or defense bandied about. What created the Internet? DARPA - Defense Advanced blah blah blah. What was the original name of the Interstate Highway System? The National System of Interstate and Defense Highways.

    Just a glance at this article shows the typical dot-com BS rhetoric. With IT wages falling for the past few years (and higher unemployment for the sector, the two things of course being related), I don't like hearing this BS any more. "Property: Our notions of property are being reshaped in the new era. There is a trend away from privatization and towards a 'managed commons' method of production and distribution." On the contrary, despite some labor-hours spent writing Linux and so forth (before being sued by well-heeld companied for copyright infringement, having the Alexis De Tocqueville Institute do a job on you, Microsoft twisting government arms to hurt you etc.), there is a massive worldwide trend towards privatziation. You can bet Bush will be privatizing many things with his friends in Congress, and that adds up to a lot lot lot more value than this shiny GPL stuff. Half the world lives on $2 a day and would easily be considered malnourished by our standards, there is a hell of a lot of production of commodities around the world, mostly food, then textiles as well as oil/coal and so forth and all of that adds up to a lot more labor hours than a few programmers typing away. Having mentioned Bush, it is a lot like being a white collar worker in the Bay Area and everyone you know is voting for Kerry in San Francisco and suddenly you find out there's hundreds of millions of Americans in the fly-over state who polls show voted for him because they think Jesus is coming with the Rapture or something. You may not see the bottom of the iceberg, but its mass is far more significant than that which you can see.

    1. Re:Globalization is bunk by mumblestheclown · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The global economy was more globalized during the days of the British empire than it is today.

      And you accuse somebody else of spouting bunk? References or statistics, please, for your assertion that, umm, "most people would find highly dubious."

      During the "days of the British empire", most people lived isoliated agrarian lives. This includes the people in the British Empire itself. The percentage of commerce that involved trade beyond a regional scale was probably far less than 5 or even 1% when viewed over the population of the earth as a whole.

      This morning I had cheese made in Holland and France, an orange grown in Spain, some orange juice from Florida, and some crackers from Norway for breakfast on bowl made in China. I'd have to have been an aristocrat to achieve this at the height of the British Empire.

    2. Re:Globalization is bunk by HeghmoH · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Jobs, from factory jobs to computer jobs are automated out of existence. Jobs also disappear when profit rates fall and capital investment falls (that's cyclical though). Supposedly jobs automated out of existence magically reappear as new jobs paying the same or higher wage. Keynes didn't think so, and despite the rhetoric, the US government and "business community" doesn't think so either.

      If these jobs don't reappear, then why has unemployment stayed basically the same throughout the entire industrial revolution? I would guess that 90% of the jobs that were done in 1800 have been automated out of existence, so why isn't 90% of the workforce unemployed?

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    3. Re:Globalization is bunk by Oligonicella · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Excellent.

      "...because they think Jesus...."

      You express exactly the polarized thinking that a big city produces. Couldn't be that all us fly-overs are thinking individuals that have opinions and values (both valid) that differ from you, could it? No. It's got to be that we are unthinking, stupid, or duped.

      Sorry, little man, you need to look for the mass of the iceberg yourself.

    4. Re:Globalization is bunk by avsed · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry, had to jump in here, even though I'm not the original poster. I'm struggling to not comment on the fact that this was modded "insightful" when it is completely wrong. In actual fact, the global economy was indeed more globalized during the latter days of the British empire than it is now; capital outflow from the UK has never recovered to the same level (as a percentage of GDP) as it was in 1914. In addition, no country (yes, including the US) has ever had as high a rate of capital outflow as was achieved by the UK before the First world war. Also, you really need to check your history books - during the "days of the British empire" I think you'll find that most people in the UK were living in cities. (certainly far more, as a percentage of population, than in the US). Whilst you're there, read a history of the East India company, or any book about corporatism, to see what globalisation really was about back then.

      Well done on your breakfast, but it's nothing new; certainly a member of the Eurpoean middle classes at the beginning of the 20th century could have done the same.

      Dan.

    5. Re:Globalization is bunk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The telegraph was a major breakthrough for globalization, but there hasn't been anything beyond that that revolutionized globalization, globalization meaning a production and trade of commodities in a more far-flung manner.

      ...argues the guy on a semi-real-time global forum in front of peers all over the world. Really, I have never had a discussion with a foreigner, but on internet discussion boards I have learned a lot about people in other countries, from the comfort of my home. If that's not anything new, then I'd like to hear what you would consider revolutionary.

    6. Re:Globalization is bunk by Neward+Rylet · · Score: 1

      The Interstate Highway System also helped bankrupt the railroad industry (which created more subsidies to keep that afloat), streetcar and mass transit companies (which were in turn broken up or taken over by the city, more subsidies), created urban sprawl and all its accutraments (strip malls, Wal-Marts). On the plus side it is now very easy to travel from Philadelphia to Boston in less than a day by car. On the negative it helped create massive urban sprawl, and (hence white flight and urban blight as so many left the city), it bancrupt the railroad industry and transit companies which put them in turn on government support and made intercity transportation significantly more difficult for those without cars (mainly city dwellers). Every time the government builds or subsidises something it tampers with the supply and demand curves and sometimes can through a whole economy off.

    7. Re:Globalization is bunk by Saeger · · Score: 1
      90% of the workforce isn't unemployed today because the rate of change is still slow enough for people to adapt.

      As automation increases (and the productivity gains hoarded by the wealthy), and fewer and fewer people are required to do actually useful work, they are still SOCIALLY required to "work for a living", and so they adapt by creating new "bullshit economies" to keep busy and the consumption cycle going.

      Imagine a world with advanced robotics (labor), nanotechnology (ultra-cheap manufacturing), and AI (services & even *gasp* creativity). No one would HAVE to work anymore, but socially there would still be an elitist hierarchy that would want to be at the top denying the fruits of an automated-production paradise to the breeding peons.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    8. Re:Globalization is bunk by mumblestheclown · · Score: 1
      Damn.. I wrote a nice long reply to you, but it acceidentally deleted.

      The short version: read the original poster's words. Note to patronizing twat (you): the "global economy" != "the british economy."

      The longer short version: a deconstruction of each item of my breakfast showing how, while britain was a world-beating place at the turn of the century, it was nothing compared to today's england where a ferry, airliner, or eurostar arrives about every 23 seconds.

      I also took you to task for claiming trying to equivocate "capital outflow as a percentage of GDP" with "globalization." I apologize for not being able to recreate this in my limited time.

      Your idea that england was more globalized then is a cocktail party myth. Dressed up with a few carefully chosen facts you might be able to convince a literature reader somewhere, but that's about it.

    9. Re:Globalization is bunk by avsed · · Score: 1

      Note to insulting clown(you): Sorry, but I never equated the modern global economy to the British economy; a statistic was requested, I provided one. By any meaningful _relative_ measure, todays "global economy" is more protectionist, more regionised (EU vs. US vs. Asia) and less interconnected, then the global economy of 1914. What do you mean when you assert than England is more globalised now? It is probably more cosmopolitan, certainly more connected, but its economy is measurably less dependant on the fortunes of non-EU states. Hence, it is fair to claim that the pre-WWI world (were incidently, the British empire was the largest economic entity, and thus a fair proxy for the global economy THEN) was more globalised than todays world.

      Dan

    10. Re:Globalization is bunk by mumblestheclown · · Score: 1
      were incidently, the British empire was the largest economic entity, and thus a fair proxy for the global economy THEN

      You continue to lack the capacity to read the original premise. His claim was that the WORLD was more globalized. Your claim is that the BRITISH EMPIRE was more globalized.

      Despite Britain's commitment to trade liberalism during the period, I strongly doubt this per the usual definition of "globalization", but nevertheless this is more or less an irrelevancy.

      NOW PAY ATTENTION HERE:

      For you see, when you make a claim about the GLOBAL economy, you have to talk about ALL COUNTRIES AND STATES; cherrypicking one particular outlier example to be a "fair proxy for the global economy" is dishonest and wrong. Full stop.

    11. Re:Globalization is bunk by avsed · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the SHOUTING, but it is you who doesn't get it: What was true for the British Empire was also true for at least Western Europe, the United States, Australia, and certain parts of South America. Much the same as now, except with higher levels of direct investment, and without China's integration into the world economy.

      Let me reiterate my claim simply, as it is clear you don't get it at all: Direct investment as a percentage of GDP is about the only statistic that is relevant when one talks about Globalization. It was higher pre-WWI than it is now, and this was also true for ALL developed nation states. Looking at capital flows globally (as a percentage of global GDP) it was higher then as well. Hence, more globalised then than now.

      The British Empire before WWI was absolutely huge, and consisted of many countries which today receive far less foreign direct investment. There is nothing dishonest or wrong in taking it as a proxy.
      You seem to make the arrogant assumption that things today are somehow radically different from in the past. Putting things in CAPS doens't make them right.

      Dan

    12. Re:Globalization is bunk by mumblestheclown · · Score: 1
      Direct investment as a percentage of GDP is your convenient cherrypicked statistic to justify some shite masters thesis, it sounds like.

      Problems with your idea:

      • No common definition of globalization seems to take this arbitrary strict economic view. Google "definiton of globalization" and the definition is almost universally defined in terms of movement of goods, services, and (especially) increased interconnectedness. To claim that the world was more interconnected in 1914 than it is today is absolute bollocks and you know it.
      • "Percentage of GDP" fundamental problem. In the time of Abraham and Isaac, there was no GDP because there was no measurable economic activity--all there was was UNCOUNTED economic activity like housework and subsistnece farming. If in the first transaction abraham sold his cow to isaac, and abraham is to be considered of one nation and isaac of another, then by your definiton this was the world highlight of globalization since the entire 100% of GDP was direct investment. Anyboy with a brain can see why you need to be shouted at: SCALE MATTERS. I don't doubt at all that there was significant FDI (I think you meant FDI, not DI) at the turn of the century and that the british empire was in some ways revolutionary in terms of its economic liberalization, but you have to consider NOT THE PERCENTAGE, but the SUM of connectedness, international trade, information, capital, and personnel flows, and the role of global corporatios as a whole. In such, your argument is completely and totally indefensible. The British East India Company may have been a megalith of its time - so much so, that it may have affected up to as many as.. I don't know.. pick a generous number.. 25% of the world inhabitants in a given year at the height of its power. Coca cola alone probably reaches that number in a typical week. In the smallest indonesian island, you will find women washing their hair today with small packets of a PandG product.
      Good luck with that masters thesis. It's an interesting one and if you squint your eyes just right, you might be able to fool yourself into actually believeing it. It also is a good reminder to the world that the global economy is not new and that people who lived before us had smart and interesting lives. But then to somehow try to twist this into saying that world globalization was higher back then crosses several lines into pure fantasy.
    13. Re:Globalization is bunk by avsed · · Score: 1

      Of course scale matters for comparison in absolute terms, but if one wishes to compare "globalisation" between eras then one MUST pick a relative measure. In fact, anything ELSE is completely indefensible - it is plain nonsense to suggest that we look at the sum of economic activities at two different times. If we were to do this and look at the US we would immediately come to the conclusion that the US domestic economy circa 2000 is more "globalised" than the global economy circa 1900 because it meets all of your criteria: whilst its absolute (inflation adjusted) GDP is much larger, it is internally much more interconnected and its output is also far more diversified THAN THAT OF THE ENTIRE WORLD ECONOMY of around 1900.

      In actual fact, the US (UK, Australian, etc.)economy of 1900 was more open to FDI, less protectionist, and much less regulated than it is now. Thus, a century ago, economies had already achieved the goals of the champions of globalisation today: free, unregulated movement of capital, goods, and services. I'm not suggesting that the average worker had a PC at home, was connected to a global network, and lived in an information nirvana, as you seem to be implying I'm doing. I *am* suggesting that you have fallen for a common fallacy, that you are refusing to accept a globalisation metric that is used by the IMF, and that your anecdotal arguments, such as the origins of your breakfast and the comparison of coca-cola (10% of UK GDP at the time, so in economic terms your point was incorrect anyway) are completely irrelevant.

      I think that most liberal economists would agree with the statements I've made. You, however, seem to be inflicted with a myopia of the accident of your year of birth, and are content to believe the common viewpoint that everything is more globalised now.

      And where did you get the idea that I'm doing a Masters from (FYI, I'm not), and what's that got to do with the discussion?

      Dan

    14. Re:Globalization is bunk by mumblestheclown · · Score: 1
      Of course scale matters for comparison in absolute terms, but if one wishes to compare "globalisation" between eras then one MUST pick a relative measure.

      So much bullshit, let me count the ways.

      1. You ignore the tiny issue that your definition of globalization doesn't seem to match everybody else's. Instead, your apologetics point to "a globalization metric." Sorry, ain't buying it.
      2. You continue to arbitrarily decide that the UK is the world and that this is a question of "relative" globalization. Your attempt to redefine the original question isn't working.
      3. You confuse the "goals of the champions of globalization" with globzlizatation itself. Globalization isn't about whether there the degree of regulation is high or not. It's about the amount of connectedness despite any regulation. I obviously am not an idiot (and neither are you, though you are barkarking up a dead end, so to speak), so please stop treating me as one with your stupid word games, hoping I wouldn't notice.
      4. If you redefine "globalization" into "some arbitrary nonsense" then of course you can make it fit whatever thesis you want. Unfortunately for you and the invisible goat who brings you your mittens, globalization has real, commonly accepted definitions, and you've touched on none of them. I'm tired of this nonsense. If you've got a point to make that doesn't twist definitions, then make it. Otherwise, go back to your studies. There is very little chance that you are not now a masters or undergraduate student or were not recently one.
    15. Re:Globalization is bunk by avsed · · Score: 1

      I define globalisation to be the integration of national economies; I believe this is not "arbitrary nonsense", but a commonly accepted definition. Integration of national economies can be measured by FDI (as a percentage of GDP in order to track this through time). If you disagree (as you seem to be doing by suggesting that I'm engaging in sophistry), then please provide a meaningful alternative measure.

      I claim that sustained FDI as a percentage of GDP was much higher in the past for the dominant national economies.

      I conclude that by this measure, national economies were more interconnected 100 years ago then they are now.

      As a corrollary I make the (weaker) claim that the hype surrounding globalisation is what leads people to believe that the conclusion above must be false. By not addressing my premise directly (other than saying, "sorry, aint buying it"!) you have re-enforced my belief in the validity of this claim.

      If you are going to reply, please point out the fallacy in my argument, or refute my premise, rather than blindly directing a charge of BS against me. Ad hominem attacks on my supposed educational immaturity and/or academic background credit no-one, and I assure you that your assertions are quite wrong.

      Dan

  21. what is /. coming to? by MoreDruid · · Score: 1
    Slashdot editors asking us to RTFA?

    That must be a first

    --
    The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.
    1. Re:what is /. coming to? by hine_uk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think they felt a swell of pride when they got mentioned from TFA "News: In what began as a primarily geek phenomenon at Slashdot.org,"

  22. Actually it is the local government by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful



    Location matters depending on one thing - the quality of local government.

    Take North Korea for instance - it isn't that different from South Korea, and yet the people in North Korea are dying of hunger.

    The only difference between the North and South Korea(s) isn't location, but rather, the governments that run the two places.

    Even within a country, you can find that people of different classes congregate into different areas, and that is largely the effect of governments.

    People paying hefty premiums for the real estate in High Class Area for many reasons - of course, the "High Class" does sound nice. But other than that, better schools, better security, better connections, et cetera do add up.

    In slums area, like in shanty towns, people often don't even have to pay for the real estate they occupy, but they DO pay for the effects of CRIME, little or no chance of schooling, rampant joblessness, and so on.

    All those can be and would be addressed effectively if you have a good government.

    The Philippines as well as Myanmar were RICH COUNTRIES in Asia. Today, the people of both countries are suffering because of the failure of their respective governments.

    On the other hand - we can see the rise of China - whether you agree or not, the present government of China is "better" in some ways, as compare to the past - and that allows the people of China to have a chance to move foward, and many do.

    By the same token, the government of United States of America is failing, and we can see the effects - dropping standards of living, growing deficits, the exodus of jobs, the rising crime rates, and so on.

    City Without Borders is just an idea. Cities such as New York City won't be in the list of City Without Borders for long, if New York City continues to be ruled by bad governments.

    Other newcomers from South America or Asia or Europe may take its place, simply because talents will flock to places with good governence. And with the concentration of all those talents, miracles happen.

    That's all.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Actually it is the local government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      By the same token, the government of United States of America is failing, and we can see the effects - dropping standards of living, growing deficits, the exodus of jobs, the rising crime rates, and so on.

      I don't mean to be a stickler about the crime thingy, but crime rates have been steadily dropping for the past decade or so.

    2. Re:Actually it is the local government by antiMStroll · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not by any means universally true. Vancouver has the about the most expensive real estate in Canada and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who ascribes it to the quality of local government. A beautiful location, year-round temperate weather, even a similarity to Hong Kong's geography attracting Pacific Rim money are bigger factors which, in my opinion, offset what has to be the most slack, lazy and irresponsible (in the sense of procatively taking responsibility for anything) municipal government it's been my displeasure to live under.

    3. Re:Actually it is the local government by LilGuy · · Score: 1

      Obviously they don't take into account theft of copyrighted materials. ;)

      --

      You're nothing; like me.
    4. Re:Actually it is the local government by Duncan3 · · Score: 2, Funny

      and.. it's as far as you can get from Quebec!

      --
      - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
    5. Re:Actually it is the local government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wtf are you talking about?

  23. Americans second by Alsee · · Score: 0

    We might find individuals thinking of themselves as New Yorkers first and Americans second

    I think a lot of people have been feeling that way since November 2nd.

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  24. Paul Gaugin asked... by hine_uk · · Score: 1

    ..."Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going?". "well I dont know about anyone else . But I came from my room. I'm a kid with big plans and I'm going outside! See ya later!" "Say, who the heck is Paul Gaugin Anyway" Sorry, couldnt help myself - Calvin and Hobbes (still missed)

  25. WAY OFF!!! by deft · · Score: 1

    "You should read the original article to see if you agree with the author -- or not."

    You do realize this is slashdot, don't you?

    And btw, aren't anonymous readers actually anonymous cowards around here?

    --

    There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
  26. Much ado about less than nothing by Tsar · · Score: 5, Insightful
    • Digital culture is potentially global culture. We find theatre productions from London, like "Les Miserables", becoming mega-hits on Broadway in New York City.
      Italian operas have been performed all over the world for centuries. What is different? Nothing.
    • The city scenes in the first Matrix film were shot in Sydney, the second in San Francisco, and yet on-screen they constituted an architecturally homogenous unidentifiable "global city."
      Modern skyscrapers are designed more for efficiency than uniqueness, and with few exceptions are not terribly distinctive. Just because my city can be photoshopped to look like another one does not make me more a "citizen of the world."
    • The increasing globalization of production creates a "global culture" that is cosmopolitan and robust in its diversity.
      What an asinine statement. My grandfather could walk into a store 50 years ago and buy a Japanese radio as easily as an American-made one. Did it make him more culturally aware?
    • Balancing this trend, however, we find a resurgence in international arts. Films like "Amelie" succeed because they inflect the emerging global culture with a local or regional cultural flavor.
      Films like "Amelie" succeed because they are well-made and entertaining despite the subtitles, not because of them.
    • In addition, Chow Yun-Fat is not only a successful Chinese actor, but more importantly a successful global actor.
      Mark Twain was an international star as well. So was Benjamin Franklin. Chow Yun-Fat is not a different species, just a different breed.
    Each generation thinks that their time is the most important moment in history. It is the hubris of our species, and it leads us unfailingly to make bad decisions about the future, thinking we know more than our predecessors and as much as our successors. This is why each generation laughs at its ancestors and is laughed at by its descendants.

    Come on, people; we have thousands of years of history to draw upon here. Can't we muster some perspective? Read Ecclesiastes--there is nothing new under the sun.
    1. Re:Much ado about less than nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

      Is there anything of which one can say, "Look! This is something new"? It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time.

      There is no remembrance of men of old, and even those who are yet to come will not be remembered by those who follow.

      Ecclesiastes 1:9-11

    2. Re:Much ado about less than nothing by tmalone · · Score: 1

      Exactly! Nothing new is in this article. The only thing that has changed is that we exchange ideas over the internet. The world is not drastically different than it was before, and we not inherently more important just because our generation found a new way to steal music. Most of the arguments made in this article could have been made in the 1970s, the 1960s, the 1920s, the 1840s, etc....

    3. Re:Much ado about less than nothing by GauteL · · Score: 1

      "Films like "Amelie" succeed because they are well-made and entertaining despite the subtitles, not because of them."

      Excuse me, but this seems to me like a statement of ignorance.

      Why is it that subtitles are somehow associated with being poor quality? Is this implying that only the USA produces good films?

      The european (and asian) film production is incredibly rich and not just incomprihensible art-films, but often very entertaining.

      Sadly (for the US) it seems they very rarely make it in the US, because of for instance:

      * An expectation of a certain formula for the film
      * An inability/unwillingness to read subtitles
      * Nationalism
      * Cultural differences
      * The (at least perceived) sillyness of dubbing

      Dubbing films is big in most parts of Europe, while subtitling is the norm for Scandinavia and some other countries in Europe. The result is that most of Europe is open to a very large amount of films, that the USA ignores. Some of these are much more innovative and creative than Hollywood-productions. England, sadly, seems to be closer to the US in this respect.

    4. Re:Much ado about less than nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      judging from your weblog, you are exceedingly out of touch with what is really going on in the world around you.

      Globalization is happening whether you choose to see it or not.

  27. Re:Already getting slow, here's the article text. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll be disgusted if the mods don't take this down. The server isn't in the slightest bit slow. This is complete rubbish! There needs to be a "Copy of the Article" mod that doesn't give karma to kill the motivation for idiots like these to fuck up the thread.

  28. Plus ca change... by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
    Since this was well known in Shakespear's time...

    It probably isn't news.

    --
    Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  29. Why is Sydney oden that list? by mumblestheclown · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There are a dozen cities in Asia (yes I know Australia is not Asia) globablly more important than Sydney ("the gateway to Woomera"). Sydney is a great place to (begin a) holiday, but except for the fact that it has a somewhat unique location, it is unexceptional from a business standpoint. You might raise the same objection about Miami, but given how much south / central american money passes through there, I can see a reasonable case being made for Miami. Sydney is not defensible as a top global business city unless you use the criterion "best of each continent", in which case they forgot McMurdo station off that list.

    1. Re:Why is Sydney oden that list? by F13 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Sydney ("the gateway to Woomera")

      firstly, what a snide and useless remark.

      It is quite easy to find information that supports Sydney as a global business city.

      Australia is the 11th largest economy in the world and Sydney its largest, most international city and the economic capital. Set on Port Jackson Harbour, the city has a long history of trade, commerce and finance.

      Many multinationals have their Asian-Pacific headquarters in the city, including Price Waterhouse Coopers, Compuserve and BT. Others such as IBM, Coca-Cola and Unilever have offices here.
      Taken from here

      Sydney is often included along with other noted business cites such as singapore.

      Sydney is attractive for its language diversity, and Morgan Stanley has located some of its back-office operations there. Tokyo and Hong Kong are both a bit too expensive for such operations

      it is becoming increasingly common for Chinese companies to raise money not just on the Hong Kong market, but also in other markets such as Sydney or Singapore.
      Taken from here

      And other information from NSW.gov site.

      # the most multicultural city in the Asia Pacific
      # 70% of the nation's top 250 IT&T companies are headquartered in Sydney
      # base for 44% of regional call centres in the Asia Pacific
      # lowest unemployment rate in Australia
      # major Asia Pacific financial centre
      # information communications technology capital of Australia

      link

      And
      Australia is once again among the leading nations in terms of economic growth. For the second year running, the worldwide executive opinion survey conducted for the IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook considered Australia's economy as the most resilient in the world.

      Of the 53 authorised banks with operations in Australia, 40 are based in Sydney. This includes nine of the 11 foreign subsidiary banks in Australia and the 10 largest investment banking groups. Major foreign banks with operations in Sydney include JPMorgan Chase, ABN Amro, Citibank, and Deutsche Bank. Other global banks have established highly successful back office operations in Sydney. These foreign banks benefit from Sydney's time zone advantage, spanning the close of business in the United States and the opening of the European trading day.

      Taken from here and here

      Cheers

    2. Re:Why is Sydney oden that list? by CommunistTroll · · Score: 2, Funny

      So tell me, what's the weather like in Melbourne nowdays?

    3. Re:Why is Sydney oden that list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha ha ha, those bitter victorians ;)

    4. Re:Why is Sydney oden that list? by smallstepforman · · Score: 1

      Why, its raining, as has been all week. You have a problem with that. Look on the bright side - its way to cold and wet for the criminals to even bother stepping outside...

      --
      Revolution = Evolution
  30. RTFA? by Begemot · · Score: 1

    You should read the original article to see ...

    Oh no, it won't work here.

  31. The '90s are back baby! by lxs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This article reminds me of the kinds of articles that were written in the early '90s about the fall of nation states and the emergence of a cosmopolitan information economy due to that newfangled internet thingy. Well I'm glad the days of millenarian doom and gloom are over and that we will go back to '90s optimism. (yes the world is a mess, but it was bad back then too. Remember it gets worse before it gets better) Now all I want is my VR helmet.

  32. Nice theory, but not new by Underholdning · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sounds a lot like the theory of The Global Village from 1962

  33. Unsure, but no. by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As is so often the case when reading academic articles, it's hard to determine whether I agree or disagree with the author. I do, however, disagree with the notion that the concentration of economic power in cities is some sort of new or increasing phenomenon. Cities have always been, essentially, points of concentration of economic power. Concentrated economic power might even be the defining characteristic of cities.

    Many years ago, access to and control of natural resources such as salt or fish or arable land or water was the reason a city might develop. Today, access to man-made resources such as communications infrastructure, various markets, or even tax policies may be more important than natural ones. But the fact remains that different localities provide different operating environments, some of which are more advantageous to a given business than others. Place, therefore, still matters.

    1. Re:Unsure, but no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As is so often the case when reading academic articles, it's hard to determine whether I agree or disagree with the author.

      Academic article? This piece is far from being an academic article. This was written by a college kid and placed on a pop web site. To call this rambling whimsy an academic article is quite a leap.

      He might reference people you never heard of, and use terminology you never use. But that hardly makes this an academic article above and beyond any rambling published in a blog.

    2. Re:Unsure, but no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I do, however, disagree with the notion that
      > the concentration of economic power in cities
      > is some sort of new or increasing phenomenon.

      The article doesn't suggest that the concentration of economic power in cities is a new or increasing phenomenon.

      The article states that perhaps very large cities are more important to the global economy and relatively unimportant to the local economy, among other things.

      From there, it (poorly) attempts compare the physical world with the digital world: are there large (virtual) cities in the digital world [Amazon, Slashdot]? And small ones [your web site]? How do these digital "cities" parallel the real physical world, and how are they different?

      I'm not saying it is a good article, but that is what he was getting at.

    3. Re:Unsure, but no. by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 1

      Somebody ought to mod parent up, as it's way more lucid than the actual article. I consider that my reading comprehension is at least on par with that of the neighborhood schnauzer, but TFA was cryptic to say the least.

      Thanks for the explanation.

  34. Re:Why is Sydney on that list? by DJ+XpL0iT · · Score: 2, Informative


    Why indeed?

    English speaking? Proximity to water? Same timezone as the burgeoning Asian markets, yet Anglo-friendly for multinationals wanting to build their presence in Asia.

    If you consult some studies from people who have actually the phenomenon of the 'Global City', you'll find that Sydney meets the criteria, whereas, for example Singapore (trotted out as the 'real' Global City in the region) is better described as a 'city state'.

    Sydney has established itself as the leading Australian city in world city terms (Baum,1997; Stimson, 1995). It is the major international air hub, is the most important financial centre and, during the growth in Asian economies, extended its role tobecome a location for many transnational corporations wanting to service south eastAsia.

    With your final comment - you come off sounding like you have "Tall Poppy Syndrome". Your city not on the list hey?

  35. I concur... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    with all the post at this level.

    The above post is a total WHORE

  36. Re:Already getting slow, here's the article text. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He posted a copy of the article. Big fucking deal. Get over it and get a life you fucking losers.

  37. Re:Why is Sydney on that list? by mr_snarf · · Score: 1
    Proximity to water?
    But you can't drink the water :)
    --
    printf("Goodbye cruel world!\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b");
  38. Location is a meat game. by infonography · · Score: 4, Interesting
    heard that before? Yep it's Gibson. 2004 may be remembered as one the final gasps of the right. Globalization inevitable. It isn't some sort of wishful, after the loss doctrine for the Left elite. The neo-cons want to build walls against change and unfamiliar ideas.

    Unfortunately for them, their own plans are about to lead them to cultural ruin. Bush's plan to provide High Speed internet to the nation should be read as what to him would seem akin to the Rural Electrification Project. Where the idea was, lets get power to the people out in the farms so they will be more competive and produce more. That sort of backfired. They got used to the power and started wanting more. More TVs, DVD, Fancy cars and the lowly Banana.

    The upshot was that the young started to abandon the farms in droves. As they did the cheap labor of the farm children was replaced by cheap labor from immigrants. The old cycle was that the Farm would be inherited by the children of the farmer and next generation would take over. As the found new jobs as computer programmers and got MBAs they let their parents sell of the old family farm to large agro businesses. Large Farms got larger and Cities got bigger.

    Wiring the rest of the county will give reason for companies to relocate to cheaper parts of the US and bring good jobs to town who's main income was the local speed trap. If your a Conservative Rural Republican in a Red State, visions of selling farmland to city slickers for housing and commercial parks must seem like heaven. Voting for Bush was voting your pocketbook.

    Now here comes the other side of the coin. Unlike mining towns of the 19th and early 20th Century you really can't lock people in. Your neigbors will undercut your housing deals because they all got buckets of land and nobody to grow whatever.

    City Slicker Programmers and the upper skilled workforce are not Conservative Rural Republicans, There those damn Blue State Liberals. They eat fish RAW!!!!, A lot of them aren't even from the USA, most dress like they were extras in that confusing movie The Matrix. As Techs and Tech businesses move to the boondocks they will turn the red states blue.

    Right now the current FUD is that Liberals don't respect people with Faith. The fact is that the rural people can't afford to break the back of the liberal technology complex. Ever wondered why Strict harsh and very communist China hasn't stompped all over Hong Kong? China needs Hong Kong more then Hong Kong needs China.

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
    1. Re:Location is a meat game. by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      What an ignorant load of tripe off-loaded by a self-presuming intelligencia.

      'Neocons' are as advanced and far-sighted as (certainly) you. It's just a different outlook.

      Can't be that though, can it? Got to be that you have the clear sight and they are ignorant bumpkins.

      Tool.

    2. Re:Location is a meat game. by Dynamic+Ribbon+Devic · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. He doesn't even seem to understand it is Reganism and Thatcherism that pushed the free market economy and small government. He is so caught in his anti-Bush mentality he doesn't even understand what the Right really stands for nowadays.

    3. Re:Location is a meat game. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, you mean the Right DOESN'T stand for massive debt, runaway government, censoring scientific research, intrusive laws, lack of oversight, lack of foresight, and a general lack of intellegence (military and otherwise)? That they aren't the ones attempting to descecrate this country's Constitution by converting it into a common dictionary to define a word that already means what they want it to mean? That it isn't about changing your story every time you're caught in an open lie? (so tell me, where are the WMDs? Why aren't Canadians keeling over in droves from their shoddy and impure medicine?)

      If you don't like Bush and his Congress are doing, then you should have broken tradition (which seems to be Standard Operating Procedure for the Right, whenever convenient) and held a real race for the primaries.

      I'm posting this AC to avoid the obvious karma whoring complaint. I'll bookmark it and check back to see what YOU think the Right stands for.

    4. Re:Location is a meat game. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I will step up to the plate on that one, but I am not the even if I am not quite the one your really asking. They are too chicken to answer. They are too busy wacking off to Rush Windbag

      I view the Right as being at least two parts (much like the Left). Business Conservitive or Libitarian leaning Republicans and NeoCon Christian Empire (nutjobs). I can safely turn my back on the first sort of republicans. These are pretty decent people. Hard work, patriotism, ethics. McCain, Powell or Spector. Then there are the NeoCons; Ashcroft (Good Riddence) Sen. Brownnose(?) and Man-on-man Santorum, organizations like The Club for (Penis) Growth etc. Who think they are founding the next empire. Empires are not going to work.

    5. Re:Location is a meat game. by khallow · · Score: 1

      OTOH, I think we'll find that people who wish to stay in relatively isolated regions will have a rural rather than urban culture.

    6. Re:Location is a meat game. by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the first group appears to vastly outnumber the second group, yet the second group seems to wield all of the power.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  39. Not Frankfurt, not even Paris. by hughk · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The interesting thing is that Frankfurt led the world with it's electronic financial futures and options exchange, DTB, know known as Eurex. Other electronic markets existed before, indeed some of the code came from a similiar project in Zurich.

    Now the cash market has become all electronic, yes the market place may exist in a building on the outskirts of Frankfurt, but the financial centre is no longer there. Much of the trading is actually taking place in London and Frankfurt becomes relegated to backoffice clearing and settlement operations.

    What I'm trying to say is that whilst the market place is important, it could be quickly established elsewhere. Where the customers are becomes more important.

    Essentiaally it means there is a movement towards a single financial centre serving a group of timezones.

    --
    See my journal, I write things there
  40. Outsourcing yourself by yahyamf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I was working from home in the US and recently moved to the middle east. I still have the same job thanks to broadband internet and VoIP telephony. Cost of living here is much less, and it's nice to have the same US salary.

    1. Re:Outsourcing yourself by bhima · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I moved a couple of years ago and has the choice to be paid in Euros or Dollars. Given the state of the dollar, boy am I glad I chose Euros.

      Still your point is very valid: It's starting to matter less where you are located and more how connected you are.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
  41. Breakdown of nation states by mariox19 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I read an interesting book several years ago, Revolt of the Elites, that is very much on topic. The author argues that a global economy represents the breakdown of the nation state as the central political-economic unit, as the global economy encourages a cosmopolitan mindset among those at the top who benefit from it.

    While I don't agree that this represents "a threat to democracy" (just the opposite in my opinion), I think the book is very perceptive.

    --

    quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

  42. wow take it easy by opencity · · Score: 2

    Lay off already. You don't need to spin for a while. Kerry's gone and won't be back. Go back to blaiming Bill Clinton, it's more entertaining. To claim NY is anti-semitic or anti-Israel is surreal. You have bought some strange extremest spin.

    The phrase 'fly over country' is indicative of insecurity that over TV'ed 'right wingers' get while watching Leo DeCaprio cavort with models.

    And what's with the hatred of the French? That's like me hating Southerners except I don't: Seems like most of them (like most of everyone) are cool. Most New Yorkers have little to do with your hatred except we don't vote like you. And we get screwed on Homeland Security Funding, but that's another post.

    New York City, speaking as a native, has an advantage, to me, over much of the country, including Hollywood, in that you don't need to drive everyday. Other than that, we're a huge amount of people trying to make the same kind of living that every one in the 'Red States' are trying to make, and some of us try to take advantage of being surrounded by a huge amount of people.

    The article, (did you RTFA?) had as one of it's few interesting points a nice shout out to slashdot. The centralization and future of the super-city is an interesting topic not really addressed.

    >>thinking of themselves as New Yorkers first and Americans second...

    Always have. You will find that in Italy, too, which is a country sort of next to France with, IMHO, really good food.

    I'm a New Yorker
    I pledge allegance to the flag ... (hopefully you can fill in the rest)
    I am a citizen of the world, my religion is doing good.

    --
    Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it.
  43. Singular city by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a city didn't have borders there would only be one city.

  44. Re: by Oligonicella · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "We might find individuals thinking of themselves as New Yorkers first and Americans second, or Parisiennes first and French second."

    That is what is happening now. It is also the reason that New Yorkers and Parisiennes are looked upon so poorly by others in their own countries.

  45. new? by agentk · · Score: 1

    How is this at all new? It's the story of human civilization, since the first of our great cities, such as Ur an Babylon.

    --

    VOS/Interreality project: www.interreality.org

  46. Empty the Cities by Baldrson · · Score: 1
    Cities have become a net security risk.

    This is true not simply because of weapons of mass destruction and their proliferation -- but because of pandemics such as AIDS.

    Packet switching protocols, such as IP, were originally developed to allow decentralization of critical communication infrastructure during the cold war. It's just incredibly stupid to not only continue to shove people into cities but to make a vision of the future based on "cities without borders".

    1. Re:Empty the Cities by bhima · · Score: 1

      Pol Pot! Is that You?

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    2. Re:Empty the Cities by tmalone · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Cities are cheaper to maintain. They also allow for agglomerations and pools of skilled labor. There is a reason that airplanes are made where they are made. There is a reason that certain cities were at the center of the dot-com boom. Boston, Seattle, and San Francisco. MIT, University of Washington, and Stanford/Berkeley. What do they have in common? That's right, top of the line CS schools. Cities are the life blood of our economy. They are much cheaper to maintain than a huge network of rural homes and the physically bring people together, something that is very important to the creation of culture. Yes, great masses of people in single locations is a security risk, but then again, I seem to recall $2,000,000,000 being lost from tiny little programs running around our great decentralized network.

  47. As a veteran telecommuter... by TFGeditor · · Score: 1

    ...I can tell you there is nothing better. For the past 5 years, I get up in the morning, get a cup of coffee, scratch my butt, sit down at my computer, and I am "at work." Our primary office site is 300+ miles away in Houston.

    Logistical issues are infrequent and minor, usually comfortably and efficiently addressed by FedEx or UPS.

    Telecommuting is not the wave of the future, it is the reality of now--at least for me.

    --
    Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
    1. Re:As a veteran telecommuter... by tmalone · · Score: 2, Interesting

      all that this means is that talking no longer requires us to be geographically next to each other. Great, the phone did that 100 years ago.
      The UPS and FedEx example is interesting. It is almost as if a new class is being developed. The Business people of the world cannot be bothered to travel anymore, so they pay somebody to do it for them. You are still governed by geography though, you have simply outsourced the requirement.

  48. The Nice Thing About Pol Pot... by Baldrson · · Score: 1

    The nice thing about Pol Pot is that despite the fact that he decided to empty the cities of Cambodia in a totally stupid way, there haven't been enough movies made about his stupidity to program the populace into knee-jerk bigotry against reasonable ways of emptying the cities.

    1. Re:The Nice Thing About Pol Pot... by bhima · · Score: 1
      The Killings Fields is the only movie I'm aware of...

      A couple of years ago I moved from a big city in the US to a small city in the EU. I enjoy living here but did not realize how much until I went back for a visit. I had a hard time deciding which was worse the suicidal driving or the pre-election hysteria

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
  49. Who gives a f--- what the right really stands for by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 1

    In the last two US elections the pseudo-libertarian free market "Right" has willingly gone over to the side of big intrusive government, massive debt, onerous laws, putting fundamentalist Christian ideology ahead of science, and alieanating overseas allies (and their markets). Your actions speak so loud I can't hear what you "really stand for" at all.

    --
    0 1 - just my two bits
  50. Re:Already getting slow, here's the article text. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's extremely annoying to have to scroll down. And it's whoring.

    I'm glad to see it's now modded -1 redundant though.

  51. Cities? by randall_burns · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What I think this article missed is that a lot of the "big money" does things like travel much of the year to avoid taxes. These folks are more likely to be found in places like Aspen or some of the nicer carribean resorts than cities. What really drives the cities are jobs that are located in cities for traditional or political reasons(i.e the New York Stock Market-the various political jobs in Washington DC). People with serious money have _choice_ and they usually don't for the most part choose to hang out in cities. Maybe some cites are doing better in the global economy-but with increased communication eventually the functions in those cities will move to someplace cheaper.

  52. Ich bin Ein Nomad .. by torpor · · Score: 1

    .. been one since I was born, am lucky enough to be able to say that I have lived and worked and loved all over the planet, and I've been to a lot of different cities in my time. its all just like one big blur now, almost .. like one big matrix city, connected with tube-like structures that fly through space, a kind of 'space-warp' from one traincar/sidewalk to the next, which only a very few can afford, though many use.

    sometimes I can't help believe that all the problems in the world are just a big television show, because in places like Tokyo and Los Angeles and Prague, there are literally millions upon millions of people living together, just fine .. or so it seems, anyway.

    One thing I've noted in the last 20 years at least, my life has definitely changed a lot thanks to the Internet. "HQ" is an e-mail address away, and even though its mostly only the 'technologically civlized' states that have access to the internet bubble, that is one large world.

    errmm.. i mean, "city state".

    you can really see/feel this in europe, or at least i do, anyway. to me, parts of western europe are like one big city-state, with sci-fi trainride interconnects in between large parks ..

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  53. AAAAHHHH!!! by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

    EMERGENCY! Global cities! This is not a drill! Sorry. Had to say it.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  54. Re:Who gives a f--- what the right really stands f by infonography · · Score: 1
    Agreed, these guys are more Neocon FUD machines, pay them no mind. Under Reagan and Thatcher the business climate was made more 'Receptive to the needs of business'. I call it Crackwhoring. The old leftist went too far in the 60s and that backlash resulted in the cultural vacuum that was the 70s. In the 60's leftist were robbing banks and blowing stuff up. Opposing viewpoints come in waves, swing left with hippys, back with disco, back left with Carter and back right with Regan/bush back left with Clinton, back with right for bush.

    Frankly the waves are getting weaker. Right - Left, who cares whose correct. However pour some sugar in a cup of coffee, you will have to stir it around to get it properly mixed. The bush vote was the last gasp for isolationist heartland America. Hollywood is a cultural acid to heartland values. Corparate money interests have no loyaties to Neocon values, if the left can raise the bid with the money from movies and technology like stem cell, the neocons will be shown the door like the crazy on the street corner with a "Doom is coming" sign who wanders into the NYSE.

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  55. This guy gets his ideas from Wired by Animats · · Score: 4, Insightful
    That's a weak article. Look whom he cites - Wired writers, most of them.

    "World Cities" have been around for a long time, all the way back to the Roman Empire. Overcentralization was once a key part of the control system of kingdoms and empires.

    Actually, finance is far less centralized than it used to be. There was a time within living memory when most major US companies were headquartered in New York. That's no longer the case. The international financial system, for most of the twentieth century, revolved around London and New York. Today, there are major financial centers all over the world. For a serious paper on the subject, see Rank Size Distribution of International Financial Centers.

    Going against this trend is the centralization of power in the Washington DC area. For most of American history, there were few major businesses headquartered in the Washington area. That started to change some time during the Reagan administration, and now the Washington area is a major business hub, focusing on businesses which are defined by their relationship to federal regulation or spending.

    1. Re:This guy gets his ideas from Wired by panarch · · Score: 1

      Sassen, Burt, Weber...
      these are Wired authors?

      Thx for the response and the link to the 2004 paper, very handy. Bear in mind that I dont' agree/disagree with Sassen's theory. It was an opportunity to think about global culture networks.

  56. Better than the dot-CON bubble... by Baldrson · · Score: 1

    Instead of looking at the dot-CON bubble as the exemplar of technical innovation, you should look at the Wright Brother's bike shop, the first computer (the ABC) built at an agricultural school in a small town in Iowa, the first supercomputer built by Seymour Cray on his farm with 25 assistants, only one of which had a PhD (a junior level programmer) and the desert workshop of Burt Rutan that built SpaceshipOne.

    1. Re:Better than the dot-CON bubble... by tmalone · · Score: 1

      isolated incidents. We aren't talking about those. We're talking about movements. The airplane building industry didn't stay in the Wright Brother's bike shop. Now, it is in places like Los Angeles and Seattle. They moved the corporate headquarters of Boeing to Colorado or something like that, but they still build planes where the skilled labor is.

  57. Toffler? by Louse · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I honestly dont know why people are still writing on topics that Alvin Toffler wrote about in 1969 with his wife. I mean, there was a movie made about his works...so its not as if it didn't gain attention...and as a movie, it would be able to hold attentions of americans better it seems. Its just future shock revisited.

  58. Re:Collapse of the colonies by AndThorn · · Score: 1

    Ah, the 'ripple-out' effect, which occurs over the boom-bust cycle. But the previous previous poster was correct in terms of the long-term trend.

    Surely the cause of all this is the job subsidy, 'policy subsidy' and 'power subsidy' of large central governments located in these cities.

  59. Re:Why is Sydney on that list? by mumblestheclown · · Score: 1
    your own quote: "leading AUSTRALIAN city."

    Nobody doubts that Sydney is the leading Australian city. But to list Sydney before Shanghai, Hong Kong, or Singapore is comical.

    Incidentally, both cities where I have a flat are on the list.

  60. Author's Note by panarch · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As the author of the mindjack article on Sassen's "Global Cities" concept, I must say I'm fascinated and delighted to see all the discussion.

    Regardless of whether or not you agree with Sassen's basic premise, it does provide an interesting opportunity to muse on the effects of digital cultural production and reproduction.

    My own theory of Panarchy is considerably different than Sassen's "Global Cities." Where we agree is that networks are on the rise, and old-fashioned power hierarchies are waning. All else is details.

    I do think this transformation is something unique in human history.

  61. Umm hello? by csguy314 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Coooome oooooon! Not even a mention of Canada there!
    It mentioned Sydney but not Toronto or Montreal? You know we *are* part of the G8 (Australia isn't). We are the US's biggest trading partner. The Oscar winning Chicago was shot in Toronto. We were also atop the Human Development Index for a number of years.
    I know it's easy to forget about us Canadians, but we'll forgive you for it this time...

    --
    This is left as an exercise for the reader.
  62. Cities should not have borders... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...they should have domes, Sandmen, a Carousel, and a Computer. Oh, and a Circuit! We can't forget the Circuit, not can we?. We don't need no steenkin' Sanctuary however.

  63. You're missing the point: Invention by Baldrson · · Score: 1
    If you can invent things like the first air plane, first computer, first super computer and first private reusable manned suborbital rocket outside of cities, what's to stop you from inventing things like flexible manufacturing but people's hypnosis with Oz?

    I'll admit the cities served a useful function at one time, but the key things they did are now replacable with technology just as technology is making them high risk locales.

    1. Re:You're missing the point: Invention by tmalone · · Score: 1

      I'll agree that for some purposes, geography is beginning to matter less, but in some other ways, it is mattering more. The simple fact is that it costs a lot of money to run sewers, roads, railroad tracks, power lines, phone lines, fiber optic lines, etc lines... It is also incredibly expensive to have to hop in your car to go to the grocery store or the dry cleaners. More and more people are wanting to get rid of that, to stop having to get in their car to do everything. Cities allow that. They are more effecient uses of resources than rural life, or even suburban life. Are they a risk? Of course they are, but does it really matter? If we keep spreading out there will be greater risks to contend with, like the continued stress that sprawl will put on our resources and infrastructure.

      Also, those things weren't really invented outside of cities. That is, they weren't created in a vaccum, and none of them were all that useful until a whole bunch of people got on board. Ideas can happen anywhere, even basic implimentations, but to have something like that mature requires lots of people from many different fields, and lots of people from the same field. Will technology some day render physical proximity obsolete? Maybe, but it hasn't yet, and I don't think it will for a long time.

  64. Well, not guaranteed by tjstork · · Score: 1


    First off it seems that you want to trash everyone's regional values and desires in order to assume a super humanity state. Why do that? If the whole point of freedom is to be able to support diversity, then, why use that freedome to have a single culture smashing state.

    In a sense, the current war on terrorism is a war of the "global culture" against insular local cultures. It's not talked about much, but I bet the prospect of McDonalds in Mecca rouses more anger in the mideast than does anything else.

    Why build this state if we have a world of 6 billion drones all doing the same thing and having the same values? Why get rid of the nation state, or even the state or even the city for that matter.

    The whole trend of technology is build to order anyway, and we can increasingly make whatever we want and with less people, so, there's not even particurlarly any economic reason to have the super state. Perhaps instead of the super state, we should be breaking up countries and trade pacts across the globe and having a world where we share intellectual property but not physical goods. That way, each culture can decide whether or not to participate.

    Any action designed to bring about a single world culture is imperialism. You on the left can argue that your "imperialism" is for the good cause of saving the environment, but it's still imperialism. Given the choice between being a member state of some super world government, or having an all out nuclear war, I might actually prefer the latter to thin the human herd out rather than be subjugated to some pan-world government that has some french ass trying to tell me how to live.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:Well, not guaranteed by Ba3r · · Score: 1

      Not only is your rambling incoherent, but you don't even attribute your response to what I said.

      • I identified what I consider to be a temporary state in humanity: that where the nation-state (i.e. "Germany", "India", "Russia") existed; an delimitation of society that developed as we reached a critical point in communications & economy where city-to-city trade was insufficient, yet global trade was not yet viable a complete model.
      • I then referred to the collapse of this nation-state organization because a). trade now exists in the global economy, b). communications allow communities to develop irrespective of proximity, but rather by interest.
      • This is, in my estimation, leading to a new organization of society, one where people associate by a). Proximity, those who are geographically close to them (i.e. in the same city), and b). Interest, those who share the same interests, like a technical forum, or /.
      • Upon stating my projection of this new potential future, I felt compelled to remark that it is a positive, for it may be able to preserve, or re-emphasize regional cultural differences

      "Given the choice between being a member state of some super world government, or having an all out nuclear war, I might actually prefer the latter to thin the human herd out rather than be subjugated to some pan-world government that has some french ass trying to tell me how to live."

      How can You denounce me for 'trashing regional values', as you insult the millions who consider themself french, and state a preference for obliteration. Your inability to understand what I was saying may have been due to my using hyper-academic rhetoric (in a tongue-in-cheek reply to the parent), or maybe it has to do with the fact that you noticed the word 'colonial' and went apeshit without the 'Reason' that I am sure you purport to worship. It is dim-witted, reactionary nitwits who are just grasping for someone to denounce as 'imperialist' and 'anti-freedom' like you who diminish those who actually approach free-state policies with rationality and level-headedness.

  65. Yeah it is the local government by argoff · · Score: 1

    People paying hefty premiums for the real estate in High Class Area for many reasons - of course, the "High Class" does sound nice. But other than that, better schools, better security, better connections, et cetera do add up.

    I don't know about you, but it seems to me that the FED and the IRS both have strong policies in place that encourage people to go into way more debt than they should and that is a big factor reguarding alot of high priced housing in the states.

    Also, here in california, city government intentionally regulates, zones, and limits residnetial building to drive up property prices for the purpose of increasing the tax base, this is anything but the quality of local government.

    If I mugged you for $1000 and invested it to return the proceeds of $1050 to all your loved ones and took the credit for it. Technically speaking you all as a group would be better off financially, but realisticly you would all be worse off - because you would have lost controll over your lives futures and destinies. This is the way it seems things are going in many US cities. We've built all this infrastructure, created a large economic base of stadiums, airports, roads, water supply, and convention centers - but eveything still gets worse.

  66. Niceties vs Life by Baldrson · · Score: 1
    I'll tell you what's inefficient: Producing food in the countryside and shipping it to urban areas. Solar energy drives us all. The utilities you're talking about have all been solved in a low-impact low-capitalization way that is a lot easier to deal with. It doesn't cost lots of money to run a composting toilet and they're workable. Roads are necessary but they're already there. Railroad tracks are decreasingly necessary. Powerlines are necessary if you don't have local production. Phone lines? What decade are you living in? Fiber opitcs? Ever hear of WiFi?

    Dry cleaners? OK, you got me there.

    1. Re:Niceties vs Life by tmalone · · Score: 1

      So, where would the food be shipped to? To every single home in the country side? Or should we all be producing our own food? There have to be distribution centers. There is that word again, center. Now, if the food for an entire 40,000 person area is coming from the same center, doesn't that pose the same risk as living in a city? Some terrorist cell takes over the food center and tampers with the food supply of an entire area. Or, we could have all food production and processing done in completely different areas of the country, at an enormous cost.
      And no, utilities have not been solved. They've been worked on, but not solved. That is why most states are currently working on Smart Growth initiatives to try to cut down on the cost of sprawl. Sprawl is expensive, very expensive. Roads, by the way, also need to be maintained. Railroad tracks are necessary for mass transit, unless of course we decide to just destroy our roads by having all 300,000,000 Americans travel them for every task they ever have.
      Is your vision of non-urban America workable? Of course it is. Is it desirable? No. You still run into major problems. For instance, if all of our activities were dictated by connectivity, then what happens if that connectivity is damaged? The network is vulnerable. It was designed to withstand physical destruction, not internal destruction. Worms cause havic, DDOS attacks can be very damaging. By relying on the network for our conectivity with others, we create a single point of failure. Old people can't get their food or medicine in the event of a majore takedown. Emergency services won't work as well. Especially if they travel on our gridlocked, broken roads.

  67. Re: by dago · · Score: 1

    Did you put parisiennes on purpose ? bad experiences from previous relationships ? ;)

    --
    #include "coucou.h"