Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

111 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

there's a reason for safety regs (4, Insightful)

j1bb3rj4bb3r (808677) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649175)

This tactic allows him to avoid hidebound European safety regulations when he proposes, for instance, a steel footbridge whose design, sketched using industry-standard CAD software, has been radically distorted by a computer virus. Ask Europeans to cross a buggy footbridge and they'll balk, quail, and consult the 80,000 regulatory pages of the EU's acquis communautaire. Tell them it's art, and they'll flock to it in droves, sit on it, and drink Beaujolais nouveau.

And when it collapses under the weight of that flock...

wtf... this dude is nuts.

Re:there's a reason for safety regs (1)

10000000000000000000 (809085) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649201)

And when it collapses under the weight of that flock...

that's what makes it art!

Re:there's a reason for safety regs (1)

FusionDragon2099 (799857) | more than 9 years ago | (#11651303)

And when it collapses under the weight of that flock...

It's a structural Slashdotting?

I like the idea of unplanned housing (5, Interesting)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649184)

Essentially, you build as you need. So if you need a shelf in a certain spot, then you build it there. You can't know everything about how you will use all the space in your house, so the key is to wait until it becomes obvious that something will always be done in a certain way and build to that "spec".

I believe that they did this in UC Berkeley. Instead of building sidewalks, they put some sod on the quad and let the students "create" the trails across the grass. Once the paths were established by thousands of students walking on the grass every day, the school built sidewalks on top of the paths and that is how the sidewalks on the quad at Berkeley were built. No one uses those sidewalks anymore, though, because the grass is so much nicer to walk on than concrete.

So the key is to build as you need, but not to build to the point where you start to avoid the thing you were building it for in the first place.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (4, Insightful)

10000000000000000000 (809085) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649255)

Another example of utilitarian design being not the best method would be the early Intersates in the US.

At first they were built as vast point-to-point straight lines miles and miles long.

This design led to very boring drives, and consequently people fell asleep at the wheel.

Modern highways the world over tend to have gradually sweeping or rising and descending layouts as a result of this.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1, Informative)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649801)

That is because the early interstate highways did not have, as a primary design goal, the confort of civialians driving on them. They were meant to be used as troup and equiptment transports during a war with the USSR and secondary landing strips for military aircraft is why they had to have X feet of straight road every Y feet.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (3, Informative)

Spunk (83964) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650863)

As a roadgeek, I must point out that's a myth [about.com] .

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11651049)

According to Richard F. Weingroff, who works in the Federal Highway Administration's Office of Infrastructure....

so what? Does anything a goverment's employee is true? Of course he'll deny it. I assume you always think if someone from goverment says like this, it must be OK, which is wrong.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

Taladar (717494) | more than 9 years ago | (#11652003)

Sorry, Internet Explorer is required to properly view this site [slashdot.org].
Displays perfectly fine in Opera (at least for the last 5 years or so when I first stumbled across /. )

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 9 years ago | (#11652775)

In the future you may wish to point out that you are disagreeing with one portion of my post, not the entire thing.

For the people who do not follow links he is only disagreeing with the X feet in Y feet portion of my comment and has as his only source one govermental employee. Not quite the level of proof a self-professed 'roadgeek' should use.

I will research this this afternoon and if I am wrong I will post saying so.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (2, Insightful)

BenEnglishAtHome (449670) | more than 9 years ago | (#11651300)

This design led to very boring drives, and consequently people fell asleep at the wheel.

I disagree. The biggest cause of boredom I encounter are the speed limits on roads that could safely be driven at twice the artificially depressed rates at which traffic is often forced to flow.

Yes, for the math challenged among you, I am saying that you don't have to look far to find 55 mile per hour limits on roads that could safely be driven at 110. As a practical matter, I realize that a somewhat lower limit is needed to prevent idiots with unsafe cars from holding their accelerators to the floor for extended periods. But, sheesh, any stretch of controlled-access, multi-lane highway that stretches straight as an arrow from my windshield out to the horizon that has a speed limit under 85 miles per hour is just a maddening waste of time and a dangerous source of boredom.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

Simonetta (207550) | more than 9 years ago | (#11652415)

multi-lane highway that stretches straight as an arrow from my windshield out to the horizon that has a speed limit under 85 miles per hour is just a maddening waste of time and a dangerous source of boredom.

If you're bored driving 85 miles per hour then I suggest that you start smoking some stronger weed while you're driving.
Or get a motorcycle.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

BenEnglishAtHome (449670) | more than 9 years ago | (#11653384)

...get a motorcycle.

I used to have a motorcycle. My hip is all healed up now and I can walk fine again. Thanks for the suggestion. :-)

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

MasonMcD (104041) | more than 9 years ago | (#11652369)

At first they were built as vast point-to-point straight lines miles and miles long.

This design led to very boring drives, and consequently people fell asleep at the wheel.


Man! We were so close! A blip of about 30 or 40 years between those straight stretches of highway, and self-navigating vehicles.

How much easier would it have been if when those straight stretches were built, to imbed some magnetic waypoints. Dang.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (2, Interesting)

UniverseIsADoughnut (170909) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649276)

Not a bad idea.

I think students have been trying this as schools all over the country. They walk were it makes sense, and you can see the beaten paths were they go, thus were the sidewalk should be.

Unfortunately the school i went to, Penn State, decided that if students make a path across an area, that the best solution is to put up a drooping chain fence, or to put some scrubs at the ends of were they walked. Instead of just getting rid of the paths no one uses and moving them to were they do. Unfortunately many sidewalk were designed purely for style and zero function. Making something look good is nice, and should be attempted, but making it look nice but functionally suck is no good.

Oh, and if a PSU sidewalk person is reading this, asphalt is not a sidewalk material! Nor is concrete sidewalks made with forms that were put down by a drunken OPP guy.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

timbck2 (233967) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649335)

Oh, and if a PSU sidewalk person is reading this, asphalt is not a sidewalk material!


Nor is wood chips that float away every time it rains, Virginia Tech! (yes, they actually tried that!)

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

bigpat (158134) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649524)

"Nor is wood chips that float away every time it rains, Virginia Tech! (yes, they actually tried that!)"

When i visited DC a few years back I noticed that many of the paths along the mall were not concerete or asphalt, but rather crushed stone on dirt. I thought it was the best thing about the visit, besides a few of the rockets at the air and space museum of course, that the seat of power for the US government didn't pave over its paths. Something symbolic about that as well as practical. I'm guessing some eager beaver has paved over them by now, but hey, at least we made it 200 years walking on solid ground without trying to improve something that should not have been.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

lowder (194305) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650130)

What about people who need to get around on wheelchairs or scooters (I'm friends with a number of such people)? Seems to me that hard surfaces do have SOME advantages over "solid ground"....

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11651223)

And what about people who are lazy and want to get around in wheelchairs or scooters? Lazy are people too!

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

UniverseIsADoughnut (170909) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649592)

Penn state does this too, though mainly as temporary sidewalks.

PSU is also the place that invented spray on grass, basically grass seed, with liquid fertilizer and green pigment. They spray it on bare dirt and it it looks like grass from a distance, then in time real grass should grow. But from what i saw that rarely happens and it just gets washed into cracks in the first rain.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

Jameth (664111) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649872)

From what others have told me, my school is something of an oddity. Here at GVSU, I've seen them put in three sidewalks where there is consistently a footpath, leaving only one beaten path anywhere on campus. (I'm fairly sure that one isn't being put in because it is too steep.)

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

Hrodvitnir (101283) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649889)

(I'm fairly sure that one isn't being put in because it is too steep.)

That's why we invented stairs.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649545)

Michigan State did the same thing with the sidewalks, and it was really nice. The bike routes got paved, the shortest walking paths were paves. Even where people would split around obstactle diffferent ways the paths would fork.

As a student, I found it really well laid out, because the sidewalks were where I wanted to walk anyway.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

Spunk (83964) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650877)

Yep, my school does this too.

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (3, Informative)

Genda (560240) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649699)

The problem with most authoritarian mindsets is that they think that it's their job to force people to do what they want, when they want, as they want. When you get good at riding the horse in the direction it's already going you can cause all kinds of interesting results.

The next step for Berkeley is to pave the footpaths with something that feels as good as grass, is more fun, and easier to keep up. Take old rubber tires and cut them into 1 cm. chunks. Mix that with a slury of earth and a white polymer, and you get a cool, soft, inexpensive material that is waterproof and resilient. It'll give as you walk on it, and feel good to the bare footed. It'll last years and can be chewed up and reused if, and when the paths change.

By making the spaces conform to human use, and by making the space intelligent enough to conform as humans use the space, you eliminate space as the primary constraint to human creativity and imagination. This is the evolution of the conscious environment. This is the trend, creating places for human beings that honors our need for shelter, but removing the artificial limitations of social construct. We're genetically predisposed to tribalism. Our religion and societies have worked against that. It'll be interesting to see what happens when the forces that shape our interactions begin to yield to the fundamental designs of our own humanity. I for one welcome the change.

Genda

-- The best way to teach a generation to think outside the box, is to eliminate the boxes...

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

Planesdragon (210349) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649953)

We're genetically predisposed to tribalism. Our religion and societies have worked against that.

Methinks that we're genetically predisposed to organized religion and stratisfied societies, too. If we weren't, they wouldn't really have taken over, now would they?

Re:I like the idea of unplanned housing (1)

gobbo (567674) | more than 9 years ago | (#11652237)

Take old rubber tires and cut them into 1 cm. chunks. Mix that with a slury of earth and a white polymer, and you get a cool, soft, inexpensive material that is waterproof and resilient. It'll give as you walk on it, and feel good to the bare footed.

It does feel good walking on recycled tyre foam, it was used as a spongy concrete-like playground safety base for awhile. Then the scuttle got out about how tyre manufacturing uses cadmium as a colour fixant, and it seems to have stopped being used.

Cadmium [scorecard.org] is a nasty [canoshweb.org] pollutant. [lenntech.com] Tire dust has enough cadmium (etc.) in it to be a real concern; they voluntarily took it out of pesticides in '97, but it is still used in many manufacturing processes. Direct application to the feet by walking on it barefoot is only going to increase our already elevated intake.

I agree wholeheartedly that architects need to get out of their CAD caves and back into the tribe, watch the patterns of movement and usage, and design for that. You know, what actually happens, instead of what looks pretty on a freakin' screen. If your design anticipates everyday behaviour, it will be pretty enough. Slap all the gewgaws you want on it after thinking about living vectors.

Zoneing??? (1)

argoff (142580) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650213)


I don't know about you, but if I tried something like an unplaned house on my land - I suspect that the zoneing police wouldn't fine me, or even arrest me, but simply beat me to a bloody pulp! But oh, boy would I love to figure out how to get arround it.

how to get arround it (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11653482)

Move to Houston, or an incorporated area of Texas. Many fairly urban areas of Texas are unzoned, and Houston is the largest unzoned city in the world.

Okay for the government, not for terrorists? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649185)

CNN is reporting! [cnn.com]
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. military is planning a final demonstration Friday night of a ground-based laser system designed to warn pilots who have flown into restricted airspace over the nation's capital.

So it's okay for the government to do what they're expressly trying to stop terrorists and stupid drunk kids in the middle of Kansas from doing on their Saturday nights. Slashdot already covered this [slashdot.org] .

High comedy!

Basically, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649196)

this is hee-larious. Who would want this?
I'm high-tech!

screw that, wheres my (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649224)

house that runs away from burglers with robotic legs and ends up in flames >:|

Re:screw that, wheres my (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649228)

That was just lame. Please try again.

Re:screw that, wheres my (3, Funny)

secretsquirel (805445) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649256)

Seriously, why can't I just get a house with a friggin laser beam on its roof.

Re:screw that, wheres my (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649263)

This was a little better.

Re:screw that, wheres my (2, Funny)

mboverload (657893) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649349)

Because the FCC says it's harmful to children you insensitive clod.

Must...protect...children...

Re:screw that, wheres my (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649379)

Does anyone know if the FCC regulates the infrared/visible light/UV spectrums?

Oh, right... (2, Funny)

mg2 (823681) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649227)

The moon or Mars would be a natural venue for the concept, a place too hostile for mankind, where viabs could work around the clock: Let robots spit out a city, then settle in when it's ready.

You'll land in the bathroom/livingroom/spacedock shaped like a booger, and then you can relax in the bedroom/backyard or use your machine-built PC in the garage

I just fail to see how this amorphous abstract thing would be practical. Admittedly, it would be cool looking and unique, but still.

Re:Oh, right... (1)

bonzoesc (155812) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649355)

From what I can tell, it's supposed to be a building that reacts to the occupants - if you don't walk through a given corridor, the building would theoretically detect the lack of wear and seal up the hole. Similarly, if you kick a hole in the wall from your dining room to your kitchen that makes a more direct path that gets used frequently, it'd keep that area clear as long as it sees it get used.

It would probably be more suitable for a workplace type setting, because room specs have been basically standardized in the Western world for a few hundred years, but cubes and factories are a pretty recent invention.

Re:Oh, right... (1)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650555)

and if it notices you're in a coma in the bedroom, it seals off the bedroom, since you're obviously not using the doorway

Robotic Termites? (3, Interesting)

RockDork (748176) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649250)


Randomly constructed, on demand buildings. Sounds like the makings of a termite mound....

Sounds like (1)

adlaiff6 (810221) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649253)

Open Source Housing.

"Oh, my! We need a coffee maker!"
"Look! The Joneses developed one last month! Let's modify theirs and distribute it throughout the house!"

Some questions arise:
Do I need to raze my old house if I want to change distrobutions?
How many users does that model support?
What kind of designers made the graphical interface; as in: will I want to operate my house from the basement only?

Re:Sounds like (1)

mboverload (657893) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649322)

Yeah, but then you would have to go into HouseLinux and edit the washing machine configuration file when it breaks.

Re:Sounds like (1)

Taladar (717494) | more than 9 years ago | (#11652065)

I would love being able to set up cronjobs to take the garbage out, clean the windows, vacuum the rooms,...

This is the key... (3, Insightful)

El Gordo Motoneta (821753) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649262)

To UGLY and BROKEN houses and buildings. There's a large percentage of
architecture as a human activity that involves creativity and the ability to
solve new problems as they come up.

If you tell me you can help design a bridge or a road with the aid of software,
then i'll buy it, but designing homes (what architecture is about) is way beyond the cold structure design.

Where I live, there's some kind of rivalry (sp?) between architects and what
in my country is referred as a "civil engineer", which is an engineer specialized in structural design and buildings. Both are able to build a house,
but most of the times you can easily spot the difference between a house built
by an architect and a house built by an engineer: Houses built by engineers look "clunky", and while they may be built correctly from a structural point of view, they ocasionally suffer from design flaws such as having bedrooms too close to the kitchen (which means the odor of food being cooked invades other parts of the house). Put simply, the engineer knows about functionality. They
don't know about "aesthetic design". And this is something a computer will never be able to learn either.

There's this joke:
- What's an architect?
- An architect is someone that isn't man enough to be an engineer, but not gay anough to be an interior decorator.

I think the joke sums it up nicely. ... Oh, and my family is about 60% architects.

Re:This is the key... (1)

mboverload (657893) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649336)

I don't know about other people, but all I need is a big box, power, internet, and a computer; That's all any real man would ever need.

Then again, what would Linus do?

Re:This is the key... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649381)

You forget a bed. A single bed.

Re:This is the key... (1)

El Gordo Motoneta (821753) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649402)

That's because you are closer to the engineer-think than the architect-think.

Geeks, nerds and techies in general seem to lack sensitivity for aesthetics. You just need a box, I just need a box, but that doesn't mean we can call a box a house.

"He just opens the drawer, grabs the first thing that will cover his skin, put it on, and go out to the street". Sounds familiar? It does to me =oP

Re:This is the key... (2, Funny)

mboverload (657893) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649424)

Don't forget the bed. The single bed.

=)

Re:This is the key... (1)

Taladar (717494) | more than 9 years ago | (#11652086)

Geeks, nerds and techies in general seem to lack sensitivity for aesthetics.
I wouldn't put it that way. After all lots of hackers talk about beautiful code, elegant algorithms,...

Perhaps one could say geeks have different priorities in aesthetics.

Re:This is the key... (1)

stienman (51024) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649395)

An architect is someone that isn't man enough to be an engineer, but not gay anough to be an interior decorator.

I think the joke sums it up nicely. ... Oh, and my family is about 60% architects.


Now if only you had gay and engineering relatives then the rest of the joke could be as inoffensive as the architect part.

In other words, if you believe you have to qualify your 'expertise' in delivering a joke for whatever reason, chances are good that either you aren't qualified to deliver it, or it's not appropiate.

Sorry, it's just always bugged me that people think it's ok to insult and degrade "their own kind" while taking it as an insult when delivered by one who is not part of their race/class/gender/etc.

While I'm at it, just because you don't find something attractive, aesthetically pleasing or particularily useful doesn't mean that it isn't any of those things to another person. I can think of several good reasons to have the kitchen near the bedroom, and in the end it's a matter of personal taste and convenience.

To label someone else's creation as ugly and broken (not to mention non-creative, clunky, flawed design, non-functional, etc) is, at best, short sighted and elitist.

-Adam

Re:This is the key... (1)

El Gordo Motoneta (821753) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649436)


Now if only you had gay and engineering relatives then the rest of the joke could be as inoffensive as the architect part.

In other words, if you believe you have to qualify your 'expertise' in delivering a joke for whatever reason, chances are good that either you aren't qualified to deliver it, or it's not appropiate.


You took it the wrong way. Lay down on the caffeine and relax.


To label someone else's creation as ugly and broken (not to mention non-creative, clunky, flawed design, non-functional, etc) is, at best, short sighted and elitist.


"ugly and broken" were the "labels" (as you call them) for what i think
would be a computer designed by software. Can you read at all?
And to think someone modded you up.

And about the "clunky" and "flawed design" has nothing to do with being
short sighted or elitist at all. What i'm talking about is exactly what
happens when you take something like a house (something with very "human"
things about it) and take away the human part.

Bah, forget it. Slashdot may be the wrong place and the wrong people to
discuss something like this.

This is the key...:-1: Offaim. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649490)

"Bah, forget it. Slashdot may be the wrong place and the wrong people to discuss something like this."

Apparently sex is one of those catagories.

Re:This is the key... (1)

ArsSineArtificio (150115) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649879)

They have a thing called a "sense of humor" now. Some people find it "attractive", "aesthetically pleasing", and/or "particularly useful".

RTFA, will you? (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649822)

This invention isn't about machines doing the designing. The machine allows any design to be sculpted in concrete, subject only to the limitations of the material.

-jcr

Re:This is the key... (1)

xtremee (739126) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649853)

I'm sure you are from Argentina, i am argentinian too and i know people that works in the construction business. There is a clearly difference between an architect and a "civil engineer". The difference is that architects makes the structural calculations and the design (including the water and gas pipes locations) and the civil engineer chooses the materials to use (concrete density, etc.), supervises the construction and, sometimes, he also is in charge of making the electrical installations.
They are both meant to work together as a team.

btw, 20% of my family members are civil engineers.

I usually RTFA... (0, Flamebait)

HungSoLow (809760) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649280)

but I really don't want to know what architectural philosphy actually is...

But can it build a house using cardboard? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649299)

Re:But can it build a house using cardboard? (2, Informative)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649695)

Better to just use corrugated steel on the outside and steel on the inside. Steel is cheap as hell and it doesn't have to be particularly good steel if it's corrugated and painted. You can always cover it with sheet steel, stucco, wood...

Roger Dean!! (2, Insightful)

AltGrendel (175092) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649306)

He has some great ideas (shown here [rogerdean.com] ) that would really be great looking with this kind of thing. No more ugly boxes!

Re:Roger Dean!! (1)

Jameth (664111) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649881)

He has some atrocious ideas. I do not want to be unable to put anything on any wall at any time. That's the flat-out worst house design ever. He's removed 100% of the useable wallspace! It'd be a chore to hang even one picture in there.

Re:Roger Dean!! (1)

macshit (157376) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650939)

Hmmm, picture-hanging capabilities aside, his house also looks incredibly claustrophobic, like the walls are closing in... He seems to have no conception of the value of space -- or lines for that matter! To be honest, I'd also say it's downright ugly; it seems fiddly and aimless.

I was gonna ask "is this guy really an architect?!?", but I see from his web page that he's actually an artist or something. There are certainly a lot of bad architects out there, but I suppose they do teach you something in architecture school... :-)

Re:Roger Dean!! (1)

Mad Bad Rabbit (539142) | more than 9 years ago | (#11651727)

Hmmm, picture-hanging capabilities aside, his house also looks incredibly claustrophobic, like the walls are closing in.

True, but presumably the inhabitants will be stoned and listening to "Yessongs" most of the time, so they won't notice.

Swallowed alive! (1)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649922)

I dunno. There's something about his designs [rogerdean.com] that leave me wondering if my name wasn't really Pinnochio, just swallowed by a whale.

Some of these shots might be nice if they didn't leave me with strong impressions of the intestinal tract...

Hobbit houses? (1)

rufusdufus (450462) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650188)

Did you look at the schetches of Willowater? Its freakin' hobbiton. He even uses the same type of drawings used in Tolkein artwork.

Windows (1)

mboverload (657893) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649312)

Lets just hope that computer doesn't run on Windows. Otherwise the water pipes will leak on your popcorn kernels and overflow the popper.

the way houses are built is insane. (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649384)

no offense but essentially every home is built onsite in a custom manner.

Huge portions of home building could be done in large factories, and equally huge strides could be made standarizing the hookups to electricity, communications and plumbing.

i'm not talking about crappy mobiles...i'm talking about the absurdity of custom electrical, plumbing and framing on hundreds of millions of homes.

the endless permits etc...people complain about software but if software were as absurd as home building you would have to get several CDs from various licensed contractors, get a permit from the state to install a computer, have the computer inspected as it is installed and each CD of components is inserted, etc...

Re:the way houses are built is insane. (2, Informative)

Hard_Code (49548) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649451)

Um, they do do this. It's called premanufactured or prefabricated or modular housing. And it is rising in quality and is actually a good way to build a house these days. Sort of like IKEA, they prefab the general components, and snap them together on site. Then they can work out the flaws, and then mass produce them. Very effective.

the way houses are built is [expensive] (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649469)

"Huge portions of home building could be done in large factories, and equally huge strides could be made standarizing the hookups to electricity, communications and plumbing. i'm not talking about crappy mobiles..."

Well aren't you behind? I'm living in a modular apartment complex put up by "Cardinal Industries Inc" in 1983.

"the endless permits etc...people complain about software but if software were as absurd as home building you would have to get several CDs from various licensed contractors, get a permit from the state to install a computer, have the computer inspected as it is installed and each CD of components is inserted, etc..."

The two aren't equivalent, so any analogies are going to fail.

Anyway Popsci [popsci.com] has already covered ContourCraft as part of it's article on applications of the inkjet.

Freeman Dyson's anecdote (2, Interesting)

StefanJ (88986) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649775)

Freeman Dyson gave a talk in Portland last year. He presented several case studies on how technology planning went right and wrong.

One of the anecdotes was about a research team he was invited to join during the Carter administration. A multidiciplinary team of eggheads got together to come up with ways to make housing cheaper.

They analyzed the factors that made housing expensive, and came up with a list of proposals to make homes cheaper. Factory building components, standardization . . . it all came together nicely.

Before they delivered their findings, they decided to look them over . . . and realized that they'd reinvented the Mobile Home.

Real Estate and the age of InkJet Construction (1)

Corpus_Callosum (617295) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650974)

This and other robotic construction techniques are inevitable. The idea of what essentially amounts to InkJet Construction is quite interesting and is certain to take off and evolve.

What is truly interesting to consider, however, are the economic ramifications of this change. Make no mistake, this is as drastic an advancement for construction, architecture and in fact, civilization as can be.

While the switch-over to these techniques may occur slowly at first, once the kinks are worked out of the systems and economies of scale brings the equipment prices down to a reasonable level, automated construction will overwhelm manual construction. It will occur because the resultant structures will be drastically cheaper to build, stronger, more attractive and in all other ways better than hand built structures.

How many people will this put out of work? Consider it for a moment. What percentage of the workforce is construction?

How about real-estate prices? The new structures will be in all ways superior to hand-build structures and can be built in days for the cost of the materials (such as plastic and concrete). Existing structures will loose their values unless they have some historical or other significance, they will be "antiques". Real-Estate prices will evaporate, approaching the price of the lot only (for all one has to do is purchase a lot and hire out one of these machines for a couple of days as competition).

In residential real-estate, people will knock down their own homes and hire out machines to build a better, bigger, custom made one for them.

The implications are astounding.

YOUE FAIL IT!? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649532)

About the author (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649706)

thought everyone would like to know that the author of the mentioned book "The Hand Sculpted House", Ianto Evans, has a webpage http://cobcottage.com . Nice guy, cool houses (having been in a few myself), and he does a kick ass slideshow-presentation. My favorite is the $500 dollar house for 2.

Read Alastair Reynolds' Chasm City (1)

MilesParker (572840) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649726)

He has a fascinating description of a far-future city that has been constructed by machines...and then things go very very wrong...
Best hard-SF/space opera writer out there right now, IMHO.

Basically, it's a stereolithography machine. (2, Interesting)

jcr (53032) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649813)

I believe that I read about this something like two years ago. It amounts to a 3D printer, but it's using concrete instead of the liquid polymers that stereolith machines do.

This has the potential to drastically cut construction costs, since you can basically eliminate the labor cost of framing the structure. You can even have the robot leave channels in the walls for plumbing, electrical conduit, etc.

Once someone gets around to building an excavation robot to dig foundations and footings, building a house could become a two-man, three-day job (or less).

I hope they get this tech on the market soon. A lot of people could use it yesterday.

-jcr

Basically, it's a [baby] machine. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11649866)

"I hope they get this tech on the market soon. A lot of people could use it yesterday."

Or they could all start using birth control, and thereby reducing the need for housing.

Re:Basically, it's a [baby] machine. (2, Insightful)

jcr (53032) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649893)

What a sad, pessimistic world you live in.

-jcr

Basically, it's a [baby] machine-II (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11650014)

"What a sad, pessimistic world you live in."

What an overcrowded one you live in.

Re:Basically, it's a [baby] machine-II (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650420)

Why is it that none of you misanthropes who gripe about crowding ever offer to just get lost?

-jcr

Not a good idea (3, Interesting)

dasunt (249686) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649878)

From the article:

He's exploiting ideas that make perfect sense in computer-driven fabrication but have never been applied to architecture. Imagine a building where the needs and desires of its inhabitants are hot-wired to the shapes of walls and floors, which can be extended and updated ad hoc, ad infinitum.

I have an old book around here that talks about 1890s Japanese housing, and how certain walls would be removed or replaced in the homes according to need:

What would be a parlour in the day would be divided into sleeping rooms at night.

There is the obvious problem with this: In Western architecture, rooms tend to hold big, bulky objects called furniture. Western culture doesn't tend to sit on tatami mats and sleep on shikibutons.

In our culture, changes to living space tend not to be frequent: We don't convert bedrooms to living rooms daily. When we do want to remodel our homes, we tend to hire builders and remodelers. I suspect that this will be significantly cheaper for quite awhile.

It sounds like he's trying to be innovative for the sake of being innovative.

Re:Not a good idea (1)

jackbird (721605) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650110)

We don't convert bedrooms to living rooms daily.

Unless your relatives are visitng and you fold out the sofabed...

Re:Not a good idea (1)

nhavar (115351) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650203)

I doubt the inovative just to be inovative comment. There are some legitimate needs that the technology fits. Yes TODAY westerners aren't familiar with/don't appreciate the ability of multitasking a room or changing a space based on need. For the most part if it is a den now it will be a den in 20 years. But how many families out there are faced with the fact that their children leave and suddenly they have much more house than they need. Or families that have sudden growth through acquiring other family member's children or multiple births that need to add on a room or two. How many people every year have to reconfigure their spaces based on a disability to sudden illness?

While the near future it might not be cost effective, as with anything, as the techniques come into the mainstream and the cost of the equipment goes down it could well be cheaper and more efficient.

Re:Not a good idea (1)

jedrek (79264) | more than 9 years ago | (#11651414)

We don't convert bedrooms to living rooms daily.

It depends on how well off you are. A lot of poor people actually do convert their living rooms into bedrooms - if only because they lack free rooms in their homes to do otherwise. While this was (and still is) VERY common all over central and eastern europe, you can see examples of it in western europe and north america as well. This is what fold-out couches and pull down wall-beds are for.

cheap, good, safe. pick 2. (1)

torpor (458) | more than 9 years ago | (#11649998)

seriously though, i'd like to see tech like this machine-grown housing, combined with the sandbag house or 'old rubber tire' house concepts that have been experimented with, successfully.

imagine a machine you just feed sandbags into, and it crawls over the building site, laying down bags (or tires) .. that'd be an awesome robot worthy of respect, and i for one would welcome its overlord-i-ness ...

cheap, good, safe. [water] (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11650053)

"seriously though, i'd like to see tech like this machine-grown housing, combined with the sandbag house or 'old rubber tire' house concepts that have been experimented with, successfully."

With advances in genetic engineering, you can soon grow your own house.

Great Idea -- but watch out! (1)

putko (753330) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650070)

I fear Americans would continue to build Big n' Crappy houses. The reduction in price would mean Bigger n' Crappier houses. Paul Graham [paulgraham.com] mentions this American school of design in his essay.

Maybe some would use the technique to make hobbit-like houses and so on. But we'd see a lot of 5-car garages.

I'm confused. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11650103)

Where are the stairs to the 2nd floor in that video??

wow ... cool idea (1)

2TecTom (311314) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650181)

sortofa macro "assembler"

wouldn't it be interesting to see someone print their simcity in real 3D

Maybe Brain was right.. (1)

LilGuy (150110) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650247)

Marshall Brain wrote a small novel (Manna) on the idea that some day we the non-rich 99% will all live in terrafoam housing - among other things - this seems like a baby-step in that direction.

Link to the book online -
http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

problems with these. (2, Insightful)

RomulusNR (29439) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650400)

A: machine automated construction.

I can't get over the way so many allegedly intelligent people cream themselves over these cute 3D animations of a huge behemoth lateral crane picking up building materials and laying them into place and voila, instant house. It must be the Lego lover's mindset, but it's not remotely as practical as it's proponents suggest. (And I still have no evidence that it is "already being done", all I see are drawings. But as Colin Powell proved, artistic drawings are proof of reality. But I digress.)

1. You have to lie these perfectly straight 200-foot rails down at either ends of the lot, perfectly parallel and at a perfect distance. And make sure they don't move.

2. You have to lug this huge behemoth crane on huge supports to the site and *onto the rails*.

3. You have to place all the building materials in perfectly lined up position. Who is going to do this? Construction workers? Another expensive piece of heavy machinery?

4. Who is going to climb up the damn thing when it gets jammed while carrying a 50-foot 10x10 support beam?

B: these wonderful, mod-hippie earthen building materials like cob and superadobe -- all of which are top secret and require you buying book X and going to seminar Q for a hundred here and a hundred there. Nope, that ain't the way to promote an off-the-grid natural building style, that's the way to be a beemer-driving neoliberal. Instead of these wonderfully "grassroots" building techniques going on to revolutionize building and make it accessible to the common man, cob et al become the trademark of upper-middle class SUV drivers who need a way to prove to everyone that they truly are earthy and granola.

(Let's not mention the inconvenient fact that the underprivileged and otherwise construction-disenfranchised that these cheap natural building techniques will supposedly help don't actually *own any land* to BUILD anything on!)

I'd be curious about cob... if it wasn't that every link about it I can find actually tells you *nothing* about how to do it, but instead urges you to attend a fucking paid training session. (And oh yeah, if I were in the landed class.)

I can process rich text, calculate spreadsheets, and read email for free, but I can't build with fucking mud and straw without going to some new age seminar. Funk dat.

Re:problems with these. (1)

technos (73414) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650966)

1. You have to lie these perfectly straight 200-foot rails down at either ends of the lot, perfectly parallel and at a perfect distance. And make sure they don't move.

Not the end of the world. One surveyor, one worker, one afternoon.

2. You have to lug this huge behemoth crane on huge supports to the site and *onto the rails*.

Not any harder than bringing out that same huge crane to install the engineered trusses. Actually, easier. You only have to drop one robot, versus many engineered trusses.

3. You have to place all the building materials in perfectly lined up position.

Three large spools of the three pipe sizes it needs (some small gauge CPVC, some small gauge copper, and some decent size DWV), two spools of Romex, and a spool of cat5 comm cable. These would only be need to be replaced once per job, probably before the robot arrived on site.

The other ingredients are concrete mix and water, easily supplied once every few days in a truck to the machine's hopper.

Let's not mention the inconvenient fact that the underprivileged and otherwise construction-disenfranchised that these cheap natural building techniques will supposedly help don't actually *own any land* to BUILD anything on!

Land is cheap. Houses are not. I can buy fifty or even eighty acres for the cost of one nice house on two acres.

Re:problems with these. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11651252)

Land is cheap. Houses are not. I can buy fifty or even eighty acres for the cost of one nice house on two acres.

I'm making a guess that you don't live near a city. At least not near a thriving city. You definitely don't live near DC.

Cob isn't secret (2, Informative)

Julian Morrison (5575) | more than 9 years ago | (#11651085)

I can summarize a working minimum of what you need to know about building in cob in one post. That's ridiculously easy compared to brick-and-wood housing!

FYI, here goes:

- Clay, sand, staw. Clay binds, sand prevents shrinking, staw acts as rebar. Use subsoil from the site, tread in the straw. Measure your subsoil by shaking it in water and letting it settle in layers, to see if you need to add clay or sand. Make up test bricks to see if you got the mix right for shrinkage, cracking, and strength. You'll need a higher percentage of sand than you expect. Sieve out rocks and gravel to avoid introducing weak spots.

- Apply it wet enough to squish, neither runny nor hard. Build upwards iteratively, stopping each course just before it starts to sag under its own weight. Measure the plumb with a spirit level and cut off soft cob to keep it from bulging or sagging. Walls can be straight or tapered, which is stronger and saves time/effort building the upper parts. Test taper by gluing a precisely angled bit of wood onto a spirit level. Tapered outside and plumb inside makes furniture an easier fit.

- Overengineer the thickness of the walls. Theoretically, precisely mixed cob applied with skill can be used in walls a foot thick, but build them two feet thick (or more) at the base.

- You need a stem wall, which is a short (waist height) hard and nonporous wall upon which to sit the cob. Stone, concrete or brick are good. This keeps the dried mud above damp ground and rain-runoff splatter. Make the top jagged so the cob sticks. You can skip this, but your house will have a limited "shelf life". Also, the roof needs to overhang enough to throw rain clear of the walls, and you need good drainage and a site which won't flood. In general, water flowing over cob will erode it, but rain won't.

- Cob functions as "thermal mass", bringing inside temperature towards the daily mean temperature (ie: it smooths out cold and heat into continuing warmth). It doesn't insulate much. Avoid using it where you get no sun (north slope) or where the climate is cold all day. Plan the house as a passive solar collector, with windows sited to admit and trap morning and evening sun.

- Joint the cob to woodwork, especially upstairs-floor beams and roof rafters, by burying anchor points of jaggedy wood into the cob wall. Logs stripped of bark with branch-stubs sticking out are good. Don't bury rafters and beams directly into the cob, because they can shift and tear loose due to settlement and heat-expansion. Non-opening window panes can simply be buried straight into walls, with expansion foam around the edges to prevent them being crushed.

- You can build furniture straight from the cob by cantilevering outwards (go slowly) or by carving in. Tamped cob can also be used to make floors - seal the final layer with boiled linseed oil.

- Never put nonporous materials over cob, especially outside. That includes oil based paints, cement based interior and exterior plasters. Cement exterior plaster is a major cause of cob wall collapse. Water runs in through cracks, down the inside and liquefies the wall base. Instead, use mud-straw plaster or lime-sand plaster. Whitewash and casein paints can be used inside and out.

There you go, that's pretty much the beginner's course and adequate if you ignore amenities.

Re:problems with these. (1)

jimius (628132) | more than 9 years ago | (#11651354)

Cob is hardly a secret, there are just a lot of ppl who pretend it is so they can make money off it. It's really too bad that cob and concepts like aerthships get such bad names becuase of a few asses who try to sell green 'wonders' while it's really very basic stuff.

http://www.weblife.org/cob/

That's all the world needs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11650686)

A machine that poops out houses. What's next?

The Venus Project (cool pictures) (1)

FleaPlus (6935) | more than 9 years ago | (#11650755)

This is probably more art than practicality, but The Venus Project [thevenusproject.com] has some very cool renditions of automated construction. Check out the "Automated Construction" link on the following gallery:

http://www.thevenusproject.com/vp_gallery.htm [thevenusproject.com]

contour crafting = brick laying (1)

jeif1k (809151) | more than 9 years ago | (#11651087)

This "technology" is a few millenia old. Sure, maybe it uses different materials and robots instead of people now to lay down the contours, but it's still the same method. And people have built pretty wild shapes out of bricks over the last few thousand years.

wabi-sabi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11651199)

Skipping the hi-tech "viab" crap that Sterling focuses on, the appeal here is a return to the less planned, less structured, and more organic process such as the mechanism that grows free software. Wabi-sabi [c2.com] is the formal word for this informal approach and it's been around for centuries. It goes a long way to explain what technology is now discovering.

Here's the Wikipedia link. [wikipedia.org]

Cool! (1)

Arivia (783328) | more than 9 years ago | (#11651220)

*starts creating Segment Decoders and Files*

Wiring & Plumbing (1)

chiph (523845) | more than 9 years ago | (#11651517)

As the machines extrude your house, it'll be pretty easy to put in horizonatal wiring & plumbing runs -- just lay them in the damp concrete before putting the next layer on top.

I wonder how they'll handle the vertical runs, like go from the water line up to the kitchen & baths? Also, every building code in the US requires a vent at the top of each plumbing stack, so for every bathroom that's not on top of another bathroom, you need a separate vent.

Chip H.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>