dagblog - Comments for "The Pandemic and the Future City" http://dagblog.com/link/pandemic-and-future-city-34091 Comments for "The Pandemic and the Future City" en "The pandemic offered http://dagblog.com/comment/302371#comment-302371 <a id="comment-302371"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/pandemic-and-future-city-34091">The Pandemic and the Future City</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p> </p><div class="media_embed"> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" height="" width=""> <p dir="ltr" lang="en" xml:lang="en">"The pandemic offered glimpses of what is possible," writes <a href="https://twitter.com/rmc031?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@rmc031</a>. "But will all this become a blip in history, or will it provide impetus for long-term change?" <a href="https://t.co/aHFBVPSy8O">https://t.co/aHFBVPSy8O</a> nytopinion</p> — Dr. Joseph Frusci (@JFrusci) <a href="https://twitter.com/JFrusci/status/1371689757579882497?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 16, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" height="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" width=""></script></div> </div></div></div> Tue, 16 Mar 2021 05:08:19 +0000 artappraiser comment 302371 at http://dagblog.com beginning excerpt: http://dagblog.com/comment/302366#comment-302366 <a id="comment-302366"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/pandemic-and-future-city-34091">The Pandemic and the Future City</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>beginning excerpt:</p> <blockquote> <p>In 1957 Isaac Asimov published “<a href="https://asimov.fandom.com/wiki/The_Naked_Sun" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="">The Naked Sun</a>,” a science-fiction novel about a society in which people live on isolated estates, their needs provided by robots and they interact only by video. The plot hinges on the way this lack of face-to-face contact stunts and warps their personalities.</p> <p>After a year in which those of us who could worked from home — albeit served by less fortunate humans rather than robots — that sounds about right. But how will we live once the pandemic subsides?</p> <p>Of course, nobody really knows. But maybe our speculation can be informed by some historical parallels and models.</p> <p>First, it seems safe to predict that we won’t fully return to the way we used to live and work.</p> <p>A year of isolation has, in effect, provided remote work with a classic case of infant industry protection, a concept usually associated with international trade policy that was first systematically laid out by none other than <a href="https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-10-02-0001-0007" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="">Alexander Hamilton</a>.</p> <p>Hamilton asserted that there were many industries that could flourish in the young United States but couldn’t get off the ground in the face of imports. Given a break from competition, for example through temporary tariffs, these industries could acquire enough experience and technological sophistication to become competitive.</p> <p>The infant industry argument has always been tricky as a basis for policy — how do you know when it’s valid? And do you trust governments to make that determination? But the pandemic, by temporarily making our former work habits impossible, has clearly made us much better at exploiting the possibilities of remote work, and some of what we used to do — long commutes so we can sit in cubicles, constant flying to meetings of dubious value — won’t be coming back.</p> <p>If history is any guide, however, much of our old way of working and living will, in fact, return [....]</p> </blockquote> </div></div></div> Tue, 16 Mar 2021 02:57:26 +0000 artappraiser comment 302366 at http://dagblog.com