Okay, so I haven't tried it yet. But Apple Vision looks pretty awesome and the people who have tried it seem to be very impressed by it. The best article that I have read, so far, is this one here by Ben Thompson (of Stratechery). He gets into some of the tech details and explains why Apple is probably the only company in the world that could have created a device like this.
For those of you who are interested, Apple Vision is still technically a VR device, even though it is being marketed as an augmented reality (AR) device that allows you to stay engaged with the world around you. This last part is true, but it is all done digitally through 12 cameras that capture the world around you and then display it back to you.
So experientially, yes, it is an AR device; however, the tech behind it is actually just exceptional VR.
But this is not the point of today's post. The point I would like to make is one that Ben raises at the end of his article. After praising Apple Vision's achievements, he goes on to argue that the arc of technology is one that is leading toward "ever more personal experiences." In other words, it is increasingly about individual, rather than group, use cases.
And this is one of the first things that I thought of when I watched the Vision Pro keynote. "Wow, this looks like a really cool way to watch and experience a movie. But how do I do that with my partner? I guess we both now need Vision Pros. And what about families with a bunch of kids? That is a lot of Vision Pros."
Okay, so I haven't tried it yet. But Apple Vision looks pretty awesome and the people who have tried it seem to be very impressed by it. The best article that I have read, so far, is this one here by Ben Thompson (of Stratechery). He gets into some of the tech details and explains why Apple is probably the only company in the world that could have created a device like this.
For those of you who are interested, Apple Vision is still technically a VR device, even though it is being marketed as an augmented reality (AR) device that allows you to stay engaged with the world around you. This last part is true, but it is all done digitally through 12 cameras that capture the world around you and then display it back to you.
So experientially, yes, it is an AR device; however, the tech behind it is actually just exceptional VR.
But this is not the point of today's post. The point I would like to make is one that Ben raises at the end of his article. After praising Apple Vision's achievements, he goes on to argue that the arc of technology is one that is leading toward "ever more personal experiences." In other words, it is increasingly about individual, rather than group, use cases.
And this is one of the first things that I thought of when I watched the Vision Pro keynote. "Wow, this looks like a really cool way to watch and experience a movie. But how do I do that with my partner? I guess we both now need Vision Pros. And what about families with a bunch of kids? That is a lot of Vision Pros."
But maybe this doesn't matter. Ben's point is that it's probably not an accident that this technology arc is happening at the same time as a larger societal shift away from family formation and toward more feelings of loneliness. Indeed, the number of single-person households has been steadily increasing in the US since the 1960s. The current figure sits at more than 1 in 4 households.
So there is an obviously dystopian narrative that we could all tell ourselves here. It is one where everyone works from home, plugs into virtual workplaces, and then flips over to other, more exciting, virtual worlds when it's time to unwind from the stresses of the former. And if you think about it, this isn't that much of a stretch compared to what many of us do today.
Whatever the case, in my mind, none of this is any reason to become bearish on cities. Humans will still be humans. And none of this tech is going to replace the feeling of enjoying a perfect pesto gnocchi in an impossibly narrow laneway in Milan, or drinking a caipirinha on the beaches of Rio de Janeiro while being surrounded by shockingly beautiful people.
Toronto has a lot more CCTV cameras than I would have thought.
According to this (2022?) data from Comparitech, there is estimated to be about 19,236 cameras installed around the Greater Toronto Area. With a population of around 6.31 million people, this translates into a per capita rate of 3.05 (CCTV cameras per 1,000 people). What this means is that there is almost surely footage of me enjoying a late-night shawarma sandwich after the bar somewhere on the streets of Toronto.
In some ways, this is a high number of cameras. Tokyo, which is usually considered to be the largest metro area in the world with nearly 40 million people, only has 1.06 cameras per 1,000 people. Dhaka is 0.71. Sao Paulo is 1.04. Osaka is 1.57. And Montreal is 1.03. Though to be totally fair here, Rio de Janeiro is up at 3.34 (and it may be the most dangerous city mentioned in this post). Paris is 4.04. New York is 6.87. Los Angeles is 8.77. And London is 13.35.
But where things get really exciting is in authoritarian places. Moscow is estimated to have 16.85 CCTV cameras per 1,000 people. And in China as a whole, there is estimated to be roughly 540 million cameras scattered around its cities, which works out to an average of 372.8 cameras for every 1,000 people. For a city like Shanghai, this crudely equals something like 10.6 million cameras.
Vyborov wasn’t arrested that day, but the police informed him that he was under surveillance through Sfera, one of Moscow’s face recognition systems, for participating in unsanctioned rallies. Considered one of the most efficient surveillance systems, Sfera led to the detention of 141 people last year. “Facial recognition, and video cameras in general in a totalitarian state, are an absolute evil,” Vyborov says.
Here's the other thing. Safety is usually touted as the reason to have lots of cameras. But Comparitech's data suggests that there's an almost non-existent correlation between lots of cameras and lower crime. I mean, just look at Tokyo. It is basically the model megacity, and its per capita camera rate is only 1.06. The real utility, it would seem, is using cameras and face recognition software to restrict personal freedoms.
But maybe this doesn't matter. Ben's point is that it's probably not an accident that this technology arc is happening at the same time as a larger societal shift away from family formation and toward more feelings of loneliness. Indeed, the number of single-person households has been steadily increasing in the US since the 1960s. The current figure sits at more than 1 in 4 households.
So there is an obviously dystopian narrative that we could all tell ourselves here. It is one where everyone works from home, plugs into virtual workplaces, and then flips over to other, more exciting, virtual worlds when it's time to unwind from the stresses of the former. And if you think about it, this isn't that much of a stretch compared to what many of us do today.
Whatever the case, in my mind, none of this is any reason to become bearish on cities. Humans will still be humans. And none of this tech is going to replace the feeling of enjoying a perfect pesto gnocchi in an impossibly narrow laneway in Milan, or drinking a caipirinha on the beaches of Rio de Janeiro while being surrounded by shockingly beautiful people.
Toronto has a lot more CCTV cameras than I would have thought.
According to this (2022?) data from Comparitech, there is estimated to be about 19,236 cameras installed around the Greater Toronto Area. With a population of around 6.31 million people, this translates into a per capita rate of 3.05 (CCTV cameras per 1,000 people). What this means is that there is almost surely footage of me enjoying a late-night shawarma sandwich after the bar somewhere on the streets of Toronto.
In some ways, this is a high number of cameras. Tokyo, which is usually considered to be the largest metro area in the world with nearly 40 million people, only has 1.06 cameras per 1,000 people. Dhaka is 0.71. Sao Paulo is 1.04. Osaka is 1.57. And Montreal is 1.03. Though to be totally fair here, Rio de Janeiro is up at 3.34 (and it may be the most dangerous city mentioned in this post). Paris is 4.04. New York is 6.87. Los Angeles is 8.77. And London is 13.35.
But where things get really exciting is in authoritarian places. Moscow is estimated to have 16.85 CCTV cameras per 1,000 people. And in China as a whole, there is estimated to be roughly 540 million cameras scattered around its cities, which works out to an average of 372.8 cameras for every 1,000 people. For a city like Shanghai, this crudely equals something like 10.6 million cameras.
Vyborov wasn’t arrested that day, but the police informed him that he was under surveillance through Sfera, one of Moscow’s face recognition systems, for participating in unsanctioned rallies. Considered one of the most efficient surveillance systems, Sfera led to the detention of 141 people last year. “Facial recognition, and video cameras in general in a totalitarian state, are an absolute evil,” Vyborov says.
Here's the other thing. Safety is usually touted as the reason to have lots of cameras. But Comparitech's data suggests that there's an almost non-existent correlation between lots of cameras and lower crime. I mean, just look at Tokyo. It is basically the model megacity, and its per capita camera rate is only 1.06. The real utility, it would seem, is using cameras and face recognition software to restrict personal freedoms.
I came across this apartment on ArchDaily this morning and I immediately thought to myself, "this looks like the Lagoa neighborhood of Rio de Janeiro." (Rio is one of my favorite cities and we nearly spent a few weeks of winter 2021 in this particular area.) So I opened it up and it turns out I was right. It's a recent apartment renovation, in this building, by Rio de Janeiro-based architects MZNO.
I then got onto the floor plan:
Circular building floor plates invariably create fan-shaped suite layouts like this one here. From my experience, these can create some really beautiful spaces up near the face of the building, but they tend to work better when you have a bit more space to play around with. You're also going to end up with diagonal walls and probably a radial structural system. In this case, the suite is just under 1,000 sf.
I wondered if this might have been two suites that were joined together, with the previous demising being the radial shear wall behind the couch (see above). There seems to be two entrances to the suite on this plan. But then I looked at active listings in the building and this seems to be a typical layout. So I think they just stripped things down to the existing structure in order to open up the plan.
The other item that stood out to me on the plan was the long corridor off the primary bedroom. But again, looking at other plans in the building, I can see that it was initially designed as a walk-in closet. This makes more sense, but it's also a compromise brought about by this being a relatively deep plan.
The bedrooms are "tetrised" together to make efficient use of a limited amount of linear glazing. An alternative trade-off (in this second plan) would have been to give it more frontage, and then bury the office (escritório). But I suppose there's a good argument to be made that it's better to have more light in your office than in your bedroom.
MZNO was probably thinking along these same lines when they designed the linear kitchen in the way that they did in the first plan. By aligning it perpendicular to the suite's exterior glass, you're able to gain access to a view and some light even when you're toward the back of the suite.
Finally, the other thing about circular buildings is that they allow you to do cool circulation spaces like the above. In this case, all of the common area corridors are single-loaded, and wrapped around a huge lightwell in the middle of the building. This maybe isn't so good if you suffer from vertigo, but it's obvious that these corridors are serving as an extension of people's living areas.
And since this is Brazil, they're naturally filled with greenery.
I came across this apartment on ArchDaily this morning and I immediately thought to myself, "this looks like the Lagoa neighborhood of Rio de Janeiro." (Rio is one of my favorite cities and we nearly spent a few weeks of winter 2021 in this particular area.) So I opened it up and it turns out I was right. It's a recent apartment renovation, in this building, by Rio de Janeiro-based architects MZNO.
I then got onto the floor plan:
Circular building floor plates invariably create fan-shaped suite layouts like this one here. From my experience, these can create some really beautiful spaces up near the face of the building, but they tend to work better when you have a bit more space to play around with. You're also going to end up with diagonal walls and probably a radial structural system. In this case, the suite is just under 1,000 sf.
I wondered if this might have been two suites that were joined together, with the previous demising being the radial shear wall behind the couch (see above). There seems to be two entrances to the suite on this plan. But then I looked at active listings in the building and this seems to be a typical layout. So I think they just stripped things down to the existing structure in order to open up the plan.
The other item that stood out to me on the plan was the long corridor off the primary bedroom. But again, looking at other plans in the building, I can see that it was initially designed as a walk-in closet. This makes more sense, but it's also a compromise brought about by this being a relatively deep plan.
The bedrooms are "tetrised" together to make efficient use of a limited amount of linear glazing. An alternative trade-off (in this second plan) would have been to give it more frontage, and then bury the office (escritório). But I suppose there's a good argument to be made that it's better to have more light in your office than in your bedroom.
MZNO was probably thinking along these same lines when they designed the linear kitchen in the way that they did in the first plan. By aligning it perpendicular to the suite's exterior glass, you're able to gain access to a view and some light even when you're toward the back of the suite.
Finally, the other thing about circular buildings is that they allow you to do cool circulation spaces like the above. In this case, all of the common area corridors are single-loaded, and wrapped around a huge lightwell in the middle of the building. This maybe isn't so good if you suffer from vertigo, but it's obvious that these corridors are serving as an extension of people's living areas.
And since this is Brazil, they're naturally filled with greenery.
