March reflections

Looking back at the news of March with a lens of Cities of Things

Every week, I post a newsletter via Target_is_New signaling notions from the news and elaborate on one topic triggered by a news item or event I visited. As my frame of view is the City of Things beliefs, it makes a lot of sense to create a monthly post here looking back and combining these thoughts. And it would be nice if I could use the generative tooling here.

I was thinking of creating a draft that can work as a primer.

(1) I write a weekly reflection on the news. I like to use these thoughts as a reflection on that past month and do that with the lens of the beliefs of Cities of Things in this manifesto.

Find the sources in these five posts: Weeknotes 278, 279, 280, 281, and 282.

This first prompt resulted in more of a summary per post than a merge. It ended with an attempt but I thought it could need a different point of departure:

(2) Can you use the last part—reflecting through the lens of the Cities of Things Manifesto—as the point of departure for a post that uses the weeknotes to build up the argument?

The result here did not work out for me. It remains too much of a combined summary to explore the overarching elements.

“These reflections, viewed through the manifesto's lens, underscore the importance of designing for relational ecosystems where technology not only serves but collaborates with humans, fostering a future where the integration of intelligent objects enriches the urban experience, steering us towards inclusive, sustainable, and vibrant communities.”

Sure. To illustrate, this is what it created as an image*:

The image above illustrates a bustling future city street, vividly bringing to life the symbiotic relationship between humans and intelligent objects as envisioned in the Cities of Things Manifesto. It showcases a vibrant ecosystem where technology and community converge, highlighting the seamless integration and mutual enhancement of urban living through collaborative innovations

So I return to my own writing.

I can say that I agree on the summary of the summaries: “Reflecting on these summaries through the lens of the Cities of Things Manifesto, it's clear that each of these reflections contributes to understanding the changing relationships between humans and intelligent objects. From self-organizing cars that enhance communal living to clothing and creative tools augmented by AI, these narratives explore the manifesto’s vision of collaborative ecosystems where humans and technology co-create the urban experience. The discussions surrounding AI's role in creativity, community services, and the balance between human agency and machine assistance align with the manifesto's advocacy for thoughtful integration of intelligent objects into societal structures. This synthesis not only adheres to the manifesto's principles but also opens up avenues for questioning and reimagining our future coexistence with intelligent technologies.”

I am afraid I can repeat this easily each month. So, after all, the individual posts are more valuable. Looking back to last month, I thought it very valuable to dive a bit deeper into the relationship between Cities of Things and designing common-based communities. Car sharing is a great case as it combines functionality with social factors. Shared ownership models can be strong drivers.

The more service strategies are combined with the deeper roles the intelligent-enhanced services play I explored in the look into writing tools. This is less directly connected to the Cities of Things scale. In the post on exoskeletons, I wanted to know about the relation of the individual to systems like cities can be. The essence of the question of the source of ideas, who is the initiator and responsible for performance that are symbioses of human and machine, is that the machine did not really get to that point. In the post on the third route that bridges a dichotomy of human vs AI agency futures, I tried to explore this a bit hasty, maybe too hasty for the machine to grasp. It is a firm belief that I think we are not only creating artificial intelligence as a mirror of our intelligence, but will adapt and change our intelligence-based operation to achieve better outcomes using these new ‘tools’.

This is a valuable exercise; I will start working this month on updating the website and other channels of Cities of Things, something that has been stalled through other work (like the Hoodbot project). I will use this as a reference for diving into the manifesto for sure, so in the end it proves its value.

More extended reflections on the weekly thoughts (1st prompt)

The Cities of Things Manifesto presents a future where cities are characterized by the interplay between objects and AI, creating ecosystems rather than mere collections of smart objects. It highlights the significance of connections between these elements, suggesting that understanding and designing for these relationships can foster more creative and intelligent urban environments. The manifesto also promotes acknowledging the contributions of non-human entities within these ecosystems, fostering a collaborative partnership between humans and intelligent objects to achieve common goals and societal impact. This vision aims to improve city living by fostering inclusive, sustainable, and vibrant communities, facilitated by the harmonious coexistence of humans and intelligent things with which they coexist​ (Cities of Things)​.

The first reflection, Weeknotes 278 – Self-organising cars for commons, explores the potential of self-organizing vehicles to improve communal living. It discusses the shift from traditional car-sharing services to more community-oriented models where governance and social structures play important roles. Highlighting a project called Charging the Commons, it examines digital platforms that support resource communities, emphasizing the importance of added social value rather than just providing a service. The reflection also speculates on the future role of car manufacturers in this ecosystem, suggesting that cars could become active participants in community services. However, it questions Apple's ability to lead such a software initiative that supports social structures, citing concerns about their track record.

Weeknotes 279 – Robotic Fashion as Mild Exoskeletons discusses the integration of robotics into everyday life through clothing, serving as mild exoskeletons. It explores the potential for such technology to extend human capabilities gradually rather than dramatically, fostering a symbiosis between human strengths and machine intelligence. This reflection contemplates the evolving relationship between humans and AIs, questioning whether AIs would be seen as butlers, companions, or something more collaborative, akin to a creative director-designer dynamic. The notion of agency and the future of human-AI relations, especially in personal and care contexts, is a key theme explored.

Weeknotes 280 – Multimodal AI as an Act of Performance Art discusses the intersection of AI and physical world interventions, notably through an experiment on designing a chair from scrap wood with AI instructions. It reflects on the creative process involving generative AI and humans, proposing that such collaborations could be viewed as performance art. The reflection raises questions about authorship and the creative act, suggesting a new way of understanding AI's role in extending human creativity and interaction with the physical world​.

Weeknotes 281: The 3rd Way in a Dichotomy of Human-Machine Relations explores the concept of human-machine dichotomy, questioning if a third, harmonious path exists between human-driven and machine-driven realities. It reflects on society's potential pivotal moments with AI, drawing parallels to the narrative of Dune, where AI is actively rejected to prevent uncontrollability. This reflection also considers the role of conversations in shaping human-machine interactions.

Weeknotes 282 – Ramping Up for Really Helpful Writing Tools focuses on the evolution of writing aids powered by generative AI. It scrutinizes the progression from grammar correction to creative and argumentative assistance offered by tools like Grammarly, ChatGPT, and Claude. This reflection considers the fine line between aiding and overstepping in the writing process, highlighting the challenge of retaining personal voice amidst AI's suggestions. It discusses various tools' attempts at enhancing writing creativity without overshadowing the author's unique style​​.