Dan Hills långa essä och uppgörelse med “smarta städer”-ideologin är briljant läsning:
[T]he city’s primary raison d’etre is to be found amidst its citizens. If we look there, we find that there is more, much more, to urban life than efficiency. In fact, many of those primary drivers are intrinsically inefficient, or at least at a tangent to the entire idea of efficiency. Can a city be “smart” and inefficient at the same time? Perhaps this is a fundamental questions, unasked by smart city advocates.
Jag tror inte SL ens har försökt ställa den frågan.