Hybrid City & Knowledge Cluster as Web Interface of Web 3.0 & Cloud Computing & Semantic ?

Is it this the next one Internet Killer Application?

Knowledge Cluster is emerging rapidly as the next step in the quest for sustainable growth and economic development for cities, regions, country, and even corporations and global virtual organization. Hybrid City is an urban development that employs information technologies to sense, analyze, integrate and react intelligently to the activates of the City across utilities and city services, the environment, people, and local industry thereby creating a better place to live, work and run a business.

  • What will be the Hybrid City?
  • How the new urban actors act and react to design it?
  • Can they help to build a better city?
  • What area will the study cover?
  • Who will Benefit and why?
  • Where the credentials pack of the team and affiliates?
  • Is it a new economy embedded in this new killer application?

In my opinion, Hybrid City is a geographic region, product / service / industry segment and community of practice in which knowledge flows from the point of origin (+1) to the point of need / opportunity (=?).

As the knowledge-based economy expands, stakeholders are finding this to be appealing transformational pathway to a prosperous, diversified, and abundant future.

Different roles in a knowledge driven city interact to enable growth and development:

1. Inventors & Entrepreneurs

a.     Managers

b.     +1=?

2.     Super Mentors

a.     Professor

b.     Opinion leader

c.     Coach

d.     +1=?

3.     Work Force

a.     Scientist

b.     Engineers

c.     Technician

d.     +1=?

4.     Individual Achievers

a.     Athlete

b.     Artist

c.     Author

d.     +1=?

5.     +1=?

a.     +1=?

To identify key issues relating to the “Hybrid City”, I have articulated three main issues, which mainly refer to the creation, use and appropriation of mobile and locative media as well as other web-based applications involving location-based activities:

  • Real depth of audience engagement;
  • The radical potential of these new technologies and the quality of existing examples of interventions;
  • Context-aware systems which reveal patterns of activity of any sort not perceptible to humans and the provision of these data to all;
  • The process of creating maps, emerging cartographies, design aspects and politics;
  • The role of Situationists’ theory and practice on the creation of such interventions;
  • The use of ubiquitous computing systems in creating hybrid spatial experiences, in the form of connections/bridges between the real and the virtual;
  • The politics determining who has access to these environments and how;
  • The potential for a passage from the public to the common through the use of these media;
  • The potential of multi-user location-based activities for generating new forms of social interaction;
  • The concept of “hybrid space”, the spatial character of the concept of “hybridity”, the “hybrid city” and its definition to the urban realm;

The topic of the “hybrid city” is timely and important. Many projects and events have been taking place around the world. The discussions today are energized and activated by the overlay of several issues that carry a new urgency: locative media and technologies, social networking, the-city-as-display-and-interface, sustainability and ecological awareness, globalization, and also a new sense of empowerment to affect the design of cities via algorithmic design, computer controlled fabrication, new materials, and the addition of increasing “intelligence,” both local and remote, to what was previously inert form. Of course, one can’t have new cities without new citizens, so one of the major factors is the coming of age of a new population that has assumed ubiquitous connectivity and computation from birth. The rise of this group has meant that a dizzying forward momentum is rapidly replacing the inertia of resistance that characterized much of the parent generation by the offspring generation.

Now, to the term of “hybrid” and the hope for converging upon a definition. A “hybrid” is a creature that is the offspring of two related but separate species but which, critically, is unable to reproduce further on its own. Hybrids are sterile, most often. This month, in the news, there was word of a new “zedonk” being born in captivity at the Chestatee Wildlife Preserve in Dahlonega, Georgia. The “zedonk” is a hybrid of a zebra and a donkey. It is also known as a “zonkey” or, more to the point, a “zebra mule.” Mules of various kinds cannot reproduce. For all their utility to humans, we must bring together horses and donkeys to make them. Other hybrids like “ligers” and “tions” suffer the same fate.

A “hybrid city” thus suggests that some combinations may be attractive and useful. What would be preferable, I think, is not to settle on a term, but to try to understand what principles might be necessary to restore and provide for richness and ever-growing diversity.

This isn’t just a semantic quibble about this word. The difference is real and structural, and hinges on the specific and real construction of openness. To give a single example that can ground that I mean this technically, let me add this: we all know about genetic algorithms by now. A genetic algorithm may evolve by mutating its own genes, but, unless it actually has the ability to extend its own genome (that is to say, modify and extend the set of genes whose values are able to mutate), it can’t produce anything but variations of the same kind — it can never produce new kinds, or new species. A closed genome is an industrial-age artifact, focused on optimization. What is needed is a post-industrial construct able to alter itself as it proliferates.

Not fixating on a closed hybridity, and instead focusing on the provision of conditions and flexible, mutating structures that ensured the evolution of new species of urbanism and urban life would be a start.

The next issue, I think, has to do with how we still exist within structures and value systems that can produce variety without producing difference, and, especially positive difference, by multiple definitions. Guy Debord pointed this out in “The Society Of The Spectacle,” and, as far as I can tell, we have yet to extricate ourselves from that maze. Whether we have 500 channels of unwatchable television or a trillion documents online does not matter if everything is motivated by an indifference to quality, and a subjugation of every effort at qualitative assessment to a simple-minded and perceptually and intellectually impoverished logic of mere counting — more is better, and that’s that. To put it plainly — it is not that we cannot build better cities — it is that we don’t have the will to, or, to strike more deeply, the value system for. Cities are mirrors, and we already have the cities that are the perfect reflections of our collective values. If we wish to change them, we need to address the value systems by which we make urban decisions.

The question then shifts to a multi-headed problem: how to provide a constructive critique of our global culture and its values, how to assert positive and constructive alternatives, and how to literally structure our poetic and technological efforts to realize those alternatives. The problem I find the most vexing is the problem of values. In our community and on this forum, we are all dedicated to imagining and designing alternatives — but the real brick wall is not our ability to imagine and design in careful and exquisite detail what would be good and beautiful — it is to emplace our proposals in a culture that does not even seem to know how to value them, let alone desire them and support them.

I like Venice in Italy and have been there, and, in parallel, I ever been in Venice, California. The relation between the two cities is instructive. Venice, California is four times bigger than the original, but, though interesting, nowhere near as rich in wonder as La Serenissima. One is a human treasure. The other is pleasant beach-town with an unusual origin. Venice, California started off, as an effort to create a Venice-of-America, not from any organic will of its citizens, but as a business proposition.

Even where a tangible effort was made to build a timidly unusual city, a hybrid of America and Venice-Italy, and even with a strong and clear precedent in mind, the value system of the society it was built within and for could not support what was offered. Venice-of-America was not culturally sustainable because people simply did not care enough to keep it going. The original Venetians had lesser technology but stronger urban values, and they consciously named their city after Venus, goddess of beauty, and then made every effort to make it beautiful. There are places in Venice-Italy where five bridges (almost) intersect. One would have been enough, but five, in counterpoint, are more beautiful, and, though more costly then as now, those people chose beauty. All we seem to know to do now is consume beauty, as tourists, not make it, at least at the level of urban will and the public realm. Until we address this, we will do the same with technology, and the hybrid city will not be what we really wish it to be.

The problem of the city is the problem of “us” — of how we construct ourselves as a community and a public and how we come to value and build the public good. It is the “demos” in democracy. In these troubled times, it may be the most important question of all.

We need to put in a Cloud technologies that allow new actors (avatar) to explore social and spatial relationships between people in motion, as a fiction media player living in a virtual world economy in revenue sharing business model based, he/her will travel on great distances in a blink of an eye, that will help leaders.

For me evolution is equal at profits.

You need to help your scientist to find cure for diseases, help your body and helping you to preserve your planet’s best precious resources.

Many are the pieces of the chorography Jigsaw puzzle. One day with this help based in a competition, million of brain growing and together will ship the future of human kind Social Media & Social Semantic Search Engine Community Competition

You know that:

  • By 2011 Gen Y will outnumber
  • 96% of them have joined a Social network
  • Social Media has overtaken porn as the #1 activity on the web
  • 1 of 8 couples married in the U.S. last year met via social media
  • Years to reach 50 million users:
  • Radio:              38 Years
  • TV:                  13 years
  • Internet:           4 Years
  • IPod:                3 Years
  • Facebook added 100 million users in less than 9 month

IF facebook were a country it would be the world’s 4th largest:

1) China

2) India

3) U.S.

4) Facebook

5) Indonesia

6) Brazil

7) Pakistan

8) Bangladesh

80% of twitter users usage is on mobile device: People update anywhere, anytime.

What happens in Vegas stays on facebook, myspace, twitter, youtube, linkedin, etc.?

  • Youtube is the 2nd largest search engine in the world.
  • There are over Blogs
  • 54% of bloggers post content or tweet daily

We are in a Word of mouth.

  • 25% of search results for the world’s top 20 largest brand are links to user generated content.
  • 34% of bloggers post options about products & brand.

Do you like what they are saying about your brand?

Or better to say…

Do you like how they are using your brand?


People care more about how their social graph ranks products and services than how Google ranks them.

  • 78% of consumers trust peer recommendation’s
  • Only 14% trust advertisements

“It’s the dream of Money, Business Relation and ‘dating’
driving economy”

The development is made and driven by users as well by technologies; Social media change from user to a user creation of content. We need to transform the traditional (web 2.0) way to create content, generate content, and make networking, business connection and community building, as well cloud business.

The amount of users of demanding content is going faster and faster, internet is departing from computer, today more than one billion users of mobile already have the opportunity to access to internet. And this number will grow to 4 billion in the next few years as well internet computer with more than 3 billions from the actual 1.3 billions.

New technologies his changing the way we are using the net, intelligent devices, clothes, machine, role player game, fridge and factory are connected and interact automatically without direct human involvements. These will revolution the consumer market as the Internet becomes the fundamental economic instrument and consumer will depend entirely from network services and business will depend entirely from the Internet to provide these services.

Hybrid city are growth drivers for the economy.

Hybrid City & Knowledge Cluster as Web Interface of Cloud Computing & Web 3.0?

Thank you for reading it,

Follow me on Twitter


Tags: , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: