I think of it in terms of Minimum Viable Maslow which is a frame that helps look at the needs of community quite differently. From that point of view I question how viable community is in some dimensions like trust etc when it scales beyond Dunbar's number? I ask the question - what technology/infrastructure needs to exist to make village/tribe scale viable? If viability can drop from 1000 to 100 then much more human need can be met that leverages the benefits of deeply trusting relationships. It requires a totally different model of governance that can deal with the tensions that you describe in the apartment block. In a tribal context those issues/discomforts are much more easily met through the models of governance that are typically adopted to deal with tribal tensions. The smaller the scale then the more a deep reliance on those around you is required. Through the lens of individualism the minimum size of viability is much larger.
I like this, Zach. The concept of 'True' residents is also quite interesting. Trying to design a city (product) which encourages people to engage with it more, similar to products is a way that doesn't seem to be thought of a lot in city planning and urban design, but I think has a lot of promise.
This seems like a good metric to me. When you have less than 100 true residents, a national government can come in and shut you down, no matter what your "legal" protections, but 1000 is a number that can get the attention of enough of the world to make a difference.
I think of it in terms of Minimum Viable Maslow which is a frame that helps look at the needs of community quite differently. From that point of view I question how viable community is in some dimensions like trust etc when it scales beyond Dunbar's number? I ask the question - what technology/infrastructure needs to exist to make village/tribe scale viable? If viability can drop from 1000 to 100 then much more human need can be met that leverages the benefits of deeply trusting relationships. It requires a totally different model of governance that can deal with the tensions that you describe in the apartment block. In a tribal context those issues/discomforts are much more easily met through the models of governance that are typically adopted to deal with tribal tensions. The smaller the scale then the more a deep reliance on those around you is required. Through the lens of individualism the minimum size of viability is much larger.
I like this, Zach. The concept of 'True' residents is also quite interesting. Trying to design a city (product) which encourages people to engage with it more, similar to products is a way that doesn't seem to be thought of a lot in city planning and urban design, but I think has a lot of promise.
This seems like a good metric to me. When you have less than 100 true residents, a national government can come in and shut you down, no matter what your "legal" protections, but 1000 is a number that can get the attention of enough of the world to make a difference.