Lazarus411 on 12/9/2012 at 09:36
WooooooooooooooooooW!
Lazarus411 on 12/9/2012 at 09:43
Is there feasible reason why cities cannot be built underwater? I know Bioshock shows us what go wrong but think of how cool that would be.
demagogue on 12/9/2012 at 09:46
So... Singapore, Hong Kong, Macau, Vatican City, Malta, Monaco, San Marino, Lichtenstein, Washington, D.C. (edit: actually a lot if not most capitals & many major cities have rather autonomous status in domestic law; I understand it's different than the proposal here), Danzig, Fiume, Tangier, Memel, Trieste, a lot of proposals for Jerusalem's future status...
This isn't a particularly new idea (and these are just the contemporary examples; lots more in history). They may be giving their own spin on the idea, but all of those above examples have their own spins & variations on the idea of an autonomous city. Anyway, it will be very interesting IMO to see how their experiments with it play out.
Lazarus411 on 12/9/2012 at 10:21
uv chambers motherfucker.
jay pettitt on 12/9/2012 at 10:21
I can't be bothered to read that at all properly, but couldn't you just use fancy light bulbs in our shiny new underwater dystopian future?
faetal on 12/9/2012 at 11:04
Perhaps. I for one wouldn't want to live somewhere you couldn't go outside for fresh air without there being a claustrophobia-inducing submersible ride in the way of it.
demagogue on 12/9/2012 at 11:24
I bet they'll play with submersed dwellings when they're designing living quarters for a future moon & Mars base. It's a lot of the same issues, hermetically sealed environment, radical pressure & temperature differences, airlocks...
SubJeff on 12/9/2012 at 11:27
Quote Posted by Lazarus411
uv chambers motherfucker.
Yes. It would be totally worth all the trouble of building watertight stuff that has the potential to leak and to have to pump air in and to have to UV lights and so on and so forth.
Totally worth it. :rolleyes:
