How would a city with 100 million inhabitants look like?

Hey, you could be on to something there.

At the moment, anything that could be properly called a megacity has a lot of gaps - the one on the northeast US coast, for example, looks "megacity-ish", especially at night on satellite and was the direct inspiration for Gibson's Sprawl.

It still has a lower population density then England.
The whole of England.

So while it, and places like the Pearl River Delta and the Taiheiyō Belt are definitely megacity-like, they're still not really there yet - some have the huge city areas, some are approaching the spread, but as actual cities there's nowhere close for now.
Still bloody big though

>That gap in Virginia, tho

It's interesting to see the dead zones. The south Texas coast is much less settled than being included in a mega-region would imply, too.

>Implying the Sun Corridor (and the Atlanta region, really) aren't about two decades away from drying up and blowing away.

Where are the green spaces!?

Probably like the Kowloon Walled City, but across a larger area.

Like one hundred cities with a million inhabitants each.

I'd split the Wasatch Front from the Front Range, but that's mostly because of distance and cultural separation than anything else.

What you're looking for are giant urban sprawls like the Pearl River Delta metropolitan area (population somewhere between 63 to 120 millions). Super densely populated areas (slums, cheap residential areas, mixed-use areas), less populated areas (commercial/business districts, rich residential areas), large industrial sites, spaced by agricultural areas, landfills, etc. Everything is interconnected by highways, high-speed train/train lines, etc.

These really aren't the hyperurban areas everyone is making them out to be. The vast majority of that Gulf Coast region is small towns along the I-10 corridor.

In Tokyo?
You'll be so lucky.

From a quick search, 3.44% of Tokyo is green space, compared to New York's 19.7% (or 14%, possibly), with places like Hong Kong and London approaching 40% or more

Interestingly, a lot of the parks apparently double as disaster relief zones

Looking at the picture, the size of the circles suggests that too - certainly it's not densely inhabited.
Is it basically contiguous low-end habitation perhaps, small town into small town?

But yes, I know it's not all a hyper-urban seamless conurbation - as I mentioned upthread, the Northeast megaregion (the one that inspired Gibson's Sprawl) has a lower population density than England, so it can hardly all be cities.

Also, I didn't make this map, I just posted because it's pretty relevant

Magnasanti for theme not accuracy. Only 6 million but it's properly oppressive.

youtu.be/NTJQTc-TqpU

Like any other city, but over a wider area?

Some popular central places would be really crowded, but anything that could be duplicated would be (assuming the local planners aren't stupid).

>All those disgusting insects in one space
It's almost enough to make me like spiders.

The Pearl River Delta is the largest urban area on Earth with a population of around 60 million.

>assuming the local planners aren't stupid
This would be a mistake.

The city with the tallest building in the world doesn't have a connected sewage system.
One of the biggest financial centres in the world uses a road plan more than 400 years old.
The US has seen highway projects that hit time overruns of almost a decade and cost almost 200% its initial budget.
In China a city of 4 million "disappeared" through administrative changes, getting split between a few others - the first residents knew was a broadcast on the morning news saying their city had been cancelled.

City planning is some crazy bullshit

...

I would love to drop a gigantic nuke in the centre of that sprawl

why?

I still don't see how that could be so bad. No stupid cars, everyone has a job, subways run on time, and very little pollution.

My reply would get me banned

Because he's an insecure faggot, that's why.

t. ch***

IIRC that map is as much about heavily integrated economic areas as it is about urban spread.

He fears the yellow man.

You can say chink, you fucking aspie.

>The US has seen highway projects that hit time overruns of almost a decade and cost almost 200% its initial budget.

>americans think this is bad
>laughingeasterneuropeanisactuallycrying.jpg

Unless we're going with technobabble, there's probably little possibility to concentrate that much population in a small area without running into logistical absurdities.

So it would probably look more or less like our current urban sprawls, only with a different administrative system.

I'm not an american actually, it's just the biggest US city infrastructure screwup I could think of.

It was also insanely expensive on a general scale - for a tunnel about the same length as a somewhat similar project in Prague (which was also double budget, but not quite as overrun on time), it was something like 10 times the cost (I think it was more involved though).

Oh, and there's numerous other problems with it, including handrails that kill people.

A lot of places in the US will screw themselves when hiring contractors to build/maintain the roads.
They'll allow the contractor to re-bid after securing the contract for a higher price. This leads them to lowballing the initial estimate just to secure the job and then saying "Oh wait, I can't do it in this time for this price!" and then waste time rebidding and negotiating with the local or state government and the whole time, they're blocking half the fucking highway.
Totally first world problems.

I didn't know that, though this (Boston's Big Dig) just seems to have been genuine escalating costs and terrible, terrible management

I did know a lot of bridges in the US are in a really bad condition though, and no-one can be bothered to find the money to fix them - probably because of the way these things usually go, an because they're not in major cities

>Paris
Nah it's about 13 millions inhabitants.

Yeah, Big Dig was a mess of greed and cronyism gone awry.
And yeah, a lot of bridges are in horrible shape, but no one wants to focus on infrastructure spending because it will cost trillions over the next 10 years and most people won't directly SEE the benefits.
In fact, the best case for all that spending is for the average idiot schmuck to never notice that anything had ever been wrong and carry on their merry way.
Only that doesn't get votes like promising that you're gonna be stigginit to Obummer and the libs. Or feeding the poor and providing healthcare to the needy.
It's only when one of them fails catastrophically can you get the average retard voter to really care about their infrastructure.
Even shit like the Big Dig was seen as "politics as normal" in a corrupt town like Boston.

> probably because of the way these things usually go, and because they're not in major cities

It's more the latter. In the US, most of the road/bridge infrastructure outside of major cities is handled by the federal government, and for years now Congress has been sitting on its hands doing nothing to fund any repairs or maintenance because they didn't want to give Obama a potential political victory that he could take credit for. Now that Trump is going to be president, the one reasons they've been blocking infrastructure spending are going to disappear on the 20th when Trump takes office, so we're probably going to finally get some federal infrastructure spending again.

I'm mostly just comparing it to Hungary's Metro 4, which was "being built" for about 30 years IIRC. I don't even want to know how overcosted it ended up being.

Eastern Europe also has this, coupled with "and if you let me do it, I'll actually put some money back into your pocket".

Not to mention that Paris can't really become a megalopolis, given it's current decline.

I thought it was "about 12 million" ?
Eh, I saw the 12 and thought "good enough", it might have been like 12.8 - no-one would miss a million Parisians either way.

The numbers for Guangzhou are also a bit funky - getting numbers for the city, urban area and the Pearl River Delta (which it's at the heart of) all a bit muddled - though that's the area that probably will be one of the closest real megacities, especially now the bridge and tunnel system linking Macau and Hong Kong (both islands in the PRD bay) - add them to Guangzhou and the 8 other cities in the region that are slowly joining up, let a few decades of China's mad expansion and you've got the real deal.

>no-one would miss a million Parisians either way.
I'd wouldn't have said it better.

It's a meme. Like t*rk. As if it were such a dirty word, it couldn't be said, even here.
At least, I assume so. I'm not him.

Only a meme among shitfucks like tumblr or leddit.
Around here, no one gives a fuck if you say "dirty words." Stupid nigger.

it's from /int/ or /pol/ (same shit) iirc

Megacities as seen in scifi won't ever happen, for the simple reason that all scientific evidence shows that we'll never reach a planetary population of more than 10 billion people.

Birth rates in the "third world" are dropping like crazy. Bangladesh, a poor-as-fuck muslim country with fuckloads of natural disasters each year already has the same birth rate as your average West-European nation.

>Around here, no one gives a fuck if you say "dirty words." Stupid nigger.

Don't run your mouth about shit you don't know, you little roody-poo candy-ass.

...

> Birth rates in the "third world" are dropping like crazy.
No they aren't, shitskins are still breeding like rats and will continue to breed like rats, it's only the white birth rate that has been falling. Niger still has a 7 children per woman birth rate and rising. Mali has just a little bit less. The idea that shitskins are going to stop shitting out more shitskins is a liberal fantasy.

You escaped your containment.

Jesus, how tightly packed housing. I wonder where their toilets are?

There's also the lack of essential services like fire stations and hospitals and a lifespan average of 50.

Would be interesting to see the border cities that provide Magnasanti its water and power through negotiations and what it exports in return.

rumorsontheinternets.org/2010/10/14/magnasanti-the-largest-and-most-terrifying-simcity/

D E S I G N A T E D

It's simple, every person keeps their toilet at their nearest neighbor's house, and lets that neighbor keep their toilet in their house in return.

Facts don't belong to any one board.

As if it were such a dirty word that, even here, it couldn't be said, retard.
Like a Jew saying God.

>Now that Trump is going to be president, the one reasons they've been blocking infrastructure spending are going to disappear on the 20th when Trump takes office, so we're probably going to finally get some federal infrastructure spending again.
Or they just don't, and when bridges start collapsing they'll blame Obama.

The birthrates in India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan are all barely above 2.

Planned layout, organic growth or a Combination of the two?
High density or sprawling? Both?
What is the ecomonic situation like? Growing economy, stagnating or declining?
What kind of technology is available?
What is the distribution of wealth among the citizens?
What are the main sources of employment and where are they located?
What is the transport network comprised of? Mostly roads?
How well connected is the city to outlying areas, other cities and the rest of the world?
What are the demographics of the city? What is their culture like and how does this affect how they behave?
What do people eat and where does their food come from?

>federal infrastructure spending again
I hate to invite political discussion that could lead to full /pol/, but isn't that specifically one of the things that both Trump and the Reps in general are against, big federal spending?

I mean, it has to be done at some point, but when has that ever made a politician do something?

Now I think about it, are there any (mega) city-building (or management) games for the tabletop?

I know there's FFG's New Angeles for the Android universe, but that's brand new, and isn't so much "city building" as it is a "maximise profit, mostly avoid crises, and try not to let everything go to shit" game with the city as the board (you play as a cyberpunk megacorp, so this makes sense)

They could do that, but I think they want to be able to say "See look what we did! Obama totally failed, but we fixed everything" even though they are the reason that those bridges were left to decay in the first place. Being able to create a problem and then claim credit for fixing it does wonders for your PR, and it will basically guarantee permanent Republican control of the entire federal government for decades. They'll save blaming Obama for the things that they want to do but would screw over a lot of people, like eliminating the EPA or putting the SEC under the control of a lawyer from Goldman Sachs. When those things have negative consequences, then they'll blame Obama.

I'm so sorry for Obama. He really tried his best, but got cockblocked at every corner. His public health care reform (does it even count as a reform if it's basically an entirely new thing?) got gutted for purely political reasons, and then its corpse paraded around as a banner for republicans to gather under.

...

I guess I'm more sorry for the US in general. Having to spend the last 8 (12? 20?) years in fucking political deadlock because half of your country would sacrifice advancing shit just to hold the other half back (and I'm going to go ahead and assume it'd go vice versa). It was the most exquisite crab bucket ever produced, I guess.

Planned organically.
Swiss cheese.
Stagnating economy.
Cyberpunk.
A healthy middle class and GINI coefficient, but real power is held by the plutocrats.
Mining the Ardaurkar Wastes for trilithium.
Futurama tubes.
No connection. The inhabitants aren't sure that there's life outside the City and the Wastes.
Uganda-pyramid, highly diverse, Islamo-humanism.
Mana. No one knows.

> but isn't that specifically one of the things that both Trump and the Reps in general are against, big federal spending?
The plan is for a massive conversion to toll roads/bridges for most federal infrastructure
fortune.com/2016/12/21/donald-trump-public-infrastructure-building/

Republicans love it because it's technically not a tax increase. Like how Scott Walker very proudly proclaimed that he never raised taxes, he just increased fees for everything.

> and I'm going to go ahead and assume it'd go vice versa
Even if it is, the Democrats have zero power to actually hold anything back. Once Trump takes office on the 20th and he gets his SCOTUS nominee confirmed to fill Scalia's seat, the Republicans will have total, unfettered control of the entire federal government, complete control of half of the state governments, and partial control of most of the remaining states. Aside from a few select holdouts, the Democrats are done as a meaningful political force.

>the Democrats are done as a meaningful political force.
How long has it usually taken for new parties to develop? I know the Whigs and the Federalists used to be things.

That's one way to do it, since increasing fuel efficiency is rendering the gas tax useless for infrastructure repair and maintenance. And everyone is going "muh privacy" on the idea of having trackers put on their cars and being taxed a fraction of a cent for every mile driven.

Done for a term or two, maybe, but it's not going to be too long before people start realizing what they did, and how badly they fucked up. The one thing that always fucking makes me scratch my head is the Repubs asking for "small government" when America has never had a "small government" and never really will.

Possibly, but the last time the GOP held near total control back during Bush Jr's administration, they did fuck all other than some big handouts to the ultra rich.

The federalists/anti-federalist setup was really primitive by comparison. After all, the country was really new and at that point very few people actually mattered in terms of politics. Few people could vote, and even then the electoral college was even more of a thing so really the parties had very little to do with the actual people in the US.

With the Whigs, bear in mind it took the issue of slavery to really break them as a party and lead to the rise of the Republican party to fill the vacuum.

It's more likely that the US will simply become a one-party state, with the Democrats clinging to life but remaining completely irrelevant in the face of total Republican control.

Cars already have built in clocks to track miles (km-s in countries with non-retarded system) so you could just read those once a year.

Cars having an obligatory yearly checkup is also enforced in the US? Or is that an EU only thing?

They have to pass smog checks but other than that there's nothing.

You are completely retarded and completely wrong.

Do you really fucking think YOU, an autistic fucking basement dweller on Veeky Forums know better how the world will look in 50 years than the worlds brightest sociologists and mathematicians?

Hahahahahaha, you fucking retard.

> Done for a term or two, maybe, but it's not going to be too long before people start realizing what they did, and how badly they fucked up

Doubtful. That would require hearing about bad things resulting from Republican control, and they won't. When human beings make a decision, they then go and seek out sources of information that will reassure them that they made the right decision. It's sort of a preemptive defense against buyer's remorse.

And once they have their objective, hearing information to reassure them, they'll use that as a test to see if they trust a source. If it tells them what they want to hear, they will believe it is trustworthy. If it doesn't, they will dismiss it as lies.

The people who voted for Trump and the Republicans are human beings, and like most human beings they will listen to news that confirms what they want to believe and tells them what they want to hear. So all the bad stuff that happens from now on? They will blame that on the Democrats, and they will never realize that their mistake.

Well he's doing it his way (as one expects of Trump), but it looks like it might actually do the job at least.
Though there's probably a bit of a risk of something like the Military-Industrial complex developing in the construction industry too.
At least it's an industry Trump has significant experience with.

Never heard of that Walker guy, but sounds like a fairly standard politician move

That's what living in an echo chamber like /pol/ does to you. Who needs facts when you got pure ideology.

Well, in the short term the GOP has an easy ride for the next decade. Control of the state governments means control of the districting process, and that guarantees GOP control of the House of Representatives no matter how the people vote. The Senate inherently favors the party of the smaller, more numerous states, which again is the GOP. Furthermore, the third of the Senate which is up for reelection in 2018 very heavily favors the GOP, since it's mostly Democrats defending in GOP-leaning or swing states.

The Supreme Court currently has a 4-4 split, with 1 empty seat that Trump will get to fill with whoever he wants, since the GOP has the Senate. After that, the next oldest justices are Ginsberg and Breyer, meaning that Trump is likely to get 2 more appointments to the Supreme Court, shifting the balance to 7-2 in the GOP's favor. The GOP's justices, on the other hand, are relatively young and will likely remain on the court for at least another decade or 2.

Thank you /pol/ for shitting up yet another Veeky Forums thread.

Quick correction: Kennedy is older than Breyer, so he'll probably be the second to go. Still, he's the closest thing on the court to a swing vote, and replacing him with a hardliner will shift the court more in the GOP's favor, so similar effect. And then Breyer will die after him, so end result is the same.

This actually seems like calm political discussion.
This is /pol/.
There's a difference.

like tokyo but three times bigger

You said it yourself. POLITICAL DISCUSSION.

NOT Veeky Forums.

There is no difference.

Swing voters are not the people you refer to, and reminder that he actually lost the popular vote, so the Democrats are not by any means done for.
Maybe, but how long do you think The Entirety of the american people are gonna stand for a vaguely theocratic Republican dictatorship? One that can dictate laws whichever way they want, quite likely fucking up more than 60 years of progress along the way to selling the entirety of our government to the corporations.
I always try to be calm and polite when discussing politics, religion is where I get rude.
What evidence is this that states we'l never have more than 10 billion people? Last I checked with intelligent planning Earth could support wayyy more people than that.

That's not really a reason to encourage it though.
>with intelligent planning
Found your problem senpai.

user, you talk as though such things haven't happened repeatedly in America. Reconstruction is probably the most glaring example of progressive backlash, and has it's mirror in current politics.
>Found your problem
Nobody will dispute that, omae.

Never been to West Virginia I see. Its like 3 people per square mile. I've never seen such a desolate place. My uncle used to live there and got in a bad accident where he ran over a gas line in his field with his lawn mower. He had to be airlifted right out of his yard to thr nearest hospital miles away. It was really fucking weird. Even the nearest "big city" was tiny as hell.

Well, smog checks are still a good opportunity to also check how many miles you put into your car since last year. No need for tracking microchips...

Unless you want to really micromanage the stuff and pay exactly as much to whoever is in charge of the different parts of the roads as they were used but that seems really finnicky, and overall gates probably do it better.

Or the Yangtze River Delta, which is around 88 million.

I don't dispute that that's a problem but it isn't insurmountable, regardless I was asking because i wanted his source.
I never said they hadn't happened but when they have before Corporations weren't as powerful as they are now, money has always had a say, but now it can have the only say and that more than anything scares me..

As long as it isn't blatant shitposting and baiting don't get your panties in a bunch. Politics and world building go hand in hand. You can't avoid this kind of thing unless you go full autism, and you should rightfully never go full autism.

No, fair point, on both counts actually.

And actually I'll have to take the blame for this one, the first post mentioning Obama was in reply to me talking about the Big Dig

That's what he's talking about, Virginia causing such a break

Can we all at least agree that megacities can make for interesting places for games to be set?
Or do people find them just too fucking big?

Now you know why most terrorists seem to love you and your kind so much that they dying to give you your own medicine then.

At what point does urban sprawl begin to drop and subterranean construction begin to seem feasible?

> Swing voters are not the people you refer to,
I'm referring to human beings in general, and swing voters are still human beings, with all the same irrational behaviors and cognitive biases as other human beings.

> and reminder that he actually lost the popular vote, so the Democrats are not by any means done for.
Popular vote doesn't matter in the US. The total number of people isn't as important as where those people are.

> Maybe, but how long do you think The Entirety of the american people are gonna stand for a vaguely theocratic Republican dictatorship?
The Republicans don't need a majority of the people to support them. They have enough to maintain total control, even if it isn't a majority.

Go to Canada and ask Toronto management.