Computing for Social Change
Here’s a little commentary on the current state of this. I didn’t go to the first workshop, since it was Teams, no need to use that, Zoom is perfectly adequate.
Haven’t seen any minutes either. I believe the concept is probably useful but not if pre-neutered in the usual way.
Here’s some partial commentary. I haven’t covered the 100 page document, since I have a number of other things to do. I also didn’t attend a ‘workshop’, the organisers decided to use Teams, there are many alternatives, some open source, even.
The first edition is now on Lulu Algorithmic Anarchist: The Book . The ‘book’ has the original A-Z content, a couple of essays from 2009, Library 451 (how some UK libraries are being neutered by US origin algorithms) and my final essay submission on green municipalism at Birkbeck in 2019.
The original as a PDF is still freely available PDF of the Algorithmic Anarchist and accompanies the printed book, since all the footnotes etc. are clickable.
I also still have some review copies if people want to DM me on Twitter with a physical address. The cover is an impression of the Ile St Martin on the edge of Gruissan.
I’m not all the way through this. Also there’s more commentary on the bits of Newham that I know well. All in all, developer led, architect led, full of buzzwords (curated, legibility, heritage, web, arc etc.) and not SMART
More in a while, especially when I’ve read the https://www.newham.gov.uk/planning-development-conservation/newham-local-plan-refresh but, so far, unambitious, climate unfriendly and disappointing.
This is a work in progress, short paragraphs arranged alphabetically by title. Changed to A5 format for printing at Lulu in October 2021. This is now a final version that corresponds to the print version as of January 2022. I’m just proofing the print copy and then it will be more widely available,
Some other essays added at the end of the manuscript. If you want a review copy write to me on Twitter.
aa-draft1.pdf
Here’s the powerpoint of a talk about making search engines. Bit messy. I’ve given this about three times, Southend Pi Jam, Birkbeck Computer Society and (somewhere?) in Hackney.
Here’s an investigatory essay that exposes why there are no ‘serious’ books in Newham Libraries (sorry, I mean Community Neighbourhoods don’t I?).
This essay also features in The Algorithmic Anarchist.
First, let me make the distinction between ‘big’ contractor and third party supplied planters and little planters, often made by individuals and small groups.
Hated is probably too strong a word, they have their place, but their place is not ‘everywhere’. Let’s list some of the reasons and then dig in, where necessary, to each one in turn, they are:
So let’s go.
As far as we can understand the big planters are in the region of £1500 each. I’m not sure whether that includes earth, mulch and delivery to site or not? That will buy a couple of mature fig trees (good shade but they like water), tens of various kinds of saplings or bushes.
They also, judging by the ones on our streets, don’t last very well, so maintenance or replacement will probably be required at between 5-10 years.
This is not always true, if we choose plants and herbs that don’t require much watering, lavender, mint, rosemary for example. Unhappily, because of tokenism (see next), appearances etc. there’s temptation to choose something pretty and annuals. Bloomin’ Forest Gate, the mini version of Newham in Flower (or whatever we call it now?) is an example. Calendula still busy drying out and dying, here and there round where I live.
Recently I’ve met and talked with a subcontractor circulating with a large water tank mounted on a van, watering some of the large planters. So this point is made.
Also, of course, some of the structures themselves are beginning to split and show age.
Oh look! We’ve done something with plants, it must be green, mustn’t it? Incidentally, I can accept a certain amount of argument about mental health and brightening up, but that can be done without this expensive tokenism.
So often/usually plantered (sic) plants do not contribute to air quality, removing pollution, are small (of necessity, see next Species Limited) and arguments about shade. The most egregious Forest Gate site, so far (though I should make a hit parade) is Kuhn Way, school entrance with its small pretty flowers. Also featuring a few sycamores (as if there weren’t enough in FG already?) in flexi-pave or on the carbon positive (probably) ‘amenity deck’ in planters.
A planter is, unlike bare earth, is finite. So the size of roots and root balls is always limited. Nothing big, shady, substantially pollution negative or particularly fruitful can grow in a planter. Such as a decent sized ‘tree’ for example.
However, in Amsterdam, here is an example of dwarf fruit trees and (a polite notice about taking fruit) at a station entrance. Really nice, but really unambitious.
Since anything and everything in a planter is ‘small’, this type of planting is not providing the sustained shade that will be useful as the planet warms up. Research gives 2-3 degrees of reduction underneath foliage.
Worse, without fairly regular watering, ill-considered planting is likely to shrivel and therefore need replacement. Lavender and the herbs that will survive do not need ‘big’ planters either, so there’s a certain illogicality about all this.
I’m not sure how much of a problem this is, but it’s mentioned in academic discussions. The profile, positioning and bulk of these create an obstacle to bump into.
Admittedly litter is a pervasive Newham problem, so one shouldn’t pick on the planters. However, we have two or three at the edges of ‘our’ LTN and they are constant recipients of cans, bottles and cigarette butts.
In some cases they serve as late-night convenient level bar tops as well, resulting in loud conversations in the early morning. This last can probably be fixed by making the top edge an angle, rather than flat.
Planters leave paving or (worse) tarmac in place. So part of the storage heater for the city heat island is maintained. There’s a slight improvement because there’s no direct sunlight, but removing paving (and especially tarmac, since it’s more or less a black body) is a great deal better. It may even provide a little carbon sequestration too.
One of the measurements that I believe to be useful is square area of paving and tarmac removed, each year. We can invent a factor for tarmac since it’s a great deal worse. It’ll melt soon anyway.
The good is the enemy of the best, but these aren’t even particularly ‘good’. Especially if you believe, as I do, that every decision and micro-decision should have a climate component.
Here’s a small essay on some of the issues with this year’s participative budget process. There are some duplications, but I’m not going to tidy it up now, too busy.