And when someone decides to fly a plane into it...?

Looks like just another flashy piece of concept art. Come back when there\'s some hard facts behind the feasibility of this concept. And the video is completely useless, ostensibly they created a 3D model of the concept and then animated it in different environments, nothing more, no information; nothing.

Good point Bobthefish. We shouldn\'t build anything. Ever. Again.

Don\'t be so close-minded. Dreaming makes for creative thinking. Although this project may seem unattainable, it can spark other ideas that lead to great breakthroughs. What if someone said it would be crazy to think we could ever walk on the moon or that cars could run on air power (there is one) or that some of the things that seemed unimaginable in medicine just a few years ago could ever be achieved? Open your mind up to creative thinking and there is no end to what can be accomplished. Close your mind to possibilities and you\'ll be forever confined to what you currently have... nothing more!

Nice building, I suppose. They\'d better screen people before letting them live there, otherwise this would become another Public Works Housing Project/Slum in no time at all.

These Arcology have been \'floating\' around for at least thirty years. Initially I thought they were great ideas, but look at housing projects. During the 60s, 70s and early 80s they were seen as the solutions to house the poor in society, but ultimately they were seen as the dehumanizing warehousing of people and as breeding grounds for crime, and a great many of these were torn down and the residents dispersed into more \'humane\' neighborhoods.
At this point I see these Arcologies as housing projects on a gargantuan scale%u2014 and cost, both to build, maintain and ultimately tear down.
I think there is an important line between planned development and social engineering.

Truth in advertising demands it be shown on its ear in the Lower Ninth Ward following the next category 5 storm.

Cricorp, the \'close-minded\' argument goes both ways. Why would none of us ever want to move in to an Arcology? Because we\'re not in North Korea; identical drones happy to live in an institutional monolith that expresses somebody else\'s ideas of what is good.

It\'s an appealing idea if you\'re a student or in a similar situation where Arcology would be a move up in the world. But the reason they don\'t work is that we individuals have our own ideas for what we like to live in.

Liberals dream of a Logan\'s Run nightmare world like this, where we all can drop those horrible, greedy, individualistic ways - and join hands together singing in harmony. With the same allocated living space, same healthcare, same outrageous tax revenue paid to keep the votes coming in, it sounds like heaven until you\'re actually faced with it.

<em>(Ed's note: let's try and keep things civilized everybody. Gizmag is a forum for the vigorous discussion of ideas, not for personalities or personal attacks)</em>

Thanks for the calming note Ed. Perhaps some of the commentators should look back at Paolo Soleri - look into his \"Linear City\" I understand this is being actively pursued by China for development. Archigram was also a group that produced some interesting concepts for cities/communities. While some may wish to just continue to sprawl and expand there is something to be said for at least utilizing the land/area that we are in to its optimum. Look into the work of the early 50\'s \"Metabolist Visions\" movement, while I am not advocating it , it does give one pause to think of what may be possible. You will see some of this happening in other parts of the world and it would be a shame not to at least listen to the thinkers that we have in this country. As the Ed said, there should be calm careful, creative, thought & evaluation of the work that has come before.
Just a thought.