A presentation that I did at the Toronto Open Data Workshop on Nov 2, 2009.

1. Hi,
I’m
Ma*hew,
and
I
work
for
a
design
strategy
firm
called
Norma<ve.
I’d
like
to
thank
Mark
and
team
for
organizing
this
event
and
recognize
the
leadership
our
city
is
providing
by
opening
up
its
data
to
the
world.
This
ignite
talk
is
called
the
New
Shape
of
the
City,
and
it’s
a
geeky
nod
to
a
few
different
authors
that
I
was
exposed
to
while
studying
environmental
planning.
1

2. I
love
the
no<on
of
Open
–
especially
that
it
works
in
so
many
contexts.
I’m
really
excited
about
the
fact
that
our
city
is
really
geJng
it.
The
thing
is,
if
we’re
learning
to
be
a
city
that
thinks
like
the
web,
we
need
to
recognize
that
“Open”
is
a
two
way
street.
One
way
informa<on
flows
won’t
cut
it.
2

3. When
I
think
about
my
open
city
data
dream
app,
the
no<on
that
Open
can
(and
should)
go
both
ways
is
the
core
feature,
func<onality,
message
and
value.
For
ci<zens,
it’s
not
just
about
what
you
can
take
out,
but
what
you
can
put
back.
City
State
is
a
tool
that
gets
us
comfortable
with
having
that
conversa<on.
3

4. Before
I
ended
up
doing
design
strategy,
and
prior
to
my
embrace
of
all
things
web,
I
was
a
GIS
guy.
I
ate,
drank
and
dreamed
GIS.
I
did
my
undergrad
in
GIS,
and
worked
in
GIS
research
labs
and
GIS
startups.
You
get
the
picture.
4

5. This
Allen
Ave.
My
car
is
the
red
one
right
in
the
middle,
and
my
house
is
right
beside
it.
We
take
this
data
for
granted,
even
though
5
years
ago
you
didn’t
see
it
outside
of
professional
GIS
circles.
This
is
an
image
of
the
city,
it’s
shape,
but
not
really.
It’s
just
a
picture.
It’s
not
a
city.
5

6. Down
at
street
level
is
where
the
real
data
flows,
where
the
interac<ons
happen.
Once
you’re
here,
you
realize
that
as
comprehensive
as
our
exis<ng
data
about
our
ci<es
is,
it’s
s<ll
pre*y
basic.
There’s
a
disconnect
between
our
physical
world
hardware
and
our
nascent
digital
analogs.
6

7. I
guess
what
I’m
trying
to
say
is
that
ci<es
are
like
computers
for
the
physical
world.
They’re
a
soYware
layer
for
our
interac<ons
with
the
physical
environment.
It’s
amazing
really.
You
put
raw
material
in,
and
ci<es
push
out
new
value.
Talk
about
parallel
processing.
We’ve
got
2.5
million
CPU’s
in
the
Toronto
model.
7

8. So
when
you
think
about
computers,
remember
that
you
don’t
just
read
data
from
your
storage,
you
write
to
it
as
well.
And
when
you
write
to
it,
it
becomes
available
for
reading.
And
if
you
put
it
on
a
network,
it
has
the
poten<al
to
become
something
special.
8

9. So
when
I
talk
about
my
open
data
dream
applica<on,
I’m
really
talking
about
enabling
the
beginnings
of
the
read/write
city.
I
want
to
see
our
city
work
like
a
big
old
hard
drive,
or
maybe
more
appropriately,
a
big
cloud
where
we
can
start
to
collect
and
share
stuff.
I
know
you’re
all
thinking
I’m
crazy.
What
about
privacy,
legal
concerns,
and
all
that
other
fun
stuff?
9

10. People,
it’s
always
been
a
read/write
city.
Always.
If
anything
the
last
century
did
more
to
turn
ci<es
into
read-­‐only
ci<es
than
any
other
period
during
the
history
of
ci<es.
I
don’t
blame
ci<es
by
the
way,
I
blame
the
20th
century
–
it’s
an
easy
target.
10

11. Richard
Feynman
gave
a
talk
in
1959
which
some
point
to
as
the
star<ng
point
of
nanotechnology.
In
it
he
talked
about
the
future
possibili<es
that
would
come
from
understanding
how
to
manipulate
and
construct
ma*er
at
an
atomic
scale.
More
than
having
one
single
point
for
his
talk,
he
wanted
to
get
people
thinking
about
what
it
meant
to
think
at
that
scale.
11

12. I’m
sugges<ng
in
some
ways
that
we
need
to
find
or
embrace
a
mind
shiY
like
Richard
Feynman’s.
We
need
to
rethink
scale
and
look
at
what
the
real
atoms
are
in
our
city,
and
what
that
means
for
open
data.
I
think
when
it
comes
to
data
flows,
there’s
plenty
of
room
at
the
bo*om.
12

13. This
is
because
in
my
mind,
down
at
the
bo*om,
ci<zens
make
the
best
sensors.
We’re
all
awesome
autonomous
li*le
nano-­‐computers,
working
inside
one
big
computer
called
Toronto..
We’re
awesome
at
data
collec<on;
built
for
it
in
fact.
It’s
just
really
hard
right
now
to
share
it
and
aggregate
it
outside
of
those
cron
job
elec<on-­‐type
things.
13

14. When
I
see
a
scene
like
this,
I
see
everything
that
makes
our
city
great.
So
many
forms
of
interac<on,
meatspace,
builtspace
and
digitalspace
all
blended
into
one.
I
wonder
how
we
can
start
to
do
something
that
makes
our
awareness
of
these
overlapping
worlds
more
explicit.
14

15. Right
now
in
my
mind,
we
need
a
form
field
for
the
state
of
the
city.
How’s
it’s
feeling,
what
it’s
doing.
Collected
as
discrete
inputs
from
our
ci<zen
sensors,
and
available
for
rollup,
firehose
drinking,
or
just
toe-­‐dipping.
15

16. In
“ The
Image
of
the
City”,
Kevin
Lynch
talked
about
how
individuals
perceive
and
navigate
urban
landscapes
They
form
mental
maps
of
how
they
interact
with
the
space.
I
say
that
as
we’re
star<ng
to
live
in
ci<es
that
are
now
forming
new
kinds
of
space
(informa<on),
we
need
to
help
people
build
new
mental
maps
16

17. If
we’re
opening
our
data,
making
it
two-­‐way,
and
(hopefully)
looking
to
do
this
in
real-­‐<me,
we
need
to
start
seeing
new
images,
and
new
maps.
Pulses
and
pa*erns
are
the
inputs
that
people
need
to
understand
their
city
as
it
adds
digital
informa<on
to
the
exis<ng
soYware
layer.
City
and
ci<zens
alike
need
this
data.
It’s
not
about
stalking
people,
it’s
about
showing
the
new
shape
of
the
city.
It’s
about
flocks,
not
individual
birds.
17

18. City
State
should
let
people
put
data
into
the
city.
Not
prescrip<vely,
but
emergently.
Don’t
tell
ci<zens
what
to
put
in
the
form
field;
let
them
decide
how
to
use
it.
We
know
what
to
do
with
Google,
and
we
kind
of
know
what
to
do
with
things
like
Twi*er,
so
I
don’t
see
why
we
can’t
figure
out
what
to
do
with
Toronto.
18

19. City
State
isn’t
about
pushing
out
new
features
for
users,
it’s
about
listening
and
reflec<ng.
It’s
about
star<ng
by
building
just
enough.
Minimum
Viable
Product
as
they
say
in
the
tech
startup
world.
The
data
will
define
itself,
just
like
Toronto
defined
itself
and
con<nues
to
do
so.
The
best
way
to
learn
from
emergence
is
to
reflect,
both
inwards
and
outwards.
Complexity
doesn’t
have
to
be
complex.
19

20. So
that’s
my
idea
for
this
app
concept
I’m
calling
City
State.
An
app
that
allows
ci<zens
to
act
as
simple
sensors,
to
give
back,
to
describe
the
state
of
the
city
in
real-­‐<me
from
any
place
at
any
instant.
And
we
get
some
raw
data
for
our
new
digital
city
soYware
layer
–
something
that
allows
the
city
and
its
ci<zens
to
begin
to
understand
the
new
shape
of
the
city.
20