FIN
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Originally posted by Diaspora
you would never volunteer any time to serve an organisation that is dedicated to championing issues such as the preventionBad Planning
Environmental Pollution
An organisation Promoting
Good architectural design
Sustainable development patterns
Better waste management
u r right i wouldn’t because i amn’t that self-indulged to say what that i think a building is good architecture or not. i know what i like and what i’m interested in and where i want my architecture to go but it’s the people who use the building that can tell you wether it is good architecture or not beause at the end of the day they are the ones affected.
sustainable development patterns: hmmm sounds like no farm houses to me!!! to me if someone owns land he has the right to put his house on it…or she..lets be politically correct about thisOriginally posted by Diaspora
The retention and management of important buildings and habitatslets take the example of alan’s project. he described the state of this particular “important” building. so an taisce will take over the management of this. improve the standards of it for the owner or maybe even buy it off the owner???
Originally posted by Diaspora
But you can handle the responsibility of signing off of work that you consider of dubious quality.
dubious quality no. varing degrees of architectural merit..yes. there can be no comprimise on workmanship or regarding regulations. do u seriously think u would survive in the outside world with princlples like that or maybe u think that architect’s only get the big projects ???? sometimes to get along u have to take shit jobs in the hope that u may get a chance to express yourself.
so what are the design cliches? and as i have said before i haven’t seen the thing. all i have seen is that pic of a model you gave a link to. it may be inapprociate but i don’t know yet.
i just couldn’t consider myself to be a champion of the quality of life really. wouldn’t be able to handle the responsibility. and why would anyone bother to change there name??? paranoia is a terrible thing.
that was suggested about a year ago to me when they were looking for people to join but i couldn’t do that to myself…
alan..it’s the quality of life!!! ha,.ha… that’s brilliant… champion ..no doubt… sure all us outside the pale still live in mud houses and so even buildings that are falling down must be better than that!!! grow up disapora…i suggest u come down “the country”. what will u do when an taisce goes belly up? go into private practice!!!! ha,ha…i would love for u to get back to us on that one to see how you do.
steel and glass on an apartment building…. exposed internally i presume!!!! would an taisce not have a problem with that..seeing as u r champions of quality of life
i was out on site and i missed all this fun!!!! let me see!!!!hmmmmm… ok..sometimes it is necessary to sign off buildings as a matter of business…if u were actually doing architecture u would understand this instead of a professional objector…. i am far from a yes man and there are definately no bells ringing.
nicely said non-taiscist….. and not trusted by anyone…i think that the term “private recreation of the affluent” is relevant as an taisce certainly does not represent even a significant minority in this country. it’s elitist and with some very backwark looking views of architecture.
“What An Taisce stands for is being “A Champion for Quality of Life”” i found this particularly funny!!!! lol.if that’s what i was getting paid to do then i would have to say yes i would … just because it disagrees with my architectural vision doesn’t mean i shoot myself in the foot. and if it was only for a meal ticket i wouldn’t get out of bed… it is all fine and good having these high opinions but we all bow down to money. and just because they are guidlines doesn’t mean the have to be followed to the letter. if it’s good architecture and beneficial to the area it will get through.
guidelines are exactly what it says…it is a guide not regulations…and besides…what a client wants is basically what we are here for
increase the risk. what is to stop them now…and to be honest an taisce r seen as loose cannons with nobody to answer too. but now we see that dependance on grants from the government seems to be the answer
well maybe we will send someone looking for water on mars and they’ll find gold… the point is only good can come from it…mind u we probably won’t send a human which is what we were talking about and therefore the consequences of that. but colonies aside it takes a few years at present to get to mars and therefore we will need a spacecraft for humans that will require designing.
disapora. the need to go into space and colonise other rocks isn’t purely an econimical decision. soon and i mean that we will have too many people on this planet for it to support us and so for survival of many it is important the we breech this. u may equate it with columbus.
with organic life i will agree with u but if we put machines on mars then we will have to mould them to be able to adapt to that environment rather different than evolving. this however will present the oppurtinuity for them to adapt themselves to their situation. while we won the lotto as regards who takes over we are giving our inheirtance to the machines so in a way we are choosing.
in space there is no need to walk don’t know about mars but i assume cos it’s generally the same mass as our rock it has similiar gravity!!!
absolutely agree we will be completely dependant on machines…it’s not far off it now to be honest. i never took to Ai the film. i have watched it twice now and still don’t think much of it but the irony didn’t pass me by that he actually strived to be human and then ended up being the only remaining human form left…quite a strange one.
however it still was the form of a human which i presume will be the main target of getting an ai to look like us but i feel they will take a more unusual form. anywhoo.depends on the cladding and sure the boards will add quite an exciting colour but however that is not the developers problem.
just thinking after i wrote that. the architecture might be able to define the boundaries of the growth of the machine. initally anyway until it can adapt.
