This again repeats older patterns and how urban planners have dealt with technology. The way urban planners reacted to the automobile was to deny its existence for decades. What happened was the companies who developed the automobiles, and all the related technologies, became the ones to define what the automobile city was going to look like. Los Angeles today is the result of the city of the future that General Motors put on display at the 1939 World's Fair in New York.

And few, if any, people who saw it would have predicted how bad it would become. What new urban blight are we starting be designing a city around the idea of digital media.

The man claims the most striking thing he found was that history repeats itself. (No, really?) Then he goes off to again plan a city around a technology someone wants to push, instead of asking, "How might people want to live, and how might this new technology contribute to that?"