Between scenes of rogue AIs and distopian futures, we are given a brief to design a housing complex for the Barbican in London.
Instantly I am brought to Margaret Wertheim's: "It is just this excluded but irrefutable 'I' that cyberspace seems to provide a home for." The concept that architecure is a slave to our human needs was theorised by Futurists in the sense that they are machines for living. Reading through "The Virtual Dimension" it came to my attention that this concept had evolved to: The architectue is a slave to our human needs. Cyberspace is a slave to our cultural and spiritual needs.
Ironically so, cyberspace has nothing "mystical" about it. Everything that occurs in a computer can be traced down or deduced to the programming code. Sure enough, the resulting behaviour may be more or less dense in complexity creating an illusion of real. We can that way simulate experiences that could otherwise not be encountered in the real world.
Florian Roetzer's argues that "the more uniform the world culture becomes, the more differences between us we desire to have". It is here where I say that an utopia can only exist for the individual. A person's utopia may be another persons dictatorship. In simulation is the only space where we can find utopia.