With the smart city moving from concept to reality, the leadership of traditional built environment professionals in shaping cities will be challenged by private corporations’ technology-driven visions.

I think we need to reflect on our teaching, in particular, our curriculum offering. Are we equipping our students with the knowledge on the new technology as well as instilling them values we hold dearly in our profession so that our students could be in the drivers' set in this transformation. I agree with Rob that this has implications for who we hire and what line of research each of us needs to undertake. It may also mean that we need to help our students to explore new career opportunities beyond the traditional sectors. 

Yes, privatization of infrastructure and data is a risk and a threat to conventional assumptions about public planning, public data, public interest.  And the current government is not up to the task of resisting this -- they more likely will accelerate this process.

The "smart city" is also a highly problematic concept, often driven by a naive or cynical view of the city as a place for efficiency in transactions -- and that our main problem is a lack of data (when more likely it is a lack of social institutions and political commitment to urban communities that worsens urban problems). And the smart city is also the surveillance city: the loss of privacy and freedoms is a planning and design issue, and we have been slow to figure this out.
The smart city may well exacerbate inequality as well.