>>7106733>Cubes are inefficient, because instead of building around what you need to have, you start to need to fill in the space... unless you're really inefficient and don't use that extra space.See, the way I figure, as a human. I would need a room to sleep in, so I'd need a flat surface for the bed. The ceiling doesn't need to be more than a certain height, so it might as well be flat as well. I mean, I guess the walls don't need to be flat, rooms could be cheese shaped and all furniture of the future would have a rounded end. But then, once you start stacking rooms next to each other, there'd be all those plus-star-shaped spaces in-between. So yeah, cubes/rectangles are the way to go for me, as far as the living quarters are concerned.
Of course, other rooms would have different dimensions, depending on the need, but generally, a rectangle's the way to go.
Unless you're Borg, so you sleep standing up and you don't give a damn about ergonomics or aesthetics and all your gear are standardized so you know exactly how much space you need and how to design around that. Like, sticking any old equipment through standardized wall sockets and probably on the ceiling too. Heck, they had their babies stuffed in the walls. Maybe different segments have different dimensions though.
This is all on the basis of it being a Star Trek universe where there's artificial gravity and a pretty good standard of living, even aboard a starship.
Anyway, just being a NEEERD.
