Two years ago the proportion of the world's population living in cities eclipsed those living elsewhere for the first time in history. The trend has persisted, in fact it seems an unstoppable juggernaut with the ratio predicted to reach 3:1 by 2050. Of course, city-dwelling is nothing new, but cities that 20 million people may call home certainly are. As Justin McGuirk discusses in this article, the transformation presents some of the most profound design challenges of our era. The process of regeneration is relentless - you can't go far in New York or London without seeing immense construction work underway, or derelict buildings whose future is no doubt already a glint in the eye of some ambitious developer.

I couldn't agree more that urban development needs radical "design thinking". Thinking, particularly, that puts humans at the centre - rather than forcing us to impose ourselves. However many tonnes of concrete and glass may tower into the sky, cities are social, cultural and always human spaces. Some cities can't be tamed. While Sir Christopher Wren tried to introduce an intricate grid system to London after the Great Fire, the residents went about their business reinstating a rough reimaging of the previous roads - with their feet and cart-wheels.

In a not dissimilar way - I believe - we are treading our own paths through our modern cities with everyday, personal technology. We're trying to take control, to temper the chaos.

How? Smartphones let us find nearby restaurants and services based on location, with reviews and means to interact with these services. We know where our friends are because they check-in to cafes and clubs and anywhere they like. They update statuses so we know what kind of day they are having on the other side of town, or find out they are round the corner. We can meet strangers with location-based social networks . We can point our cameras at buildings and learn historical facts. We can save 45 seconds by knowing where to get on a train in order to be nearest the exit at our destinations.

As cities get bigger and busier, these experiments cut it down to size, keep us closer to the perhaps 0.001% of the population we call our community. These tools represent a digital layer between person and place. They begin to tame the untamed city while the monumental physical design challenges McGuirk alludes to play out. I recognise this digital layer remains a privilege, not as inclusive as the new era of urban design calls for. But something that makes cities seem more human feels like something with a noble place in the city of the future, and we can start building it now.