Eh, the Empire State Building is alright; it depends on the photo and because I've never seen it in person that all I can really go on. But there's a ton of better looking buildings in North Korea itself than that hideous abomination.So why do you think its hideous? What do you think of the empire state building in comparison then?
It's also interesting to note that that building is probably never going to be safe for habitation, as they constructed it solely out of concrete (which is pretty rare) and used very poor quality concrete as well. It's basically just a giant monument. And besides, even if it was habitable it would seldom be used, as the hotels in North Korea are never even half full.
Probably not. Construction was halted for like 10 years due to financial issues, and was only resumed in April 2008. Because the construction of the top final floors wasn't complete, the interior wasn't even started. Moreover, due to the fact that they used subpar concrete many people have claimed that the interior sags a lot.I am sure the North Korean hotel is also nice on the inside.
From wikipedia:Is there any actual evidence that they ARE putting glass in it
"In 2008, after 16 years of inactivity, foreign residents in Pyongyang noted that Egypt's Orascom Group started refurbishing the top floors of the hotel in April 2008. Though the effect on the architecture has yet to be determined, windows and telecommunications antennae were observed being installed. The Orascom Telecom subsidiary of the group confirmed involvement in the structure to begin developing GSM infrastructure in North Korea for up to 100,000 initial subscribers. Only government officials are presently permitted to use mobile phones and the service has been banned from use by ordinary citizens and foreigners since 2002.
In September 2008, a senior North Korean official said the refurbishing of the Ryugyong Hotel will be done by 2012 - the 100th anniversary of the birth of Kim Il Sung. At the same time, an Orascom company official said the goal of the project was to at least give the structure's facade a facelift and make it more attractive. 
On December 22, 2008, photos of ongoing construction at the hotel appeared on the Internet.  The exterior construction has included the installation of windows and a covering of the top (circular) floors however, no photographs or information has been released regarding the interior, such as the questionable construction/engineering of the building or the degrading concrete ."
You can't start construction on the interior of a building (aside from structural members, of course - building the "skeleton") without first finishing the exterior. Otherwise the elements will destroy anything you do. And considering the fact that the top floors of the building were left incomplete for 10-15 years and the windows didn't have glass in them, it's a pretty sure bet that they didn't start on the interior.You dont know that..
Um, there are photos of the building's top floors being incomplete, as well as the windows lacking any glass. That alone is enough to know that it is inhabitable.Are you disputing the fact that the Hotel of Doom has never opened, has never had a single guest, the construction remains unfinished, and it was built using substandard concrete instead of steel?
Those are not facts. Just speculation.. We know little about North Korea and nothing about that building in general. Perhaps it had tons of guest, perhaps its frequently used as military quarters. Who knows? You know nothing about the concrete, and claiming steel is better than concrete is ridiculous.
As for your statement that "steel is better than concrete," it is. There is a reason that skyscrapers are steel-framed. I'm a structural engineer; I know.
Steel-framed concrete buildings are still steel-framed.Concrete is much used in Dutch skyscrapers, and they look far better than glassy steely skyscrapers and its not necessarily better to use steel.