A week or two ago the New Yorker had an article about Bucky Fuller. It discussed his personality and how it influenced his influence, as well as some of the doors he opened.
I also was turned on to him (and other interests) by the Whole Earth Catalog and CoEvolution Quarterly.
I agree that geodesic domes opened a big door, but they have the inherent limits of strongly engineered mathematical shapes. That is, they don't have a lot of heart to them. There is very little you can do aesthetically with a perfect geometry such as a sphere. Living here on earth, we need to respect our physical needs as well as gravity, and a 3D radially symmetric geometry doesn't do that.
Your TIN toy shows how to start building alternate, more flexible geometries. A lot depends on the friction of the joints, as you are really making hexagons, not triangles because of the small distance between the spherical connectors. The hubs can twist under assymetric load.
I was fascinated to hear a lecture by one of the architects finishing Antonio Gaudi's Sagrada Familia cathedral. Apparently, Gaudi also worked from a mathematical base, especially catenaries, parabolas, ellipses, and surfaces of revolution. He then textured the surfaces by constructing them from rough masonry. He took the additional step of refining and re-refining the mathematics until a strong aesthetic emerged. While overly expressive to many (hence the term gaudy) his work shows as strongly physical rather than intellectual like Bucky's.