April 28, 2012 at 11:39 pm #20208
Anyone look into any legal loopholes to set up shop down there? Off shore even maybe? I know lots of nations claim it but are not supposed to build colonies on it.June 18, 2012 at 10:46 am #20706
I’m somewhat familiar with Antarctica. There is one sector that has never been claimed by any nation. Some spots have been claimed by two or three nations, and some of the reasons for the claims (“It’s south of Argentina/It’s south of Chile”) are weak at best.
The United States and Russia have both reserved the right to claim the whole continent.
All claims have been suspended under the Antarctic Treaty.
That said, squatting might work.June 22, 2012 at 9:22 am #20717
belongs to everyone and no one, interesting huh?December 17, 2013 at 1:48 pm #22499
There’s already precedent for setting up a base outside the control of existing states. So, you could set up there. Just be careful that you don’t destroy the place you’re in…December 18, 2013 at 3:26 pm #22501
That’s what I was arguing about in the other thread. It’s totally possible to make countries on land, especially if you buy territory as opposed to squatting. Also notice how they used ships and helicopters, installed wind power generator and grew plants.
In the end they succeeded because Greenpeace is a movement and not just a bunch of individual dudes. They act together and have common funds. It also gave credibility to their claims, because to stand against the sovereign countries a lot of people are needed.
Another thing: notice timing. They used 1989 spill as an argument for their agenda. There is no better time to create a country than in times of NSA surveillance scandal.December 19, 2013 at 9:52 pm #22503
I always said that it would be much cheaper and easier to settle on dry land than building a floating seastead from scratch. Back in 2009 there was a forum here called Seasteading Outpost Belize (SOBIZ), which was a plan to buy a “cayes” (a small island right on the reef) and start seasteading there. The plan got traction, some of us were seriously looking into it. We even found an island, Alligator Caye which was for sale then (it looks sold now). But the plan somehow died out,…
In regards to Antarctica, I personally don’t see any seasteading potential there, for the obvious reasons,…December 20, 2013 at 12:21 am #22504
Back in 2009 there was a forum here called Seasteading Outpost Belize
But the plan somehow died out
Interesting, so why did it halt? Also I’d like to add, I see that people usually discuss setting up some seasteading, and from there working up business opportunities. Sure, that’s valid, but there’s as well a possibility of making some money first (in a related or totally different business area), and only after that creating seasteading so it can be jumpstarted with existing capital, reputation and experience.
For example, if a partnership consisting of famous or rich enterpreneurs and scientists announces that a political project is started, then public would have more trust in it. I mean, imagine that a seasteading-based country has been created by a bunch of unknowns, would you move there and risk your capital or health? Risk isn’t only caused by technical circumstances, but by management or other factors too, especially if it concerns people’s lives. If you look at TSI, it has some big names behind it. That gives credibility. Or like when Elon Musk announces Hyperloop and there’s much less backlash than could be. It may be better to work on PayPal first, than to try and build SpaceX or Tesla Motors right off from the start. I’m not talking about starting small vs starting big, but about starting with a tried team of people, with business links and so on.
In regards to Antarctica, I personally don’t see any seasteading potential there
By the way, if anyone makes some kind of medium-scale illegal residence there, it could also bring on Greenpeace’s tantrum, and they can be quite radical…December 20, 2013 at 10:31 am #22508
In my opinion, it halted because in reality most of the people were just talking about it, but nobody wanted to invest. Also, I think that at that time the mentality was that TSI would deliver a nice fat juicy seastead for everybody and they will all get invited aboard without even moving a finger (or a penny for that matter), even though, TSI ALWAYS said that they never intended to be an “owner-builder-operator”, but rather a “catalyst”. Very few really got that. With the only exemption being BlueSeed, who was incubated here @ TSI.
Now, somehow and no matter what, money made somewhere else (another business) will be invested in a seasteading venture. If they will be. So far, not much on the horizon.
And as a pure business start up, any seasteading venture will have a hard time raising capital since it will be viewed as “too risky”. I now that from personal experience. Also, just look @ BlueSeed. But paradoxically, if we add the social and political dimension to it, there might be some people interested. But again, how many will really invest in it?
I always viewed seasteading as a peaceful revolution. But money alone never revolutionized anything. It was the people behind it and the people on the streets who believed in that idea.
In our case the people on the oceanDecember 20, 2013 at 1:46 pm #22509
TSI ALWAYS said that they never intended to be an “owner-builder-operator”, but rather a “catalyst”.
True, but, in my opinion, there’s also some mix-up regarding TSI’s site: the postulated goals are not clear right away, if you simply scan the site a bit and not read in detail.
In my opinion, it halted because in reality most of the people were just talking about it, but nobody wanted to invest.
But why would they want to invest in a high-risk venture, if they don’t know each other well enough and haven’t worked together on any long-term project before?
But money alone never revolutionized anything. It was the people behind it and the people on the streets who believed in that idea.
Atomic age revolutionized the world, yet people from the streets had nothing to do with it. They just live and don’t care about such troubles, about technology, science, politics. It’s scientists, managers and politicians who create new atomic tech, try to expand it, or, on the contrary, attempt to stop building of new atomic reactors. I just don’t see how a bunch of random people from the streets can create anything hi-tech nowadays, and without hi-tech a new country can’t be competitive. I agree, it’s possible to create grassroot seasteading, I just don’t see how will it scale or how will it raise money and not lose independence in the course of such actions. For example, if one agrees to external investments, then one falls prey to international capital…
And as a pure business start up, any seasteading venture will have a hard time raising capital since it will be viewed as “too risky”.
if we add the social and political dimension to it, there might be some people interested.
Why the need for external investments? If someone wants a different country, why won’t they try to work for it? Otherwise, they will have to deal with more or less the same bullshit that happens today, because founders will make rules, and not citizens. If someone has political motivatons in the first place, why not try to become one of the rulers? Why simply agree to a role of citizen just because someone promised you more freedom?
Instead one can try to find likeminded people and work with them to get experience, rep and money, like the Traitorous Eight did. Note how corporations don’t force you into their products. Everyone buys what one wants, if someone likes nothing, he can start his own business. It’s the same with countries, freedom can be materialized when one elects a country for a living, without necessarily electing a politician like it is with classical democracy.
Also, just look @ BlueSeed. But paradoxically, if we add the social and political dimension to it, there might be some people interested.
That’s what I’m talking about, who are those guys from Blueseed? They haven’t created anything well-known before. Why would anyone trust them with building a more free society than those that already exist? For all that I know, they can fail hard. To have a high chance of success, founders must be experienced and determined people, who know how to rule the country in all aspects. Yes, it’s possible to start grassroot, but what is the chance of success? I don’t know, but look at business statistics, most new firms close really fast. And they exist inside another country. So the chance of creating a whole new environment is even slimmer. Maybe the seasteading country will make some profit, but there’s no guarantee that it will be succesful in political, scientific, defensive and other ways. I expect most seasteading countries founded by random dudes to fail in these aspects.December 20, 2013 at 2:04 pm #22510
IIRC, Pastor Jason was one of the leading forces of SOBIZ. He was very active in the forums, then without warning he disappeared for several months. After a while I emailed him at two different email addresses trying to find out if he was even still alive, and got no response. I believe SOBIZ pretty much died during that period.
Pastor Jason did show back up, posted a few times, and then disappeared for good.
As far as my personal financial involvement in seasteading:
In addition to my on-going donations to TSI, I also put $2,000 in one user’s seasteading project. It was more of a grant than an investment, which is good because the project never got very far.
I also gave serious consideration to another user’s project, but he wanted a minimum buy-in that was around $8,000 if I recall correctly. Whatever the exact number was, it was more than I was comfortable with. I’m doing well financially, but I’m not wealthy. And I’m getting closer to retirement so that increasingly has to take priority.
The biggest problem with investing in any seasteading projects discussed in these forums is that few people/groups want to put together a detailed financial plan. And if it is presented as an investment rather than a request for a donation/grant, any serious analysis of how the investment could actually generate a positive return.December 20, 2013 at 2:42 pm #22511
The biggest problem with investing in any seasteading projects discussed in these forums is that few people/groups want to put together a detailed financial plan. And if it is presented as an investment rather than a request for a donation/grant, any serious analysis of how the investment could actually generate a positive return.
It’s a realistic approach to accept external investments as opposed to only internal. But consider this: if they build a country like that, then the founders will have to be accountable before investors. So it’s like the country is built not only with founders’ will, but also with the investors’ will. Now let’s think about external investor, why is it that he is not participating directly in the project, but is only giving money? Most likely because he doesn’t give a shit about the country, he only wants money multiplication. That means that the country’s future is less important in the long run than the ROI. And it’s easy to see in real world what happens when ROI guys are the primary driving force. Sure, they may squeeze out profits, but I don’t see them squeezing out freedom, intellect or security.
Another thing: having to pay back means that the country is by default started with a big external debt. It would be like USA and China, only in this hypothetical realm China is the ROI board that determines when and how US pays back, not the other way around.
I’m not opposed to external financing, just gave a couple of things to consider. Your mileage may vary, as they say. For me it all depends on the people, if the external investor is not some shady venture fund, but a public figure that has declared benevolent intentions, it’s not all that bad.December 20, 2013 at 8:11 pm #22512
Generally the projects discussed are much less ambitious than trying to start an entire country; particularly those which would actually be seasteading (which IMO excludes anything involving living on an island).
The one project that I put money into was a proof-of-concept project of a particular type of seastead.
The project that wanted the minimum that I wasn’t comfortable with was a ocean-based business (i.e. a business actually involving the ocean, not just a business on the ocean like what Blueseed is doing). It had the possibility of expanding to the point where people could live on it and where it could move from sheltered territorial waters out into open waters beyond the EEZ. Because I didn’t invest, I didn’t follow it too closely, but IIRC the business ended up shutting down entirely.December 20, 2013 at 9:43 pm #22513
those which would actually be seasteading (which IMO excludes anything involving living on an island)
Well, an island confederation would still be heavily dependent on fleet. It’d also be good to have mobile buildings and assets that could quickly be transferred to ships and transported to another island in an emergency situation. An island could be artificially extended, in which case it’s also similar to seasteading… All in all, there are many similarities. Consider artifical islands: do you really want to construct an artificial island as a thing in itself, to prove to the world the possibility of such deed, to test new engineering approaches; or to live in the sea away from malevolent jurisdictions? In the latter case there’s not much difference.
Besides, TSI states that their end goal is lobbying for country creation, supporting this process etc. And not seasteading per se, quote:
At The Seasteading Institute, we believe that experiments are the source of all progress: to find something better, you have to try something new. But right now, there is no open space for experimenting with new societies. That’s why we work to enable seasteading communities — floating cities — which will allow the next generation of pioneers to peacefully test new ideas for government.
I’m simply showing there’s alternative, contrary to their words. One can go with mixed seasteading, for example. I think there are a lot of misunderstandings stemming from the fact that different people here want different things. Some want to get away from everybody, some want to seastead, some want new country, some want business. It’s not always possible to combine these ideas.
The one project that I put money into was a proof-of-concept project of a particular type of seastead.
So the project achieved little?December 20, 2013 at 10:53 pm #22514
To Ancient Man
I can understand your angles here, without even knowing you… As a matter of fact, I don’t even know your real name… I have no clue who you are,… how old you are,… how you look,.. etc.
You are a stranger to me, and that’s a fact. You don’t know nothing about me, and I’m a stranger to you. That’s a fact too. But it seems that we can have a decent conversation on the subject of seasteading and you seems to be a cool, smart dude. Regardless of this perception, do you really want to seastead ? How? I have no clue. If you want to seastead, what is your concept? Do you have a plan? I still don’t have a clue. We can talk as much as we want here, but without conclusions that will lead to a concrete action, what’s the point? Anyway.
Yes, TSI could have been more specific w/goals, etc. I agree. But, it is what it is man… Why invest in a high risk venture with strangers? True. But if we share the same goals, maybe we can communicate, built relations and start trusting each other,…How else is this gonna happen’? Why need external investments? No we don’t, if it’s grassroots. The comment was directed to a “pure seasteading business”.
And yes, if grassroots, the founder will make the rules as citizens and for the citizens and will become rulers since they work hard and invest to build it. Do you know of any other way? And as long as the rulers and the rules are fair and REAL democratic, that’s the way we’ll roll.
We are not trying to building a Perfectionist Utopia here, just an Improved One
Yes, the guys from BlueSeed might be unknown, and they might make it or fail. What’s knew under the sun? But keep in mind that they don’t want to built a new society, but a business. Any investor knows about risk. The bigger the risk, the bigger the reward or failure. But isn’t the biggest risk NOT talking a risk?
On the other hand, ocean colonization (somehow known here as seasteading) is not just a business, but a movement first, sustainable only as long as run as a profitable enterprise. I venture to say that a calculated small risk taken into “investing” in a small seasteading movement-business in order to find out the feasibility of larger scale ocean colonization it’s well worth it, due to the future ramification in the history of mankind. In my book.
I thought you already retired
Pastor Jason’s “disappearance” was somehow unexpected & disappointing… I mean, we all take breaks, go do things, but few of us always find some time to come back here “to check things out” and share new ideas. It seemed that he was really into seasteading @ that time. Who knows… I hope he’s well.
Somehow it feels that the older I get the harder it is to get involved with seasteading. And it should be the other way around since time is running out. Getting old is wired.December 21, 2013 at 4:08 am #22515
And it should be the other way, because the truth is marching on!!!!!
Hey Ocean! Hey Ken! Hi everybody else! The Floating Cities Project report is coming out on Sunday. I saw a sneak peek. Have you seen it? How do you feel about DeltaSyncs design compared with our previous designs?
I know this is the wrong thread but I’m gonna throw down with the lowdown.
Ken (and Ocean put in like $20 too, right) as you know I left Delaware in July 2012. I have been living mainly around San Diego (PB) since then, in my truck. People in Delaware can hardly imagine living in their cars, but here in SoCal the attitude is like ‘Wow! You have a car?’. My condo is rented out to a new tenant.
I had a terrible time finding a job in San Diego, but it was still easier than in Delaware. I finally got a job doing ‘hard labor by the docks’ when I was offer $9.25/hr to run a pneumatic chisel scaler with a company who contracted to repaint the hangar bay on USS Essex. I am still at this job, but now making a few dollars more per hour. Ships I worked on included (USS) Freedom, Fort Worth, Essex, Pearl Harbor, Preble, Carl Vinson, Ronald Reagan, accommodation barges, and I think a few more.
I STILL HAVE the Bergstead Kiwi model, and components to build a larger version. I would love to get more money and further the project, but I estimate it would take about $250K minimum. Meanwhile my stature where I work is continually getting stronger as I build my repoire. The company has 2 owners, Paul and Steve. Paul brought the know-how, and Steve has millions of dollars (and a house on Coronado). In time, perhaps I can convince them to support my project. They have both shown a liking to it. But getting any real support, other than continued employment, is going to require a lot of trust and respect which requires tremendous competition with the hundreds of other people who work at there. We do painting projects, which are fairly complex, requiring enormous amounts of resources. From capital to tools, man-power, materials, know-how, relationships and of course politics…
It is a fairly strong company. The experience has been excellent for my seasteading implementation perspective. Turns out Wil was right! This shit is hard and requires more resources than I really understood before
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Posted on at