i_is_j_smith | ellmer wrote: either we make it happen “on the whole ocean” – or at least a big part of it – or it stays meaningless. The point is to start with something “easy” and get more complex as we gain experience and technological skills. Making the first seastead in 3000m of water, or in a place like the Bering Sea, doesn’t make any sense…why try to fly when you can’t even crawl yet? The first cities were built on the banks of rivers where there was easy access to water, food, energy, and transportation. Only once the civilizations expanded and became more technologically advanced did they move inland. Seasteads will be the same…first getting established in areas where it is easy to colonize and then moving into more difficult areas once we gain more experience. |
ellmer | You part from the viewpoint that building a raft you can live on in the middle of the ocean is a kind of “technical challange” for humanity. – It is not. Live aboard rafts with ocean crossing capacity are out there for thousands of years. Simple log rafts have crossed de pacific sucessfully (Kon-Tiki). Large concrete shell rafts hosting hundreds of persons and full scale industrial facilities are out there working sucessfully for many decades for oil / gas and shipping industry. The challange is economic nothing else. The reason why oil and gas industry is “out there applying seasteading right now” is obvious. The question is how we can bring prices to a level that squaremeter cost becomes available for “average guy housing”. I doubt that landfilling is easier or more economic than building a simple concrete raft structure.    
|
i_is_j_smith | ellmer wrote: a raft you can live on in the middle of the ocean is a kind of “technical challange” for humanity. – It is not. It is. Nobody has done it yet. “Live aboard rafts with ocean crossing capacity” are not seasteads. Neither are “Simple log rafts” that “have crossed de pacific sucessfully” or “Large concrete shell rafts hosting hundreds of persons and full scale industrial facilities”. Living long term, and with a decent level of self-sustainability, in the middle of the ocean is a technical challenge that humanity has not even come close to besting. ellmer wrote: The reason why oil and gas industry is “out there applying seasteading right now” is obvious. The oil and gas industries are not “applying seasteading” any more than the US Navy is by building super aircraft carriers. |
ellmer | I would dare to say that the only reason why people do only live during months on that kind of structures and not for ever is because life on that kind of structures is boring and little appealing. It is surely not because it is a “technical challange that humanity has not even come close to testing”…you could move there permanently today – if you wanted – no technical problem – it is just – no school for the kids, no fun, no hospital – what is missing is the “waterfront development charakter” that gives you a enjoyable neighborhood – not the technical possibility to do so. I think all the applications below do quite well with the open ocean 50 miles off coast (30m waveheight in the north sea) many people are living there quite long term to keep the business going. The technical issues are solved. There are also more enyoyable more long term and more mobility and more privacy and fun oriented lifestyles at sea – but they need a swiss bank account to work.   
 
   
So there is not really a technical challange – there is a market challange – take it out of those “small and exclusive segments” and make it massive – available for John Blow and his bank account – if we can not do it at average city housing prices it simply will stay “exclusive” and therefore “irrelevant” as a society development. Wil concretesubmarine.com European Submarine Structures AB |
OCEANOPOLIS | what Will was trying to say is that building seasteads its not a technical challange. It is not, indeed. The fact that it hasnt been done in the format of, lets say, a huge floating island with various businesses aboard geared toward high self- sustainability and political autonomy-sovereignty, which is true,…its another story. 3000 ft or 60 ft dont make no difference if you’re floating over it… The advantege of hanging out around the so called “shallow spots” (reefs) its purely 1) economic-better fishing and 2) recreational-have fun in the sun. What is there to be done in 3000 ft of water?? Nothing. ” Living long term, and with a decent level of self-sustainability, in the middle of the ocean is a technical challenge,….” No its not. Its a matter of MONEY. “The question of how we can bring prices to a level that squaremeter cost becomes available for “average guy housing”, its almost solved. Build in 3rd world countries. |
elspru | When we limit seasteading to the 0,0000001% of the oceans that are represented by shallow spots – this means we can forget about the “society forming mass effect of seasteading anyhow” – either we make it happen “on the whole ocean” – or at least a big part of it – or it stays meaningless. A tiny limited landfill somewhere is just nothing that will have importance anyway. Look for deep sea anchors and forget shallow spots. If it does not float and has no potential to colonize the oceans it is a “non bigdeal” anyhow. The point of these shallow spots, is “congregation areas”. So basically if you’d like to go socialize, with a bunch of seasteaders, where do you go to find some other people floating on an ocean? The chances of any 2 boats meeting, and both being seasteaders, if we all just go about all 100% of the ocean, would make it rather difficult to congregate, form cities or even large communities. So while much of the time, people can spend seasteading wherever, if they’d like to go somewhere legally ambiguious, these shallow spots are “freezones” prime for such congregation. If you’re seasteading out in some ocean, want to meet some new seasteaders, where do you go? A shallow spot, freezone. calm aware desire choice love express intuit move |
Elwar | Adams Seamount is a submarine volcano above the Pitcairn hotspot in the central Pacific Ocean about 90 kilometres (56 mi) southwest of Pitcairn Island. It is a massive seamount rising 3,500 metres (11,483 ft) from the sea floor to about 59 metres (194 ft) below the surface of the ocean. The volcano hasn’t had activity since 50 BC. |
elspru | Adams Seamount is a submarine volcano above the Pitcairn hotspot in the central Pacific Ocean about 90 kilometres (56 mi) southwest of Pitcairn Island. It is a massive seamount rising 3,500 metres (11,483 ft) from the sea floor to about 59 metres (194 ft) below the surface of the ocean. The volcano hasn’t had activity since 50 BC. that’s within Piticairns EEZ zone. Though the residents of Piticairn are few in number, and may be swayed to switch loyalty from britain, if someone else was to provide them, with superior products and services. calm aware desire choice love express intuit move |
Farmer | Would someone please kill the spambot? Also, let’s find code for a “report this post” icon. |
©2012 The Seasteading Institute