Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 32 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #9357
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    Most people looking to overthrow the state and skip over the democratic process often have ill intentions of their own. Then, those other countries which have less then pleasant regime’s (Afghanistan) are already serving as satellites for the West (in this case, the US). I think the US government can outspend seasteaders when it comes to political subversion.

    Sheesh, bunch of prissy little girls.

    How sage. Did you write that from behind a keyboard in North America?

    If you could find a country being run into the ground by people who aren’t in the pocket of the US, China, or Russia, then by all means. I don’t think the populace will be onboard with furthering the aims of a bunch of white Americans who want to live on the ocean though. Especially if the country has ‘obligations’ to the IMF. If you try to extricate them from that, then you’ll have the US and other countries kicking you out anyway. However, if you don’t extricate them from that, then you won’t be able to bring them prosperity.

    The World Bank lets nobody mess with their sweatshops; nobody.

    #9352
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    Gentry wrote:

    JeffM wrote:

    There sure are a lot of agendas in this thread. It makes me sigh with relief to remember that its the TSI team who are spearheading this right now. Otherwise we would be in serious trouble.

    Personally I don’t feel like playing Braveheart on the ocean and treating inspections (which it would be unreasonable to not expect at first) like invasions from the armies of Mordor.

    Agreed. I kept avoiding posting in this thread.. mostly out of disgust :P

    [/quote]

    Definitely. Talk of fomenting coups and invading countries makes me sick to my stomach.

    #9351
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    @i_is_j_smith

    I agree, we will need complete autonomy, and we will definitely need a flag.

    We can’t expect the governments to send out a memo to everyone defining the distinction between a seastead and any other type of sea vessel though. A navy official will see something sitting in the water than moves on the ocean, flies a flag, and has a crew. Of course they’ll think it looks strange as hell, but we can’t count on them having the foresight to question whether or not an inspection would be legal (in our case, if they’re aware of it).

    Wires are bound to get crossed, in which case we will have to establish dialogue with any nation’s authorities beforehand to ensure that there are no screw ups. Should this fail, then we do what other nations do; fire a warning shot. To be safe we should have the proper authorities on speed dial so that messes can avoided.

    What I was saying though was that in the beginning, we may have to suffer a few, but I agree that allowing that to happen may set an undesirable precedent since we’re looking for complete autonomy on the ocean, not to simply be vessels which fly a nation’s flag. It should be established that our vessels are in themselves our sovereign territory (if not the ocean around or below them).

    By that I was assuming by flag you meant our own flag, if you meant another nation’s flag I apologize.

    @tusavision

    Yes, I agree, thats why a seastead should only have the armaments necessary to defend itself against illegal boarding actions (and maybe small craft). Killing foreign soldiers should be avoided, and illegal boarding actions from foreign militaries should just be neutralized, disarmed, well treated, then be sent packing. Complete video documentation should be kept so that they can’t cook up any bullshit afterwards (e.g “the seasteaders starved and beat the soldiers… so thats why we took them as POWs and sunk their seastead”)

    I also agree that we have to worry about the press as well, because as the US has proven time and time again, the press can make the general public believe that up is down and twist any story into a sensational circus.

    We have to safeguard our sovereignty to the letter of course, but anything more only attracts attention and asks for a fight. The media would tear us apart and make us look like gun toting loonies in a floating community.

    As for staying off of the radar, that would be pretty desirable. Submersibles are very limited in what depths they can reach though. The only option left seems to be to go deeper, but that poses complications in design and cost, depending on its size. It cost the soviets a fortune just to build one normal sub that could reach 1300m, and it was made out of titanium. There isn’t much stealth to be had at conventional depths anymore.

    #9322
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    There sure are a lot of agendas in this thread. It makes me sigh with relief to remember that its the TSI team who are spearheading this right now. Otherwise we would be in serious trouble.

    Personally I don’t feel like playing Braveheart on the ocean and treating inspections (which it would be unreasonable to not expect at first) like invasions from the armies of Mordor.

    #9311
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant
    If this game were ever made (even if it were only flash), I would recommend something similar to Myst 4.

    Not in story, but in style. The game deals mostly with story and puzzles, but Myst 4 stood out from previous titles because of the beautiful environments. Eye candy makes up for a lot, especially in games where you’re required to think and solve problems rather than shoot things.

    If anyone who reads this is into thinking/puzzle games, I would highly recommend it (once you play it, you’ll see what I’m talking about).

    In a game though, try to keep politics to a minimum and/or focus more on the engineering/science behind seasteads and seasteading lifestyle. Games should be fun, not re-educational :P

    #9262
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    The investors will have to be bought out at some point… the sooner we’re rid of them, the better. You can’t have an independant nation with essential financial ties to mainland investors. On a related note, there are probably many wealtheir individuals who be interested in this kind of life out on the sea. We don’t only need landlocked investors ;P

    However, on the other hand a rugged, individualist freedom oriented venture doesn’t seem very practical.

    #9251
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    This could be solved by sending representatives to countries and places like the UN to consistently represent us. By the time seasteading takes off, I’m willing to bet we would have considerable international attention, and they would be willing to hear us out on what exactly it is we want to accomplish.

    So long as we’re clear on what we’re about and give the proper legal assurances (e.g we won’t be harbouring terrorists, or acting as hosts to other criminals and illegal activity), I think they might be willing to give us an extra-national designation of some kind (which would come complete with a flag to let navies know not to bother us).

    Seasteads would have to keep strict control of the flag so that smugglers and other undesirables wouldn’t try to abuse it.

    #9240
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    I hear that there are a lot of paramilitary outfits in South America and other areas.

    Buying a small island from one of these nations would be best, but you never know which locals might take issue with it, and how far they’ll go to make you leave. The first priority would probably be development aimed at ‘securing’ the island, and making sure some locals didn’t come and butcher us in our sleep. This could make a paramilitary outfit very useful at first, until we had an organized system with a trained seasteader militia.

    I know that its not really fair to call them all murderous, but there is an awful lot of understandable, anti-american imperialist sentiment, and a bunch of white North American buying one of their islands might be enough to get them riled up. We would have to make it clear that any intruders on the island shouldn’t be harmed, and should at most be disarmed and sent back, or detained until their own authorities could come pick them up.

    I’m starting to think armed invasion is the best approach.

    Well armed invasion is just armed robbery on a larger scale… no one will like you, and they won’t acknowledge that anything you take belongs to you.

    Buying one would probably be easiest… some countries would slaver at the thought of 20 million american dollars, especially since we aren’t looking for a valuable, tropical paradise; we just need an island fit for development. Hell, even an area of shallow water would be fine.

    #9229
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    That would be very useful. An artificial island which could be made to have a fairly secure foundation would be good. It will require a lot of rocks, dirt, sand, soil, etc, but it would make an interesting long-term project for seasteads.

    The volcano one does sound pretty stupid, but it might work. Perhaps after forming an island, some large, man-made hydrothermal vents could be established around the submerged areas of the island to relieve pressure and help ensure that it doesn’t go and destroy any seasteader development. Hell, maybe they could even be harnessed for energy production.

    The vents would also help create a very healthy underwater habitat.

    Just a thought, even if it belongs on the crazy ideas forum :P

    #9228
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    Thats very true smith.

    I was thinking that seasteaders would undertake island development after the seasteading movement had developed and gained some momentum, so that we might have the resources and ‘pull’ required to purchase an island, and perhaps even have some of the restrictions lifted. Of course there would have to be a clear dialogue with whatever government it fell under, so that it could be assured that we wouldn’t be building anything like a toxic waste storage facility for American companies to use. I’m sure that if they were brought to understand the amazing things we want to build & accomplish, they might be willing to give us some extra rope.

    The restrictions are probably there the make sure that monied idiots don’t go ruining any of the islands (e.g some rich American might decide he wants to build himself a personal waterpark and level half of the trees).

    Although its been repeatedly beaten down as unlikely, perhaps a nation somewhere will actually allow us to buy an island. It seems to be the only hope we have.

    However there are lots of other avenues of thought, so even if we never get an island, we have other options. I guess seasteaders will cross that bridge once they reach it.

    #9215
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    Well, even if we only had a small island, we’re more ambitious than most people :P

    We can expend outwards and downward. I have no doubt that our largest advantages over land nations will be our thinking outside the box and being able to put our ideas to work. If we’re going to be building seasteads and living on the ocean, then marine/submarine and surface/subterranean development should be considered in the future as well.

    Even a small island would make an ideal staging ground for a new kind of city. There could be floating ocean structures and underwater structures, subterranean excavation, mining, and construction, etc & variations. Another consideration is that the interconnection between the island and underwater structures would solve a few issues with maintaining an underwater habitat for humans.

    Of course one serious consideration would be seismic acivity (especially in the areas where we would probably be acquiring an island), but appropriate foresight of this during any phase of planning & construction could probably minimize damage.

    Of course seasteads will be the first major wave that will pave the way, but whether or not TSI helps lead every major initiative, others will be inspired to do so anyway. Dynamic geography or not, I can see seasteading setting a new precedent which will cause others to undertake new kinds of innovative, nation building projects.

    #9213
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    Interesting read, thanks for the link!

    Bumping this thread since its not appearing on the forum for some reason.

    #9115
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    He put all of that very well. I especially liked the points he made about ocean exploration receiving little finding, and how 72% of the earth is waiting to be conquered while NASA, taking up massive amounts of funding, is drawing up plans for mars missions, terraforming and colonies which won’t even begin for decades (then you can wrap your mind around how long terraforming will take, and how infinitely more expensive development would be on mars than on/in the ocean).

    #9105
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    Expectations;

    1. In order to gain independance, the seastead will have to minimize all reliance, and to maximize its ability to compete with land businesses. So it would have all the things which have been gone over before; clean sustainable energy, hydroponics, drinkable water production, etc, to ensure that as much value is coming into the seastead as possible, rather than leaving. This is due to the fact that the ease of operation, access to materials and means gives land businesses an edge, among other things.

    2. In relation to number one, a seastead would be actively developing its means of production, i.e output and efficiency.

    3. There could be other businesses on a seastead, but naturally they would only be dealing in a few essentials (which couldn’t yet be effectively produced by the seastead), and providing other products which would be entirely impractical and a waste of energy/resources on a seastead (e.g. most manufactured goods, at first).

    4. In order to run as effectively as possible and an appropriate balance be found between supply, demand, and labour supply, a seastead would have to operate under an austere population policy. In order for the facilities/capacities of the seastead to be able to effectively provide for the seasteaders and minimize reliance on imports as much as (continually) possible, the forementioned balance would have to be reached. The eventual presence of non-essential personnel working in business entities which rent space would also have to be factored in, but the rent they would pay would probably more than account for the difference in increased/expended labour value.

    5. By taking in everything in numbers one through four, I’m basically painting a picture where a seastead should be self-sufficient to the point of having a “minimal” living state, the quality of which would improve as its ability to produce and generate revenue improves. This is to reduce reliance on the land as much as possible (in the interests of independance), and to ensure that if land businesses banded together and ground our competition into the dust somehow, that the seastead wouldn’t fall apart as a result of insufficient funds.

    Thats about it. I believe that if this formula were followed in seastead growth, it would decrease all chances of failure as a result of economic failure (the moment our dependance on imports exceeds our means to live on a seastead).

    Conclusions and Related Thoughts

    I know that there quite a few Libertarians interested in seasteading, and this “minimal living’ policy (its more like a safety net of self-sufficiency) might not seem too attractive, but living on an independant seastead doesn’t create a Libertarian world anywhere except within the bubble of the seastead; so tying the fate of a seastead to the market of a land nation, and not keeping a strict balance of its forces to ensure that as little labour is wasted as possible and that as much profit as possible will be generated (without working seasteaders to death or forcing them to live in abysmal conditions), will only result in the seastead being ‘competed’ out of existence by land businesses. So to be clear, by minimal living policy, it only means a standard of living which can be maintained in lieu of success in land markets.

    Besides, its no so much like ‘government’ as it is like the administration of a single company (which also happens to be a nation, and its employees citizens, all of whom live and work on the ocean).

    I know this sounds a little heartless, but there wouldn’t be any place for surplus labour on a seastead (‘surplus’ being where its presence decreases the efficient operation of the seastead). Since a seastead has to behave like an independant company, it needs to have as little ‘baggage’ as possible. Its not like land businesses hire everyone who walks in off the street, and then leave management of their company to the, “invisible hand of the market”. With a seastead, its administration would have more responsibilities than those of a simple company though. Technically there would be no government, and no private industry (only in the sense of how each are conventionally defined), so its more or less what everyone is looking for. The circumstances create a kind of synthesis, which also effects the impact businesses have on a seastead (whether they’re there to rent space and/or sell wares).

    In conclusion, this way the seastead can most easily turn a profit, while all those living on it get as much butter on their bread as possible. Once developed, seasteads would attract talented and skilled persons from the world over, offering engineering challenges and better living standards than their native countries could provide for them. The larger it gets and the more efficient its facilities become, the more people who are able to live there.

    #9110
    Avatar of JeffM
    JeffM
    Participant

    Yeah, it doesn’t seem to have much of a point either. Not a whole lot going for it besides the fact it looks like something from startrek. I can see how the design is intended to weather hurricanes, floods, etc though.

    I like the bottom of it.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 32 total)