Forum Replies Created
January 22, 2010 at 1:48 am #9306
Let me know if you need me to do the intro narration.
“Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?”August 23, 2009 at 6:20 pm #7561Thorizan wrote:
The point of Seasteading is to experiment with which laws work best. It may turn out that pure anarchy does so, but few chemically balanced individuals truly have that view. We need to find out what is best, and have that duplicated to the four corners of the Earth.
It depends how you define anarchy. My guess is that you define it as “absence of laws/government”, which is not how anarcho-capitalists (the others on this thread) define it.
The logo similarity is no coincidence – the idea for the logo was mine, and it is meant to evoke both Burning Man, and Atlas Shrugged. But a happy version of Atlas the power of the human mind, drive, passion holding up civilization on the ocean proudly, standing tall, not bowed under the weight.August 17, 2009 at 11:46 pm #7486
Just wanted to clarify that Eelco’s duration of time with us (or at least, whether we can pay him) will depend on how successful we are at funding his project in the next couple months. I’m optimistic that we’ll be able to fund or mostly fund this project. I think we’ll get a significant number of donations at the conference (we’ll be featuring these projects, probably pass a hat after Eelco’s talk, for example), we may be able to reduce the budget given that I’m providing a free room, TSI may be willing to chip in some, and we will continue the fundraising drive while Eelco is working. Currently we are at 5%, you can see the progress here:August 17, 2009 at 11:09 pm #7485Tholan wrote:
Congratulations again Eelco! I hope you find a great place to live in the USA.
I remodeled a spare room for him, so he definitely has a great place to live . Has it’s own balcony and everything.August 12, 2009 at 9:18 pm #7395
We will of course be trying to make Ephemerisle a replicatable event, and Florida would be a great place to hold one someday!
If y’all do decide to get together semi-regularly (even every few months would be great), drop us an email, I think we’ll be starting a mailing list soon for “Chapter heads” to discuss running seasteading social groups…August 7, 2009 at 8:41 pm #7328
that’s awful! I hadn’t realized there were laws like that. My understanding of US law is that there are some specific activities prohibited in foreign jurisdictions (purchasing services from underage prostitutes, bribing government officials, joining foreign armies, a few other things), but that generally you are not considered to be under US jurisdiction.
it only applies under foreign jurisdiction, which there is none of on the high seas.
If you are flying a flag, I think you are in the jurisdiction of the flagging country, so you are under a foreign jurisdiction. But you have to ask a lawyer to be sure.
This is the kind of domestic law that TSI & seasteaders will have to try to lobby against, once seasteading gets big. “Enforce your laws in your jurisdictions, let other countries enforce their laws in their jurisdictions.” But it may be difficult.
I wonder how many countries have these laws? You can get citizenship in other countries, but it takes either a bunch of money, connections, and/or residence for several years. The US will not let you relinquish your citizenship unless you have another citizenship already, I dunno about Denmark.June 25, 2009 at 7:05 pm #6712
If you are interested in sailing and small-scale food production, check out the book Sailing The Farm, by Ken Neumeyer. It is old, but it is the only book I know of on the subject. Self-sufficient live-aboard boating sounds like a great way to start the low road seasteading lifestyle.June 25, 2009 at 6:39 pm #6711
I could see it being sort of like a tower defense game, where you build up your seastead, and then some incoming threat comes in – maybe a wave, maybe pirates, maybe a tsunami. And you see if it survives. The goal is to last as long as possible before sinking. You could add guns to defend against pirates, add stability for waves, add income-generators (hospital, bordello…)
That would make a game out of a simulation…June 17, 2009 at 10:12 pm #6597
Let me know if this works, not sure if I actually know how to seed a torrent, but I have attempted to:June 17, 2009 at 9:37 pm #6594
I have a CD of bathymetric data as well, some version of this:
But from 5+ years ago. We can start by identifying seamounts not within 200nm of land, and then figure out waves…June 11, 2009 at 12:50 am #6449
We’ve thought about this area – reaching out to institutions like Woods Hole, or people like Richard Branson. The problem is that we don’t really know (in many cases) what we would do with them or how we would work together. And it seems a bit spammy to just say “Hey, check us out”. If we have specific requests (come talk at our conference), then it makes sense.
We had some volunteers who started working on this, and if we had a good committed volunteer, we’d be open to doing more of it. The person would have to figure out both what concrete things we’d be asking, who is best to talk to, and do the outreach.June 9, 2009 at 7:12 am #6380
For some reason, Reason / Hit & Run posts seem to gather lots of uninformed, critical comments from libertarians. For example, from New at Reason: Brian Doherty on Seasteading, came this exchange:
Neu Mejican: “The tyranny of the condo board will make the federal government seem mild…no?”
BakedPenguin: “Unless condo boards are now sentencing people to five years of being caged, beaten, and raped for taking un-correct substances, then… no”
“The tyranny of the condo board…” is the sort of superficially glib comment which totally evaporates under close examination, and the response cleverly points out the ridiculousness of comparing condo board annoyance with the tyranny of the federal government.
As James points out, we are unlikely to convince commenters, but we can make an impact on all those who read the comments. In this case, a comment that can easily get a laugh at our expense (“Ha, ha, their new countries are going to have to have CONDO BOARDS!”) from someone reading quickly is transformed into an argument in our favor (“Wait a sec, I would TOTALLY trade having to pay income taxes and worry about US drug laws for a friggin condo board, WTF was that first guy thinking?”).
Anyway, just little stuff like this to elevate the debate and show that we have answers for many of those issues.June 8, 2009 at 9:47 pm #6375Pastor_Jason wrote:
Just an observation I think is worth sharing. This thread is the longest on these boards, this post makes it 113. Infact it is so long that we’re larger than many whole headings on this forum. We’ve also gained the attention of TSI staff, some of whom comment on this thread.
Just in the month of May, out of 20 blog posts, Patri’s commented about this effort 4 times!!
Well, you are actually prepared to go do something, which makes you a minority even among the minority interested in seasteading . Your approach may not be quite the one that suits my own skills/wants/lifestyle the best, but it seems to be good for yours and I wish you the best of luck!
On people: I wouldn’t be surprised if you don’t get very many at the beginning, so just be prepared for that. Hang tough, start a blog, enjoy what you start with, and we’ll keep spreading the word about you, and hopefully you will accumulate people and resources and infrastructure over time.
Questionnaire: Let me know if you have anything you want posted on the blog or monthly newsletter (1000+ subscribers).June 8, 2009 at 8:53 pm #6371
There is a technology for making floating islands out of recycled plastic and foam. It produces an artificial wetlands effect, nourishing an ecosystem from the phytoplankton up:June 4, 2009 at 4:06 am #6320Eelco wrote:
I did… and then I defined what one was. To say that a man, with all he eons of evolution, can take the role of a woman, and complete it without any loss is naive. To flip that around would also be wrong. Men are men, and women, women, each having their own strengths and weaknesses. You toss children into the mix, and you get a team working together for the greater good, each balanced with the others. When one actor is missing, the play cannot go on as written, and adjustments need to be made. This makes it sub-optimal. Now, is it possible to overcome these challenges, Mr. Obama… certainly, but the more of these units that exist, the less balanced the entire civilization becomes, and they are more easily destroyed, either culturally, or physically. To surive, the community must be strengthed… and the community is a collection of these core units. To strengthen the community, you must have as many units in balance as possible.
That sounds awefully, uhm, collectivistic. Even if we accept your assertion that on average, man/woman couples do a better job of raising children, and you might well be right, are you willing to extend that logic, including the consequences you derive from it?
I bet intelligent people do a better job raising children, by almost any metric you can think of. Whatever homosexuals are doing suboptimal, no doubt it is dwarfed by this factor. Should the government impose a minimum intelligence bar for having children?
Need I go on?
Yes, this is exactly right. I totally agree that a man and a woman is the optimal way to raise children. As is having both parents highly trained in child rearing. As is having them be independently wealthy and free to spend lots of time with their children. As is having them be perfectly healthy. As is having them be very even-tempered, and able to cope well with loss of sleep.
There are many things that make for better or worse conditions for raising children. That does not mean that one should make the best conditions for raising children the foundation or core of a society. Just like any other aspect of life, there are costs to all benefits, and regulating that we do everything perfectly means we make everything really expensive. Kids are robust, they don’t do well when neglected or abused, but all the evidence I have seen shows that there is little to no difference in outcomes throughout the whole range of amazing to bad parenting. Outcomes = genes + luck. Not genes + luck + parenting. I know its weird, but that’s what the science says.