Forum Replies Created
February 16, 2014 at 10:05 am #22913
They where operating in the Russian territorial water under a Dutch flag and they climbed aboard The Prirazlomnaya platform which is a stationary unit that is attached to the sea floor inside the EEZ of the Russian Federation and owned by Gazprom.
It’s not prohibited to go through EEZ with another country flag. Also, the ship was captured in international waters, they were held without charges and so on. You make the mistake of USA police dictatorship, that goes around killing people or putting them in Guantanamo. Russians had no legal rights to do what they did.
The article you link to is on pro-Russian site, it’s made by Rossiyskaya Gazeta, the official newspaper of Russian Government. Look at the reaction of the democratic world. I see you, like ellmer with his Abramovich, are protecting authoritarian regimes and oligarchs. That’s exactly what many libertarians do and that’s exactly why they fail all over the world. True libertarian would not support dictatorship of 9.9 space.
Of course we’ll do salvage and aquaculture on a seastead “as much as we want”. Your are saying it with and attitude of a wannabe qualified authority on what kind of businesses should be done or not on a seastead.
I’m saying there’s big difference between legal and illegal business. Who is gonna buy things from you if you are not registered anywhere and don’t pay taxes to no one, have unclear legal status and so on? Most probably, it would be black market. Even if you do find someone who will buy from you, you will be considered illegal tax haven by major powers and they will dispatch forces like with Greenpeace ship.
These are segments of your imaginations, not facts.
The fact is that there is no political seastead. Please, stop imagining that you have like-minded persons to create your seastead or that you have money for seastead. You don’t even have place on your site for discussions. You are just assuming anything will be built at all and operated for long enough time to acquire sovereignty. What a wild imagination.
That’s piracy, plain and simple and the Russians actually showed A LOT of restraint. If they would have tried to board a seastead, they would have been given one warning and then shot at if they wouldn’t have backed down. End of story. Get your facts right regarding maritime law.
Also, your are saying again that seasteading isn’t possible.
Get your facts right regarding maritime and international law. And learn to read and remember what you’ve read. End of story.February 15, 2014 at 8:49 pm #22908
All the islands, islets, rocks are claimed, man. All ships are registered under a flag. We talked about it, too. It is possible but it will cost tenth of millions to buy an island and sovereignty attached to it. If you have that kind of cash, just do it.
OK, let’s imagine I did it without a team. Now what, do I become a dictator? I’m not going to let others rule my country if I was the only one who paid for it. Moreover, if I have no team, then I can’t trust anyone, I don’t have administrative staff and so on.
So the logical conclusion is to gather the team.
It will cost under $100k to build a small floating islet, start immediately and grow from there.
OK, now see how much businesses fail in the first year of existence. By the way, we already talked about this a lot.
You are just assuming that the “more high-profile things you do, the more invasive the interference will be. It starts with spying, it ends with force.” Thinks don’t work like that at sea. How long have you been @ sea? If your “high profile” is terrorism and piracy of course you’ll get fucked up fast. If your “high profile” is marine environment research, responsible fishing, tourism on your seastead, salvage work, aquaculture, alternative energy production & research, etc, than we’ll make partners, not enemies.
Have you heard what Russians recently did to Greenpeace people? That’s what awaits anyone who behaves like they have sovereignty, even though they are not recognized. Do salvage work and aquaculture as much as you want, that’s more like oceanic business rather than seasteading.
How do you know how heavy your seasteading venture will be interfered until international sovereignty recognition?
Listen, we already talked about all that you just posted. What’s the deal with you and ellmer? Do I have to repeat myself over and over? We discussed already high-profile activity and why the seastead will be interfered. Refer to that thread, please. If you don’t remember, I’ll quote myself:
What do you mean by being left alone? Are we talking about hermits? Then it’s a totally different case. I’m speaking about a situation when there are a lot of skilled people with strong beliefs on-board, who trade with other countries, who make business, who use Internet etc. That’s not being left alone in my book. It’s all about being included in the world economy. In such circumstances the platform is a potentially dangerous structure, especially if it has arms. If the captain suspects any danger to his crew when his ship sails near the platform, he will at least issue a warning to it, at most attack right away. Even if there’s no imminent danger to the Navy ship, the states will be highly suspicious of such formation that is not respecting sovereign law, isn’t paying taxes to no one, has a lot of high-profile activity and arms etc. One mistake, any mistake, and they bring it down. That’s not to say they won’t tolerate for a bit of time 1 or 2 such platforms, but not much more. Yet the goal of TSI is enabling everyone to create countries. It’s just not viable long-term.February 15, 2014 at 6:12 pm #22906
In the context of “offshoring”, there is no doubt in my mind that seasteading will offer the highest degree of “non-interference” (meaning, as ellmer put it, “not meddle with people’s private business”). Sovereignty of a seastead will be GAINED WHILE seasteading, and IS NOT A PREREQUISITE for seasteading.
It can be done both ways. But while you seastead you will be interfered heavily, till you gain sovereignty. And there’s no guarantee that the seastead will eventually gain it. Whereas if it’s bought from the start, then at least one recognition will be had. Hence, my argument: it’s either seastead with interference or seastead with sovereignty. Maybe seasteading with interference is the highest degree of possible non-interference without sovereignty, but it surely won’t be 9.9 as ellmer wants us to believe.
You don’t need “sovereignty” to build your own seastead in a cheap boatyard in Guatemala. All you need is money. You don’t need “sovereignty” to gather a crew of like minded individuals who are willing to live, work and self-govern themselves aboard that seastead. All you need is few determined people with balls and cash. If you have that, you have self-determined your right to “sovereignty”, and nobody can take that away from you, no matter what.
We already discussed that in another thread. So you insist on repeating the discussion that we already had? OK, here is my answer: you are speaking about domestic sovereignty not about international sovereignty. Essentially, seastead with domestic sovereignty isn’t different from any other unrecognized country (from the point of view of the states). The states will treat it as such and will interfere if they want.
And who gives a rats ass that some government agency (any government) will spy on you?
The more high-profile things you do, the more invasive the interference will be. It starts with spying, it ends with force.
My firm belief is that when it comes to achieving seasteading goals, “I’d rather ask forgiveness than permission” and all my seasteading plans will “roll like that”, with people who “roll like that”.
All that’s not prohibited is allowed, so I don’t see how forgiveness relates to this. It’s either you are an outlaw if you don’t follow law, or you are a respectable subject of international law.
Seasteading on an islands or ships is not technically “seasteading” because it’s not “outside the territory claimed by the government of any standing nation”.
Why not? If no country claims the island or ship, then there’s no contradiction with the definition.
If you put your mind to it, everything is possible on this Earth.
Of course, everything is possible, if the situation changes. It’s possible in theory, but in practice the geopolitical situation has to change so that offshoring isn’t fought. It used to be possible, it can again become possible, but right now it’s not possible.February 15, 2014 at 2:53 pm #22904
If you firmly believe that seasteading “is not possible on Earth”, why are you here? Most of us here believe the contrary and we stick to that ideal and to each other. If your idea of “Country Creation” is to buy an island and sovereignty attached to it, why are you here? We want to built a floating city or island here not to buy a piece of land.
I said non-interference without sovereignty isn’t possible on Earth. Where did I say seasteading itself isn’t possible? Either it’s seasteading with interference or it’s seasteading with sovereignty.
Moreover, seasteading isn’t only about floating cities and artificial islands. It can be natural islands or ships. Quote from Wikipedia:
Seasteading is the concept of creating permanent dwellings at sea, called seasteads, outside the territory claimed by the government of any standing nation.
Since there is no obvious reason for you to be here, but you still are, than there must be a reason for that too. Please enlighten us, so we can understand your intentions here, cause so far your contribution to seasteading is zero.
It seems people here can’t understand properly what’s being posted. I asked ellmer many times to answer two simple questions, yet he didn’t and continues to repeat same mantras. Now you are attributing to me words I didn’t say. Please, quote where I said seasteading isn’t possible.February 15, 2014 at 11:45 am #22902
No by “non interference” i do not mean “sovereignty” i mean “not meddle with people’s private business” i mean “privacy” i mean the implementation of the glorious right of self determination and the quest for freedom and happyness whatever a person understands as such.
That’s just not possible on Earth, agencies like NSA can spy anywhere. Say goodbye to your privacy. The only way to stop this spying is confronting it with the same forces. If NSA has 5000 hackers, then to counterattack you must have ~ the same number of hackers. If NSA has 1000 lawyers, you must have 1000 lawyers. The only way to achieve that is to make a country. The sphere will be heavily spied on from the time of formation. If it starts to represent any danger, it will be teared in pieces. The world has changed, it’s not 10th century anymore and not 19th century. You can’t simply jumpstart a country on the ocean without everyone knowing, spying and heavily interfering.
Moreover, from your words it follows that you are a benevolent dictator. You want 9.9 interference space. But it works for people who are alone, or who are dictators. You can’t get 9.9 space if you have a neighbor who can see you on the street, who can talk to you if you don’t want, who can sing songs anytime, who can file a petition against you.
Sorry, we are just walking in circles here, you repeat the same arguments over and over. I’m still waiting for answers on two following questions:
a) Why can’t states interfere with a sphere on the ocean?
b) How is 9.9 state possible in democratic society?
I think the whole idea of the need of a 10.000 page rulebook that only a lawyer can understand, needing to be written, and enforced, on a not consienting population is somewhat sick.
Well, you are an engineer, don’t you think to become an engineer you must read 10.000 page book? It’s the same with laws or politics, do you consider these areas of science a toy for babies?
I spot that in our world this democratic base idea is lost in the sea of “ruling producing buerocrats, politicians seeking lobby benefits, and enforcement agencies going wild on many levels” this whole sistem does not ask for the consient of the citicen anymore – as they should.
That’s a logical fallacy: bureaucracy doesn’t necessarily mean we should destroy 10.000 pages rulebooks. It means the specific bureaucracy must be destroyed, because they’ve become analogous to bad engineers.
I also think that the idea that one person should be King over another and subdue that person is sick and wrong.
So the idea of a stupid man not having the same rights as a smart man is also sick and wrong? Maybe we should allow anyone to become engineers who read a brochure and the chief engineer will be chosen by voting amongst those persons? Maybe we would also allow chimpanzees to vote for president, seeing as how they have consciousness and can communicate with humans?
The only way to do that in a civilized and legal way is “offshoring” in its widest sense, you accomodate citicenship, residency, bank account, production sites, in the right way and you are subdued by no king “de facto” as you are “out of jurisdiction for every interferer”.
I’ve never said you’re wrong on that. What I said is that it’s not possible on Earth nowadays, and you never proved me wrong. I’ve showed you how states battle with offshores, with Bitcoin, with unrecognized countries… The fate of the sphere will be the same. Either there is sovereignty, and then there’s non-interference, or there isn’t sovereignty, and then you become outlaw from the point of view of the states, no matter what you are doing or trying to achieve.
On a ship with a flag of convenience you still might apply to the rule set of the island nation of bunga bunga, – on paper – but bunga bunga has a agreement with all ships to “not interfere” in exchange to a moderate fee which can be considered a “consented tax” for the service of keeping interferers out of your hair.
The major power can easily pay more than a “moderate fee” coming from the seastead. And then the seastead will be captured by bunga bunga forces.
Offshoring is the ARTFORM of balancing and neutralizing the powers that try to interfere and subdue your life – as long as individuals seek self determination and privacy in a ruling infested “red taping world” – offshoring will stay megatrend.
You are just repeating same mantras like Moses. Venice was created more than 1000 years ago, Nemo and Moreau were written 150 years ago, the world has changed, you’re late to the party. There are only 2 ways now: Sovereignty and Space. That’s what is megatrend. Country Creation and Space Exploration/Mining.February 13, 2014 at 1:44 pm #22896
Historicaly Venice is more recognized to be “part of the solution” than to be “part of the problem” in the transition from the “dark ages” to “enlightment”
Still, that doesn’t give anyone right to consider Venice Republic a democratic state. Maybe it was better than the others, but it isn’t enough to call country a democracy.
Also, many historians now agree that “Dark Ages” is a misnomer and that they weren’t particularly dark. And I don’t see how Dark Ages are related to the discussion, slavery was widespread in Europe since the dawn of times.
It is also more recognized to be part of “trade and interchange” than part of “war and division”. Although i assume that in its role as “successful power broker” al sides have been played somehow, and to some extent, in 1500 years of turbulent history.
I’d say it’s more like the rulers of Venice considered war the logical continuation of trade. And why is it 1500 years, if the country was subdued by Napoleon?February 13, 2014 at 9:49 am #22891
I give you a historic example for a “interference free space” developing socially and business wise over centuries VENICE.
Maybe you will also propose riding on horses and sailing on wooden ships? In times of Venice Republic states couldn’t control all of the Earth. Now they can. And they will prevent unlawful formation of country.
Anyway, it seems to me by non-interference you mean sovereignty. If so, the concrete sphere won’t be meddled with only if it’s recognized as state. Venice was recognized as state, it wasn’t some abstract non-interfered piece of space. It was a specific political institute. If states recognize the sphere, then it’s sovereign, if it’s not recognized, the sphere will be considered terrorist outpost, unrecognized state, freedom fighters stronghold, whatever.
Otherwise, give differences between your term “non-interference” and common term “sovereignty”.February 13, 2014 at 9:48 am #22890
Venice called “the floating city” oriented to political autonomy, direct democracy
It still is perhaps the most elegant and refined city in Europe, greatly influencing art, architecture and literature.
Yes, very elegant and refined city that was full of slaves. Very democratic.
Part of its magnificence and wealth was derivated from being a successful “major power-broker” for centuries but staying out of being “war territorry” itself due to its easy defendable “swamp position”.
Venice Republic didn’t consist of one city, it had colonies and war was happening there.February 12, 2014 at 11:04 am #22873
people always have been looking out for 9.9 interference free spaces far from ruling to “live their lifes according to their own codes”. It is part of the human nature. Just think the historic example of a pirate ship – it is a interference free space highly mobile, with a bunch of people on it every man has a vote
If they have a right of vote, it’s not 9.9. You are talking as if state and pirate captain are different entities; they’re not. There’s no difference in interference from state, from pirate captain or from ordinary pirates. A pirate on land has interference from state and citizens; a pirate on pirate ship has interference from pirate captain and other pirates.
The fact remains that a interference free space is a “quality on its own” that is “unpolitical in its nature” and can be used for good or bad as any tool and space in human history.
Your interference free space is incompatible with freedom of several humans in one location. There are only 2 ways for 9.9 space, either you are an absolute dictator, or you are alone. Otherwise, you have to compromise, and it’s not 9.9 space anymore.
That’s probably why, in the past, libertarians have made little progress in the political sphere.
Of course, they made little progress. Not much people like dictators or being alone.
The point of the “offshoring debate” is to make clear that the “quest for interference freedom” is not only a theme for outlaws and pirates, it is also a “mainstream thing” people in ties with political influence and money power behind them, steering multinational companies, are into that business.
If it’s a “mainstream thing”, then show me at least 1 example of space on Earth that does not have interference and simultaneously doesn’t have jurisdiction.
What i suggest is to “offer a good product” to that market on many levels, free trade zones, asset movement sistems like paypal and bitcoin, yachts that travel worldwide and report to no king – independent islands – floating free cities – ocean spheres, technology enables a new generation of interference free spaces we are just at the beginning of it.
Major powers already fight Bitcoin. Why would they let your “good product” be?
I’ve already commented on Nemo and Moreau, it’s science fiction of 19th century, in 21st century real world there’s no non-interference place on Earth that doesn’t have jurisdiction and it’s practically impossible to construct one because states have high-tech means of interfering. Otherwise, I dare you: show me an example.
Nobody will “put a ruling” on that – it is already happening on large scale far outside what any state power can interfere. Some of us are aware of that and embrace the trend (like the seasteading movement), some oppose, but staying realistic – like any technology leap in human history – it is happening anyhow.
It happened on the pages of science fiction journals in 19th century. Nowadays, it’s not a trouble for the major powers to interfere with any point on Earth and do whatever they wish. You just repeat same arguments over and over again ignoring what I say and spamming links to your site. I guess it’s part of your SEO strategy.February 12, 2014 at 6:27 am #22870
Work is an integral part of life. It’s a law of nature due to thermodynamics. If you don’t do anything, your entropy will increase. It doesn’t matter if you work for yourself or for employer, it’s still work with the same properties of “do or die”.February 11, 2014 at 6:26 pm #22865
The proposed scale was for business freedom interference, I guess…But isn’t any business a dictatorship in itself? When you are at work you are a slave…you have to do what you’ve been told and train or you’ll get fired.
Business isn’t a dictatorship because it’s usually voluntary. Most people aren’t forced to work for a particular company or a person. So if we think of 10 as a measure of business freedom, this means that anyone who is inside the 10 space is forced to be a slave for the space master. Because refusing to do business will drop the number below 10.February 11, 2014 at 4:11 pm #22863
A 10 on the interference freedom scale could be a double-edged sword…
But what is 10? Is it absolute dictatorship? If a human is alone, I agree, it’s possible to have 10 (because most are dictators to themselves). As soon as there’s another person with you, 10 is possible only if the other person is a total slave.February 11, 2014 at 3:43 pm #22861
Yes ancient – that is the eternal struggle of the white forces against the black forces
I disagree with this interpretation. The world isn’t black and white. Discussing things in black/white terms only leads to unnecessary conflicts.
The match white forces against black forces is 50/50 half of the worlds capital is flowing offshore outside of control right now.
It’s not outside of control, it’s possible because those in power receive their share from it. But the trend for the last few years is that of fighting offshores. Offshores are a thing of the past and not future, the future belongs to cryptocurrencies.
It can only be a 10 on a submarine or in outer space.
I don’t see how it is possible on submarine. What stops countries from meddling with the submarine? Absolutely nothing.
Even a stationary ocean sphere outside EEZ would include the possibility to be spotted and interfered some day somehow. Only if you add mobility and invisibility (for all practical means). The interference freedom closes in to 10.
It’s possible right here right now to interfere with the submarine. The major powers won’t back up and watch how someone creates a dangerous structure in their vicinity. The world is a global village for a very long time, globalization is nothing new, with telegraph you could get message from India to US in several minutes. The vision of ocean as a place without interference wasn’t really viable even in Jules Verne time. He had to place Nemo on the submarine because already by then ocean surface was under state control. It happened when they ousted pirates. By now even underwater is under state control and it’s not possible to have non-interference without having sovereignty.
exactly this makes offshoring a megatrend.
Offshore being trend is really old. There is a great example: The Island of Doctor Moreau by Wells. Now it’s just not viable, that’s all. Nemo and Moreau are 19th century themes, not 21st century.February 11, 2014 at 12:50 pm #22858
Time and tide waits for no man. http://www.themanmadekey.org/
But I can’t find the place for discussion there…February 11, 2014 at 12:46 pm #22857
We live in a world where half of all money flow is offshore already, tycoons like Abramovic and Branson are “offshoring” their private life to islands and megayachts, Google is offshoring data centers to get rid of state interference in their business
it can easyly be predicted that this trend will not stop until at the end all business, all money, all data, will be “taken out of interference” of politics and states and in one form or another be “offshored” and put to “privacy” status.
You speak about offshores, but offshores do have jurisdiction. Switzerland had financial privacy, but now it’s conquered by major powers. Moreover, if you come to your Swiss offshore and say that Assad is a bad person, you will be arrested. It’s up to 3 years of jail in Switzerland for that, good luck with “non-interference”.
Privacy is a basic right and going off radar is just implementing your rights in the real world.
In real world there are no rights; rights are merely human constructs. What seems right to you, isn’t always right for another person.
Posted on at