Author Topic: Seasteading  (Read 1685 times)

rkbabang

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3374
Seasteading
« on: September 06, 2017, 05:50:03 AM »
This is an excellent interview.  A little long, but worth listening to.  I obviously disagree with Michael Strong when he suggests the US should have universal basic income, but other than that the entire interview is phenomenal.

https://www.seasteading.org/2017/09/podcast-michael-strong-how-seasteading-will-enrich-the-poor/

You can also find this on iTunes or Overcast as well. Search for "Seasteading Today with Joe Quirk" and it is the latest episode with Michael Strong.


I read Joe Quirk's book "Seasteading: How Floating Nations Will Restore the Environment, Enrich the Poor, Cure the Sick, and Liberate Humanity from Politicians" a few months ago and it is excellent as well.


Gregmal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
Re: Seasteading
« Reply #1 on: September 06, 2017, 07:38:29 AM »
Always thought this was a really fascinating idea. Saw a bit about it in a piece on Peter Thiel and conceptually I like it a lot.

rkbabang

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3374
Re: Seasteading
« Reply #2 on: September 06, 2017, 07:53:19 AM »
Always thought this was a really fascinating idea. Saw a bit about it in a piece on Peter Thiel and conceptually I like it a lot.

I've always loved the idea as well.  The idea itself has been around for decades in one form or another (I remember "Freedom Ship" in the mid 1990s) and it looks like support for it and the technology to enable it may catch up to make this possible in the relatively near future.

I think the whole idea of the nation state is on its way out.  Decentralization, and freedom of movement is the future.   The first signs of this will be the re-emergence of the independent city-state in a big way.

Return of the city-state - Nation-states came late to history, and there’s plenty of evidence to suggest they won't make it to the end of the century

vox

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
Re: Seasteading
« Reply #3 on: September 06, 2017, 02:13:49 PM »
If I understand this correctly, the premise of seasteading is that freedom of mobility will allow for competition among forms of government and regulation, which allows for decentralized decision making, more freedom and optimal choices. Is there any mechanism to enforce that people can come and go from any 'city-state' as they please?
« Last Edit: September 06, 2017, 02:18:20 PM by vox »

rkbabang

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3374
Re: Seasteading
« Reply #4 on: September 06, 2017, 04:13:07 PM »
I guess the point is if there are thousands of these their main objective will be to attract people to them.  What good is living on a seastead if it is just you and 3 of your friends.  The most successful seasteads will be the ones which attract the most people to them.  This is where the competition will come from. Could established seasteads decide to limit immigration someday? Sure, but there is a lot of ocean on the planet, people will go somewhere else or start a new one. There are only a few hundred states on the planet right now and it is almost impossible to start a new one. What if there were thousands and it was easy to start a new one?

vox

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
Re: Seasteading
« Reply #5 on: September 07, 2017, 05:59:26 AM »
There's a section in the podcast where they talk about how greed predates capitalism. Human instinct to war also predates nations. It seems hopelessly optimistic to assume that there wouldn't be seastead cities that engage in piracy, war, and military intimidation.

rkbabang

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3374
Re: Seasteading
« Reply #6 on: September 07, 2017, 06:24:27 AM »
There's a section in the podcast where they talk about how greed predates capitalism. Human instinct to war also predates nations. It seems hopelessly optimistic to assume that there wouldn't be seastead cities that engage in piracy, war, and military intimidation.

There will certainly be the bad along with the good.  Such is the human condition.  More competition is better than less.  Hopefully when there are vastly more options most people will choose not to live in such places.  But yes, it is naive to think that piracy and war won't happen.  They both happen now as well.  I've said before that I don't think it is possible to get rid of crime within or between human societies.  Minimization strategies are the best we can ever hope for.  I find there are unrealistic utopians on all sides.  Thinking that you can create a government, outlaw some type of crime, and: Abracadabra! The problem is solved, is also a a naive utopian dream.

CorpRaider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1803
    • The Corpraider
Re: Seasteading
« Reply #7 on: September 07, 2017, 06:34:44 AM »
Weird.  I think Peter Griffin, tried this on family guy and one of Saul Goodman's early clients.  Would prefer to see resources directed toward space.
Finally...another finance blog! 

http://thecorpraider.com

rkbabang

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3374
Re: Seasteading
« Reply #8 on: September 07, 2017, 06:43:23 AM »
Weird.  I think Peter Griffin, tried this on family guy and one of Saul Goodman's early clients.  Would prefer to see resources directed toward space.

There are resources already going toward space, which is a good thing, but there is a lot of room left on this planet left to settle as well.   Seasteading will happen much sooner than cities on Mars, just because it is an order of magnitude easier and cheaper.  Humanity expanding into the solar system will happen too, but that is going to take a while yet.

vox

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
Re: Seasteading
« Reply #9 on: September 07, 2017, 07:40:36 AM »
I think most people in modern society view war as the result of a failure in diplomacy. When we analyze the potential conflict with North Korea, for example, we rue the past policy missteps, but few propose that we should have engaged in military intervention earlier. For most of human history, I think war was viewed as an inevitability and a natural state, punctuated by periods of peace. It seems to me that by doing away with nations and the coalitions that they have built through centuries of negotiation and treaties and the multi-national governance structures meant to constrain their worst impulses, you open up a very wide range of possibilities with many of them much worse than the status quo.