is real individual sovereignty possable right now?

[Anon136]

step 1) expatriate yourself
step 2) commission the construction of a sea faring vessel large enough to act as a permanent residence with defenses capable of repelling pirates. do not have this vessel registered with any government, have it towed into international waters before boarding, taking great care not to bring anything onto the vessel which would bring outside jurisdiction onto the vessel (such as legal tender).
step 3) purchase a MASSIVE insurance policy from an influential multinational to be payed out to your family in the event that you are murdered by a government in international waters or in extra-judicial waters.

then you just try your hand at finding governments that would allow you into their territory (so you could resupply) while recognizing your claim of sovereignty, probably you would need to bribe them a little but i bet it could be done. i had the idea of trying this as a kickstarter documentary but the wife is not really into the idea, she says its too dangerous. i don't think I'm ever going to get to go on an adventure

[Anon136]

it makes me sad that no one seems to be interested in this idea

[bitrebel]

Your idea is shallow, not well thought out, and expecting 99% of the details to be filled in for you.
If people were not interested in being sovereign, they would not be in this forum or interested in bitcoin.

The most sovereign person, is well equipped with Tactical Nukes.
Everyone else is less sovereign.

[jeannie]

North Korea is the best to stay

[bitrebel]

North Korea is the best to stay

Why, do they have a Four Seasons hotel or something?
Or do you just like being close to Dennis Rodman?

[bitrebel]

it makes me sad that no one seems to be interested in this idea

Are you still a teenager?
If not, then you need to spend some time thinking about this, before you get too excited.

AND.... It's Sovereignty, not soveriegnty.

[evilscoop]

May I draw your attention to Sealand
http://www.sealandgov.org/

Just off the uk coast

[Anon136]

Your idea is shallow

how so?

not well thought out

this is accurate but i never claimed that it was well thought out

expecting 99% of the details to be filled in for you

i'm not planning on doing this. im just trying to have a discussion about something that i find interesting.

If people were not interested in being sovereign, they would not be in this forum or interested in bitcoin.

if this is a reply to when i said "it makes me sad that no one seems to be interested in this idea" than it would seem to imply that this idea is the only way a person can become sovereign. i doubt you meant to imply this so you must have made some other mistake.

Are you still a teenager?

no and i fail to see the relevance of this question.

If not, then you need to spend some time thinking about this

so if im not a teenager i should think about it more but if i am a teenager than i should not think about it more? your position is confusing to me. it seems that you feel this is a bad idea but you fail to explain why it is a bad idea. if you wish to have a discussion with me than please make yourself useful. this comment was not useful.

[Este Nuno]

Why bother denouncing citizenship? What advantage does that give you? And what's preventing you from just doing this now anyway with a boat?

[Anon136]

Why bother denouncing citizenship? What advantage does that give you? And what's preventing you from just doing this now anyway with a boat?

A citizen is the subject of a sovereign. Which means a citizen is a slave to his or her sovereign. As long as you are a citizen your sovereign will have jurisdiction over you even in international waters.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

May I draw your attention to Sealand
http://www.sealandgov.org/

Just off the uk coast

http://web.archive.org/web/20000816001317/http://www.havenco.com/about_havenco/index.html

About HavenCo

HavenCo Limited is exploiting a unique opportunity to set up the world's first real data haven. The initial showcase datacenter is the Principality of Sealand, the world's smallest sovereign territory. It was founded over thirty years ago and has obtained a unique legal status as the only sovereign man-made island. Its claim to sovereignty has been tested and supported in several legal challenges. Please go to the Government of Sealand site for more information on the Principality.

http://web.archive.org/web/20000818054855/http://www.havenco.com/about_havenco/theteam.html

Ryan Lackey - Chief Technical Officer

Mr. Lackey has worked to bring high security, pro-individual-freedom technologies to the marketplace, first while a student at MIT, and then later in startups developing cryptographic[sic] electronic cash solutions for a variety of markets. Ryan has presented at several conferences and symposia[sic] in the security field, and is well known within the security community.

<[sic]'s mine>

Ryan Lackey was only one mention in this forum:

http://qz.com/86255/the-mysterious-creator-of-bitcoin-could-be-japanese-mathematician-shinichi-mochizuki-says-the-inventor-of-hypertext/

Bitcoin’s creator is Japanese mathematician Shinichi Mochizuki, says hypertext inventor

Ted Nelson, the American academic who in 1963 coined the term hypertext, and is therefore viewed as one of the World Wide Web’s founding fathers, just released a 12-minute video with a big reveal at the end: The inventor of bitcoin, says Nelson, is probably Japanese mathematician Shinichi Mochizuki.

Nelson offers no direct evidence for his conclusion that Shinichi Mochizuki is behind the pseudonymous creator of bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto. Instead, in his eccentric way, he offers plausible circumstantial evidence about his theory, outlined below. Internet surfers and the press are bound to investigate furiously.

1. Mochizuki is the kind of genius who could create bitcoin. Whoever created Bitcoin has the intellectual might of Isaac Newton, says Nelson. Mochizuki’s work as a mathematician has cracked some of the simplest and toughest problems in his field, attracting global media coverage.

2. Mochizuki, like the creator of bitcoin, is fond of dropping brilliant works on the internet and stepping back. Bitcoin was released by a pseudonymous programmer (or programmers) under the name Satoshi Nakamoto, who then disappeared from the internet. Nelson compares this to Mochizuki’s style of delivering his work not through academic journals, but simply by dropping it on the internet and walking away. (Notably, this is one area where Nelson gets his bitcoin history wrong: Satoshi Nakamoto didn’t just drop bitcoin onto the internet and disappear. He, she or they, engaged with the community for some time over chat and email before disappearing.)

3. Mochizuki could easily have written all the correspondence associated with Satoshi Nakamoto. Despite being a Japanese professor at a Japanese university, Mochizuki’s English must be quite good, says Nelson, because he was the salutatorian of his graduating class at Princeton, and he completed his undergraduate education in only three years. (Nelson doesn’t note this, but it’s reasonable to expect that Mochizuki is actually a native English speaker; he moved to the US with his parents when he was only five years old.)

It’s worth noting that at least one expert in the cryptographic aspects of bitcoin doesn’t believe Nelson’s theory. Here’s Ryan Lackey, creator of Sealand, the world’s first data haven, refuting Nelson’s video:

Apologies for quoting it all: http://www.mail-archive.com/cypherpunks@minder.net/msg13438.html

Re: simplest possible ecash mint
Nomen Nescio Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:46:35 -0800

Ryan Lackey writes:
>
> I don't believe "normal users" should ever interact directly with the
> mint; using the mint as a reissue server only in normal operation is a
> key optimization -- especially when coupled with tamper-resistant mint
> hardware.  Easier to develop, easier to operate, easier to audit.
> Users should purchase cash from change makers; the issuer could also
> operate a change maker, and can handle sales to change-makers separately.

You're using some of these terms without defining them clearly:
mint, issuer, and change maker.  Earlier you said the change maker was
responsible for changing between ecash and something of value, presumably
including other currencies.  Presumably the mint is the cryptographic
engine which issues ecash coins.  The issuer is apparently someone
who is allowed to force the mint to issue coins at will, although the
mint is supposed to log and report on such interventions.  (Anyone can
destroy coins, so an issuer is not needed for that functionality.)

Can you explain how these three roles would work in a transaction where
Alice gets some ecash for dollars, pays Bob in ecash, who turns the
ecash back into dollars?

Here is how it seems like it should work.  The change maker Carol has a
bunch of ecash she stands ready to sell.  Alice gives her $X in dollars,
along with blinded data to become Alice's ecash.  The change maker does an
exchange operation at the mint, giving the mint $X in the change maker's
own coins, along with the blinding factors from Alice.  The mint gives
back new blinded coins which Carol passes to Alice, who unblinds them
to get her ecash.

Alice passes the ecash to Bob.  He does an exchange operation at the
mint to get new coins and to verify that Alice's cash is good.  He
then delivers whatever goods or service Alice has paid for.

Bob later wants dollars, so he goes to change maker Carol and delivers
to her ecash.  She does an exchange at the mint to verify that Bob's
coins are good, and then sends Bob dollars in return for his ecoins.

This sequence conflicts somewhat with your model.  Bob had to interact
directly with the mint, and you said that normal users would not.
But only the mint can verify the validity of coins so it seems to be
necessary.

The issuer was not involved in this transaction.  Apparently he is
only there to inflate the currency.  You should consider eliminating
the issuer, who can easily cause trouble.  At startup time let the
mint generate its keys and emit a single high-value coin.  That will
be the money supply for all time.  Allow a banking system to grow
around this "high-powered" currency and fractional reserve bank loans
will automatically adjust the money supply as needed.  See Selgin,
http://www.terry.uga.edu/~selgin/.

After one hop... 2013-04-22 Free Banking: George Selgin: Bitcoin

[Phinnaeus Gage]

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2YS04vpEsh8J:https://angel.co/anarky/activity+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Ashish Gulhati followed Vipul Ved Prakash, Udhay Shankar and Ryan Lackey

http://pgp.cs.uu.nl/stats/D71918D5.html

PGP key statistics : Vipul Ved Prakash. <mail.at.vipul.net>

D71918D5 - Vipul Ved Prakash. <mail.at.vipul.net>

cross signatures : 4

810BF655  stats  Ashish Gulhati <hash.at.well.sf.ca.us>
A5270689  stats  john spurling <synec.at.nakedlunch.org>
D2E0301F  stats  Ryan Lackey <ryan.at.metacolo.com>
CAA67415  stats  Udhay Shankar N <udhay.at.pobox.com>

[benjamindees]

The problems with this tack are:

1) Floating structures are at least an order of magnitude more expensive than dry land;
2) You need lots of capital and
3) People.

So, even if you have the resources to support not only yourself but also about a dozen other people, you still have to find them and weed out the idiots and foreign agents.

Also, the next time your insurance company needs to be bailed out by a government or central bank, you're likely to find your policy cancelled.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

More on Ryan Lackey: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/decentralization/message/4860

I'm working on an electronic cash system, and hope to have something
suitable for applications to use (for testing) by CodeCon; design documents
will be up shortly, and I'll try to put up a test client and public
issuer sometime in mid/late January. My overall goal is a "good enough"
technical infrastructure, combined with some bootstrap backing, to make
the system interesting, and let people experiment with the ideas of the past
15-20 years in a more public way. I'd like to have something with a few
interesting applications, and an easy in/out from traditional finance,
by defcon x.

(although, the name DMT is a good one -- "Do you use DMT?")
--
Ryan Lackey [RL7618 RL5931-RIPE] ryan@...
CTO and Co-founder, HavenCo Ltd. +44 7970 633 277
the free world just milliseconds away http://www.havenco.com/
OpenPGP 4096: B8B8 3D95 F940 9760 C64B DE90 07AD BE07 D2E0 301F

[Este Nuno]

Why bother denouncing citizenship? What advantage does that give you? And what's preventing you from just doing this now anyway with a boat?

A citizen is the subject of a sovereign. Which means a citizen is a slave to his or her sovereign. As long as you are a citizen your sovereign will have jurisdiction over you even in international waters.

Why not just wait until it is advantageous for you to renounce? Like if the time ever arises where they claim jurisdiction over you, then just say no, I renounce my citizenship. I remember there was a book awhile ago from someone who renounced his citizenship. As far as I know, he regrets it now.

[Anon136]

Why not just wait until it is advantageous for you to renounce?

some people value liberty on more than just a practical level. for some people its also about the principal of the matter.

1) Floating structures are at least an order of magnitude more expensive than dry land;
2) You need lots of capital and
3) People.

yes i definitely agree with the first two. this option is only available to the wealthy, no doubt about that. still with nearly all great things the wealthy pioneer first then later it becomes available to normal people.

but about people, why do you need people? i mean you need some collaborators but they can all be citizens who live on land. All you really need is some people who are well connected to provide you with insurance that makes it legitimately in their interest to use their political connections to protect you and you need some people who are willing to sell you supplies. if you couldn't find a sovereign who would allow you into its jurisdiction than you could always have the supplies brought out to you while you remained safely in international waters.

if lots of people started doing this than you could have frequent meetups where all the sail boat sovereigns in the world gathered in the same approximate location somewhere in international waters. this could be the beginnings of a legitimate but adhock seasteading community. this would help to satisfy ones need for human contact and provide some of those important benefits that come from being part of a community, typically something associated with living on land  

i think this adhock approach may be more promising than an attempt to "plan" a seastead.

[niko]

is real individual sovereignty possable right now?

Define "individual" first. Say, a mushroom is an indiviual organism? Or is it the whole fairy circle? Or it includes the soil, too, as it wouldn't exist without it?

Also, when you think of yourself as an "individual," do you include all the extremities? How about that air in the lungs - surely you wouldn't be yourself without it? And where the air comes from?

I hope you see where this is going. There is no such thing as "individual," only your illusion of such.

[Anon136]

is real individual sovereignty possable right now?

Define "individual" first. Say, a mushroom is an indiviual organism? Or is it the whole fairy circle? Or it includes the soil, too, as it wouldn't exist without it?

Also, when you think of yourself as an "individual," do you include all the extremities? How about that air in the lungs - surely you wouldn't be yourself without it? And where the air comes from?

I hope you see where this is going. There is no such thing as "individual," only your illusion of such.

This is like saying that since you can not identify PRECISELY when orange becomes red that there is no such thing as orange or red.

anyway I'm not interested in this. i know you think it is topical but i do not and this is my thread.

[benjamindees]

but about people, why do you need people?

Defense, mostly.  But from a practical standpoint it is easier to share maintenance tasks with at least a few other people.  It depends on how self-sufficient you want to be.  If you're just eating microwave meals that someone delivers to you regularly then, yeah, I suppose you could do it without help.  But is that really "sovereignty" if you wouldn't last a fortnight without outside help?

[Anon136]

but about people, why do you need people?

Defense, mostly.  But from a practical standpoint it is easier to share maintenance tasks with at least a few other people.  It depends on how self-sufficient you want to be.  If you're just eating microwave meals that someone delivers to you regularly then, yeah, I suppose you could do it without help.  But is that really "sovereignty" if you wouldn't last a fortnight without outside help?

sovereignty isn't about self sufficiency, its about not being someone elses property. the point of the insurance is to create incentives that make it not in the interest of governments to attack you. if that worked than all you would need is the ability to defend yourself from pirates. I could definitely be wrong about this but it seems to me that a single large belt fed machine gun mounted to the deck of your ship would probably be sufficient to dispatch pirates. with that being said, having two or three people on the ship instead of one would be beneficial and there is certainly never ruled out this possibility.