Internet billionaire donates $1.25 million to create libertarian islands

[AyeYo]

To be honest, it wouldn't cost anything extra for the US to defend a seasteading community off its coast.  All it has to do is announce that the community is under its protection.  No country is going to attack the US or any protectorate of it with its current military capabilities. 

The irony in that situation would be unbearable.  Rugged, independent individuals leeching protection off an evil government they pay no taxes to. 

[Anonymous]

It wouldn't be parasitic if the US gained a lot of value from guarding the community; however, it would defeat a lot of its intention in being a sovereign entity.

[J180]

To be honest, it wouldn't cost anything extra for the US to defend a seasteading community off its coast.  All it has to do is announce that the community is under its protection.  No country is going to attack the US or any protectorate of it with its current military capabilities.  

The irony in that situation would be unbearable.  Rugged, independent individuals leeching protection off an evil government they pay no taxes to.  

If you bother having a read of the FAQ, the project makes no mentions of morals (good and evil) and isn't even anti-government, though it's mostly libertarians interested in it right now. They want to test all sorts of societies, including socialist ones, but even most libertarians want a government.

Something I would like to see to tried is direct-democracy, e-democracy specifically: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-democracy

[AyeYo]

To be honest, it wouldn't cost anything extra for the US to defend a seasteading community off its coast.  All it has to do is announce that the community is under its protection.  No country is going to attack the US or any protectorate of it with its current military capabilities.  

The irony in that situation would be unbearable.  Rugged, independent individuals leeching protection off an evil government they pay no taxes to.  

If you bother having a read of the FAQ, the project makes no mentions of morals (good and evil) and isn't even anti-government, though it's mostly libertarians interested in it right now. They want to test all sorts of societies, including socialist ones, but even most libertarians want a government.

Something I would like to see to tried is direct-democracy, e-democracy specifically: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-democracy

My bottom line point is that it really doesn't matter who is doing it, it's a totally idiotic idea.  You can't pretend you're testing these systems of government in some controlled conditions just because you're in the middle of the ocean.  In fact, it's not even good conditions for that type of experiment.  It's not even ok conditions.  In actuality, I can't think of a worse set of conditions to use to test governmental systems under.  A platform at sea is TOTALLY dependent on the outside world and will house such a small community that the literal survival of the society will completely depend on each and every individual.

Look up the many biodome experiments if you want to see the success rate (0%, just FYI) of this type of thing.

[J180]

To be honest, it wouldn't cost anything extra for the US to defend a seasteading community off its coast.  All it has to do is announce that the community is under its protection.  No country is going to attack the US or any protectorate of it with its current military capabilities.  

The irony in that situation would be unbearable.  Rugged, independent individuals leeching protection off an evil government they pay no taxes to.  

If you bother having a read of the FAQ, the project makes no mentions of morals (good and evil) and isn't even anti-government, though it's mostly libertarians interested in it right now. They want to test all sorts of societies, including socialist ones, but even most libertarians want a government.

Something I would like to see to tried is direct-democracy, e-democracy specifically: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-democracy

My bottom line point is that it really doesn't matter who is doing it, it's a totally idiotic idea.  You can't pretend you're testing these systems of government in some controlled conditions just because you're in the middle of the ocean.  In fact, it's not even good conditions for that type of experiment.  It's not even ok conditions.  In actuality, I can't think of a worse set of conditions to use to test governmental systems under.  A platform at sea is TOTALLY dependent on the outside world and will house such a small community that the literal survival of the society will completely depend on each and every individual.

Look up the many biodome experiments if you want to see the success rate (0%, just FYI) of this type of thing.

You are right about the community being too small. 200 good individuals (the initial raft) could probably make the worst kinds of governments still work. But this is supposed to be a long-term project, the idea to have governments (eventually) act like corporations, with market forces selecting for them. So if you don't like your government you could detach your property and go somewhere else. Under that system, seasteads will start to stick together under particularly effective/uncorrupt systems and we'll start to see city states of few thousand people.

[TiagoTiago]

Unless you get surrounded by a ring of corrupt seasteds that endup getting absorbed by one evil empire, and then they start growing innards till you not have anywhere to go but you can't stay either...

Like with the evolution of living species, the evolution of states favors the ones that are good enough for the moment, but not necessarily perfect. At at some point(s) remaining imperfect costs less than changing for the better.

[J180]

Unless you get surrounded by a ring of corrupt seasteds that endup getting absorbed by one evil empire, and then they start growing innards till you not have anywhere to go but you can't stay either...

Like with the evolution of living species, the evolution of states favors the ones that are good enough for the moment, but not necessarily perfect. At at some point(s) remaining imperfect costs less than changing for the better.

I can't make the same connection with evolution so you so might need to clarify it a bit, as I assume others will have the same problem. Perhaps you could provide an example of a real-world geno/phenotype with this property?

[AyeYo]

You are right about the community being too small. 200 good individuals (the initial raft) could probably make the worst kinds of governments still work. But this is supposed to be a long-term project, the idea to have governments (eventually) act like corporations, with market forces selecting for them. So if you don't like your government you could detach your property and go somewhere else. Under that system, seasteads will start to stick together under particularly effective/uncorrupt systems and we'll start to see city states of few thousand people.

That doesn't change anything.  A few thousand people still results in ultimate reliance on one another.  If this society is supposed to be self-sustaining, you'd at least one person from every imaginable profession.  With a couple thousand people, that's about all you're going to get is 1-2 people from each profession.  That means everyone needs to execute their job flawlessly.  If a couple people miss a beat, the survival of the entire society is at risk.

[J180]

You are right about the community being too small. 200 good individuals (the initial raft) could probably make the worst kinds of governments still work. But this is supposed to be a long-term project, the idea to have governments (eventually) act like corporations, with market forces selecting for them. So if you don't like your government you could detach your property and go somewhere else. Under that system, seasteads will start to stick together under particularly effective/uncorrupt systems and we'll start to see city states of few thousand people.

That doesn't change anything.  A few thousand people still results in ultimate reliance on one another.  If this society is supposed to be self-sustaining, you'd at least one person from every imaginable profession.  With a couple thousand people, that's about all you're going to get is 1-2 people from each profession.  That means everyone needs to execute their job flawlessly.  If a couple people miss a beat, the survival of the entire society is at risk.

It isn't supposed to be self-substaining (as I've had to repeat several times). They want to trade with other countries, most goods will still be imported even with a few thousand people. I will put that in bold text if I have to say that again!

[hugolp]

It isn't supposed to be self-substaining (as I've had to repeat several times). They want to trade with other countries, most goods will still be imported even with a few thousand people. I will put that in bold text if I have to say that again!

He is a troll, dont bother.

[AyeYo]

You are right about the community being too small. 200 good individuals (the initial raft) could probably make the worst kinds of governments still work. But this is supposed to be a long-term project, the idea to have governments (eventually) act like corporations, with market forces selecting for them. So if you don't like your government you could detach your property and go somewhere else. Under that system, seasteads will start to stick together under particularly effective/uncorrupt systems and we'll start to see city states of few thousand people.

That doesn't change anything.  A few thousand people still results in ultimate reliance on one another.  If this society is supposed to be self-sustaining, you'd at least one person from every imaginable profession.  With a couple thousand people, that's about all you're going to get is 1-2 people from each profession.  That means everyone needs to execute their job flawlessly.  If a couple people miss a beat, the survival of the entire society is at risk.

It isn't supposed to be self-substaining (as I've had to repeat several times). They want to trade with other countries, most goods will still be imported even with a few thousand people. I will put that in bold text if I have to say that again!

You aren't understanding what I'm saying.

You need a controlled environment to do an experiment.  You need an isolated environment to do a political experiment.  This idea is as unisolated as can possibly be because it is 100% dependent on help from the outside.  They will have to import damn near everything.  That's NOT a realistic society, so the experiment is a failure from the get go.

[Fakeman]

You need an isolated environment to do a political experiment.

Where did you come up with that idea?

[Anonymous]

Then I guess AyeYo would be happy to agree that you can't test Free Market economics in a society with government stimuli such as taxation along with other entities.

[elewton]

Economists often rely on "natural experiments", since it it almost impossible to persuade a representative sample of humans to change their entire lives in order to generate data.

In these hypothetical cases, many models will be applied to interpret the data generated.  The societies do not exist in isolation to answer someone's question.

While I would not currently choose to live in one of these societies, I see no large involuntary human cost to their activities and a great deal of potential gain.  Even if the next 1000 artificial societies fail, we'll have access to a great deal of information regarding how not to order societies.  It's difficult to imagine anyone opposing their activities without malicious intent.

[AyeYo]

Then I guess AyeYo would be happy to agree that you can't test Free Market economics in a society with government stimuli such as taxation along with other entities.

There's no such thing as a free market.  Markets don't just happen, they are created through laws and regulations.  So, yes, it's impossible to test free market economics, period.

[marcus_of_augustus]

What do they do with the human wastes, particularly sewerage?

Any specific rules, codes on that I wonder?

[Anonymous]

What do they do with the human wastes, particularly sewerage?

Any specific rules, codes on that I wonder?

Do you think people want to walk on streets of filth? Hell yes there will be sewage because people will want it.

[marcus_of_augustus]

What do they do with the human wastes, particularly sewerage?

Any specific rules, codes on that I wonder?

Do you think people want to walk on streets of filth? Hell yes there will be sewage because people will want it.

So straight into the ocean?, treated?, one company?, competing sewage networks?, etc?

What rules/codes I wonder? Who says what goes?

[Anonymous]

What do they do with the human wastes, particularly sewerage?

Any specific rules, codes on that I wonder?

Do you think people want to walk on streets of filth? Hell yes there will be sewage because people will want it.

So straight into the ocean?, treated?, one company?, competing sewage networks?, etc?

What rules/codes I wonder? Who says what goes?

Human desire.

Do you have the audacity to put money towards a company that dumps your waste directly into an ocean? The people will say what goes with their dollar.

[marcus_of_augustus]

What do they do with the human wastes, particularly sewerage?

Any specific rules, codes on that I wonder?

Do you think people want to walk on streets of filth? Hell yes there will be sewage because people will want it.

So straight into the ocean?, treated?, one company?, competing sewage networks?, etc?

What rules/codes I wonder? Who says what goes?

Human desire.

Do you have the audacity to put money towards a company that dumps your waste directly into an ocean? The people will say what goes with their dollar.

Without wanting to rub your nose in it, so to speak, you haven't offered any specific details how these messy intricacies get sorted out in such confined quarters as an offshore floating rig. Have you ever worked on one?