Slashdot Mirror


Paypal Founder Puts a Half Million Dollars Into Seasteading

eldavojohn writes "Wired is running an informative article on Paypal Founder Peter Thiel's investment in seasteading. There's a great graphic indicating how the spar design helps platforms weather rough seas with a ballast. There's a lot more than just Thiel throwing the half million towards this and they hope to pitch this to San Fransisco for a bay pilot. Ocean colonies can be both liberating and also downright human-rights-lacking scary."

10 of 275 comments (clear)

  1. get real by nguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you seriously think the established nation states of this world are just going to let a bunch of platforms float outside their jurisdiction and reach?

    In fact, nations don't even have to do anything about their landmass, they can simply apply their laws to their citizens in international waters, and they can enforce them there too. So, if you are a US or European citizen, you'll still be subject to DMCA, high taxes, and drug laws. Of course, you can give up all your citizenships, but then you'd have a hard time doing business with anybody on land.

    This kind of escapism just doesn't help. Either fix your own nation or stop complaining. Running away stopped being an option when the West was settled, and it won't be an option again until we figure out FTL travel.

    1. Re:get real by scipiodog · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This kind of escapism just doesn't help. Either fix your own nation or stop complaining. Running away stopped being an option when the West was settled, and it won't be an option again until we figure out FTL travel.

      You know, for many people it simply isn't an option any more. What are the legal means you have in the USA - you can vote locally, for congress senate and the President.

      Let's face it, for all federal elections (where most power is concentrated these days) you get two choices, which are virtually the same person when it comes down to it.

      If you really intend to "fix your own nation" you virtually have to dedicate your entire life to doing so.

      It is simply unfair to condemn people because they haven't "fixed their own nation" in the face of their compatriots' ignorance and big-government vested interest. It could be argued that it makes more sense to run away to sea - it may be more efficient!

      --
      http://clightnirish.wordpress.com/
    2. Re:get real by fastest+fascist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What if you find the whole concept of nations with millions of inhabitants ridiculous? How do you fix that without resorting to escapism?

    3. Re:get real by bwalling · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Either fix your own nation or stop complaining.
      A recent poll in the US showed that 17% of people thought that the issue of whether a candidate wore a flag pin on his/her lapel was important. The fix for that is a bullet.
  2. Re:Slashdot Whipping Post Du Jour by Trespass · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Or is there some mysterious eBay-PayPal-Scientology connection I'm ignorent of?

    They're all full of assholes?

  3. Deep Libertarianism: Human Ecology by Baldrson · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Seasteads are a great way to protect human rights because they protect the most fundamental human right, the one from which all others are derived: The right to vote with your feet.

    If all you do is ensure that anyone can leave any time they want, then you have only one remaining ingredient to support this most fundamental human right:

    Somewhere to go.

    With the current, very limited, number of territories world-wide, the choices available to refugees is limited not only by the number of territories that would welcome them, but by the absolute number of territories.

    Increase the baseline number of territories and freedom reigns.

    The problem with current conceptions of "human rights" is they are enumerated in some sort of unstructured laundry list which results in the entire edifice crumbling under stress. Its tragic because the more you "feel" various things are "rights" -- the more "rights" you put on your wishful-thinking-list, the more "righteous" you sound to the intellectually handicapped. This creates a terrible situation for humanity -- where facades of "human rights" displace the need for territory -- the need for carrying capacity -- that forms the real foundation of life hence humanity hence their rights.

    I've written up some thoughts on the nuances of a more rationally architected system supporting human rights in Deep Libertarianism: Human Ecology that allows jurisdictions to become as "tyrannical" as they want over their territory, so long as they let people leave at will and support the creation of carrying capacity for the formation of volulntary association.

    Seasteading is an important potential in this direction.

    Unfortunately, Google's Patri Friedman, while far better than most, is indulging in more of the sloppy thinking that endangers human rights when he says things like "You can change your government without having to leave your house" or implies the assumption that seasteading jurisdictions will not exclude immigrants at their whim. We live in a physical universe with ecologies that operate in space. Attempting to deny spatial structure because you find it inconvenient or even "oppressive" is simply fantasy.

  4. Re:Best current bet for utopia by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First time I've ever wanted to friend an AC.

    Living in a society is about compromise and respect for other peoples opinions and beliefs. Groups inside a society who have no tolerance for other views are a serious issue. Most of the problems societies have are when these groups get too powerful.

    Frankly sending them all out into the middle of the ocean sounds like a great idea. Living accommodations optional.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  5. Re:Best current bet for utopia by spun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Utopia is not an option. On the other hand, free markets and private property limit the negative effects of greed and turn it into a positive externality. Prove it. From what I've seen, free markets allow greedy and selfish people to accumulate more money than cooperative people. Money is force. With enough money, one can manipulate markets. This allows the greedy to attack the rest of us economically, to force us into servitude.

    By encouraging greed and discouraging cooperation, a free market system ensures that everyone will have to act in a greedy and selfish fashion in order not to be taken advantage of by the greedy and selfish.
    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  6. Re:Confirmed shipping addresses... by HorsePunchKid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So just pick a place where there aren't any hurricanes. :)

    --
    Steven N. Severinghaus
  7. Re:Best current bet for utopia by Original+Replica · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Groups inside a society who have no tolerance for other views are a serious issue.

    The inverse, groups that cannot be tolerated by society can be problematic as well. Giving the Puritans land far far from the rest of England was just as much a blessing to England as the Puritans. Any modern day cult that builds a compound in the middle of nowhere could be said to tolerate other's views, but they don't really fit in so well when we find that they are like to marry 14 year old girls to 45 year old men. But out in the middle of the ocean, it wouldn't really bother us anymore. Or would it? Would the American people allow such a society to sit just off our shores? What about a cannabis farming floating island anchored just north of Bermuda, do you think Uncle Sam would let them alone? I don't think these floating islands are going to be the escape from global government/society that many want them to be.

    --
    We are all just people.