Seasteading: Sustainable, Viable, Equitable?Follow

There are a couple different efforts to colonize our oceans.

The Seasteading Institutes goals are to build floating cities to test out various forms of government - it seems a pie in the sky goal.

Not technically sea-steading but still with a goal to avoid governing, Blueseed is a big tech start-up and research vessel (also, not yet a reality) that will live off the coast of Silicon Valley.

The Freedom Ship is an on-again/off-again project of a floating city that will travel the world, but based off the Florida coast. It's just one big vessel. This once seemed the most likely seasteading project to get off the ground (or on the water) at one point but then it died. There may be some resurrection going on. It a really really big cruise ship is all - too big for any international port. With all the recent illnesses that have spread through cruise ships - this whole concept seems overblown.

It seems the missions are all attempting to avoid all governance. I suppose if you have the money to go reside in international waters out from under the long arm of any laws and want to do that, so bit it, but I don't think it's a worthy cause risking the health of our oceans. The sea is not really meant for us to live and colonize on it's surface. On the other hand colonizing or homesteading the oceans could begin to build a worldwide policy foundation that will be necessary when we start to colonize the space.

Exactly.

The difference from the norm is that these vessels will presumably never hit land - at least the floating cities. currently all the laws governing the open oceans are basically transport laws that vessels become subject to when they want to enter or leave national or state waters. So, if the US is forced to have authority over your spot on the water, even if you never come into state waters, then it also has to take responsibility for it - insuring it's not exploited or used to film dolphin **** movies, etc.

Or we'd be entertained by the spectacle of Sealand being forcibly towed. I can smell the headlines from here.

Hawaii became claustrophobic in less than three months for me. Can't really imagine that working out any better on an overglorified bath toy. Though I guess it depends on the internet situation.

Overlooking the minor problem that it'll cost more to maintain a floating colony than to say, throw a couple of walls up in the middle of Montana somewhere, it sounds like a really great idea.

I'm not sure a glorified HOA counts as a "testbed for government" especially in a situation where you have zero natural resources (well, plenty of seawater I guess). Wasn't there a different proposal floated (heh) for one of these recently? Ocean libertarian wonderland? Insert Bioshock jokes here?

Unless it's your stolen walrus the neighbor is skinning, what's to complain about?

I got a kick out of this.....

Freedom is all relative I suppose, but the 'committee' having final say on something as trivial, yet personal as a store front appearance seems big brotherly, no?

This post has been self-censored.

Edited, Feb 11th 2014 6:26pm by Elinda

I wonder how that will deal with anti-corrosion and other maintenance, that along with floating structure vibro problems are fairly significant challenges, especially with the personal freedoms angle. Requiring a galvanization tax would be moderately hilarious to me .

Thankfully there are tons of people looking to sell to those who want a natural community rather than only those who want a sanitized environment.

Sounds better than trying to hold it in.

Obviously the **** deck.

The free market has spoken, it's in your bedroom.