> Seasteading would have real, permanent consequences considering the agenda involves recruiting a large number of people. Sure, that's kind of the whole point

> Seasteading would have real, permanent consequences considering the agenda involves recruiting a large number of people. Sure, that's kind of the whole point. Try things out. You can always move back to your home country if it doesn't work out. Exactly what consequences are you trying to claim would happen? The point of these kinds of things are that everybody can have a say in how things are run, a bit like an HOA where everybody isn't just creating an intentional living community, they're creating a whole new concept for organizing a society. The United States alone has many examples of this, from communes all the way up to the Mormon church. Lots of failures, a few phenomenal successes. > In the areas of the world with little poverty, you generally find well developed rule system. Similarly, areas with great, squalid levels of poverty often have few-to-no rules. That's the charter city argument. No rules means that people with power get to decide who gets to do what. By making a new city with new, commerce-friendly rules, the hope is to replicate the success of Hong Kong.