3 ms·

> Good luck competing with China if they get there first. The French, the English, the Dutch and the Portuguese all got to Asia. Which one was first and which

by ggm 11mo ago

> Good luck competing with China if they get there first. The French, the English, the Dutch and the Portuguese all got to Asia. Which one was first and which one(s) were last to leave is not the same. The far side of the moon doesn't have a magic "dibs, it's mine" quality. It's big, and it's an extreme environment.

poszlem 11mo ago
By "there first" I don't mean - whoever sets the foot there. I assumed that was obvious.
- ggm 11mo ago
  "If a thing which is remote and in the future takes the characteristic of being done first by my adversary then the mostly likely outcome is a marvel universe dystopia endgame where everything we do is fruitless and they win and we lose" Look, I get you don't think you wrote hyperbole, but you did. Getting to a strategic capability based on far side occupancy and assuming that automatically is non competitive and incurs first to file wins outcome.. please. The most likely outcome is an antarctica treaty. The next most likely outcome is broadly speaking comparable capabilities and MAD. By all means wargame your own vision where China does it solo and nobody else can compete.
  - poszlem 11mo ago
    I'm not talking about planting a flag and saying "dibs." I'm talking about the first country that reaches actual sustained capability, moving mass, building infrastructure, supplying it, and controlling the surrounding space. Whoever gets there first shapes the rules, because that's how every strategic domain has worked so far! That's why "just let China have the Moon" doesn't really hold up. These places are only neutral when no one has the power to enforce anything. Once a country can build, maintain, and defend a Far Side installation, the incentives shift. If multiple nations reach that level around the same time, fine, you get something like MAD. But if one gets there years ahead of everyone else, it's not going to look like Antarctica, it's going to look like someone taking the high ground before anyone else can contest it.

by ggm 11mo ago

poszlem 11mo ago

By "there first" I don't mean - whoever sets the foot there. I assumed that was obvious.

ggm 11mo ago
"If a thing which is remote and in the future takes the characteristic of being done first by my adversary then the mostly likely outcome is a marvel universe dystopia endgame where everything we do is fruitless and they win and we lose" Look, I get you don't think you wrote hyperbole, but you did. Getting to a strategic capability based on far side occupancy and assuming that automatically is non competitive and incurs first to file wins outcome.. please. The most likely outcome is an antarctica treaty. The next most likely outcome is broadly speaking comparable capabilities and MAD. By all means wargame your own vision where China does it solo and nobody else can compete.
- poszlem 11mo ago
  I'm not talking about planting a flag and saying "dibs." I'm talking about the first country that reaches actual sustained capability, moving mass, building infrastructure, supplying it, and controlling the surrounding space. Whoever gets there first shapes the rules, because that's how every strategic domain has worked so far! That's why "just let China have the Moon" doesn't really hold up. These places are only neutral when no one has the power to enforce anything. Once a country can build, maintain, and defend a Far Side installation, the incentives shift. If multiple nations reach that level around the same time, fine, you get something like MAD. But if one gets there years ahead of everyone else, it's not going to look like Antarctica, it's going to look like someone taking the high ground before anyone else can contest it.