Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (40 users) | |
|
| Shady Sands United States. August 24 2012 13:21. Posts 3572 | Profile Blog # |
So there have been quite a few space exploration threads lately.
India's launching a rocket to Mars --
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=362398
NASA is cooperating with the private sector on a range of issues. --
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=180910
NASA goes and figures out how the Earth came to be --
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=362136
We stopped dreaming (Rant by Neil Tyson on poor state of space exploration) --
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=347705
Reading through all of them, though, I was struck by one thing -- no one has figured out how to make money off space yet.
I'm not talking soft stuff like tourism or communications satellites. I'm talking concrete plans on how to take ownership of and extract resources from extraterrestrial objects.
Why?
Because Space is communist.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial_Real_Estate
The United Nations sponsored 1967 "Outer Space Treaty" established all of outer space as an international commons by describing it as the "province of all mankind" and forbidding states from claiming territorial sovereignty.[2] Article VI vests the responsibility for activities in space to States Parties, regardless of whether they are carried out by governments or non-governmental entities. The Outer Space Treaty of 1967 has currently been ratified by 100 states, including all the major space-faring nations. It has also been signed by 26 other nations but not yet ratified.[3]
The international Moon Treaty, finalised in 1979 and entering into force in 1984, forbids private ownership of extraterrestrial real estate.
This is the root of why it's so hard to get private dollars into space exploration. There's no legal framework to reliably turn those dollars into ownership of space resources.
But imagine, for a second, what could be if we put in place the proper legal framework. A few friends of mine who work for the Mercatus Institute, the libertarian think tank funded by the Koch brothers, floated over an idea for the existence of a space homesteading act. While I share none of their political inclinations, I share their appreciation of a good idea, and I think this, in particular, is a great one.
From the email:
The space homesteading act would allow corporations and wealthy individuals to claim ownership of a set plot of extraterrestrial land (e.g. lunar or Martian land) if they could maintain continuous human habitation on that piece of land for a few years straight. The claim would only remain valid if the human habitation there continued onwards.
In one fell swoop, this law would incentivize so much wealth to go into researching extraterrestrial human habitation. I read reports every day about how much cash Google, Apple, Microsoft, and other corporates are sitting on, and I think--instead of investing in the next iteration of 140 characters, why not invest it in rocket ships and colonies to claim chunks of the moon?
Seriously, this is a great idea. It would unleash all the wealth and competitive forces of capitalism in the direction of figuring out how to get people into space and let them live there. That's amazing. And the best part? If enough popular support gets behind this, the lobbying costs can be minimal.
But popular support itself is a fickle thing. So that's what I'm asking all of you about.
1) Do you think this is a good idea?
2) Do you think this will become a popular idea?
No need for a poll--I'd simply like to hear well thought out responses below.Last edit: 2012-08-24 13:23:09 |
| | Check out my buddy's startup: http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/13/strikingly/ |
|
|
| NadaSound United States. August 24 2012 13:32. Posts 224 | Profile # |
I really don't think that it is the legal frame work that keeps companies and wealthy individuals out of space, but rather the logistics of sustaining a presence in space and of course the huge risk involved in such an investment.
Also, I think that the space treaties hold a realistic and practical regard for the Human colonization of space. If we ever do become serious about making a real push into space it will be an international effort. I really can see any one nation being able to offer the necessary funds, ingenuity and production to support the sustained presence of Human's who are hundreds of thousands of miles away from Earth, let alone a couple million for the case of Mars. Last edit: 2012-08-24 13:52:37 |
|
|
| Yettyman United States. August 24 2012 13:40. Posts 36 | Profile # |
In my opinion there needs to be a large advancement in space travel technology. It currently costs huge amounts of money just for unmanned satellite missions. If it becomes space becomes more accessible then I can see a use for the law that you propose.
If a large amount of countries were able to be able to have constant space missions then I think the law would be necessary to avoid international conflict but I think that only major super powers would launch extensive space mining and/or colonization missions for a large period of time and I think cooperation would be a higher priority at the outset due to the risk. |
| | Wish there was a random icon :/ |
|
|
| Danglars United States. August 24 2012 13:43. Posts 1921 | Profile Blog # |
Reading through all of them, though, I was struck by one thing -- no one has figured out how to make money off space yet.
Virgin Galactic (Virgin Airlines)seeks to make a profit.
Read more about companies seeking to provide this for customers on wikipedia.
Not that government run institutions are good at turning profits, that really isn't their purpose. So maybe somebody like NASA is more interested in exploring space and planets than making somebody a little richer. Just my two cents. |
| | MC HuK HerO Creator HWAITING || Go iS! || Great armies come from happy zealots, and happy zealots come from California! | |
|
|
| Shady Sands United States. August 24 2012 13:44. Posts 3572 | Profile Blog # |
On August 24 2012 13:43 Danglars wrote:
Show nested quote +Reading through all of them, though, I was struck by one thing -- no one has figured out how to make money off space yet.
. Read more about companies seeking to provide this for customers on wikipedia.Not that government run institutions are good at turning profits, that really isn't their purpose. So maybe somebody like NASA is more interested in exploring space and planets than making somebody a little richer. Just my two cents.
I agree that this is a good sign, but I don't think this is the right way to profit off space. The best way to do it would be to just carte blanche let the forces of capitalism own chunks of lunar or Martian territory. |
| | Check out my buddy's startup: http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/13/strikingly/ |
|
|
| Tarot Canada. August 24 2012 13:45. Posts 324 | Profile # |
On August 24 2012 13:44 Shady Sands wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 13:43 Danglars wrote:
Reading through all of them, though, I was struck by one thing -- no one has figured out how to make money off space yet.
Virgin Galactic (Virgin Airlines)seeks to make a profit. Read more about companies seeking to provide this for customers on wikipedia.Not that government run institutions are good at turning profits, that really isn't their purpose. So maybe somebody like NASA is more interested in exploring space and planets than making somebody a little richer. Just my two cents.
I agree that this is a good sign, but I don't think this is the right way to profit off space. The best way to do it would be to just carte blanche let the forces of capitalism own chunks of lunar or Martian territory.
To do what? |
|
|
| starfries Canada. August 24 2012 13:47. Posts 2617 | Profile Blog # |
| The thing is, there aren't that many resources on the Moon or Mars or anywhere else we can reach right now. If you factor in the costs of getting to space to begin with, there's no way you'll make a profit. The only real reasons to go right now are what's already happening - science and tourism. So I doubt letting people own a piece of the Moon will encourage anything beyond publicity stunts. |
| | DJ – do you like ramen, Savior? Savior – not really. Bisu – I eat it often. Flash – I’m a maniac! | Foxer Fighting! |
|
|
| Shady Sands United States. August 24 2012 13:49. Posts 3572 | Profile Blog # |
On August 24 2012 13:45 Tarot wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 13:44 Shady Sands wrote:
On August 24 2012 13:43 Danglars wrote:
Reading through all of them, though, I was struck by one thing -- no one has figured out how to make money off space yet.
Virgin Galactic (Virgin Airlines)seeks to make a profit. Read more about companies seeking to provide this for customers on wikipedia.Not that government run institutions are good at turning profits, that really isn't their purpose. So maybe somebody like NASA is more interested in exploring space and planets than making somebody a little richer. Just my two cents.
I agree that this is a good sign, but I don't think this is the right way to profit off space. The best way to do it would be to just carte blanche let the forces of capitalism own chunks of lunar or Martian territory.
To do what?
Strip mine it? Lots of Helium 3 on the moon, for example.
Or for asteroids, there are entire asteroids with loads of rare elements like platinum and rare earth metals.
Or more simply, owning surface rights to the moon would allow you to collect solar energy without the interference of an atmosphere, which you could then beam down to Earth via microwaves.
There's a whole ton of ways to make money off space once you have the land rights. |
| | Check out my buddy's startup: http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/13/strikingly/ |
|
|
| Shady Sands United States. August 24 2012 13:50. Posts 3572 | Profile Blog # |
On August 24 2012 13:47 starfries wrote:
The thing is, there aren't that many resources on the Moon or Mars or anywhere else we can reach right now. If you factor in the costs of getting to space to begin with, there's no way you'll make a profit. The only real reasons to go right now are what's already happening - science and tourism. So I doubt letting people own a piece of the Moon will encourage anything beyond publicity stunts.
But most of those costs are high precisely because there's not a lot of investing going into the sector right now. |
| | Check out my buddy's startup: http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/13/strikingly/ |
|
|
 Xiphos Canada. August 24 2012 13:56. Posts 5732 | Profile Blog # |
On August 24 2012 13:50 Shady Sands wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 13:47 starfries wrote:
The thing is, there aren't that many resources on the Moon or Mars or anywhere else we can reach right now. If you factor in the costs of getting to space to begin with, there's no way you'll make a profit. The only real reasons to go right now are what's already happening - science and tourism. So I doubt letting people own a piece of the Moon will encourage anything beyond publicity stunts.
But most of those costs are high precisely because there's not a lot of investing going into the sector right now.
I think that once the Earth becomes inhabitable with pollutions, then space will become a viable option. Because human race is becoming more and more indolent by the second as we haven't met any other species that could compete with. But later on, we will be confonting against the continuity of our kind because of the pollution factor, then we would have colonies like they have on the Macross series!
Meanwhile, I get to live on the homeland and probably be dead by then. |
| | 2012 - Remember of the Fallen Heroes and Command the way to your victory. |
|
|
| starfries Canada. August 24 2012 13:56. Posts 2617 | Profile Blog # |
On August 24 2012 13:50 Shady Sands wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 13:47 starfries wrote:
The thing is, there aren't that many resources on the Moon or Mars or anywhere else we can reach right now. If you factor in the costs of getting to space to begin with, there's no way you'll make a profit. The only real reasons to go right now are what's already happening - science and tourism. So I doubt letting people own a piece of the Moon will encourage anything beyond publicity stunts.
But most of those costs are high precisely because there's not a lot of investing going into the sector right now.
well, there's not going to be any investment unless there's the potential for profit. and the problem of lack of resources still remains - there isn't anything to go for up there, unless you want to wait until Earth turns into a shithole. |
| | DJ – do you like ramen, Savior? Savior – not really. Bisu – I eat it often. Flash – I’m a maniac! | Foxer Fighting! |
|
|
| Shai Canada. August 24 2012 13:58. Posts 553 | Profile Blog # |
I'm probably socialist by American standards, so I'm biased against this from the start.
But do you really want McDonald's to conquer the moon and charge stupid amounts for people to go there? Or any other company. This will invariably lead to monopolies which aren't in the best interest of a working capitalism.
I'm a big fan of having another space race, but there needs to be protocol and a ruleset. |
| | A case could be made for "a deistic god, a sort of god of the physicist, a god ... who devised the laws of physics, god the mathematician, god who put together the cosmos in the first place and then sat back ..." - Dawkins |
|
|
| Shady Sands United States. August 24 2012 14:00. Posts 3572 | Profile Blog # |
On August 24 2012 13:56 starfries wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 13:50 Shady Sands wrote:
On August 24 2012 13:47 starfries wrote:
The thing is, there aren't that many resources on the Moon or Mars or anywhere else we can reach right now. If you factor in the costs of getting to space to begin with, there's no way you'll make a profit. The only real reasons to go right now are what's already happening - science and tourism. So I doubt letting people own a piece of the Moon will encourage anything beyond publicity stunts.
But most of those costs are high precisely because there's not a lot of investing going into the sector right now.
well, there's not going to be any investment unless there's the potential for profit. and the problem of lack of resources still remains - there isn't anything to go for up there, unless you want to wait until Earth turns into a shithole.
True to a certain extent. But why wait until then?
Ideally, we would combine this homesteading act with interest rate subsidies or loan guarantees on every dollar invested in space habitation. Do this while the human race can still afford it. Take money away from government agencies, and turn it over to the private market.
Look at what happened when the US government subsidized the private railroads--trackage multipled 40 fold in 40 years; in Russia from 1850-1890, when the government tried doing the same by force rather than a subsidized market, trackage barely doubled.
Space needs less 112 million dollar rockets from 3rd world countries looking for an ego trip, more dollars spent by the best corporations on figuring out how to claim and own space. |
| | Check out my buddy's startup: http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/13/strikingly/ |
|
|
| Shady Sands United States. August 24 2012 14:02. Posts 3572 | Profile Blog # |
On August 24 2012 13:58 Shai wrote:
I'm probably socialist by American standards, so I'm biased against this from the start.
But do you really want McDonald's to conquer the moon and charge stupid amounts for people to go there? Or any other company. This will invariably lead to monopolies which aren't in the best interest of a working capitalism.
I'm a big fan of having another space race, but there needs to be protocol and a ruleset.
By the nature of this law, it'll be impossible for Mickey D's to conquer the moon. Each plot of land would need a separate colony. It would be inefficient and far too risky for them to maintain dozens of lunar or martian colonies.
And if they need to charge people stupid amounts to go there, then so be it. Wouldn't that be much better than nobody being able to go there at all because government agencies fucked everything up? |
| | Check out my buddy's startup: http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/13/strikingly/ |
|
|
| Tarot Canada. August 24 2012 14:03. Posts 324 | Profile # |
On August 24 2012 13:50 Shady Sands wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 13:47 starfries wrote:
The thing is, there aren't that many resources on the Moon or Mars or anywhere else we can reach right now. If you factor in the costs of getting to space to begin with, there's no way you'll make a profit. The only real reasons to go right now are what's already happening - science and tourism. So I doubt letting people own a piece of the Moon will encourage anything beyond publicity stunts.
But most of those costs are high precisely because there's not a lot of investing going into the sector right now.
Because no company sees potential for profit. If they did, they would have lobbied for this already.
Without some sort of major breakthrough, nothings going to change the fact that it still takes around ten thousand to take 1kg into space, and a even few excavators is going to weigh hundreds of thousands of tons. Last edit: 2012-08-24 14:04:22 |
|
|
| Shady Sands United States. August 24 2012 14:06. Posts 3572 | Profile Blog # |
On August 24 2012 14:03 Tarot wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 13:50 Shady Sands wrote:
On August 24 2012 13:47 starfries wrote:
The thing is, there aren't that many resources on the Moon or Mars or anywhere else we can reach right now. If you factor in the costs of getting to space to begin with, there's no way you'll make a profit. The only real reasons to go right now are what's already happening - science and tourism. So I doubt letting people own a piece of the Moon will encourage anything beyond publicity stunts.
But most of those costs are high precisely because there's not a lot of investing going into the sector right now.
Because no company sees potential for profit. If they did, they would have lobbied for this already. Without some sort of major breakthrough, nothings going to change the fact that it still takes around ten thousand to take 1kg into space, and a few excavators is going to weigh hundreds of thousands of tons.
Right--so then people have to invent ways to utilize lunar materials to live and exploit there, right?
That's the point. Get the dollars to go into tech research for that shit. Then turn that tech into a full fledged, lunar industrial base--a set of factories and plants on the moon that is self-sustaining from a materials standpoint. Then humanity has taken its first giant leap into space--a truly extraterrestrial presence that will never go away. |
| | Check out my buddy's startup: http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/13/strikingly/ |
|
|
| Djzapz Canada. August 24 2012 14:06. Posts 5686 | Profile Blog # |
When Neil deGrasse Tyson said we stopped dreaming, he didn't mean we should explore space to make a buck by harvesting resources or through commercial space flights. He meant that we should explore space to expand our knowledge, whilst accomplishing truly great things.
The private sector will always be incredibly limited by its need to profit. |
| | "My incompetence with power tools had exponentially increased after 21 years spent inhaling experimental oven cleaners" |
|
|
 pyrostat Korea (South). August 24 2012 14:07. Posts 70 | Profile # |
| starcraft is space itself. |
|
|
| Shady Sands United States. August 24 2012 14:09. Posts 3572 | Profile Blog # |
On August 24 2012 14:06 Djzapz wrote:
When Neil deGrasse Tyson said we stopped dreaming, he didn't mean we should explore space to make a buck by harvesting resources or through commercial space flights. He meant that we should explore space to expand our knowledge, whilst accomplishing truly great things.
The private sector will always be incredibly limited by its need to profit.
But the problem is the drive for knowledge is always a means, and never a self-sustaining end.
The drive for profit is the only end which can endure in a human society forever, because profit strengthens the very forces that enable it to be, whereas knowledge can not claim the same sort of cyclic nature. |
| | Check out my buddy's startup: http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/13/strikingly/ |
|
|
| Shady Sands United States. August 24 2012 14:10. Posts 3572 | Profile Blog # |
On August 24 2012 14:07 pyrostat wrote:
starcraft is space itself.
this is exactly what I want: real life TvT. I want to wake up in 2050 and see the headlines about the Lunar Mining Combine dropping asteroids on their rivals on Mars. I want to see stories about Google Space launching nanobot attacks on Apple Space. I dont want to just see that shit be science fiction forever. |
| | Check out my buddy's startup: http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/13/strikingly/ |
|
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next All | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
