Feb 21, 17 / Pis 24, 01 02:13 UTC

Re: Punish Corruption with Death, By Law!!  

Hello Eyer, Actually, if Asgardia starts out as an island nation I would not have to consult any other nation regarding my idea. Also I have as I have already stated looked into buying an island. This was long before I had even heard of the Asgardia project and I came across a suitably sized Island for four and a half million dollars. Which is far less than the cost of having to buy the construction materials to build a facility to house a mining drone, launch said materials into space, construct said facility, automate it, and develop any needed technologies for said drone to actually be able to do the job is was meant to! Oh, and, let's not forget the costs of having to be able to ensure the livelihood of said facility! Or do you actually believe that the facility will e immune to impact events from things such as space rocks? Actually, it would make far more sense to build such a facility on a planetary body rather than out in space for the very reasons I mentioned.

As I have explained to you before, unless you can obtain said resources you do not have a near infinite supply of anything! As long as those resources are unobtainable their existing is irrelevant and they can not be depended upon for anything. Your entire suggestion is based upon an ability that we humans do not yet possess and would first need to develop before implementation of it can begin. Which adds decades onto the process of Asgardia even being recognized as a nation to begin with. After all, anything launched into space by the yet unrecognized nation of Asgardia will cease to be the property of Asgardia and that will start an infinite loop of Asgardia having to rebuild said facility over and over again. Before your suggestion can be implemented until Asgardia is officially recognized as a nation. Actually, any facility that costs more revenue to construct and maintain as a prison in space would than it generates is doomed to failure. So, yes any prison located in space would have to be run as a business meant to generate funds and I mean two maybe even three times as much probably more than any located on Earth. As terrestrial prisons do not have all the expenses a non terrestrial one would. Of course maintenance would be a thing. Over time everything breaks down and needs repairing if not out right replacement. Automating a facility would not change that fact!

The problem is the threats from the environment of space are vast and many could simply just appear without prior warning or they travel far too fast to allow us any decent preparation time to defend against. While you simply can not defend against others like blackholes for example. Even for the ones you could defend against like asteroids we currently need ten years minimal to detect and prepare a defense against those. Worrying about the things that could possibly cause you harm is not irrational not doing so is. You are far more likely to prepare for the threats you worry about than the ones you do not. Also, worrying about possible threats even if the initial defense proves to be adequate causes the advent of backup systems just in case the initial defense proves to be lacking

The idea that you can plan for every eventuallity is complete crap, as is that good design can account for every possible situation. Sure, you can try but you just can not plan for them all and still complete the project you are working on. The most likely threats will be planned for and the less likely ones forgotten and those weaknesses will be targeted at least by folks intent on causing harm that is. Those forgotten weaknesses is what my way of thought focuses on because I am realistic enough to know that others will be aware of them and may possibly try to exploit them. I do not expect for everyone to defecate rainbows and be totally devoid of the ability or desire to create chaos like you seem to. Human beings are irrational and human beings with agendas are more so.

I would have thought that the fact that business worldwide and I am referring to legit businesses pay their employees was proof enough. To prove to you the folly of having an unpaid workforce. After all, what motivation does an unpaid employee have to even show up to work and deal with the stress of said work? How are unpaid employees even supposed to obtain the things they need to survive? We are not part of a society where the necessities of life are freely provided for us. Which we would need to be in order for your idea to work, we Asgardians can not even decide if our budding nation can do without a monetary system! Common sense dictates that you do what you need to in order to survive and if that means selling out then you do it and since Asgardia for the beginning of it's life as a nation. Would not have the capability of freely providing it's citizens with everything they need to survive. The workforces of Asgardia will have a need to obtain money. Assuming Asgardia did exist and did not have a monetary system in place. I as a citizen have needs that if not met could mean the end of my life! Needs meaning medical as I have been diagnosed with a mental disorder that makes it dangerous for me because it hits with no prior warning and causes the loss of control of my limbs and the loss of consciousness. Unless I have daily medication for said affliction. Now, Asgardia will likely not have a pharmaceutical industry to speak of. Meaning I would have to turn to that of the Earth's and that would require money. But because Asgardia does not have any I would have a need to get it elsewhere. Which means, if some group whether nice or not so nice offered me a chance to obtain the money I would need. I would take it even if it meant harming others sadly. Because I have a responsibility to myself before anyone else and that is to survive. All humans have that responsibility and would do what they needed to in order to survive including you and if that meant selling out you would do it in a heartbeat as would anyone else not ready to die!

There is not any assurance that they may not still screw up or sell out if they are being paid. However, them selling out is less likely than if they were not paid at all!

  Updated  on Feb 21, 17 / Pis 24, 01 02:25 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Feb 21, 17 / Pis 24, 01 02:24 UTC

Hello Sammich, That is true but depending on the severity of the corruption I would not even waste the time punishing said officials beyond taking away their position and sending them packing. Certain things are just silly to waste tax payer money on prosecuting. Of course, I would suggest prosecuting those officials who's corrupt actions lead to the direct or indirect harming of people or the nation itself. I would also still recommend sending them packing as a way of protecting Asgardia from the threat they pose. It would be suicidal for Asgardia to have prison facilities if they are not on world. Collecting the bad people of Asgardia some of which my be angry because their positions of power were taken from them and leaving them in the nation is just a bad idea

Feb 21, 17 / Pis 24, 01 10:15 UTC

4.5 mil, a long time ago. Look at prices now. I doubt you'll find something suitable that cheap and even if you can that's only a fractional percentage of the overall cost of actually setting up.

The cost of my intention is basically nothing because the development of inital facilities will be taken upon by folks like myself and from that point further it should somewhat be self funding. Build things right, and rocks of up to a certain size, and a certain speed are of little consideration, and anything larger wants dealing with independantly anyway. These resources are not unobtainable, you just have to actually get them, as getting into orbit is 2/3 of the battle then starting there makes perfect sense. If you'd done a feasibility study on actually lifting mass for anything serious from the floor you'd understand the futility of such a direction. Inititives like mine are far more likely to succeed than suggestions like yours, which only generate further costs and problems which will cripple further progress instead of directly solving key problems required with solving many other problems. By virtue of the unfeasibiltiy of lifting a few hundred megatonnes from the surface, let alone within a few dozen generations, then to have mass residential facilities space mining will be well underway and the resources to build a prison complex most certianly trivial. It's far more feasible to count on these resources which will require to be obtained, than an optional island. Automation can indeed take care of most, if not all of maintainence tasks.

With regards to "space threats" then as previously mentioned elsewhere, we should be making an effort to find these, deploying equipments to do so - and this will sensibly take place long before any manned facilities come into play. You don't need ten years to detect and prepare a defense for an asteroid if most of what you need is already prepped for intercept, it's just awaiting a destination. You don't even need weeks to assure adjustment of Delta-V to miss Earth via several strategies. Especially if already in space. Again, starting from the floor isn't a clever move. Eventually multiple systems will orbit in a belt a little further out than the moon in order to reduce response further, and then in belts slightly slower and faster than Earth around sol to mitigate even further. I don't think it's realistical to have to consider a mitigation strategy for the likes of black holes, as you rightly deduce it's likley to be ultimately futile but luckily we're not really likely to be threatened by one for a few hundred millenia. And even if we was, the dialation of time due to the immense distortion provided by their mass would skew your perspective to the point where it's more than likely your life will be ending instantanously. Worrying about it is most irrational. Worry does little productive. Backup systems are not a product of worry, they are a product of sane and rational thinking. A product of ensuring lack of failures. A product of good design. A product of planning for everything.

Unpaid employees are to obtain the things they require preferbly by the abolishment of the monetary system, or possibly more likely via some intermediatory step like some UBI-esque scheme that's almost assuredly to become the defacto operating standard a long time before we actually have any governmental employees - if indeed we have any at all, as a direct democracy would completely erradicate the concept of government employees, if even the concept of employee is a valid concept at this time. The motivation to "show up to work" is the task itself and the fact the like doing it - or why would they of bothered starting? Motivation for any other reason isn't likely to have a good outcome. The lack of decisiveness over the requirement for a monetary system would only be provided by the likes of yourself who seem completely disconected with multiple principles - like the need for money is within itself artificial, not a natural feature of the universe - and demonstrate a complete failure to either recognise or acknowlege the flaws of operating under such principles. I do not find it surprising to learn you require medication. It's not likely Asgardia will have a pharmaceutical industry, it's far more likley you'll have direct access to pharmacutical equipment - if you don't have your own - and you can make your medication on demand, to what ever stock levels would satisfy your fears. Elseways if this is medically required expect it to be provided. You really need to stop thinking in terms of scarcity, that's a short term affliction that will soon be a footnote in history. No requirement to get it elsewhere. This technology is available now, by the time this happens it'll be far more comon.

Good to know you'd be so eager to sell out others to retain yourself, sure that's definitely common thinking but it's certiainly not progressive. That's the precise sort of behaviour that makes many things written into history as immense travesties possible. Rather than stop the problem, spread it around some more - good thinking. No-one's life is worth as much as yours.

There's not any assurance they'll screw up if paid. There's definitely assurance they'll sell out - they already proved that by trying to take payment. Paying them doens't make it less likely unless you can constantly come up with a higher number than everyone else. And even then it only makes it less likely, it doesn't eliminate the possibility.

Feb 21, 17 / Pis 24, 01 21:48 UTC

Hello Eyer, Where else is there to start from? We do not have access to the resources in space nor do we currently have any facilities in space to enable the construction of facilities in Earth orbit! As for the costs of getting the materials we would need into orbit. You could lower them two ways 1) develop stronger lighter construction materials as is being done now and 2) spread the number of launches necessary out over time. Getting everything up there to construct a functional facility does not have to be done all at once. So, if done correctly starting from the floor is feasible and it is currently the only option available to us! That is exactly the same arrogant thinking that preceeded the sinking of the Titanic and the loss of all those lives! Because of the ship's design everyone thought of it as unsinkable and never even considered the possibility that they could be wrong. Hey Eyer, we do not have any defense against such threats in space! Any rocket launched to destroy or divert an incoming asteroid will be launched from Earth until we do have a space based defense system. You keep talking about me not doing feasability studies on this and that. Yet, you do not seem to have done any regarding your own suggestion either! You do not seem to be aware of the flaws that plague it. Perhaps you should take your own advice and sit down and really examine the feasibility of a suggestion that relies upon an industry like space mining we do not yet have. Call the idea crazy but, it seems that your suggestion would stand a better chance of succeeding if we already had the ability to take advantage of the amounts of resources available in space, before we made plans that depended on said resources. I mean, you can not use what you can not obtain!

The job itself is hardly ever the motivation for folks to work and even when it is it is not their entire motivation! Their continued survival is their main motivation and enjoyment of the work is second if they enjoy said work at all. Now, if they are not being paid and can not obtain the things they need to survive. Because the monetary system has been done away with. They are far more likely to stop working altogether than to keep doing so just because they enjoy the job. Regardless of how far into the clouds your head is, you need to accept the fact that unless a nation can and does provide their citizens with everything they will need and want for life. That nation can not feasibly survive without having a monetary system. The expenses of simply providing for their growing population would prove to be too much alone! Considering all the possible surprises that could increase the cost of living for each individual. Please tell me you are kidding me with that bit about backup systems? Of course, they are the product of worry. They would not exist if the inventors of such systems were not worried that something could cause the main safety or whatever systems to fail and create a need for such a system. Needless worrying on the other hand that is not productive. Worrying about things that can happen is productive because those things can and do happen. So you do not find it surprising that I require daily medication so what? I mean, it's no surprise to me why you think I need it, you are wrong to believe I need it for the reason you do but are free to believe whatever floats your boat. Even if I had access to the equipment needed to make the medicine the life saving medicine I require without the knowledge to make it how would that do me any good? If you actually knew me personally you would know that I understand far more than I let on. For that matter if you weren't so egotistical as to think that just reading the words I type. Gives you the knowledge of me you would need in order to makes assumptions about what I do and do not understand. You would not be so arrogant as to assume to know anything about me without having taken the time to get to know me.

Who said I would be eager? I would actually feel like ten tons of crap after having done so but, I still have a obligation to myself to survive and when survival is at stake morality is useless and will likely get you killed! So, you are suggesting that I should allow myself to perish just because you disagree with the idea of doing what is necessary to save yourself is that it? Would you allow yourself to die in the same situation? Actually, no you would not and you know it, so, do not go trying to make me look like a demon for simply being willing to follow my biological programming and do what it takes to survive. When you would do the same thing Mr. Hypocrite! Oh, and, it is not a matter of who's life is more important, just one of me wanting to survive plain and simple.

People make mistakes whether paid or not so there will never be an assurance against that. But, you can make it less likely that they will sellout simply by paying them a rate worth doing the job they are tasked with. The more important the job description the more you pay them. To lessen the likelihood of them selling out, the possibility would still exist but I never claimed you could eliminate it entirely anyway!

  Updated  on Feb 21, 17 / Pis 24, 01 22:21 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Feb 22, 17 / Pis 25, 01 05:02 UTC

Where else is there to start from? We do not have access to the resources in space nor do we currently have any facilities in space to enable the construction of facilities in Earth orbit!

The answer is simple! We start from where we are, now! We gain access to the resources in space by placing the facilities there that make it possible! It's not going to come to us, we have to go to it - and that's a lot easier to do mechanised, throwing back procedes!

I'm pretty sure this has been well covered, multiple times.

Lets pretend you've a more conventional means to come up with the rediculous numbers involved with funding a ground lift operation. You can obtain everything you need, and can pay to get it up there. Even with magical future materials, you're still looking at a few megatonnes just in the thermal dissipation hardware, not any of the fuilds that are more likely than not required to circulate it, which will weigh even more, or the sensor network or any supporting equipments. Start adding this weight in, and the radiation shielding, the superstructure, everything required for biostasis - there'd be requirement to lift tens of tonnes of compressed breathable air via your method, water is a tonne per cubic meter and you'd need lots of cubic meters of that for a sizable population About 0.36 per person, acros the current 168897 people signed up would suggest requirement of about 60,802 tonnes of water. etc. You're obviously not lifting this in one go, so the only other option is multiple smaller launches. To look as NASA's SLS, or the Falcon 9 Heavy systems comming into play shortly then thats a lift payload of about 70 tonnes. So that's 142856 lifts per megatonne, and there's likely to require a couple of hundred megatonnes of lifting total. Lets be fair to your madness and suggest these magical future materials which are somehow more reliable than the known present resources manage to drop this to 100 megatonnes total lift, and seriously you're looking at that just in thermal dissipation alone, more - then that's a minimal 1,428,571 lifts, assuming nothing goes wrong across any of them, required total. There can be several weeks between them, launch site dependant, for the rendevouz window to re-align - even using multiple launch sites geographically distributed and with an infinite budget to "just keep launching" then the absolute best that can be hoped for is five or six launches a week. Lets be kind and say seven, and assume this rate can be regularly maintained - that one will add up - which pulls up to 204082 weeks, or 3925 years - As a best case senario. Defintely, you'll be pulling that off before anything I can get done.

Seriously, do a feasibilty study on it or quit making yourself look stupid. I'm not sure where you got the impression that I have done no feasibility studies, everything I'm talking about maths up nicely.

You continually cite arrogance simply because I do not crumble into irrational fears over easily solved problems, many of which have been long since solved. I can build something "unsinkable" - the only thing that would threaten it would have equal chance of destroying the Earth or any other habitational environement so this within itself isn't a unique "danger". Just becase I can consider this, doesn't mean I'd not consider the possibililty of failure, at any point or in any system and not already have at least three countermeasures in place, as well as redundant systems. Not everyone is quite as simple or as eager to fail as yourself.

Indeed, any "rocket" destined for astroidial intercept would likely be leaving Earth, until we have developed a "space based defence system". This is precisely why efforts should be pushed specifically towards the development of this system. You don't cry you haven't got a hammer, you tie a rock to a stick and get hitting until you can fabricate a more sensible tool. Such a system would sensibly starting with improving long range detection techiniques by deploying multiple additional hardware specifically seeking for such, sharing this with other similar initatives as trade for access to their data, eventually deployed to such a number that anything moving in the solar system is detectable. By the time such an initative is likely to have sensors in place in a similar belt to, but independant of the Earth, then it's more than feasible to have bits of LEO scrap cobbled together and ready to fuel, reducing cost and time of intercept. You don't need to wait for weather and launch windows are commonly easier from orbit. If systems like the EM-Drive are viable for use then we can intercept more, earlier, and park them ready for mining in the case of the larger ones, and the smaller ones for gravel fragment types can be towed directly to processing.

The job itself frequently is the motivation for folks to work, as evidenced by all the low/no pay work - like charity work, long term carers - as long as they recognise the value in what they are doing it will get done. When you start getting people doing things and this isn't their main motivation then this is where you will see the more nefarious facets of behaviours to manifest. Doing something you hate just to be able to eat, or have somewhere to sleep isn't the way to get the optimum production. It's a way to foster hatred, incite rage, and breed apothy towards the outcome of what they are doing. Continually fighting themselves commonly results in depression and a large contributing factor to the current rates that are prevelant in most "developed" countries. Being prepared to do something they otherwise would not in the persuit of this money is already exhibing behaviour that suggests it should be trivial to either coerce or fund them into misperforming their duties or something more dangerous. They have proven themselves compromised.

Yes, absent a monetary system most won't turn up for their current job - and you could potentially argue similar for UBI-esque schemes that are more likely than not about to become globally commonplace, the thing is, in most cases what they are doing really doesn't need to be happening. It's all a consequence of other things, which if actually required could feasibly be automated for the most part(reducing what needs to be done to a managable load to those who would like to do so) but absented the requirement for money, a lot of roles will vanish and those which remain are likely to significantly adjust. And yes, the nation will provide for anything the citizens need or require. To think otherwise in space isn't going to have good long term consequences. It isn't good once people start hoarding food, air, water etc.

Worry isn't productive, consideration is. It's not worry that provides for the production of backup systems - worry is what stops you from even starting - consideration, of failure specifically, is what results in backup systems. Worry leads to fear, consideration leads to solutions. Testing is what assures it's fit for purpose.

Not knowing how to make your medication shouldn't be a disabling variable, as long as you know what you'd require. The machine does the rest. It's likely even personal hardware of such ilk to be linked to the medical systems so would likely know what you'd require, and potentially have it ready and waiting.

Eagerness doesn't change the fact that you would not just entertain the notion, but actively select it! In a heartbeat! As opposed to finding another solution that made sense! What you must do to survive is what you must do, but when this comes at the cost of another, especially an innocent it's not entirely acceptable! Considering further this is taking place in a theoretical monetaryless environment, you'd not be attacking the other citizens to gain money, that's futile behaviour and a massive logic fail even for you. The only logical reason behind such a move would be that have this pretty unique thing you require. Chances are, they have it because they too require it. At which point you've entered a "my life is worth more than yours" stance and just proven that it isn't. For them to have this, and you not, suggests further that the adequate resources - as evidenced by them still having some - you have been given have been needlessly squandered and now you expect other people to suffer for your mistakes. As opposed to just going and getting some more.

Factoring further dependance of finances, and generating further desire by floating larger numbers in other places you actively increase the chances of "selling out". As previously mentioned, requiring fiscal compensation is already evidence of potential for corruption - from there it's just what number it takes to do it. As there's always someone somewhere earning more, then this fuels desire for what they have.

  Updated  on Feb 22, 17 / Pis 25, 01 10:14 UTC, Total number of edits: 2 times
Reason: typo, math correction

Feb 22, 17 / Pis 25, 01 08:35 UTC

Hello Eyer, You act as if this is the Star trek universe and we have access to twenty fourth century technologies! The kind of AI required for the type of automation you would utilize does not yet exist and currently we have no viable way of eliminating. The need to launch rockets loaded with the construction materials we would need to build any facilities in space from the Earth. You also overly complicate the entire process by simply not combining the systems you can and lowering the total number of systems needed to be launched, which lowers the weight and costs as a result. I cite arrogance because many of your ideas are arrogant. You could never build any ship that is unsinkable or any system that is infallible that I guarantee. Because you do not control every variable that affects whether your ship can be sunk or would cause your systems to fail and you would need to in order to be able to build any ship that can not be sunk or design a system that can not fail. Any ship you build I could sink regardless of the countermeasures in place and with a simple strategy. I would just overwhelm the countermeasures and render them ineffective resulting in your ship sinking! See not very hard at all.

No, the job is not the motivation for folks who do charity, volunteer, or low pay work. Folks who do charity and volunteer work do so because they enjoy helping either people, animals, or the environment, the work just allows them to do that and folks who work low paying jobs only do so because they at that time could not find better paying work! I did volunteer work but not because I enjoyed the work itself, rather it was the act of helping folks since I knew many of them and their families personally. How do you figure that me not knowing the recipe needed in order to make my medicine would not be a disabling variable? For that matter what makes you think the machine would know it? Stop going all star trek with your assumptions and be realistic.

Find another solution that made sense!!? What other solution could make more sense than doing what may prove necessary to survive!? What, am I supposed to just allow myself to die? Or try and be a hero and risk my life just so others can live? Bull it is not! The same innocent person you mentioned would do what it takes for them to survive even at the expense of others so, why shouldn't I? Besides, who said anything about attacking anyone? That action goes against the lifestyle I currently live. I simply said I would take the bribe offered so I could get what I need to survive. If it was a situation where it was either them or me then you are darn right I would view my life as being more important. Everyone would so do not try and give me any bs about it. Wow, you sure do go out of your way to try and make me look bad. But you have failed after all, me squandering or being given what I needed was never mentioned and considering no one but myself in Asgardia knows what I do need to survive and I am mainly referring to my medicine. The Asgardian government can not give me said medicine for me to squander! Going and getting more how and from whom? Even if Asgardia were to give all citizens health inssurance. Asgardia will have to import medicines as the nation will not have the ability to create such things for some time. Doing so will cost them a pretty penny and as such any health insurrance plan they offer will either only partially cover prescription meds or not cover them at all. The money spent on importing the meds will need to be recouped so importing meds continues being possible. But if Asgardia decides to not have a currency and meds are not covered by the health plan then, I would have to find an alternative way to pay for my meds!

  Updated  on Feb 22, 17 / Pis 25, 01 08:37 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Feb 22, 17 / Pis 25, 01 11:13 UTC

You act as if this is the Star trek universe and we have access to twenty fourth century technologies! The kind of AI required for the type of automation you would utilize does not yet exist

It doesn't? You must follow a lot of research a lot closer and involved yourselves with a range of wider industrial processes than I! It stands to reason really, what with level of research placed into your responses!

Yes, intially material will need to be launched from Earth. As previously explained, the cost of material, developments and even possibly the launch are possible to be made to "pay for themselves". Yes for actual purpose it will likely require future lifts with consumables, but that's likely to be funded by it's operations - as prevously outlined. The ground network would still be in operation too. The output of said facilites operating will drastically reduce the cost of getting other facilities to do other and better things operational, if it can't fund that too. The number of launches required isn't possible to minimise further, and there's constantly more balls juggling than you throw.

You may consider my ideas arrogant, I just consider them a solid enough framework to begin padding out serious details. Not having any serious obstical present itself.

You might not be able to build something unsinkable, but that doesn't mean everyone else suffers the same scope of limitations. You might have no faith that I can design things that cannot fail - or at least know they have failed and schedule themselves for replacements quite possibly before failure occurs - but that is of no impact to reality. One of us understands how the hardware actually operates. That should make a big difference in the outcome, which is again, not dependant on your faith. Which is possibly a good thing.

Yes the job is the motivation for people that spend their time performing "charity work" or those in a full time carer position now, more than a parent or spouse. These people get up everyday and put themselves through it because they recognise the value of doing that job. It's rarely the "work" itself that is the pleasure, more the output of. There's plenty of folks doing low paid work because that is what they enjoy to do. Again, anyone otherwise is already exhibiting behaviours that are both unwise to encourage and would possibly be better off in the higher paid position they seek. However, as you highlight the act of desperation forcing them into it, again this does not make for a good long term operative. Forcing anyone to do anything isn't something to sanely condone.

It's quite likely the machine itself wouldn't know it, and instead look up how to make it in a database - kind of how such machines operate now - although if you only really use it for a handful of things it's perfectly feasible it could retain a few dozen formula in local memory. With the likes of 512GB of SSD storage on a single chip the size of a postage stamp now available to plop into designs device storage of every known chemical compound and combination on the device itself could become feasible. Again, it should know you specifically require this regularly as you'd suggested this is a medical condition and thusly something that makes pharmacuticals isn't unwise to link to a medical system that is reviewing what people are taking with minimal aim of mitigating unwanted or unexpected side effects when multiple things are mixed. Please highlight for the me the unrealistical aspect, and I'll outline the real world technologies that are in place now that can make it happen.

A solution that made sense would be to attempt to seek that which you need!!? Namely this pharmecutical - which I am beginning to suspect is really crack - as opposed to trying to get money from someone in a society that doesn't use money. Randomly attacking citizens in such a situation isn't going to get you this pharmecutical, and it isn't going to get you any money. They may indeed offer you this money - will they be stupid enough to pay it? Be incredibly stupid to give you this money beforehand, what with being quite literally out of reach of recompense. Waiting until after to find out if they pay shouldn't be acceptable. Or we can really have some fun with this one. Who said anything about attacking anyone? you did. If you smoked less crack you'd remember this.

But because Asgardia does not have any I would have a need to get it elsewhere. Which means, if some group whether nice or not so nice offered me a chance to obtain the money I would need. I would take it even if it meant harming others sadly.

I love how this plan factors in the blackout condition on failure to apply. In a state of "loss of control of my limbs and the loss of consciousness" you'd be the perfect "lone wolf" operative and well worth the investment I'm sure. Squanderance was mentioned, I mentioned it - adding some realism to the hypothetical. As hypotherically, attempting to exist a population in space without tending to it's requirements is madness. You can't give them any excuses. Stability must be provided. They will cause plenty instability themselves but this will lessen over time as stupid habits adjust to a more sane environment. And, no, we really won't have to import. We can already make things on demand and being able to attribute the resources for the facilities, the resources required to feed such operations are infinitesimal. It doesn't cost anything on "health insurance" as from start to finish the entire chain was pretty much costless. As a fraction of "initial investment" it would be almost immeasurably small even running for hundreds of generations. The government can't give you this "medicine" but that can arrange everything to be in place for you to get it. Most likely from some public access dispensery or private hardware you yourself own. That would possibly be a good place to get some. There's no need to recoup money as none was invested and surplus manufacturing capacities can simply give Earth all it needs, as it's money shouldn't be of any tangible use. By the stage of us sensibly, safely, living in space, there's nothing they can make that we can't. Nothing they have we do not have more of(apart from maybe land, and for a limited time, population, and flaws like a dependance on fictional resources, regular violence, tyranical governments etc).

By having all we should need, building orbital prisons as an alternative to insane ideas like dumping our problems on Earth should be trivial and the ease of long term operations makes a death sentence uncivilised.

  Updated  on Feb 22, 17 / Pis 25, 01 11:18 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time
Reason: typo

Feb 22, 17 / Pis 25, 01 18:19 UTC

No, it does not, you claim you can design a system that could detect and prevent failures before they occur. The problem is that would take an artifically intelligent system capable of the billions of computations per second required. To detect every little thing that could lead to a failure down to the precise second of occurence of said failure. In order to be able to prevent if before it occured and we do not have such systems. Otherwise the things you have based your plan around would currently exist or be in the early stages of development! So far the only self repairing substance known is self repairing concrete. Self repairing computer systems would revolutionalize the world and seeing how we do not have the things such systems would make possible, one can correctly assume that they do not exist. I do not just consider them as arrogant they are arrogant, you treat them as if they are guaranteed to never fail and yourself as if you can not fail. Well, in both cases you are mistaken anything you design/build is not guaranteed never to fail. Failures will occur your thinking otherwise is simply delusional. Of course everyone is limited to the same scope as far as, not being able to build an unsinkable ship goes. For one thing it becomes more expensive to plan for every possible eventuallity and for another you just can not control every factor that may play a role in the sinking of your ship. The most important factor being the human factor.

If someone wants to send your ship to the depths, they will find a way to get the job done. Assuming that you would be smart enough to thwart every person who might try to sink your ship is arrogant and delusional. You are not all knowing and there is always someone smarter than you are. No, the work itself is not the motivation for charity workers. Do you honestly believe that anyone who enjoys helping folks consider that work? The people who work low paying jobs do not enjoy working for low pay. Not in a world where the cost of living is always rising, they are simply doing what they must in order to survive. Or do you think that people who enjoy working for low pay would protest to have the federal minimum wage increased? To even imply that they enjoy working for low pay, when there is and has been evidence to the contrary makes you look rather dim!

You do realize new medicines are constantly being developed right? Meaning your medicine creating machines would need far more than 512 gigs of storage space, also not everyone only takes one medicine some folks take several medications. Which means more recipes for the machine to remember and more chances for the data to become corrupt, other mistakes to be made, or tampering to go unnoticed!

As I have said before you are free to believe as you wish, you are wrong of course, but feel free to exercise your freedom to continue being wrong. When did I ever say that I would attack anyone? Really when did I? Perhaps you should stop trying to put words in my mouth, it hurts your credibility by making you into a liar. Yes, I said that and? My decision to take a bribe could lead to people being harmed but, that does not mean that I personally would go around harming people! Really, you need to start exercising some common sense because, people can be harmed by a decision you make without you being the one to actually harm them!

Now a couple of questions 1) Without having a currency of it's own how is Asgardia supposed to engage in trade to get the things it needs to build any of the facilities your plan relies upon? And 2) why so hostile?

Feb 23, 17 / Pis 26, 01 00:00 UTC

Yes it does, you should really learn to pay better attention to the world around you. It will save you embarrassing yourself. I'm sure we've covered this before. https://sites.google.com/site/mahmudmitu/ There's one system. That doesn't exist - which possibly explains why it's for sale for only $200 - That's just the first hit in a search engine, there's plenty of other solutions based on different principles, some are quite industrial and take large stacks of raw chemicals and combine them in the correct ratios and currently in use by large firms like bayer, proctor and gamble etc. It's kind of what makes the current industry posisble. High automation, and massive databases of chemcial compounds. It's also been scaled down to a tabeltop model, although this isn't quite as cheap.

Yes I can design an artificially intelligent system capable of billions of computations per millisecond. Because all the processing power isn't going to be sitting in one place, and it's not going to be doing all tasks. There will be literally billions of sensors, and much of them will be kitted up with processing capacity in order to react faster. The system in itself is a network of smaller lesser complex systems each handing off to the next. A system sits above this with the sole purpose of watching the data generated by everything over time - sure we've been through this before - and the fluxtions and anomalies in this data can suggest failure well before it's actually due, in the larger number of cases.

Everything I'm planning around either exists or is far enough through development to consider viable to an accpetable capacity by the time we'll actually be needing it. You would know this of had bothered to look, instead of instantly shouting it's unfeasible. Just because you yourself are incapable of performing to any specific measure does not mean everyone else suffers the same. Basing your interpretation of other people's abilities on that of your own defects isn't a way to gain an accurate picture.

With regards to self-repairing concrete, the "protocell" technology used there developed by Professor Rachel Armstrong, expecially if combined with various peices of mycoid research could feasilby give rise to growing entire "organic" structures(or vessels, this was entertained and still an option for the Persephone project) that are in symbiosis with the occupants, the act of being lived in giving it all it needs to self-repair, and potentially to resize itself to suit loads. It's initatives like this which are going to help transition away from the 3-5yr lifecycle on parts and start designing to span generations. You really don't want to be five years into travelling through deep space and then suddenly need to start replacing everything. You'd need a ship 5x as massive as it needs to be, just to carry the spares on a significant trip - like the next solar system across or further. The disposable thinking is going to have to stop to entertain such notions, and to get that usable for the aerospace world, traditional manufacturing can perfect it. The 3-5yr lifecycle is going to have to stop here, too, it's simply unsustainable. Change or cripple yourselves to extinction. Some companies are already making the right moves. Much heel dragging and making the most of what they can, but they've started.

Self repairing systems will revolutionise things, most certainly. It's one of the variables that will wipe out even further jobs and push things even more certainly towards some UBI-esque scheme occuring on almost global rollout. Yes we do have everything we need to make this possible, with regards to computers sensing their own failures then like any other assumption you're likely to make this is also wrong. This technology is commonly and currently deployed in things like motherboards that power ATM's so they can detect malfunctioning equipment or additional hardware, on PLC's controlling the coolant valves in nuclear reactors etc. With sensors soon in every lightbulb, lamppost, toaster, kettle, fridge, freezer, cooker, washing machine, boiler, pocket, wrist, car etc the systems deployed keeping check on all this data are most likely to be themselves, with another independant layer analysing the "big data" to spot these anomalies. It's incredibly simple at each individual component, but compared to you it's smart technology.

Anything designed/built sensible, maintained appropriately should never fail. Or it was a pretty poor design unworthy of the initial effort. This is not delusion thinking, it's understanding of the variables involved. As far as "unsinkable" goes, the specification of five meters NiFe just on the outer radtiation shields was me being somewhat conservative. If I'll put down five meters where less than one will likely cope, the general scale of over-engineering should suggest it to be reasonably resilient. Especially if I'm aiming for it. Planning for every eventuality can be more costly - but as we're looking at a near 0 cost, compared to any other method I see suggested - it's a minor thing. And cost doesn't ever become a factor. Safety can be a factor, all day long. Cost isn't a concern, this isn't about trying to make money. It doesn't how much it'll cost, if it's saving lives it's happening. And as previously mentioned multiple times, having to rely on money isn't going to get this done - it's only going to hinder it, and then if it's retained afterwards it'll only serve to transfer more of Earth's issues into space.

I'm not delusional enough to think I'm smart enough to thwart everyone. Just confident I've occurred enough deviance to have the system take care of itself. Thinking potential threats - internal or external - can be mitigated isn't defective thinking, it's an understanding - which you seem to vastly lack - of every system deployed and of physics itself. The understanding soothes these irrational and undereducated fears you seem to develop because instead of fear of calamity I see easily implimented solutions that prevent it from happening in the first place.

As I previously specified, it is not the "work" itself that appeals to most "charity workers" but the product of this effort. And commonly as you do not get one without the other, as they recognise the value of the output they get on with it. The people who work for low pay probably do not enjoy it. I have never said otherwise. Doing "what you must in order to survive" is a poor state of affairs and to be honest, thoroughly uncivilised to promote and frankly barbaric to be proposing should retain as normality for the larger number of people. It is the cause of multiple existant problems, and will only potentially generate more problems as time passes. I've never suggested the pay being low is something that appeals to them, and the suggestion that I have compared to the specific sequences and overal tone of my words makes you look quite dim.

That's 512GB in a postage stamp sized 64 layer NAND flash chip - I'd wager you can fit more than one in there. Considering the smallest ones are about the size of a large desktop printer and that's about 1/3 empty space if you open it up. Then you have to consider how small a chemcial formula is. Ac2O3. The database of such signitures held by a multinational firm that supplies various industries - including the pharmecutical - and this was some time ago but the entire daily backup haul was less than 250GB. This was just the ones they held patents of, sorted by CAS number. These increase by about 15,000/day and to realistically store them all on chips like this you'd likley require a couple of dozen to account for a few years expansion. A handfull fo these chips will hold a lot of formula and really not take up much room - possible to do without increasing significantly the form factor or power draw of existing equipments. You can dip yourself 10,000 signitures out of the CAS database without any specific charge. Should be enough for "personal use". They'd easily fit on a single chip. With reagards to tampering or corruption, if you knew anything about this field you'd understand that the CASRN number has a builtin checksum system to confirm the data is as expected. The system itself should be able to spot tampering, additional or failing parts.

When did I ever say that I would attack anyone? Really when did I? Perhaps you should stop trying to put words in my mouth, it hurts your credibility by making you into a liar.

Yes, it hurts my credibility when I provide qoutation of your words you provided freely of your own choosing readily available for independant third party confirmation. This indeed is an act of my putting words into your mouth, and copy and pasting your text must make me a liar. It's interesting that you claim you wouldn't go around harming people, as that is literally the first - and only - solution you'd presented. I'm really not the one that needs to start excersizing any form of sense, I'm constantly demonstrating it. It really won't be my descisions that result in people being harmed, either. Unless that's the intent of the descision, wherin it will done with peak efficiencies. I don't make problems, I solve them.

  1. Exactly how it engages in trade now. With other currencies. As mentioned multiple times in multiple places. It's really getting to the point where I can start to copy and paste my replies from previous replies to the same question. And I'm not relying on Asgardia to get it done, either. That's the way you think. I only rely on Asgardia to retain rights to it after putting it in space.
  2. Actually, I'm being incredibly civilised, on the scale of it.
  Updated  on Feb 23, 17 / Pis 26, 01 00:10 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time
Reason: typo

Feb 23, 17 / Pis 26, 01 02:42 UTC

Hello Eyer, Keyword here SHOULD not meaning there is still a possibility of it failing. That possibility never disappears no matter how well designed, built, or maintained something is. It is just lessened so, you still have to consider that it might happen. My own defects? What would those be Sir assume-a-lot? Surely you can not be referring to my realistic view regarding the world and what is possible. That view is supported by events in recorded history, so what defects could you possibly be talking about? Actually, if you took the same amount of time to fully comprehend what you read, as you do when wasting your time with insults. You would see that I am not judging anyone's abilties, I am trying to help you to understand that building an unsinkable ship or infallible system is simply not possible. Due to you not being in control of every variable you need to have control over to make your ship or system a reality and by implying that you could build an unsinkable ship. You are basically claiming to be smarter than anyone who may try and sink your ship. But as I have shown all a person needs to do is figure out what countermeasures you have employed and then figure out a way around them. It is not brain surgery and anyone determined to get the job done will do just that. It is time you took a vacation from the land of make believe and spent some time in reality. Well, you should not be, people invent new ways to cause chaos daily and it is impossible to keep up with them all.

If you knew what I understood your head would explode! Irrational fears? No, I just consider all possibilities and do not assume that because they have been planned for that they will never happen. When all is said and done everything I mentioned as something that could happen will happen. The only issue is time, when enough passes things will happen. Even well maintained machines still experience major systems damages, just not as often as poorly maintained machines. Systems become old and obsolete and machines break down, everything breaks down eventually.

So, while you maybe able to build sophisticated cpu systems, you will never be able to build infallible ones, well not while conscious anyway! As for low payed workers, wasn't it you who said the job was their motivation? Implying that they enjoyed the work and weren't just doing what they needed to in order to survive! What product? The only thing they are getting is the "feel good high" caused by the release of dopamine in their bodies! They can get that without doing any charity work. You repeatedly said "attacking innocent people would not help me obtain what I need to survive". What I said was "I would take a bribe from either a nice or not so nice group. In order to be able to obtain what I need to survive even if it meant harming others". Meaning I would make that decision even though my doing so would harm others. Not that I personally would go and physically harm others. So, yes you are putting words in my mouth, you assumed I meant I would physically harm others, never verified that was what I meant, but presented your interpretation as fact anyway. That's the definition of putting words in someone's mouth.

I owned up to making that statement, so any and every third party can examine it until the cows come home and they will never see me as having said I would attack anyone! When I become obligated to think of alternative ways to survive that maybe more complicated and puts my life at further risk then I will do so. Until then, I will pursue the simplest plan because it has the highest chances of working. Asgardia does not yet exist and by exist I mean you can not go to Asgardia for any reason. The Asgardia project exists but does not engage in trade as it has no need to! Of course, I expect Asgardia to obtain what it needs to get up an running as a nation, why wouldn't I? We are talking about necessities here! That's real bright, rely on a nation that does not exist yet to retain ownership of anything it launches into space!!! Why not rely on Santa claus or the Easter bunny to give you a hand building your unsinkable ship while you are at it!?

  Updated  on Feb 27, 17 / Ari 02, 01 15:53 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Feb 25, 17 / Ari 00, 01 14:15 UTC

The system itself shouldn't be possible to fail. Invidual components in the system may possibly fail, but the scale of failure required to achieve significant impact will require to be huge. It's not something you think doesn't happen, it's something you plan to happen.

Yes, defects - of which there are many - but this was specific reference to your unrealistic veiw regarding the world, and what is possible. As supported by "the real world". You have been judging abilities, mine specifically - when much of what I am talking isn't going to be relying on my abilities at all. However, I've provided multiple demonstration that should it be left up to my abilities alone then there shouldn't be a problem that can exhibit itself I am not able to overcome. Both unsinkable and infallible are possible. Suitably prepared and supplied. Figuring out countermeasures is futile, as the system is the countermeasures. There's remarkably few "new" ways to "cause chaos" - Most things are pre-existing things recycled with a slight adjustment.

For me to know what you understand would possibly require a lobotomy, or possibly several strokes. They most certainly are irrational fears, based largely on failure to comprehend the principles of which you are talking. Planning doesn't stop things from happening, instead you plan for them happening. It's this planning that makes the difference between irrational fear of an unknown quantity and having viable mitigation strategy that makes fear irrational.

I possibly could design a sophisticated CPU - I likely won't be, this IMHO best left to someone with more skill in such an area - and will have ability to produce "eventually" - and definitely construction of "infallible" systems is possible, by speficially expecting and preparing for failure in the design and implimentation phases.

I did not say that low paid workers motivate purely for the job, I said the no pay workers motivate purely for the job - or the output therof. Doing things "in order to survive" is the entire problem I'm attempting repeatedly to highlight, and what makes this model so dangerously flawed.

You did indeed suggest you would elect to take this bribe, meaning that the outcome of harming others was specifically selected as acceptable whilst performing the most complex operation you could possibly envision in order to ensure your own personal survival, regardless of consequences! This was also the only option presented, which within itself is incredibly telling! Especially as anything "indirect" you could do has equal chance of causing harm to youself! It's incredibly unlikely for you to gain usefull payment for delivering harsh words! This isn't putting words into people's mouths, but an accurate analysis of the words you choose to impart! We are talking about necessities here! They will be provided, space just wouldn't work without it! To think or attempt otherwise would just be madness! But, as you are so eager to think otherwise, to ignore the other chaos this will generate lets genuinely entertain the senario of you running out of this pharmecutical your require(that I begin to suspect is crack, on the quality of your arguments and other simliar). You're offered a "bribe" - you accept. It's incredibly unlikely you'll recieve payment before, as you are literally out of reach of any recompense. Getting this money to you, and or you turning this money into the pharmecutical and then getting it to where it needs to be in usable timeframe(which will elevate costs significantly) should be an interesting prospect. As would be the concept that you'd be around to recieve it, there's going to be nowhere to hide once you've done w/e it is payment was for. Prison - terrestrial or stellar - exile or death sentence says you're not doing it much more, and further suggests it's good to get people with that level of deficit to forward thinking and tendancy to devolve into irrational fears and then select inappropriate solutions out of harms way of the general population.

And, yes, it is real bright. This is precisely why the first satellite isn't being launched until after UN recognition. As you would know if you could actually pay attention to reality. The suggestion of reliance on mythical creatures is quite amusing, but still more feasible than most of your suggestions and I didn't say I was going to build an unsinkable ship, just it's possible suitably prepared.

Feb 27, 17 / Ari 02, 01 14:57 UTC

For the record, I recognize a reasonable place for the death penalty, but am not an advocate by any means.

For those individuals who cannot be rehabilitated, or refuse to be rehabilitated, it is not practical to waste resources, especially as scarce as they will be on a space station, on prisoners.

Persons found guilty of serious crimes are off the station, pure and simple. Others from Earth will be brought up to take their places. What happens to them once they are down on the planet, however, is yet to be decided.

I do not see why prisoners should not be used for manual labor. Provided the jailers do not perpetuate the disease of evil by inflicting it back upon the prisoners, they could be a semi-reliable labor force for things like food cultivation and basic sanitation.

Feb 27, 17 / Ari 02, 01 17:18 UTC

Hello grasshopper, My unrealistic view!!!? Says the guy whos plan relies on the ability to mine a surplus of resources from asteroid when we do not even have that ability, believes that unsinkable ships and infallible cpu systems can be built, that the work alone is the motivation for no pay or low pay workers to work, and thinks that having to do what is necessary to survive is a problem! Let me save you the trouble I got the message the first time regarding what opinion you have of me. So continually insulting me is not necesssry, it is also pointless considering how I could not give two craps less about being insulted. Especially by you remember to me you are just a stranger. I only know you as a screen name so, there is no reason why your insults should ever get to me and since it seems that you can not tell they have not and will not.

Like everyone I have things I need to work on but, you wouldn't know what they are which is why you couldn't name a single one and just said "of which there are many". Know who else thought the building of an unsinkable ship was possible? The Germans remember the Bismarck? The monsterous battleship the Brits sank off the coast of France, what about the Yamato a super battleship built by the Japanese that the US sank, and of course then there is the Titanic besides being supposedly unsinkable all those ships have something in common and that is they all were sank! Three supposedly unsinkable ships were sank and three examples of the inability to build an unsinkable ship and here you are with nerve to insist that you can do something greater minds attempted and failed at, what a dreamer you are!

Really a failure to comprehend the principles I spoke of!!? Guess you need an example of exactly why what I am not necessarily worried of happening, rather I acknowledge the fact that they can still happen is not irrational. We have traffic laws, speed limits, and all other manner of accident prevention methods. Yet many people when behind the wheel do not just sit back and rely on those methods to keep them safe during their drive to work or home. They actively anticipate what other drivers will do, moniter the weather and road conditions, and exercise common sense. But why would they do all that when we have traffic laws that are in place to solve the problem of dangerous drivers? Because, those laws being in place does not mean that drivers can not and do not still pose a threat to one another! The same goes for the things that could happen that you plan for planning for them alone. Does not eliminate the possibility that they could still happen and the possibility that your countermeasures may fail or not be enough!

Yes, I did and yes it does however, you still can not show me to have said that I would physically attack others as you have said I would. You can only prove that I am willing to do what it takes in order to survive. An attitude that life aboard a space station will require if you intend to survive an accident that may require you to. Choose between your continued existence and that of someone else's, no one that is currently part of this project. Would allow themselves to die or unnecessarily put their lives at risk just so I can go on living including you, so why should I when I would be thrown under the bus because we humans. Do not behave nobly like you see in the movies? So? Maybe I may end up working a job in a field that involvement in may prove beneficial to some group on Earth and convincing me to help them out is their only way of getting in, maybe they are a group of the not so nice people and just want on the space station for some dark purpose, or maybe they just want the truth of what is actually out there in space and I happened to have seen something interesting, or perhaps they want info on someone and I just happen to have it! Not everything people will pay you for requires you to physically harm another. People will pay for things that may seem odd to you or me and that includes everything from a-z.

Assuming that I would physically harm people, not verifying that is what I meant, and presenting it as fact is putting words in someone's mouth. Analyzing someone's words is totally different and does not end with you asserting an assumption as fact. Yes, I am aware however, I put my life at risk just by doing the mundane so, I see no reason to be scared. I have nearly died three times anyway and I have been in a coma. Which in my opinion is like death so, I am not worried about any risks to my life.

Asgardia would allow visitors right and anyone with enough money to buy me off as doing so would not be cheap considering my blah blah attitude towards money. Would have enough to come for a visit and hand me my money before I did anything. The government of Asgardia would know that I require said medicine how? I have not mentioned the name of said medicine to anyone on these forums. So, how would the government know what medicine I require?

Stop with the hypocrisy, you and everyone else on these forums would all do whatever it takes in order to survive and if it is okay for you to do whatever it takes then it is okay for everyone else to do the same. It is not about being of bad character, it is about one of the two obligations I as a living being have to myself and that is to survive. My survival is more important to me than your sense of morality is so save the bs for some one who gives a care. I am not going to pretend to defecate rainbows just because the Asgardia project seeks to create an ideal society. I am human and as such am flawed, I am not perfect and rather than pretend otherwise, I choose to be honest and if folks do not like that nothing personal to them but it is not my problem.

Anyway, we need to get back on topic the thread has been derailed long enough.

Sorry Fixer I knew what you were trying to do and still replied off topic

  Updated  on Feb 27, 17 / Ari 02, 01 17:27 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Feb 28, 17 / Ari 03, 01 14:53 UTC

Truely the extent to which you demonstrate the inability to think is only dwarfed only by your inability to pay attention. Continually correcting your crud is now becoming that repetitive I can begin to respond to it entirely by almost entirely by copying and pasting from previous posts of mine.

We do have the ability to mine asteroids. Just no-one has yet. Just like you could build a train track from your house to the sea, but no-oine has yet. All the bits are in existence. It doesn't exist now, but it's not beyond the scope of possibility to make happen. Well, it would be for you as your lack of ability to do math, perform feasibility studies, geological surveys, understanding physics etc would seriously hamper the initative, but it's achieveable for most.

"infallible" hardware is possible by explictly expecting and planning for failures, combined with 21'st century monitoring and maintainence. It's commonly not going to be the CPU that exhibits failures as these should all be on filtered lines and environments maintained, but more likely things with moving parts.

"Unsinkable" is possible, approached correctly and supplied suffiently. All three you listed was operating at a much lower technological level in terms of raw material refinement and suffered immensely from attempting to save money - which can't reconcile with other requirements.

Insulting you is rather pointless, but as you're doing a lot better job of it than me it does render it futile. But there again the entire premise of attempting to speak sense unto yourself is a little futile because as one thing gets cleared up you revlove back unto another previously ratified facet, usually based on irrational fear caused by lack of education and a desperation to have something to be scared of.

The major difference between the road law example you cite and monitoring/maintainence of systems is that the road laws are an artificial construct, so easily ignored by the humans operating in the system - creating almost all the problems within. Systems monitoring rules are not so easily bypassed, not being done by humans. Similar to the driver in your example it will observe the data produced by equipment in order to "anticipate" and "excersize common sense" avoiding "accidents". The possibility of failure still happening is expected, and thusly mitigations probvided. Wherever practical the laws of physics themselves should be the operating mechanics and thus failure impossible. There are no countermeasures, the system is the countermeasure.

Realistically, you are not going to be recieving payment for delivery of harsh words. You're not interfering with systems, not having any access to anything important and any attempt to would be noticed and recified rapidly. It's reasonably safe to assume that the random and unusual (harmless) things people will pay for are both unlikley to meet your needs or be applicable at the precise time you would require it. Starting to run out of reasons for anyone to pay you for something, and you had specifically suggested harming others as a way to recieve this payment. The only specified direction. It's almost infinitely unlikely you'd be in posession of any information it's not possible to obtain via a more reliable source. Getting on the space station is unlikely to be your call, and even if you was somehow in some position of regulation involving, any sensible system would be set so you can't abuse anything, requiring collusion from more than yourself - involving multiple people to accept bribes of something there is no use for - You'd actually avoided hitting into any of the real details, like how you're supposed to collect this payment after, or use it to get some more crack, let alone in time to stop your blood itching. This isn't ending life to save life, as this doesn't directly involve the loss of one to preserve a greater number. It's 1:1 or many:1, and doesn't lead to any direct saving of life. Just a representation of the most complex and least assured to succeed plan you could come up with on such short notice. Unless your plan is to attempt screw up as many others as you can as you ensure you're never granted the opportunity to do the same again.

Having them hand you money before you do anything is quite wise from your point of view, however from their point of view it's wiser to hand you the money after. To assume that can be resolved, it still doesn't cover how you'd actually get to spend this money, considering the cost to get there to give you the money, and the amount required to motivate you we can safely assume that w/e it is would not be benign - or why the cloak and dagger, one would just knock on the front door. It'd be cheaper.

The government of Asgardia probably won't know your medicianal requirements - it could find it out - what would know is your medical records, unlike the attitude you seem to expect, you don't "hit and hope" with space, things like medical checkups will be regular. Your "medical condition" would be known beforehand, in order that you can recieve the medicaiton you require. Unless you was just hoping to magically find some lying around in the middle of space it's likely this will require to be produced for you, something a lot harder to do and unreasonable to expect when you don't know it's required. As previously mentioned, this will most likely manifest as a public dispenspment machinery or your personal/private equipment that will fabricate it on demand. It doesn't matter precisely what medication it is, it currently exists so it can be made.

I don't do hypocrisy. I would do w/e it takes to survive, on an instinct level - and if pressured into a corner taking of life to preserve my own would be without hesitation - however if afforded the time to think(ie: more than 1 second reaction time) I would be weighing in variables and the decision wouldn't be based entirely on preservation of my own life, with the situation handled as the individual case merits. In the larger picture my personal survival is a minor detail, and sometimes the queen must be sacrificed to force a checkmate. I'm not so selfish that I think it's all centric to myself, even in my "inner world". I do have some skill with thinking "outside the box" however, so when placed in such situations I commonly walk out, as evidenced by my still walking, with the checkmate and the queen. When presented three options, make your own fourth. I don't pretend to defecate rainbows, I do however recognise the value to morality and ethics. These are what will ultimately result in this "ideal society" of which you speak, so should be thoroughly promoted. One should also strive to lead by example, It is unreasonable to expect of others that which you cannot expect of yourself. I am not perfect(although some claim otherwise, despite my attempts to curb this opinion) but my flaws do not extend to that of the average human.

But, yes, to get back "on topic" - For the record, I also recognise the place forfieture of life could have. I also recognise this would not be entirely "civilised" and a defacto declaration of failure. Thusly seek alternates. If it's feasible to provide for long term mass residential facilities in space, then it should be equally feasible to provide for reahbilitaion and detention facilities, also in space. For the attribution of resources example, scaricity would require to be resolved before the attempt unless you'd evision life in perpetual deficit, especially when finely tuned and balanced cycles are disrupted through natural population expansion. "Unmet needs" isn't a concept that's sensible to entertain in space - it seriously won't work - and thusly needs will require to be met to consider habitation long term safely. Sensibly, "correction facilities" would not be in the "residential facilities", but entirely seperated and isolated. The scale of resource attribution being met to make the construction of habitation facilities possible should render the fabrication of additional facilities reasonably trivial.

As to the use of prisoners for manual labour, similar exists under another term: slavery. It's not an entirely progressive concept. It can certianly be useful, but considering most tedious labour is already possible to take place by machine then by the time this will be taking place it's questionable what labour could be productive for them to do - and you also have to consider if they can be trusted to do it and how you'd actually force this labour out of them.

The "return to Earth" option is only a truely viable concept for those that "came from Earth" - a generation or more into "born in Asgardia" isn't going to be "right" to send to Earth, as a punishment. It's got nothing to do with Earth, and forcing our problems on Earth isn't a sensible long term solution, and even short term is likely to be incredibly problematic. With regards to establising correction/detention facilities on Earth's land, then you still have the problem of them leaving this facility. Even those that "came from Earth" would still be us dumping our problems we cannot solve onto Earth. The reception to the topic of punishment vs rehabilitation indicates the larger percentage would choose to persue rehabilitation options, more than custodial sentences. Indefinite incarciration I'd hope to be an incredibly rare occurance, reserved for those whom there are no potentially corrective options. For "correctional facilities" to be considered worthy of the title then those that pass through them should leave, in theory, capable of integration back into "larger society". In the interests of fairness, they should be granted the opportunity to prove themselves. Lifting them from Earth then is an issue that could of been avoided. Leaving them there just abandons the investment in their rehabilitation.

Feb 28, 17 / Ari 03, 01 15:15 UTC

Personal attacks detract from your argument. Please desist, both of you. You are making the thread an unpleasant place for EVERYONE ELSE, even if neither of you actually care. I would appreciate it if both of you could first tell the other what it is you THINK they are saying, then clarify any discrepancies, then move on from that.

Both of your posts are so long, filled with anger, and difficult to read for those actually trying to find facts within the opinions.