I'm not aware of anything in international law that specifically mandates we must have a monetary system.

We require money now by virtue of this is the model we are imersed inside, this is not disputed. What is disputed is a requirement to adopt this system for ourselves. We need Earth currency, for dealing with Earth's nations up until the point they no longer have anything we can't supply ourselves with. We shouldn't actually require it for ourselves. But certainly, anything we want from Earth they will be wanting money in exchange, typically. The thing is, they want their money.

Consider, we actually have no physical territory. We have no banks. Any "Asgardian money" would be kept in another nations bank. Possibly a security fail right there. Unless you'd possibly talk about some "cryptocurrency" that utilises entropy in the blockchain then it's not long before entropy eats more watts at resdiential rates to process it than is delivered in return for it's processing whilst at the same time technology is specifically generated and optimised to mine faster - as everyone wants free money, increasing this entropy faster. Then to actually spend this anywhere, then it would need to be converted into the local currency, more than likely at a cost, reducing it's actual value even further. There's no reason anyone anywhere would accept our currency realistically, so purchasing local currency with this should be interesting and considering we have no borders then trade between Asgardians is likely to take place in the local currency, or something pre-existing, also for the significant future so the recipient can actually spend it, without having to pay to do so.

For trade with Earth, as of current, we have little but dreams, ideas, and knowlege. "A free base of scientific knowlege in space" sincerly suggests "open source" so it's not likely any of these are to fetch a particularly high price.

As previously mentioned, it's significantly unlikely to have the capacity to account for our population without first solving several issues, one of which is the resources actually required to do so. At which point we ourselves will have little to no requirement for money. By just giving Earth everything it wants/needs(as we will have more than we can use) then soon they'll likely decide it's futile, too.

And certainly, automation is A answer. Machines can fix machines - not like people but it's getting better. It can solve a lot of problems, it already has. It's already creating an environment where there's insufficient jobs to support populations, and this isn't a trend expected to change as "AI" and robotics are continually improving and the population is constantly growing.

An excellent case in point here is self-drive vehicles. Already this is common "home" technology, to one extent or another, and becoming more common. Companies like google and uber are poised ready to roll out entire fleets to replace the likes of taxi, companies like renault, mercedes frieghtliner etc are rolling out selfdriving heavy goods vehicles to actually move product distances. In five, ten years time manual control won't even be an option. This will "kill" an entire industry of "employment". Drivers of all sorts of road vehivles will be put into supervisory positions then inevitably removed entirely from the loop. Just that one thing removes a lot of "human work", small percentages overall I'lll grant but as a raw number it'd probably take some time to make them all a cup of tea. It's also likely to kill things like private car ownership - who wants to pay for fueling/maintainence on a car, and worry about storage when not in use when one can turn up to take you where you'd like to go, when you'd like to get there and then dissapear afterwards. New car sales are already dwindling for most manufacturers - this is also a trend not predicted to adjust very much, especially once most vehicles on the road are part of commercial fleets that are self-driven and tend not to smash themselves doing stupid things, like driving whilst drunk, not paying attention to the lights, paying more attention to the makeup in the mirror, texting etc - meaning less replacements required. Combined with the automation in the auto industry there's a whole wealth of employment requirement just absented right there - full cars and parts production requirement reduce simply due to lack of accidents - as this effect trickles into other industries connected and impact them additionally.

Much of the "service industries" shall remain un-impacted for some time, but advancments in "AI" and automation will reach here eventually too. It'll likely never eliminate the requirement for "human labor" but with the presented variables it's not unwise to suggest that the probability lattices are more likely than not to convene into a potential future where within two decades two thirds of the population quite literally have no job. This is why a lot of places are entertaining notions like UBI, basically if 2/3 of the population stops buying things then the companies - including those pure human labour - go busted and other 1/3 then suffer too. Such a concept will actually make it possible for those that deeply entrenched into the current system they cannot envision another possibilty the time for reflection upon the matter and once the physical resource issue gets tidied up it should be a lot easier to drop the futility. Already there is recognition that the current disposable model of operations currently vastly deployed isn't long term viable, and are already switching scope to engineer with generational lifecycles. As opposed to the current avg 3-5yr lifecycle on parts.

Hey Eyer, Because Asgardia currently has no physical territory the nation will be reliant upon other nations for obtaining the necessities such as food, water, clothes, and so on. That being the case Asgardia will be importing far more goods than it creates and will do so for quite a while. In order for Asgardia to be truly independent the nation will need access to resources untouched by the nations of Earth and Asgardia will not have that for quite some time. Realistically, it would take at least a century for Asgardia to reach space and possibly three centuries minimum until Asgardia can mine asteriods for their resources. Asgardia will be dependent on Earth bound nations for everything because nations on Earth. Will have access to far more resources than can ever be produced on a space station!

Even after Asgardia has finally reached space, there will still be things that can only be obtained through trade with Earth. So, unless you can imagine what you desire into existence and can teach every other Asgardian to do so. Asgardia will need a banking system and as far as Asgardia not having territory is concerned. That is not an issue as land can be acquired for that purpose, after all it is far more likely that Asgardia will start out as an Earth bound nation before it becomes space based

No, because we actually have no territory, the citizens of other nations will rely on their native or host nation for "necessities" - Just as they have done for quite some time. Or are you trying to suggest Asgardia should begin to impliment a massive taxation scheme in order to be able to provide for it's citizens as they exist in other countries?

We will actually need somewhere to put our citizens, before it's possible to consider accounting for them. Asgardia isn't going to be importing anything when it doesn't have anywhere to import it to, or any particular reason to be importing it. It'd take you a century to reach space, possibly - This I can readily accept - However, I could probably get something small past the Kármán line by the end of the week with what I can find kicking about if one was so inclined. Wouldn't be that much extra effort on top to get that to a "usable orbit". A couple of years of specific effort and I could possibly be thinking about realistically hauling something significantly more fragile than "cargo". I can definitely beat a century, solo. We can be mining asteroids in less than a few decades, and opening up for not quite ½ a century in a best case senario for amassing sufficient raw materials to build the infrastructure to construct facilites - if we add your output onto mine, then add that to someone who's actually competent etc and I wager we can drop that number further.

With regards to acquiring land on Earth, it's possible to buy a small island somewhere maybe - be interesting to hear how it is suggested this should be paid for and considered into it's long term maintainence, or we could even have one built(that's even more expensive) but realistically, there's very little on the market suitable for our purposes right now, unless you're suggesting we only buy a few buildings or relatively small sites in which specific facilities sit - ignoring associated costs - then that's still things sat in another country unless that site also has diplomatic status and function - which is only words on paper as security at best. It'd be far cheaper just to keep money we need to spend on Earth in Earth banks. Just the regulatory issues with playing with other established facilities is prohibative to setting up a bank, let alone a banking system. That we will only need for a few mins on the scale of existence.

Realistically Earth nations are most unlikley to be eager to rid themselves of their second most valuable comodity, and we would be in no particular position to be offering suitable recompense. It's highly improbable to expect for a charitable donation on this front. Even if land was acquired, securing it would be problematic.

In the sort term, whilst establishing mining facilities etc then yes, Earth will have more bountyfull resources. But once the harvest starts getting thrown back, which with a bit of effort could be happening this side of 2050, the total mass available makes the entire planet look pretty insignificant. If the output of this mining is sliced up and a percentage fed back into replicating itself then flow of resources should steadily increase in frequency and total quantity over time will grow exponentially. Yes, there will be need for terran-based facilities to make this a reality, but it's likely we already have what we need, and can build/buy what remains without significan trauma.

Hey Eyer, No, not at all, I am just being realistic about the chances of Asgardia being self sufficient and do not agree that it will reach such status as quickly as you seem to think possible. Considering that Asgardia's ultimate goal is to be space based and that hazards like radiation present challenges we have yet to solve. Then there is the challenge of getting the space station that is to be Asgardia built and situated in orbit. Getting it built will not be cheap even if you build it in compartments as they do cruise ships and getting it into orbit will also be costly.

It also does not seem as if the idea has been planned out very well either. As for land for Asgardia to acquire nation status all it needs is an island natural or manmade that is two hundred miles from any continent, that has it's own infrastructure, a permanent population of at least two hundred people, a monetary system, a government, and a military. Which would not be very hard to acquire at all and as far as buildings in other nations go. Once Asgardia has obtained nation status all land on which Asgardian facilities reside will be considered as Asgardian soil under the sole juridstiction of Asgardia. So safety will not be as big an issue as you seem to think.

Unless you have found a way to protect the electrical systems of any craft or station from dangers such as high energy particles zipping around space, or micro meteorites, or any other space threat. I honestly do not believe that you could get any type of craft or space station into space in less than a century by your lonesome. You would also need a defense system for the station itself one capable of detecting and destroying any physical threat. To acquire everything needed for Asgardia to become space based and independent to the level you suggest takes far more time than you suggest.

More importantly, everyone in existence would have to agree to do away with the current monetary system for any nation to be able to do without a physical currency and that is not likely to ever happen. So for the purpose of trade Asgardia will need to also have a monetary system in place. Oh, and, for the purposes of trade each nation uses it's own currency as it is easier for them. They just pay the dollar, pound, or whatever currency equivalent of the nation with whom they are trading for the goods they seek and that is then converted by the nation selling the goods into their native currency.

Getting it into orbit isn't just costly, it's unfeasible. Consider the wieght of a small to medium city and then look at the cost per kilo to transfer orbit. For our current population, let alone expansion. Quite literally the only way this is happening is if we take what's already up there and use it. Things like radiation are a problem, but not a significant one. The significant one is the resources to construct stations. Plural. Once you've solved that it's trivial to simply add more mass to increase density and then radiation isn't a problem either.

Asgardia doesn't even need land to acquire nation status - it'd help possibly - but it's not a definitive factor as far as I'm aware. The only "safety" issue with actually having land I would envision is invasion. Ignoring how this island would of been paid for, the infrastructure constructed and fed, etc the military wouldn't be large enough(and ignoring the de-militerised use of space, as this isn't space, but military troops on Earth is really not a good start to preventing Earth's conflicts traversing into space with us) to actually perform any significant defensive role - unless all two hundred was military, and even then you can take out the lot from 20 miles away with a couple of missiles. For things in other countries, they can only be as safe as that country itself. Which commonly isn't anywhere near as safe as most people feel. Especially if that country decides to invade it.

High energy particles are something that increased density may also manage - although some go clean through the Earth with no significant resistence so maybe not. But it doesn't seem to cause any noticable effects. Micrometorites shouldn't pose much resistence to five meters of NiFe skinned in 6CM of titanium - but we can start clearing that up now, and also begin using that as material for expansion. I'm not really bothered by what you choose to believe, it's what I know that counts. It might take more time, but as a best case senario it's certainly feasible to be starting production of serious infrastructure towards 2030-2035, which should allow for farms and other facilities to roll off from 2045 or so until about 2055 or so when mass residential facilities should have sufficient infrastructure surrounding to make long term habitation feasible. Detecting and destroying threats isn't much of a concern, if you'd researched Dr Ashurbeyli you'd know this.

As each nation uses their own currency, why do we need one? we're already chopping and changing to deal with them - another isn't going to help that situation. We don't need a monetary system in place to buy things from them, and that's all that's going down really. We have nothing to offer currently. When we do have something to offer we have no real reason to convert it into "our money" as it's realistically best spent furthering our independance of Earth. And their corrupted systems like currencies. Even that 200 people on an island isn't a good excuse for the headache of rolling out a legit banking system - that's the 200 islanders right there. Just in the banking system. For a system that's useless anywhere but that island, and only relevant to 0.1% of the current population.

Hello Eyer, You keep missing the point which is, Asgardia will not magically be independent right from the word go and as such will have a strong need to engage in trade with the nations of Earth. A need that will not go away for some time after Asgardia has reached space. Also, in order to use the resources available in space to build anything. We first have to have a way of obtaining them in place and we do not. So, all the resources we will need to build the space station that is to be Asgardia will have to come from Earth. I was not honest about my beliefs regarding the claims you have made because I thought that you should be bothered. Because I do not think that and no offense but I do not care if you were or weren't. Of course protecting our nation is and will always be a concern, after all Asgardia is intended by the founder to be the protector of the Earth and the protector can not protect anyone if he does not first protect himself! Yes having land of it's own is a requirement for creating a nation. I researched the requirements a while ago and it was one of them.

Your worries about Asgardia being invaded if it were to first start off as an island nation are paranoid at best. Take Japan for example, Japan is an island nation with a military just big enough to defend itself and Japan has been doing just fine for centuries before western nations even existed! Besides, the true threat would be from the influx of criminals to the nation not an invasion by another nation. It is so very costly to conduct a war by sea. Factor in the fact that any invading nation is not guaranteed to gain anything of value to offset the expenses of sending troops, machinery, and supplies by sea to the front and you can rest assured that no nation is going to be eager to invade! Actually, money is not corrupt it is simply a tool and tools are neutral. Corrupt people just use money to commit evil deeds!

Who said it'd be magically independant from "the word go"? All I said is we will be before we can achieve anything significant, like accounting for our population realistically then we will be defacto independant. Clearly to get to this stage, it will involve trade with Earth, for which Earth currencies are pretty much the only solution. This isn't a requirement to adopt this system for ourselves, as previously mentioned. I'm not entirely certain where your research has managed to impress upon you that posessing land and having a monetary system is a requirement for recognition as a nation but I would strongly suggest that you would possibly need to address the sources you consider trustable for such purpose.

Start doing math. 170k population as it stands - and there's no real sense considering something that doesn't account for everybody - and applicable infrstructure to keep them alive long term. Even if you could afford the insane prices per kilo to get a small to medium sized city into orbit - and that's just the radiation shielding, let alone the thermal dissipation systems which will again need to be about the size of a small city, or the superstructures themselves - the number of trips it would take, plus assembly time would mean everyone that is alive now would be dead long before it's even got all the parts together, let alone assembled. It's likely their grandchildren would be dead. And it will of crippled the Earth in the attempt. Only an absolute moron would be thinking this is a viable propsect for operations. It would take the output of several already existing nations combined to fail at half way when they've collapsed everything around them in the attempt.

Quite literally, the only way this can possibly happen is by taking what's already up there to do so. And yes there is a way to do that, we just have to build and deploy it. It's a little more complex in reality than that statement makes it sound, but it is ultimately that simple.

"Worries" about "invasion" are founded on much previous example of human behaviour. That sort of behaviour is still rife, it is not an undounded concern. Japan is a poor example, as it has far more than 200 in it's defense forces - they are not allowed to posess a military, let alone on the island. 200 isn't enough to do anything, really. And Japan hasn't really been invaded since being nuked towards the end of world war two. It's not very costly to conduct war by sea, especially as it'd be over in five mins or so as being able to secure that island from a well prepared vastly larger force will cost fifty times what the island did(and still fail), plus the setting up the infrastructures to actually make it somewhere you could survive, plus the setting up, training, equiping and supplying a long a term defensive force. Seriously, how was you suggesting this actually be paid for?

Ignore all the useless crap like a banking system(could you even calculate the costs involved with setting that up?), defense forces, law enforcements, governments, etc and focus just on the island, and setting it up for the long term inhabitation of 200 people. Assume an island can be bought(try to find suitable for costing, else math on having built in international waters) as this is cheaper than built, you'll need minimally buildings to live in being built, roads and pavements and other civic architechtures, sanitation infrastructure, assuming the island isn't big enough to farm for 200 people then also you'll require to have supplies shipped in... regular. And all the supplies for building all the previous will require to be shipped in, adding to the base materials and labour costs. These are mostly one-off costs, there's also maintainence costs involved with much of it which will sincerely add up over time, but ignore those for now. Got a number? For less than that I can have facilities put in place that can in decades construct so much more than one island for 200 people. It's not even going to get ½ way into that number and you can have someone "professional" design it. and build a prototype.

It is not money itself that corrupts, but it is indeed a corruption in as much as the persuance of it causes it. It is the acceptance of it that allows for people to be corrupted as they then are able to weigh it heavier than their own moral and ethical values and discard them as they become a willing tool of another. It just becomes a question of what number does it take. There's no particular reason for us to adopt and or promote this system. Sure, there is requirement to utilise it whilst immersed in inside it, but it's not a bubble with no way out. There's loads of ways out, the one I highlighted previously is just likely to be the most painless. Involves a considerable wait, but weighing in overall payback into the equasion it more than makes up for any effort or time expended.

Hello Eyer, Realistically speaking your idea is flawed it requires us to have capabilities we do not before it can even be implemented. We would need to have fleets of mining drones and ore processing plants in space which we do not. With no current way to obtain any resource located in space. We can not yet depend on them for anything. Which leaves Earth as our only way of obtaining the resources and construction materials needed to build the space station that will be Asgardia.

Now, assuming Asgardia were to start as an island nation and was invaded here is the most likely outcome. Asgardia asks nations like the US, Russia, and England for help, they send aid seeing as Asgardia is a peaceful nation that has not bothered anyone, Asgardia wins. Another likely outcome is a nation thinks about invading, realizes there is nothing in it for them, they decide not to invade, and all live happily ever after. Yet another is some nation thinks about invading, sees the cost, and decides it is not worth it. Actually, Japan was the perfect example because there are nations that could run over Japan if they wanted. Yet Japan has not in recent times been invaded by any nation even though they hardly have the military strength to fight off a bigger invading army! The only thing saving Japan is the COST of waging war. The training and transport of troops, upkeep of vehicles such as tanks and personnel carriers, fuel for said vehicles and the ships transporting them, ammunition for said vehicles and troop weapons, and we are not even talking one time costs either but constant spending! The expense of war is why so many nations try to avoid it no one wants that kind of expense staring them in the face.

Especially when they would not be getting anything in return! Also, an island nation would naturally turn to the sea for obtaining food for it's population so that problem is taken care of. An island nation would also take advantage of the fact that it is an island nation and build a resort or two in order to generate a tourism industry and use that money to help maintain it's infrastructure and pay for new additions to it. Due to the low population size the costs associated with building and maintaining the infrastructure needed to get the nation up and running will be low.

As for the cost of getting a space station into orbit while it would be insanely high, it can be lowered by creating new lighter materials designed to deal with radiation and building it in compartments. Of course the most cost effective way would be to build the thing in orbit. Which could be done by taking the individual pieces up and putting them together in space. Of course there is a need for Asgardia to have a monetary system. How would our citizens MAKE A LIVING without money? Also, people could very well end up dead due to people who are not paid for the work they do not doing their jobs correctly. You seem to be under the impression that people will be willing to work for free and basically be slaves. You also seem to think they will work for free and do quality work and in both cases you are mistaken. People need some incentive to do their best while working and that incentive is their pay and at times a promotion/raise. Take those things away from them and all you have left are people doing high stress work in an unforgiving environment. If you want to live in such a nation and risk your neck be my guest. But do not suggest that we all do the same just because you have the mistaken belief that we will not need money in Asgardia.

Oh, and, the need Asgardia has to at least claim if not possess land is to show other nations that we are indeed a serious nation and should be treated as such. Do you honestly think a nation without land will be taken seriously by anyone? Right now Asgardia is a mere concept a nice one for sure but a concept all the same. It has no physical location at all and that makes it extremely difficult to take seriously. If Asgardia was a place one could go to without having to venture into space. It would speed up the entire process, we might even be able to get help getting the systems in place needed for self sufficiency to be obtained and the UN would be more inclined to recognize Asgardia as a nation. Allowing us access to the international community and protection under UN regulations!

It requires nothing not already within grasp, or already within hand.

You clearly don't start with fleets of mining drones, but one by one they add together. You build ore processing plants, in orbit. Then send them closer to where the serious resources are. In the short term they can begin to send them back here. A lot of this can be built from LEO debris reducing the total cost of the operation. Even more so if we have been paid to remove said debris from it's orbital slot.

Again. Start doing the math. 170k people. You're talking 17 gigawatt in thermal energy generated by the organics alone. Using the ISS's 80kw thermal dissipation systems as a loose model, then that's going to be in excess of two hundred square miles of radiator panelling alone. And that's just the hard vacuum facing external loop. Ignore the cost of lifting that much (assumed ammonia) fluid to actually make it function, or the internal loop, or anything else to make it go, work out the cost in lifting the radiator panels from off the floor. It's seriously not happening. Even if you could work out a way to pay for it, then by the time all the transfer slots have lined up and it's actually lifted it's going to be several generations away. And there'll be nothing better up there than radiator paneling. When you've done the math, deliver unto me an estimate - just for the radiator panelling, we'll ignore the rest of everything required but if you really want to prove how unfeasible what you're talking is feel free to add that in. Then try and roadmap up how to come up with that sort of funding, and what sort of timescale we can expect delivery in. Lifting from floor and assembly in orbit is still lifting from the floor and doesn't save anything.

Alternately, you can lift a few bits of equipment, which in comparison is incredibly cheap, that can do almost everything else for you. The likes of 3D printers, CNC combined in the right way with some possibly less than basic recycling facilities can end up producing the bulk of machines. As well as extra "drones" it can make copies of themselves, but with ore processing plants. Already being in orbit the cost of getting it past Mars reduces too. By massively increasing the resource pool you can also do away with facil concepts like compromise on radiation shielding and build everything twice as thick as is needs to. Safety.

It's unlikely the US, Russia or England would be peacocking about the international stage for Asgardia's benefit - unless this happened to co-incidently fall in line with another initative. There's no tangible benefit to engage in conflict. What is on the table for the invading is whatever resources are on the table, minimally land. Disputes over which are still common. You cite expense of war, but it commonly generates revenue - hence it's favour - rather than expires it. When it comes to .gov spending money - it's a fictional resource. They want more they just print it. Pretty simple really. And it really won't cost that much. A few missiles at best, possibly a few thousand rounds. Most wipe more than that out in training. As to the costs involved in running a small island for 170k people +150people/day... Again. Do some math. First start with what it'd take to buy an island of suitability. Then work out what it'll cost to build a small to medium sized city for them, having all the materials and labour shipped to this island, then what it'd cost for all the supporting infrastructure. Then you should be able to get back to me with a loose estimate on what this will cost to setup, a loose roadmap of how we can go about securing this stupendous sinkhole for mass scale finance, and how much this would cost daily to keep running. And what tangible benefits this would provide.

Work isn't "work" when you're doing something you like doing. When you like doing it, it doesn't matter if there's some form of compensation attached or not. Citizens wouldn't be forced to MAKE A LIVING(holding down shift makes what I say right) - living would just be what they do, however they want. Employment as you understand it is likely to be incredibly archaic by the time any of this is happening, and that's just looking at how things are shifting on Earth now. Passion is a much better motivator than money, it means you're only really getting those who want to be there - as opposed to those who don't want to be there and resent it so cut corners as they're busy looking to the clock and trying not to do it or intentionally perform under par as they do not care for the outcome. It'd certainly not be slavery, as the participants would be willing. You don't need to pay someone to stare through a telescope and find a little rock no-one has seen yet - you get the right someone and show them where the telescope is and you'll then have to pry them off it later. They'll turn up again tomorrow not because you pay them, because they want to be there, doing that. Passion is why anything really happens, money just gets in the way and takes the opertunity from the masses and concentrates it into the few.

My belief that money is not required in Asgardia is not mistaken, it's weighed with much deliberation on multiple variables. Anyone with the most basic understanding of economics can realise once the supply hits infinite - which from the perspective of your species short lifetime what is available in the solar system can be considered thus, and further these resources will require to be on tap in order to have hope to procede further - then money is literally, of no value(assuming it actually had some value previously).

Again, you seriously require to address the sources you would consider trustable on such affiars as requiring land to be recognised as a nation, and would possibly be good to question why "in space" was specifically selected as terminology in the opening address defining the concept. I don't see how spending a few hundred billion on a short term project then regularly haemorrhaging a few hundred thousand a month speeds up anything in particular, let alone "the entire process". It just generates mulitple needless(at this point in time) headaches and costs, with no long term gains.

Hello Eyer, I do not need to do the math, the discussion is not about how much it will cost to get things done, it is about the feasability of doing away with a monetary system. You keep talking about the costs of running an island nation for 170k people, who said there would be 170k people living there? The idea is to establish Asgardia as a nation before it ever reaches space and to do that we do not need to establish a nation that can support all 170k citizens right off the bat! We can build up to that point there is no rush. Starting with one drone will take too long and besides we would first need to have facilities in space for these things to be launched from. Which means it will take half a century at the least to even begin to be able to build the facilities needed to implement your plan! You are getting ahead of yourself with the idea. Actually, there is a good chance the nations I mentioned would intervene on Asgardia's behalf. If the nation is positioned in a way as to make it strategically important to any of those nations they will help also the nation may end up having access to resources they either need or can not obtain at home. What would Asgardia have to offer in order to make sending an invasion force profitable for any nation? We are talking about a nation that would be brand spanking new. I keep mentioning the expenses of waging war because they are relevant. Name the last war waged in which the nation that began the hostility did so even though they had nothing to gain? Exactly, you can't, because wars cost billions of dollars and thanks to different variables do not always go as planned. What makes you think Asgardia would need to have building supplies shipped? When it makes far more sense and would save money to use the resources at hand for construction!? As for financing the building of the nation and housing for the starting population of two hundred. You would just do as any intelligent person would do and take advantage of the fact that your nation is an island nation. By building a resort or two in order to generate a tourism industry. You also building a fishing fleet and use money from having a fishing industry. After all tourism would be a big part of a newly founded nation's economy until other industries are developed and begin to thrive.

Actually, that was not my thought process at all, I simply wanted to emphasis the make a living part because money is a huge part of making a living. Asgardian's will need to turn to Earth based companies for items they will not be able to get at home if they lived in space and they will need money for obtaining those items. So, work is not work if you are doing something you like how is that even relevant? You honestly think that people will work high stress jobs for people that might add to the stress level of said job and do quality work just because they are passionate about said work!!? Sorry but that is complete rubbish, we are not talking simple jobs but jobs that puts the live and fate of the entire nation into the hands of these people. That is a tremendous responsibility to entrust to someone let alone a non paid someone. What happens if they reach their breaking point and become disgruntled or when they lose their passion for the job? They could possibly kill every last Asgardian is what! All it would take is someone in charge of the environmental systems becoming stressed out and saying screw it before sabotaging those systems and ensuring that the citizens run out of oxygen and drinking water! Remember space is the final destination for Asgardia and once out in space Asgardia will be on it's own.

So, yes your belief that Asgardia can do without a monetary system is mistaken. You naively assume that everything will be perfect and that there will not be any problems or unseen emergencies. Dreaming is nice and all but, dreamers have no place in the creation of a nation. They are more helpful once the nation has been established and is stable. My species short lifetime? You say that as if you are not human, if you aren't human then what are you? That is just it the supply of resources available to Asgardia is not infinite and will not be for quite some time. They may eventually reach said point but the nation has to exist and have the ability to obtain them first!

Hello Eyer, I do not need to do the math, the discussion is not about how much it will cost to get things done, it is about the feasability of doing away with a monetary system. You keep talking about the costs of running an island nation for 170k people, who said there would be 170k people living there? The idea is to establish Asgardia as a nation before it ever reaches space and to do that we do not need to establish a nation that can support all 170k citizens right off the bat! We can build up to that point there is no rush. Starting with one drone will take too long and besides we would first need to have facilities in space for these things to be launched from. Which means it will take half a century at the least to even begin to be able to build the facilities needed to implement your plan! You are getting ahead of yourself with the idea. Actually, there is a good chance the nations I mentioned would intervene on Asgardia's behalf. If the nation is positioned in a way as to make it strategically important to any of those nations they will help also the nation may end up having access to resources they either need or can not obtain at home. What would Asgardia have to offer in order to make sending an invasion force profitable for any nation? We are talking about a nation that would be brand spanking new.

I keep mentioning the expenses of waging war because they are relevant. Name the last war waged in which the nation that began the hostility did so even though they had nothing to gain? Exactly, you can't, because wars cost billions of dollars and thanks to different variables do not always go as planned. What makes you think Asgardia would need to have building supplies shipped when it makes far more sense and would save money to use the resources at hand for construction!? As for financing the building of the nation and housing for the starting population of two hundred. You would just do as any intelligent person would do and take advantage of the fact that your nation is an island nation. By building a resort or two in order to generate a tourism industry. You also build a fishing fleet and use money from having a fishing industry. After all tourism would be a big part of a newly founded nation's economy until other industries are developed and begin to thrive.

Actually, that was not my thought process at all, I simply wanted to emphasize the make a living part because money is a huge part of making a living. Asgardian's will need to turn to Earth based companies for items they will not be able to get at home if they lived in space and they will need money for obtaining those items. So, work is not work if you are doing something you like how is that even relevant? You honestly think that people will work high stress jobs for people that might add to the stress level of said job and do quality work just because they are passionate about said work!!? Sorry but that is complete rubbish, we are not talking simple jobs but jobs that puts the live and fate of the entire nation into the hands of these people. That is a tremendous responsibility to entrust to someone let alone a non paid someone. What happens if they reach their breaking point and become disgruntled or when they lose their passion for the job? They could possibly kill every last Asgardian is what! All it would take is someone in charge of the environmental systems becoming stressed out and saying screw it before sabotaging those systems and ensuring that the citizens run out of oxygen and drinking water! Remember space is the final destination for Asgardia and once out in space Asgardia will be on it's own.

So, yes your belief that Asgardia can do without a monetary system is mistaken. You naively assume that everything will be perfect and that there will not be any problems or unseen emergencies. Dreaming is nice and all but, dreamers have no place in the creation of a nation. They are more helpful once the nation has been established and is stable. My species short lifetime? You say that as if you are not human, if you aren't human then what are you? That is just it the supply of resources available to Asgardia is not infinite and will not be for quite some time. They may eventually reach said point but the nation has to exist and have the ability to obtain them first!

Yes, you really do need to start doing math, that's an intrinsic part of a fesibility study. I note how you'd avoided getting anywhere near actual numbers involved with such an operation. Or for getting a station of suitability lifted from the floor. Or where this money would likely be found. There's likely a reason behind this, if only I could figure out what...

I get the idea of 170k from the (loosely) 170k that signed up. Realistically anything that is planned should account for all of them, or it encourages a divide amongst us caused by those of special privlige and those with not. This needs to happen right away or it'll never happen - certainly not within the lifetime of most, with costing ½ the station material costs to setup and doing the other ½ in the next ten years of operating - and the damages caused from attempting it will be much greater than the damages caused by waiting until you can account for everyone. To take a facil figure like 200 citizens, 0.01% out of the 170k that signed up, how would you propose these elite 200 who get to live on Asgardia's wonderful island be selected? and then supported long term... Unless each one has specific role then 200 isn't enough to make something of that scale work, so you would also need to add the employment and transport of larbour for all the infrastructures into the cost additionally.

The idea is indeed to establish Asgardia as a nation before anything goes into space, in order to retain rights over what is put into space - in line with the international outer space treaty. However, you don't need land to do this. Or a monetary system. Just recognition from other nations that you are indeed a nation.

Starting with one drone won't take too long because by the end of the day it will of harvested enough material to make two drones. Day two Four drones. Day three Eight drones. Day four Sixteen drones. Day five Thirty two drones. Day six Sixty Four drones - it really won't take that long at all. On the scale of it. We'll be operating exponentially. In less than a year after deployment there can be tens of thousands(realistically a lot less will be needed, or used and whithout other facilities expanding to suit production will not be that fast - but the potential is there, and when this builds self-expanding/self-replicating mining facilities such becomes viable at distances greater than LEO, where it really matters) - and that's just in LEO, ignoring all the ones sent off to intercept asteroids, adjust their orbits - if it's small enough parking it for processing. Yes, this will require facilities. But that's not an impossible task to accomplish, it's certainly cheaper to do that than buying an island and attempting to build and run a nation long term on there. And all the facilities will be in place to help compliment the output of mining operations, as much as spingboard the mining operations themselves. I wouldn't start with one either, I'd use at least three, possibly six and lift enough "consumables" for fitting a dozen more with the facilities ready for when they tow in the scrap. It'll add a couple of hundred kilo to the lift, but it'd save several tonnes in completed drones.

There is incredibly little chance of Asgardia becoming "strategically important" to any of the nations you have previously listed, we don't really have any big stocks of oil that they would like or othersucuh and basically the inevitable long term outcome of our operations will make a couple of pies they've been baking taste quite sour. There is literally no incentive for this protection. We certianly have little to offer. Maybe if there was something nearby anyway you'd stand a chance. This is definitely something you'd want to be confirming, in writing, before transfering funds for the land. But you've not even looked into what this would cost and claim it's feasible. Unless you're having this island built in international waters, which should up the cost slightly, then the surrounding waters are more than likely to be somone elses for significant distances, especially if they are known good fishing stocks. Thanks to things like industustrial havestings of the oceans and the half-decade mulit-terrabequrel spill from Fukashima lapping in the ocean currents steadily building particulate concentrations, global fish stocks are plummeting and I don't predict many places will be eager to pass off their territorial rights regarding. Fishermen get funny about that sort of thing.

Tourism is an interesting concept. Come see the island of 200 special people! See where they live, and pour milk on their cornflakes!. Marvel at how little civic infrastructure $200,000,000,000USD can setup and $100,000 a day can maintain! Bring money! And your own sandwiches as all our food has 400% added for shipping. I'm sure if you would setup a website prebooking tickets you'd be able to use that money to buy an island of dirt for them to visit, and from the next set of tickets if any, build a shed...

Asgardians shouldn't require to turn to Earth based companies for items they can't get at home in space, because quite simply there shouldn't be anything they can do we can't do as good or better. Even if they'd specifically want these things then they shouldn't need money, as such. To ignore concepts like personal productive capacity being more likely than not to be commonplace our industrial capacities will need to be of the sort of scale to produce not only where we will be living but what we will be wanting once we live there. Or it's not going to be happening. Lifting it from the floor is not cost effective, ensuring it survives re-entry and is equiped with descent arrest is trivial. There will be much goods for exchange, assuming the industrial processes have not entirely been encouraged away from Earth and kept on contained orbital facilities where the harmful pollutants can be entirely captured - Or the outputs of asteroid mining will leave piles of raw materials that literally cannot be consumed as fast as the exponentially increasing mining. Somone somewhere might swap one for a tonne of platinum or something else far more common up there than down here and by extent of it's abundance pretty much worthless to us.

Quite bluntly, I don't expect anyone to do anything, but do what they choose. "Work" is something we should have next to no use of by the time any of this happens, and within the next decade or so will change form vastly on Earth too. You can continue to think this is complete rubbish, all I ask is you youtube the moment you inescapably enter reality - I'm sure it's something that will be of amusement to others. You seem to have formed some dangerous preconception that paying someone to complete a task somehow implies they are somewhat competent at the task to begin with. At no point in time did I suggest unqualified people be allowed to attempt servicing on critical life support that are in operation, but should anyone attempt such sabotage then the alogrithym checking that part of the sensor loop spots abnormalities in the data reported and disables that part of the system and schedules it for maintainence. The presence of money in the equasion does not mitigate the possiblilty, or adjust the outcome. It certainly doesn't counter disgruntlement. It can buy distraction but ultimately the problem will resurface.

Post character limit achieved, split to next.

Someone trying to do something stupid with the environmental support wouldn't be allowed by the environmental support systems themselves. Again, solved at design level. All the serious things wouldn't even have controls, anyway, they only need one setting: on. Everything else is auto. Anything that would have potential long reaching safety concerns would require additional authorisation. Think two keys too far apart for one man to reach in a launch silo. You don't leave it possible for one person to kill everyone. Well, I wouldn't. Clearly you would which is why this is such a concern, but don't worry people that know what they are doing would be building this. People that even make me look unprofessional will likely be doing this. Unless you vent it into space then you shouldn't run out of anything either, it's all constantly cycled. It's not as if there's going to be windows with little handles inside for people to open. The toilets are not going to flush into hard vacuum. Most likely this will be processed and eventually launched to farms. The internal pressure hull is commonly hermatically sealed - the only way in/out is the airlock(s) and that only gets you as far as the next airlock in the next hull(and would refuse to withdraw the lock bolts unless the next area is pressurised equal - no loss).

Certainly my belief Asgardia has no requirement for a monetary system is not mistaken. Again it is factored on the balance of many existing variables and trends. I can assure you not everything will be perfect, that's a hard bar to achieve especially where humans are involved as each will have a conflicting view of what this is, but any serious problem will of been solved before it's even entered the design phase, let alone left the design phase, Or even the act of starting construction will be dangerous, and irresponsibly so. We should feature no particular desperation enough to consider engaging in such behaviours. Certainly the presence of money isn't going to eliminate any particular concern, and will definitely enhance several. There won't be any unforseen emergencies because between now and then there's a lot of time to be thinking about the problems, and how to solve them. Or better, how to make them solve themselves with another problem. There's actually few that require solving the rest already having been solved previously. There are ofc always "better" solutions posisble in some cases but what remains to be solved being simply associated with operating at this scale. Some systems don't scale to well to that capacity. Almost everything has been seen before, so unknown events are quite minimal. The only naivety present is your own. Caused by indoctinerating yourself so heavily into your existant fiscal system that you literally cannot envision another alternate system as being viable as it would threaten many core concepts you need to keep telling yourself to be able to cope with operating in that system. Dreamers have every place in the creation of a nation - That's how you end up with something better than what already exists as opposed to just a clone of the same under a different name, with the same deficits and destined only to demonstrate the same failure points - but this dreaming must be tempered by reality as cold and as harsh as space itself in order to assure suitability for purpose. You seem to think I only concentrate on the dreams, and not how it can be made to happen. Which is the important part, and the second part I consider. The first part I always consider is: how will this fail? - The first question you should be asking in a feasibility study. This helps build a map of what needs to be addressed in order to be made to work. Especially in light of the return, it's worth what little effort it actually is.

The nation existing happens with or without currency, as a currency isn't a defining property of a nation. It would also need to exist as a nation first in order to retain rights over equipements we would put in space. Once we are recognised as a nation then we can worry about the equipment. If we can't get recognition then it might get interesting evading space fence and NORAD etc. After that it's just generally waiting for the payback(there's more to it than that, obviously. But the most are required to do nothing more than wait). Yes there will be a few decade wait involved before any significant progress is notable, and during that time we will almost certainly be requiring to utilse money as part of trade with Earth. But again, this is not a defacto requirement to adopt this system of operation for ourselves beyond this point or for any other purpose - operating in enforced scarcity in a post scarcity enviroinment in order to feature match the forcing of people to slave themselves for survival as per Earth nations is at best barbaric and somewhat masochistic - nor would it represent a requiement for us to fabricate a currency of our own, adding another problem into a 234 problem pile. You may take the attitude that this "may happen" I prefer to take the engineering certainty of making it happen, solving any problem that presents itself in order to make it happen. Still not enocuntered a significant problem. Certainly not one that would make me cease further effort. It will doubtless take some effort to make it reality, but to be honest, I'll be doing most of that anyway with other things. I less than three modular design. The extra effort involved with making it suitable for purpose will not be that much overall, and like much of what I do distribution across geographically remote locations will ensure success of at least one section, even if I was to cross the road and be hit by a bus tomorrow. It's happening. Tock follows tick.

Hello Eyer, I do not need to do any math because facts that disprove the feasibility of the idea have already been presented by me and acknowledged by you. The main one being international trade. Another being the fact that even we Asgardians do not agree that it is feasible for Asgardia to not have a monetary system! Before Asgardia can even entertain the idea of not having a monetary system, we citizens all have to agree on the idea and we don't therefore it is not possible. Buying an island large enough to support a population of two hundred is far cheaper than trying to buy one able to support 170k people. So are the costs of building and maintaining it's infrastructure and considering that. The idea is to give Asgardia a physical location so it's chances of being recognized as a nation improves. You would have to be dim to try and build a nation able to support one hundred seventy thousand people. When it costs far more than building one to support just two hundred people. In fact the former idea would be a huge waste of financial resources that could go to taking care of other important Asgardian matters! What people would I choose to send? I would choose from the folks who's native lands do not allow dual citizenship and contrary to your belief that does not make them elite nor would it cause a division among our people.

Having land of our own would make folks more inclined to recognize Asgardia as a nation. In the general discussion sub category someone asked is Asgardia a fraud and that person is a citizen! When your own citizens doubt the validity of the concept why would you expect for others to do the opposite? Especially when Asgardia does not exist as anything more than a concept at this point! To truly show Asgardia to be a serious nation and that it should be treated as such, Asgardia needs a physical location like an island. Otherwise it all looks like some elaborate scheme.

Actually, I have the understanding that even qualified people need an incentive to do the job they are charged with and do it with a sense of professionalism. We are talking about folks who will end up monitoring systems that place the lives of every Asgardian citizen in their hands. That is quite a stressful responsibility to bare on it's own. Factor in the added stress of working for a boss that maybe a jerk or working with coworkers who maybe jerks and the fact that these people are not being paid for their work and you have the perfect recipe for a ticking time bomb who could destroy the entire nation! As for the one setting idea for systems that mattered that is simply foolish. Not having the ability to turn off systems that matter would allow for the spread of any malfunctions that may have caused the environmental systems to have failed in the first place and there is a way around everything so the additional authorization idea is no guarantee against the tampering with of critical systems! Sure, it is a good idea but by no means is it fail proof. I could easily get around the additional authorization protocol, so can anyone else who wants to. Actually, if I knew for a fact that the person was liable to tamper with the systems no I would not put them in a position where they could do so. However, I am no mind reader so I could not possibly know that ahead of time.

I can however, estimate the possibility of that happening by analyzing the factors in the equation and a non paid worker will only put up with so much before snapping. Besides, by not paying your workers you leave them open to being financially exploited by folks with agendas and some of those folks are known as terrorists! You would have introduced a massive security breach unintentionally by not paying people who should be paid for the work they do! That is another reason why folks are paid for the work they do. So they have no need to turn elsewhere for the money they need to get the necessities of life. Please save all your idealistic dreams they are of no help to us currently. We need realistic views while trying to build this nation not lofty unobtainable dreams

Yes, you desperately need to do some maths. Or at least start thinking about what you are saying.

International trade is not defacto reason within itself to develop our own currency, Plenty of currencies already exist - and ultimately these are what will be used for this purpose, so invalidates creating our own even further. It's also not a particularly good excuse for and provides no viable reason for continuation of this trend within our own borders. The fact you cannot see a viable system sans currency in this point in time is pretty moot, as this won't be happening for some time, and when it does the landscape of many things will be vastly different, and much of these changes are happening soon - in less than ten years the increase in populations combined with the reduction in job aspects humans can fulfill alone, let alone any other factors, suggests either some equivical concept similar to universal basic income - rewriting the entire premise of employment for most - will be in place in most countries on the globe so their citizens can continue to buy things in order to keep their hideously flawed economies working, helping people see the futility of fiscal systems further - another option is there will be mass criminal behaviour as the two thirds of the global population that are unable to be be employed due to the general lack of available job positions will wreck most things for most people as they just try to survive, and the other option would be a mass culling. I'd like to think at least for a few generations UBI-esque schemes would be given a chance - and by then we can collectively solve every problem involved with removing the fiscal concept in it's entirety.

Buying an island for 200 people is significantly cheaper. It's still a significant investment. One you seem adamant not to actually investigate the feasibility of persuing. This is telling of much of the faith in your plans. The purchase costs are still significant, the transport costs on the materials will be as much or greater than most of the materials required to build the civic infrastructures for supporting 200 people(likley requiring more than 200 people to effectively operate, and still be heavily dependant on external sources for much) and residential domiciles for said 200. To qoute yourself this is a huge waste of financial resources that could go into taking care of other important Asgardian matters - things that effect more than the 200 specially selected people. And yes, if you'd studied either human behaviour - primate behaviour generally - or history your would know the power of division in social groups of those who have and those who have not.

Having land would possibly enhance the perception of being a nation, but it is certainly not a requirement. Maybe if one was to attempt via conformation to the declarative theory of statehood, but as this ultimately hinges on the recognition requirement from other nations as indeed being a nation you can skip all the previous of the declarative theory and just forumate upon the constitutive theory of statehood as that is more assured and far, far, far cheaper. It's also not a particularly good argument to support the notion that deeply infecting us with the same crippling greed as Earth would be within our long term interests. It certainly fails to add any validty to a "nation in space" as a concept.

The way you have been taught to think makes you operate on the understanding incentive is required in order to provide quality output. As opposed to skill or passion or some other variable that tangibly effects the output by itself. Monitoring systems isn't a stressful job, really, they can be made to monitor themselves for the most part. Even if it was possible to be manually monitored, it'd actually be someone else that takes care of any problems. But should you of been bothered to of looked into any of this you'd be well aware how all the sensor network would likely be ACO tuned and "AI" would take care of the lot. You'd end up with someone that bored with looking at graphs of systems designed to fail every few generations - as opposed to the current deficited 3-5yr lifecycle on parts - they require to use of exclaimation marks at the end of their poorly thought out disaster senario to help spread fear and panic in the unthinking! Society is doomed! fear and panic, someone might snap whilst looking at graphs and end us all! You can factor out the stress of being the boss, because you have the "perfect" job, but the boss is a knob, you just go and work for someone else. They're not going to find many people to work for them after a while - and why would they have the need to be working for someone else? Why are they not doing what they'd want to be doing? simple really. Not that "jobs" are likely to exist as you currently understand them. But again, the slightest bit of attention to the world around you and you'd realise this. Like you'd realise you don't turn the system off, if it fails, it turns itself off. If it ever gets to failure. The AI monitoring the sensor telemetry should spot abnormalities and flag it for investigation/servicing/replacement well before failures. If it fails that hard it can't stop, the next thing up takes care of it and isolates it of power entirely if needs must - it's called sensible design structure of sensor networks. It doesn't effect other systems or other parts of this system because they are distributed and generally flow around the problem. The additional auth is assurance from tampering with anything that matters, because attempts otherwise will be rapidly noticed. The fact people could tamper with these systems is why you'd deploy "AI" wherever possible in the chain. Things need to react faster than people, with far more care to details.

The amount of stress someone will put up with before they snap isn't based on the financial compensation they recieve. If they will snap, they will snap and that's all there is to that. No amount of money changes this. It might change how many will be attempting, and by that measure assuring to hit a higher number that will snap. As evidenced by all the breakdowns in high paid positions. It's not a small number annually. But who needs to do math? we can just say anything and hope someone is dumb enough to fall for it. By not paying your "workers", they have no incentive to take "bribes" because it is their want to see this succeed that made them volunteer in the first place. Especially if this rolls out to a direct democracy model of government it'd be like slapping yourself in the face. There's more chance of someone signing up with specific aim of. But then there's no assurances they'll get near somewhere "useful". As everything they need will be taken care of, and everything they want can be provided unto beyond exhaustion - just to be able to get to a stage where it's realistically feasible to account for our population long term in the stars, this will not just be possible but assured - it's difficult to find something to bribe them with. And you don't generate security breaches by using entirely unpaid staff. I'd love to know which security manual you'd picked that nugget out of, I should like to have it framed. It doesn't really matter about Terrorists! because companies like CIA and Mi6 should have little specific interest in us, the generalised open source nature of operations serving to satify their curiosity whilst confirming we are no viable long term threat and would have abnormal difficulty placing operatives into places and or positions wherin it's possible to cause significant effects - and even should this be a possibility then to what aim? we're not going to war with anyone even if we can be convinced someone else is responsible.

Idealistc dreams? possibly. It would be far more accurate to describe it as a realistic appraisal based on the variables currently exhibited, and features spotlighted to head towards combined with what we would actually require. It's not just obtainable, it's happening. It's just a lot easier to not put up a system than tear it down in less than 100 years as it's just a waste of time and effort.