Thanks for the feedback - appreciated!
Thanks - appreciated!
Hi Ruby, since I've actually given this topic some thought I'm gonna delurk for once. The issue I have with FHI's space papers is that they basically pay no attention to questions of governance. Being able to reach things and being able to coordinate/control things are two very different things. Space is way too big for central control. Even in the Milky Way you'd probably need something in the ballpark of 100'000c for a central government to make sense. Consequently, we probably overestimate the degree to which space settlement is controllable and the constant usage of the term "colonization" is confusing, if not plainly wrong. I wrote a more comprehensive version (ca 45 minutes reading time) of this argument here: https://medium.com/@KevinKohlerFM/cosmic-anarchy-and-its-consequences-b1a557b1a2e3
Yes, I think you're right. For context: I am writing on a general audience book so I need to close some inferential steps before getting to the more "juicy" stuff but I agree that on LW I could probably straight up post stuff like "A solar system commons trust is superior to the Outer Space Treaty and could help to fund a global UBI"