One thing about space law that's often overlooked is that much of it is the result of treaties. The Outer Space Treaty, for instance. And treaties can be rescinded. And it's not like you can deny the ability to go into space to a nation that already has that capacity. Which means the future of space law, and indeed the future of humanity in space, kinda relies on us maintaining good diplomatic relations between major space powers. However atm we're quite far from that ideal. Also remember that the Outer Space Treaty is all that's keeping us from putting nukes in space, not technical limitations. So we really don't want ties here on Earth to get much worse...
@@Celestial_Reach Are you referring to things like China's manufacturing of dubiously legitimate islands in the South China Sea in order to assert control over large areas of open water and the resources under it?
People ask who'd need the insane amounts of energy a Dyson swarm would produce. But they've never wondered how much red tape you need to produce to effectively cordon off space.
@@altha-rf1et Define "it". Also, I'm not sure the US is the best example for overly many regulations. I do feel sorry for your political system though.
@@limbo3545 depending on what you mean by "locally", that might be true. Probably at least means a world government, not something people ranting about "tHe gLoBaLisTs" on Twitter these days would call "local" :D
@@unvergebeneid Who cares what you do on your asteroid in the kuiper belt as long as you don't throw rocks at the inner planets? And additionally to that: Who can control scattered populations of people over the whole solar system?
If regulations can ever be used to harm their competition, you can bet your eternal soul that some corporate officer will be willing to gleefully assign hundreds or even thousands of millions of dollars as nothing more than the price of keeping competition to a minimum.
I am pretty sure we have lucked out on the tech tree that we have perfected so that regardless of what economic and legal frameworks we use ; material goods will have no more value after we have a decent perm. space center or colony. That is to say, automation and self repair of wear compnants is good enough already, and computers are realiable enough that having any presense where astroids and mokns can be mined will already leave us in a post scaricity world if by nothing else then an employee of Amazon or SpaceX on the moon deciding to get cheecky and send out a clanking self replicator to bring back all the materials these companies might try to hide via artificial scarcity. (remember it is easier to manufacture in space, just harder to design for vacuums because welding is TO easy in a vacuum) And I kind of dont want that to be how we actually enter post scarcity. Even though I defenitly do not want glory hogs getting undue attention and gobbling up more rewards then they earn, I also still want people to get credit both good and bad for the work theyve done, and thats not going to happen with a "pirate" self replicator sent out to destory the current system; rather requiring humanity to write a new system that aknowledges our state of advancement and honors it for the freedoms that our frankly very near to post scaricity world should allow us.
Tfw in the year 2045 your small business sets up an automatic mining facility and a space habitat for scientists and management, but a big corporation bribes the government so they tell you to take it down. And the hippies say we need more government because we aren't expanding into space fast enough to save the environment.
I really can't see capitalism surviving into space. It's a risky, dangerous, and immensely costly project - so much higher than any Earth venture. Look at how much we've spent, and it's only been for small-scale exploration! Command economy, with cooperation between multiple large-economy nations, seems almost a prerequisite. This is one branch of futurism that I think gets overlooked; how would an economy be organized and controlled in the future? Who would control it? There are different options, and the reality may be far different than what we expect, but it's not just going to be our current system, just IN SPAAAAACE.
@@borbo23 Perhaps in the very earliest beginning (i.e. what we have already done), when we are still learning how not to die in all the new horrible ways space offers and every single part has to be brought in from home, but space is... *Checks notes*... Really really really big, and lots of people will have plenty of reason to go there, even if they aren't trying to be part of the economy of the rest of the species. Plus I don't think that most people understand that the hardest part of designing space worthy craft so far has been designing them so that they survive in space and more importantly that they survive getting there from the surface of the Earth. Once you take away the second aspect of the equation you start getting craft that can be made for not much more than the cost of a house or even less depending on the design and all of a sudden space becomes very accessible to even the average joe, even if it is still expensive. And while there are plenty of economic reasons to go to space (mostly space resources would stay in space once the economy up there is established because it's just easier to get and keep space stuff in space) there are tons of reasons that aren't economic to go there as well. After all, the American colonies were founded by a bunch of oddballs who didn't like what their government was doing to them and eventually decided that it really was better to be separate, even if that meant they had to figure things out for themselves in a very new and dangerous land. I can't possibly think of any group of people who might fit similar criteria and who might endorse a free market system...
Funnily enough, privately owned ships and boats are not legally allowed to have mounted weapons, even for defence against piracy (even within the US-right to bear arms???). As such, that precedent could mean if photon torpedoes and phasers were to be used, individual security officers would need to roll down the window and shoot handheld phaser rifles and photon torpedo bazookas 😂
One thing about space law that's often overlooked is that much of it is the result of treaties. The Outer Space Treaty, for instance. And treaties can be rescinded. And it's not like you can deny the ability to go into space to a nation that already has that capacity. Which means the future of space law, and indeed the future of humanity in space, kinda relies on us maintaining good diplomatic relations between major space powers. However atm we're quite far from that ideal. Also remember that the Outer Space Treaty is all that's keeping us from putting nukes in space, not technical limitations. So we really don't want ties here on Earth to get much worse...
As much as I enjoy your videos about technological possibilities, your videos about social futurological topics like this and the recent ethics of uplifting are my favorites. With how fast technology is developing today, I think it's so important that our social creations like law and ethics, traditionally conservative in most cultures and built a posteriori, adapt to be forward-looking and built a priori, and generating thoughtfulness and discussion with content like this is a huge part of making that happen! Thanks so much and please keep it coming!
How do we decide to whom bodies in space belong to? The same way we've always decided the ownership of some new bit of real estate. They belong to whomever gets there with enough rocks to drive away other interested parties.
I really enjoyed this episode, mainly because it really doesn't say much about space regulations and just kicks the discussion down the line and considering how I feel most current regulation is made by the rich and powerful to suit their wants/needs at the time, it feels like the right perspective. Nothing too preachy or substantial, just when the time comes for somebody to make money, everybody is going to want to wet their beak and get a bit of the pie so how are we ever going to figure out how they will regulate it. Also, how are we going to figure if the EU is going to want to protect their mining from American intervention or if China will just claim areas and not care about what others say. Basically at the end of the day, it will come down to 2 things. Who has money and who is in power. They are literally going to be the only ones that matter in a conversation about space. If you want to start talking about law and order where it could take years to send somebody to check up on them, good luck with that. Nobody is going to take anybody seriously when you tell them to get lost and they come back with a piece of paper and say "Ooh, just you wait, if I send this signal with a complaint, in just 3 years, a ship might show up with somebody to try and calm you down." The one big fail I think this clip had however was the talk about legal responsibility when it came down to the asteroid hitting London. Look at the modern day for your answer there. We have ships carrying oil all over the place, they are registered as their own legal entities and companies. They are operating under loss conditions for multi billion dollar companies. They have no liability. What are you going to hold responsible, some poor captain on a long haul that probably won't even be needed since you just launch it from a catapult of sorts and wait for it to arrive? Modern equivalents already have shown us that this is just a fairy tale, the framework is already here and if you think people are going to open themselves up for more liability in the future because they hate their own companies, yeah, no. . .
Weird question, but can a galactic scale institution or legislation count as megastructure? You ringworld is cool, but is it as cool as having standard nut and screw available on every habitable world of the galaxy and beyond?😅
@@jasond130just stock up on 1/4”to 11/16” and 8mm to 14mm you should be good. Or you could find a way to retrieve them from that mysterious void inside the vehicles I’ve worked on over the years.
As contractual as they are, the First, Second and Fourth amendments are unambiguous in their wording with no rational wiggle room, yet lawyers have found a way to argue that despite their explicit, clear and unambiguous nature they somehow leave room for the one thing they explicitly ban from being done and courts have accepted that something being banned outright isn't explicit enough for it to be banned.
A lot of that is due to the differences of language from today and 200 years ago. A major sticking point in the American 2A is whether you can completely ignore a prefacing statement, and another is what the meaning of "the people" is. Are "the people" meant to mean every single person, or the body as a whole? Does the preface mean the protection exists solely for communities to be able to form militia for defense, or can it be ignored so Clyde can have his AT-4 and Al Quaeda's worth of small arms in his paranoia bunker?
@@kirknay The problem with that line of reasoning is that we can see through both actions and elaboration through writing that your example of the second amendment is, without ambiguity, at least that anything up to naval weaponry for ships is included in the "government can't do anything to stop you getting your hands on it with no ambiguity" list, a proper debate would basically be limited exclusively to WMDs and high yield conventional ordinances like MOABs with most laws relating to weapons being unambiguously unconstitutional. Which shows the point of how powerful the intentional misinterpretation of words in legal documents can be given the debate is today entirely on to which degree of illegal is society willing to tolerate given the fight is for tolerating the illegal rather then if it's illegal.
@@ZontarDow And that is exactly why the founding fathers wanted us to completely trash and rewrite the constitution every 21 years or so, but instead we decided to wholeheartedly latch onto 2 century old documents because of both laziness, and peoples' ability to abuse tf out of it for various ends.
There already is some case law concerning liability for objects in space. My understanding is that NASA had to pay a fine to Australia for littering with the de-orbiting Skylab.
that is the problem, they did not had to, they just payed, mostly to maintain good relationship. also helped that the 'fine' was minuscule, so it was obvious pr benefit. the first major case, where billions will be the stake will be the actual test of any of those regulations and willingness to obey.
Yes, they didn't have to pay, also in many countries laws are not considered as "predecent" as usa does, same for who pays for lawyers - it doesn't always go to losing side to pay 100%.
Sheriff - I"'m the law see the star on my badge." "I don't recognize the authority of that star badge" Sheriff - "Ok, then perhaps all the stars out in space, when eject you out of the space lock!!"
I think the best way for regulations to actually work in space is if governments actually take the first initiative to build up space infrastructure, instead of corporations. Things like building observation posts, means of transport to space, etc. will allow for these governments to better enforce their laws, but this gets more difficult with distance.
IMHO, anything past low earth orbit would be lawlessness. There's a strong possibility the Moon could be the "Wild West" based on today's technology. It all comes down to the economics of enforcing regulations.
:) And he an I interact basically daily too, so silly of me not to have thought to ask, though I know a lot of us longer-time creators get a bit burnt out by collabs, so I rarely ask because it can be a big imposition. Devin's take on the matter probably would have been awesome though, he's a great guy
I can see them being the most respected department of the system's government. Nobody wants to be hit by a stray hammer, so they tend to be very supportive of the regulations that minimise the chances of that, and cheer on the space-littering fines that bankrupt careless slobs.
So Glad your covering this Isaac, & leads to whole area of legalities re many scifi issues { person hood rights & responsibilities across species /alien, A.I. replicants etc..}., & of course sorting out current terrestrial law - crosses over astro- economics /politics. I tend to think lets get our earth based house in order re international law, before wild westing the space horizon ..... but this not how history so far has worked. Youve inspired me to look into the philosophy of Law as close cousin to the need to look at the philosophy of Science & History too
Honestly considering the distances, the rocket equation and the ludicrous amount of stuff up in space. For a long time to come. The owner is whom ever gets their first and surrounds their claims with MACs as their complaints departments. In case anyone has a problem with it.
I doubt that very much. The necessary defences (read that as: enough defences that any given glaim jumper cannot buy sufficient missiles to blow up your MACs) would be prohibitively expensive for anyone who is not a state, exactly BECAUSE of the rocket equation. So the rules will be made by states, and if a private organisation thinks they can ignore those, they will find themselves slapped with fines and tariffs. Which might drive space development in its own right, mind you. Can't slap me with tariffs if my main market is off planet...
@@Alexander_Kale You must be new here because in a fusion economy. The price of, well, everything, falls through the floor. And like I said, about the ludicrous amount of stuff up in space. There are literally millions of asteroids larger than mount Everest. In the asteroid belt alone. Expanding the military power needed to try to dislodge an entrenched position is far, far larger the to just go to the next asteroid over.
@@vi6ddarkking Your initial argument specifically referred to a limited ability to put stuff in place. So in other words, your own scenario assumes a price limit. I merely adhered to your scenario. And no, blowing up your MACs will not require more money than building said MACs and putting them into place. As gets repeatedly mentioned on this channel, torpedoes have an inherent advantage over every other form of spaceship, because they do not need to slow down. If anything, a scenario like the one you envisioned would be enormusly expensive, because everyone would require to spend ludicrous amounts of money on defenses, thus increasing the price on the final product. And yes, that matters, even in a fusion economy, because you still have to spend the resources.
@@Alexander_Kale It's a matter of the path of least resistance. You can try to trade mac rounds and lazers. Or you can say howdy neighbor and go the the unclaimed, literal mountain of minerals, ice and metals. In solar system terms, right next door.
@@vi6ddarkking Which means you do not need MACs in the first place. And if anyone dares to put MACs on your rock, you call the marines or your PMC of choice and THEY trade lasers in a very one directional way until the MAC is scrap. Because who owns what will be decided in the courts, courtesy of this not being the wild west anymore, nor does the US look favourably onto acts of piracy. You paid for that rock, it is your rock, and anyone who tries putting MACs on it will get a Cease and Desist order followed by a targeting solution.
It would be an interesting topic to do what the government of a colony ship would be. I would hope some sort of democracy, but also it would need a strong hierarchy so that the captains rules were immediately followed. The only caveat to following captains rules immediately would be if they are in direct opposition of the health of the crew, settlers or the ship itself. What would the relationship between the crew and settlers be? I would envision a much smaller crew to run the ship then its potential to house settlers. What is the crew to settler ratio? 1-10 or 1-100 or more. Who has the power to pick the colony, if once arriving, it’s unsuitable. Who has the power to turn the ship around and go back? Who is responsible for putting down a mutiny what force can be used to put down a mutiny? What happens to Settlers and crew who break the law in transit?
Its all the same. Only 3 options really exist. Rule by wealthy, rule by groups of corrupt idiots, and rule by cult leader. All the Ists, Isms, and ocracies boil down to those 3 options. Even anarchy inevitably leans into one of those given enough time for the dust to settle and the strong to age.
Probably need to replace wealthy with influential, of which wealth can obviously be a big factor and which influence can often bring, but it is the influence that's actually permitting someone to swing a big sword in governance.
I love your videos, I’m a massive fan of Sci-Fi and want to create my own Sci-Fi cartoon at some point. Your vids have given me A LOT of inspiration and ideas. Thank you for your good work sir!
Space has quite a bit of regulation now that wasn't discussed (sat orbits(geostationary slots), frequency allocation to prevent interference etc). Space debris becoming an increasing problem, faa fined one company).
I saw this on YT and immediately went to Nebula to watch it there, but I couldn't find it. I found something else and watched that, then came back to watch this on YT. I have made suggestions on Nebula for things that would be nice to have, and they promptly responded with great courtesy. To the point though, those are all important concerns. We all know what will actually happen though. Rich people, whether rich because they have a lot of money or rich because they have a lot of power in a moneyless society, will hire smart lawyers, or better still well-connected lawyers, to make up the regulations as required so that the rich people paying the lawyers will become richer and/or more powerful. Since lawyers will be involved, lawyers will also become richer and/or more powerful. Also, accountants will become richer, but not necessarily more powerful, because accountants are just lawyers with spreadsheets.
I tihnk that's probably a fairly apt analogy for lawyers and accountants :) please email me if the link below doesn't work for this episode on Nebula, [isaac.arthur.utube@gmail.com] nebula.tv/videos/isaacarthur-space-regulation
Hey Issac ! I was just watching an old video of yours about Things That Will Never Exist...and this has nothing whatsoever to do with that video 😂. I just was wondering if you are a fan of Farscape? I recently found it and my mind has been blown just wanted your thoughts
Laws and jurisdictions are based on their ability to be enforced and damages collected. Ethics is internal to that jurisdiction and the enforcability of wider treaties
The problem with space regulations, much like terrestrial regulations, is that when the average person hears terms like "public use" they think it means available for use by the public. When a bureaucrat or politician uses a term like "public use" they mean "government owned and controlled". That's why we pay taxes to maintain national parks, but then have to pay an admittance fee for government to allow us onto "our" public land to see the sights. I grew up reading Heinlein Space Operas with their built in assumption that, for the most part, space colonization would be a fairly libertarian affair, with individuals or groups allowed to pretty much do as they please as long as they're not trying to be space pirates. Sadly, that will almost certainly never occur.
Another thing that we will have to figure out in the future is who gets to pilot these space craft, especially when individuals or corporations start doing active and regular space flights in the way this show describes. Will they need to get their own space pilots licence? Will they need to get different licences for different types of space craft? As there is a huge difference between a small personnel shuttle and a intergalactic space ship. Will a separate licence be needed for planatery re-entry and exit due to the different skills for a manoeuvre? As if you are only going to be operating in space then what is the point in waisting all the fuel and time practicing re-entries if you are never going to do so. And then you run across the thing off someone raised on an intergenerational ship let's say, would they need to go through that same licencing? And if so through what board or organisation if they are too far out for reasonable communications
In Principia, the OST is considered more of an aspirational document, although it does have enforceable provisions such as responsibility for spacecraft operations, astronaut rescue obligations, and territoriality ("ownership," as it were, is your base or spacecraft plus a reasonable area of operations, resources stop being considered part of a celestial body once extracted, etc.). The UN (and later, United Earth), attempted to solve the problem of the effect that unregulated asteroid mining would have on Earth's economy by establishing an international regulatory agency that worked with the major space resource corporations to create artificial scarcity by buying up resources at market value and then holding them for import to Earth once commodity prices have gone up again. By the 23rd century, this organization, the Extraterrestrial Resource Exchange Commission, has become this economic juggernaut comparable to the British East India Company, OPEC, or Amazon in strength to its contemporaries. Territoriality in itself is a point of contention between United Earth and the Mars Colonial Union. Earth considers Mars a bunch of rogue colonies that they only have to engage with diplomatically for practical reasons, and while Mars agrees with the OST in principle, they can't ratify it because the territoriality clause denies them sovereignty, plus the hypocrisy in allowing the nations of Earth (a celestial object from Mars' perspective) to claim territory on its surface are only a couple points of contention. Although, given that the colonies of Mars have been independent for about a century and a half by the contemporary setting of the series, it may be a moot point, although one that Earth still likes to bring up whenever they want to stir up resentment toward their former colonies for political reasons.
The question of "who owns this is that" that is raised in this video for some reason makes me embarrassed to be human. I mean, it's a sensible thing to address, but demonstrates our hubris. I fear for the fall that is likely to follow such pride in thinking we have some natural claim to all things.
Wait, you're a lawyer/judge and you just do this for a hobby? I do love intellectual insight and debate, so thank you for a being a professional and a nerd.
It's done on purpose. Given how volatile geopolitics is today, it's best not to add more fuel to the fire. However, this topic will need to be discussed. I'm surprised that we managed to convince the Soviets to some kind of agreement. Today? Not a chance in Hell.
Honestly if your talking about giant space monsters I would love to hear your opinion on Shin Ultraman. You don't have to watch the series it's spawned from but I can't help but think of your videos when I watched it.
Love your stuff! Like so many, your work helps me think realistically when worldbuilding and plot designing for my scifi and science fantasy stories. Crazy how rife with story possibilities that basic problems with regulation is
The way I see things is that a law only exists where it is enforced. As such all laws will be based around these principles. For example: an asteroid belongs to whomever is operating a sufficient operation there, and extends as far as can be defended, the land can thus be divided to the owners discretion. Violations are likely, for the near term, to be penalized via the parent companies or countries as they can exert the influence to do so. I see it very similar to early colonial americas. What’s theirs is what they get there hands on and can keep. This unfortunately means battling for influence, often literary, and lots of politicking to get you way in whatever arbitrating body, even unfairly and unethically. And when it comes to the definition of the borders of a solar system, I think the main stelar body’s gravity influence zone makes the most sense. Is this system’s star or the other’s exerting the most gravity at this point?
Back in 1950-ies space laws were seen as probable result of the first large-scale atomik war in space. Everything else were considered written worm of good intentions. =8-Ъ
From what I understand unpaid debts and crimes would be handled by a group of unaffiliated bounty hunters generally looked down upon and called Cowboys 😂
About there not being much precedent for nations having an exit clause, for an example of something similar look at the end of the British empire. Countries like Canada gained independence gradually, with Britain's consent, and now we're a country in our own right!
Damn, so untold decades of corporate wars in space. Super cool in anime, but sux for the people living through it. "World WarIII , pshh hold my drink Solar War I" this is gonna be bad
My short story, Exo to Barnard, covers the steps taken by regulatory bodies to prevent contamination of Earth and her colonies. Embedded observers who are neutral to the colony's desires scrutinize their efforts to explore and settle a world around a Red Dwarf.
@@RainenAvernathyNot any clearer, sorry. It was just first time I noticed an ad in YT comments, and an ad to sold stories in amazon, only sold this one stody by this author, ever as far as I can see.
Isaac, today I’m just commenting to let you know that we love your work, and by all means never stop producing these amazing pieces of documentary! 💙 We dream of a spacefaring civilization as much as you. Big blessings 🙏🏼
I think nobody has the authority to make any rules or laws in space, but i do accept that at some point who ever first lands on other planets will have a say in the rules of that location, i guarantee at some point companies will own planets and it will be because no sole government should be given that much power to control not only earth, but the rest of the system.
@All - When A.I has matured, I think artificial intelligence should. I think the best what should be done at the moment is safety proofing concepts. Can you safety proof space travel?
That's a lot energy to dump into something discreetly, but you can actually mine a system specifically against ships moving above a desired speed, and if they hit anything bigger than a grain of sand at that speed they're vaporized.
@@isaacarthurSFIA If a spacecraft can move at such speeds then there would be systems in place to protect the spacecraft from something like a grain of sand. I'm assuming interstellar space would be as "dirty" as our solar system. If I remember my Star Trek lore correctly, technology like the navigational deflector would solve that problem. However, if we were to dip into Star Wars lore, you'd need technology like an interdiction field to pull passing ships out of or prevent spacecrafts from traveling FTL.
I love that this channel can literally put out a video called ‘space regulations’ and the audience will happily watch it.
Isaac could upload an hour long video titled "tying your shoelaces in space" and I'd watch every minute of it.
We don't need no click bait. Isaac Arthur is the hype. Lol
That way we can make sure some laws never make it onto the books as too much regulation always stifles innovation.
It's actually a point that needs to get spoken about sooner or later
Not just happily watch, excitedly watch it. [Pushes up non existent glasses🤓]
Sea law will likely be used as a foundation for space law, for salvage and accidents.
Hopefully. Though humans have been increasingly ignoring what has already been answered to make their own path (primarily entertainment)
One thing about space law that's often overlooked is that much of it is the result of treaties. The Outer Space Treaty, for instance. And treaties can be rescinded. And it's not like you can deny the ability to go into space to a nation that already has that capacity. Which means the future of space law, and indeed the future of humanity in space, kinda relies on us maintaining good diplomatic relations between major space powers. However atm we're quite far from that ideal. Also remember that the Outer Space Treaty is all that's keeping us from putting nukes in space, not technical limitations. So we really don't want ties here on Earth to get much worse...
And the onset of a new era of remote gigaton weapon testing.
Even if only to get at the valuable innards of commercially viable space rocks.
I'm not sure that makes me hopeful. Cause sea law is going to change hard in the next 20 years if I'm reading things correctly
@@Celestial_Reach Are you referring to things like China's manufacturing of dubiously legitimate islands in the South China Sea in order to assert control over large areas of open water and the resources under it?
"There are no wolves or bears in space." - Isaac Arthur out of context.
Space snakes. He forgot about space snakes.
@@SopaDeLenguaThey're named space whales afaik
Yet
There will be... there WILL BE! :)
@@brianback3865
I... AM.... the space snake!
People ask who'd need the insane amounts of energy a Dyson swarm would produce. But they've never wondered how much red tape you need to produce to effectively cordon off space.
not much red tape it will not be like DC with all it regulations and two part system
The moment we move out into space is the moment regulation is only something that happens locally.
@@altha-rf1et Define "it". Also, I'm not sure the US is the best example for overly many regulations. I do feel sorry for your political system though.
@@limbo3545 depending on what you mean by "locally", that might be true. Probably at least means a world government, not something people ranting about "tHe gLoBaLisTs" on Twitter these days would call "local" :D
@@unvergebeneid Who cares what you do on your asteroid in the kuiper belt as long as you don't throw rocks at the inner planets? And additionally to that: Who can control scattered populations of people over the whole solar system?
"I am the Space Law." -Space Sheriff Dredd
Welcome to the Serenity, here.. let me show you the airlock space-pig.
Drok, it's a judge. You ain't taking me to the iso-cubes.
"I am the senate" - Regular Palpatine
...not the Disney version though
Literally Adeptus Arbitres
@@Слышьты-ф4юThat is the truth.
*Gets stopped at the Tannhauser Gate 35*
"May I see your space license, lifeform?"
Eat C-beam, toaster!
And galactic council membership license...😋
If regulations can ever be used to harm their competition, you can bet your eternal soul that some corporate officer will be willing to gleefully assign hundreds or even thousands of millions of dollars as nothing more than the price of keeping competition to a minimum.
I am pretty sure we have lucked out on the tech tree that we have perfected so that regardless of what economic and legal frameworks we use ; material goods will have no more value after we have a decent perm. space center or colony.
That is to say, automation and self repair of wear compnants is good enough already, and computers are realiable enough that having any presense where astroids and mokns can be mined will already leave us in a post scaricity world if by nothing else then an employee of Amazon or SpaceX on the moon deciding to get cheecky and send out a clanking self replicator to bring back all the materials these companies might try to hide via artificial scarcity. (remember it is easier to manufacture in space, just harder to design for vacuums because welding is TO easy in a vacuum)
And I kind of dont want that to be how we actually enter post scarcity. Even though I defenitly do not want glory hogs getting undue attention and gobbling up more rewards then they earn, I also still want people to get credit both good and bad for the work theyve done, and thats not going to happen with a "pirate" self replicator sent out to destory the current system; rather requiring humanity to write a new system that aknowledges our state of advancement and honors it for the freedoms that our frankly very near to post scaricity world should allow us.
Tfw in the year 2045 your small business sets up an automatic mining facility and a space habitat for scientists and management, but a big corporation bribes the government so they tell you to take it down.
And the hippies say we need more government because we aren't expanding into space fast enough to save the environment.
I really can't see capitalism surviving into space. It's a risky, dangerous, and immensely costly project - so much higher than any Earth venture. Look at how much we've spent, and it's only been for small-scale exploration!
Command economy, with cooperation between multiple large-economy nations, seems almost a prerequisite.
This is one branch of futurism that I think gets overlooked; how would an economy be organized and controlled in the future? Who would control it? There are different options, and the reality may be far different than what we expect, but it's not just going to be our current system, just IN SPAAAAACE.
@@borbo23 Because command economies have been so successful.
@@borbo23 Perhaps in the very earliest beginning (i.e. what we have already done), when we are still learning how not to die in all the new horrible ways space offers and every single part has to be brought in from home, but space is... *Checks notes*... Really really really big, and lots of people will have plenty of reason to go there, even if they aren't trying to be part of the economy of the rest of the species.
Plus I don't think that most people understand that the hardest part of designing space worthy craft so far has been designing them so that they survive in space and more importantly that they survive getting there from the surface of the Earth.
Once you take away the second aspect of the equation you start getting craft that can be made for not much more than the cost of a house or even less depending on the design and all of a sudden space becomes very accessible to even the average joe, even if it is still expensive.
And while there are plenty of economic reasons to go to space (mostly space resources would stay in space once the economy up there is established because it's just easier to get and keep space stuff in space) there are tons of reasons that aren't economic to go there as well.
After all, the American colonies were founded by a bunch of oddballs who didn't like what their government was doing to them and eventually decided that it really was better to be separate, even if that meant they had to figure things out for themselves in a very new and dangerous land.
I can't possibly think of any group of people who might fit similar criteria and who might endorse a free market system...
First. The space feds will take my railgun, but they cant take my 3d printer
They can’t take the sky from me….
@@ColdHawk What if they impound your spaceship?
If they can confiscate something like a railgun from you then, they can take anything.
@@alimaeus455 they would have to catch me first 😅
Funnily enough, privately owned ships and boats are not legally allowed to have mounted weapons, even for defence against piracy (even within the US-right to bear arms???). As such, that precedent could mean if photon torpedoes and phasers were to be used, individual security officers would need to roll down the window and shoot handheld phaser rifles and photon torpedo bazookas 😂
One thing about space law that's often overlooked is that much of it is the result of treaties. The Outer Space Treaty, for instance. And treaties can be rescinded. And it's not like you can deny the ability to go into space to a nation that already has that capacity. Which means the future of space law, and indeed the future of humanity in space, kinda relies on us maintaining good diplomatic relations between major space powers. However atm we're quite far from that ideal. Also remember that the Outer Space Treaty is all that's keeping us from putting nukes in space, not technical limitations. So we really don't want ties here on Earth to get much worse...
As much as I enjoy your videos about technological possibilities, your videos about social futurological topics like this and the recent ethics of uplifting are my favorites. With how fast technology is developing today, I think it's so important that our social creations like law and ethics, traditionally conservative in most cultures and built a posteriori, adapt to be forward-looking and built a priori, and generating thoughtfulness and discussion with content like this is a huge part of making that happen! Thanks so much and please keep it coming!
How do we decide to whom bodies in space belong to? The same way we've always decided the ownership of some new bit of real estate. They belong to whomever gets there with enough rocks to drive away other interested parties.
Aaah...the pleasure of learning about futurism whilist having substantial dinner
Love it when I've got a good meal ready and a new video drops
I really enjoyed this episode, mainly because it really doesn't say much about space regulations and just kicks the discussion down the line and considering how I feel most current regulation is made by the rich and powerful to suit their wants/needs at the time, it feels like the right perspective. Nothing too preachy or substantial, just when the time comes for somebody to make money, everybody is going to want to wet their beak and get a bit of the pie so how are we ever going to figure out how they will regulate it. Also, how are we going to figure if the EU is going to want to protect their mining from American intervention or if China will just claim areas and not care about what others say.
Basically at the end of the day, it will come down to 2 things. Who has money and who is in power. They are literally going to be the only ones that matter in a conversation about space. If you want to start talking about law and order where it could take years to send somebody to check up on them, good luck with that. Nobody is going to take anybody seriously when you tell them to get lost and they come back with a piece of paper and say "Ooh, just you wait, if I send this signal with a complaint, in just 3 years, a ship might show up with somebody to try and calm you down."
The one big fail I think this clip had however was the talk about legal responsibility when it came down to the asteroid hitting London. Look at the modern day for your answer there. We have ships carrying oil all over the place, they are registered as their own legal entities and companies. They are operating under loss conditions for multi billion dollar companies. They have no liability. What are you going to hold responsible, some poor captain on a long haul that probably won't even be needed since you just launch it from a catapult of sorts and wait for it to arrive? Modern equivalents already have shown us that this is just a fairy tale, the framework is already here and if you think people are going to open themselves up for more liability in the future because they hate their own companies, yeah, no. . .
_"Basically at the end of the day, it will come down to 2 things. Who has money and who is in power."_
Correct. Might makes right.
Weird question, but can a galactic scale institution or legislation count as megastructure? You ringworld is cool, but is it as cool as having standard nut and screw available on every habitable world of the galaxy and beyond?😅
Will the galaxy be standard or metric? I need to know what kind of wrenches to stock up on.
@@jasond130just stock up on 1/4”to 11/16” and 8mm to 14mm you should be good. Or you could find a way to retrieve them from that mysterious void inside the vehicles I’ve worked on over the years.
@@Jameson1776 quick notice, your comment is not showing up in "show most popular" mode. No idea what's up with YT on the mattsr.
Metric is the standard, reb.
More like mega neusance. I expect itll come out more Firefly than Star Trek..
The bit at 20:00 about a specific shipment of platinum is just a wonderful way to elucidate the issues with space rules.
Fantastic video!
Lokutus for earths' first emperor! Long live Emperor Lokutus!!!
There is only one law, might makes right. *BELTALOWADA* ✊
As contractual as they are, the First, Second and Fourth amendments are unambiguous in their wording with no rational wiggle room, yet lawyers have found a way to argue that despite their explicit, clear and unambiguous nature they somehow leave room for the one thing they explicitly ban from being done and courts have accepted that something being banned outright isn't explicit enough for it to be banned.
A lot of that is due to the differences of language from today and 200 years ago. A major sticking point in the American 2A is whether you can completely ignore a prefacing statement, and another is what the meaning of "the people" is. Are "the people" meant to mean every single person, or the body as a whole? Does the preface mean the protection exists solely for communities to be able to form militia for defense, or can it be ignored so Clyde can have his AT-4 and Al Quaeda's worth of small arms in his paranoia bunker?
@@kirknay The problem with that line of reasoning is that we can see through both actions and elaboration through writing that your example of the second amendment is, without ambiguity, at least that anything up to naval weaponry for ships is included in the "government can't do anything to stop you getting your hands on it with no ambiguity" list, a proper debate would basically be limited exclusively to WMDs and high yield conventional ordinances like MOABs with most laws relating to weapons being unambiguously unconstitutional. Which shows the point of how powerful the intentional misinterpretation of words in legal documents can be given the debate is today entirely on to which degree of illegal is society willing to tolerate given the fight is for tolerating the illegal rather then if it's illegal.
@@ZontarDow And that is exactly why the founding fathers wanted us to completely trash and rewrite the constitution every 21 years or so, but instead we decided to wholeheartedly latch onto 2 century old documents because of both laziness, and peoples' ability to abuse tf out of it for various ends.
There already is some case law concerning liability for objects in space. My understanding is that NASA had to pay a fine to Australia for littering with the de-orbiting Skylab.
I bet thousands of atoms from all those deorbiting satellites land in my backyard every day! I should get a piece of that pie! :D
that is the problem, they did not had to, they just payed, mostly to maintain good relationship. also helped that the 'fine' was minuscule, so it was obvious pr benefit. the first major case, where billions will be the stake will be the actual test of any of those regulations and willingness to obey.
Yes, they didn't have to pay, also in many countries laws are not considered as "predecent" as usa does, same for who pays for lawyers - it doesn't always go to losing side to pay 100%.
Sheriff - I"'m the law see the star on my badge."
"I don't recognize the authority of that star badge"
Sheriff - "Ok, then perhaps all the stars out in space, when eject you out of the space lock!!"
My thoughts, itll def end up more Firefly style Gov than Star Trek.
+1 for an Honorverse mention :D I get excited for any mentions of WH40K and Honorverse in the science shows I watch XD
I think the best way for regulations to actually work in space is if governments actually take the first initiative to build up space infrastructure, instead of corporations.
Things like building observation posts, means of transport to space, etc. will allow for these governments to better enforce their laws, but this gets more difficult with distance.
Personally, I think we should use Tree Law as the basis for space regulation 😎
Would love to see a video on say a new country forming on the moon with superior technology. Something like the Lux series of books or others similar.
NGL I can't see regs making it past the inner asteroid belt for centuries to come.
IMHO, anything past low earth orbit would be lawlessness. There's a strong possibility the Moon could be the "Wild West" based on today's technology. It all comes down to the economics of enforcing regulations.
Ah, the episode that explains why "outlaw" star systems, like Pyro, will still have some form of "law and order".
Missed opportunity for a Legal Eagle crossover
:) And he an I interact basically daily too, so silly of me not to have thought to ask, though I know a lot of us longer-time creators get a bit burnt out by collabs, so I rarely ask because it can be a big imposition. Devin's take on the matter probably would have been awesome though, he's a great guy
I would love if he said yes and u two do a follow up to this eps.
@isaacarthurSFIA
The first rule of Space Law: All Your Base Are Belong To Us.
The galactic empire's dreaded enemy, space OSHA
I can see them being the most respected department of the system's government. Nobody wants to be hit by a stray hammer, so they tend to be very supportive of the regulations that minimise the chances of that, and cheer on the space-littering fines that bankrupt careless slobs.
So Glad your covering this Isaac, & leads to whole area of legalities re many scifi issues { person hood rights & responsibilities across species /alien, A.I. replicants etc..}., & of course sorting out current terrestrial law - crosses over astro- economics /politics. I tend to think lets get our earth based house in order re international law, before wild westing the space horizon ..... but this not how history so far has worked.
Youve inspired me to look into the philosophy of Law as close cousin to the need to look at the philosophy of Science & History too
Honestly considering the distances, the rocket equation and the ludicrous amount of stuff up in space.
For a long time to come. The owner is whom ever gets their first and surrounds their claims with MACs as their complaints departments.
In case anyone has a problem with it.
I doubt that very much. The necessary defences (read that as: enough defences that any given glaim jumper cannot buy sufficient missiles to blow up your MACs) would be prohibitively expensive for anyone who is not a state, exactly BECAUSE of the rocket equation.
So the rules will be made by states, and if a private organisation thinks they can ignore those, they will find themselves slapped with fines and tariffs.
Which might drive space development in its own right, mind you. Can't slap me with tariffs if my main market is off planet...
@@Alexander_Kale You must be new here because in a fusion economy. The price of, well, everything, falls through the floor.
And like I said, about the ludicrous amount of stuff up in space.
There are literally millions of asteroids larger than mount Everest. In the asteroid belt alone.
Expanding the military power needed to try to dislodge an entrenched position is far, far larger the to just go to the next asteroid over.
@@vi6ddarkking Your initial argument specifically referred to a limited ability to put stuff in place. So in other words, your own scenario assumes a price limit. I merely adhered to your scenario.
And no, blowing up your MACs will not require more money than building said MACs and putting them into place.
As gets repeatedly mentioned on this channel, torpedoes have an inherent advantage over every other form of spaceship, because they do not need to slow down.
If anything, a scenario like the one you envisioned would be enormusly expensive, because everyone would require to spend ludicrous amounts of money on defenses, thus increasing the price on the final product.
And yes, that matters, even in a fusion economy, because you still have to spend the resources.
@@Alexander_Kale It's a matter of the path of least resistance. You can try to trade mac rounds and lazers.
Or you can say howdy neighbor and go the the unclaimed, literal mountain of minerals, ice and metals.
In solar system terms, right next door.
@@vi6ddarkking Which means you do not need MACs in the first place.
And if anyone dares to put MACs on your rock, you call the marines or your PMC of choice and THEY trade lasers in a very one directional way until the MAC is scrap.
Because who owns what will be decided in the courts, courtesy of this not being the wild west anymore, nor does the US look favourably onto acts of piracy. You paid for that rock, it is your rock, and anyone who tries putting MACs on it will get a Cease and Desist order followed by a targeting solution.
It would be an interesting topic to do what the government of a colony ship would be. I would hope some sort of democracy, but also it would need a strong hierarchy so that the captains rules were immediately followed. The only caveat to following captains rules immediately would be if they are in direct opposition of the health of the crew, settlers or the ship itself.
What would the relationship between the crew and settlers be? I would envision a much smaller crew to run the ship then its potential to house settlers. What is the crew to settler ratio? 1-10 or 1-100 or more.
Who has the power to pick the colony, if once arriving, it’s unsuitable. Who has the power to turn the ship around and go back? Who is responsible for putting down a mutiny what force can be used to put down a mutiny? What happens to Settlers and crew who break the law in transit?
Its all the same. Only 3 options really exist. Rule by wealthy, rule by groups of corrupt idiots, and rule by cult leader. All the Ists, Isms, and ocracies boil down to those 3 options. Even anarchy inevitably leans into one of those given enough time for the dust to settle and the strong to age.
Probably need to replace wealthy with influential, of which wealth can obviously be a big factor and which influence can often bring, but it is the influence that's actually permitting someone to swing a big sword in governance.
It is so funny how many of these questions have been handled in one way or another on Naval vessels.
No wolves or bears in space? That's exactly what a Space Wolf-bear would want us to believe.
There will be several. The thing is they will be wearing the clothing of humanity, which makes them even worse than the natural creature.
@2:15
say it with me
*THAT IS THE POINT.*
In space, there will be three powers: The Military Forces, Pirates groups and the Outlaws who don’t care about anything but fuel, food and air.
💯
Damn am I #2!? I hope so because I definitely love this channel and sometimes watch it for hours
I love your videos, I’m a massive fan of Sci-Fi and want to create my own Sci-Fi cartoon at some point. Your vids have given me A LOT of inspiration and ideas. Thank you for your good work sir!
Space has quite a bit of regulation now that wasn't discussed (sat orbits(geostationary slots), frequency allocation to prevent interference etc). Space debris becoming an increasing problem, faa fined one company).
I saw this on YT and immediately went to Nebula to watch it there, but I couldn't find it. I found something else and watched that, then came back to watch this on YT. I have made suggestions on Nebula for things that would be nice to have, and they promptly responded with great courtesy.
To the point though, those are all important concerns. We all know what will actually happen though. Rich people, whether rich because they have a lot of money or rich because they have a lot of power in a moneyless society, will hire smart lawyers, or better still well-connected lawyers, to make up the regulations as required so that the rich people paying the lawyers will become richer and/or more powerful. Since lawyers will be involved, lawyers will also become richer and/or more powerful. Also, accountants will become richer, but not necessarily more powerful, because accountants are just lawyers with spreadsheets.
I tihnk that's probably a fairly apt analogy for lawyers and accountants :)
please email me if the link below doesn't work for this episode on Nebula, [isaac.arthur.utube@gmail.com]
nebula.tv/videos/isaacarthur-space-regulation
Hey Issac ! I was just watching an old video of yours about Things That Will Never Exist...and this has nothing whatsoever to do with that video 😂. I just was wondering if you are a fan of Farscape? I recently found it and my mind has been blown just wanted your thoughts
Farscape was great, though I don't recall enjoying it as much when it ws new and got into it re-watching it years later.
There’s no Magnificence in regulation. And that’s why there wasn’t any suitable or appropriate place for “Red Giant” by Stellardrone.
I love that song :)
10:22 one could sell the TV rights to the struggles of the colonists suffering
as a reality TV show
I never thought I’d want to see a video about regulation this much. I guess just about everything becomes interesting on SFIA!
yeah I'm still really surprise it won the poll, admittedly I'm still not expecting it to be a fan favorite :)
I do. I own every atom, every particle, every wave in the universe. However, I share them freely, because I'm just cool like that.
the idea of laws in space depresses me, dont dash my hopes and dreams of space freedom and outlaws
When do we get the episode on the Gravity alteration tax, for adding or removing mass from the Earth?
Laws and jurisdictions are based on their ability to be enforced and damages collected. Ethics is internal to that jurisdiction and the enforcability of wider treaties
With my luck I would get stopped by some space cop for going 5 feet faster than the speed of light
Usually the victors of war dictate history and law, that pretty much is what I would expect when it comes to space regulations...
The problem with space regulations, much like terrestrial regulations, is that when the average person hears terms like "public use" they think it means available for use by the public. When a bureaucrat or politician uses a term like "public use" they mean "government owned and controlled".
That's why we pay taxes to maintain national parks, but then have to pay an admittance fee for government to allow us onto "our" public land to see the sights.
I grew up reading Heinlein Space Operas with their built in assumption that, for the most part, space colonization would be a fairly libertarian affair, with individuals or groups allowed to pretty much do as they please as long as they're not trying to be space pirates.
Sadly, that will almost certainly never occur.
Another thing that we will have to figure out in the future is who gets to pilot these space craft, especially when individuals or corporations start doing active and regular space flights in the way this show describes. Will they need to get their own space pilots licence? Will they need to get different licences for different types of space craft? As there is a huge difference between a small personnel shuttle and a intergalactic space ship. Will a separate licence be needed for planatery re-entry and exit due to the different skills for a manoeuvre? As if you are only going to be operating in space then what is the point in waisting all the fuel and time practicing re-entries if you are never going to do so. And then you run across the thing off someone raised on an intergenerational ship let's say, would they need to go through that same licencing? And if so through what board or organisation if they are too far out for reasonable communications
4:02 damn is dude really walking up a ladder like that?
Less gravity? No need to use hands?
Might will be right until enforcement and case law catch up.
Yea my frieghter isnt up to code, the seals dont hold right. Just put on a space suit and recharge often, the atmosphere is low vacuum.
In Principia, the OST is considered more of an aspirational document, although it does have enforceable provisions such as responsibility for spacecraft operations, astronaut rescue obligations, and territoriality ("ownership," as it were, is your base or spacecraft plus a reasonable area of operations, resources stop being considered part of a celestial body once extracted, etc.). The UN (and later, United Earth), attempted to solve the problem of the effect that unregulated asteroid mining would have on Earth's economy by establishing an international regulatory agency that worked with the major space resource corporations to create artificial scarcity by buying up resources at market value and then holding them for import to Earth once commodity prices have gone up again. By the 23rd century, this organization, the Extraterrestrial Resource Exchange Commission, has become this economic juggernaut comparable to the British East India Company, OPEC, or Amazon in strength to its contemporaries.
Territoriality in itself is a point of contention between United Earth and the Mars Colonial Union. Earth considers Mars a bunch of rogue colonies that they only have to engage with diplomatically for practical reasons, and while Mars agrees with the OST in principle, they can't ratify it because the territoriality clause denies them sovereignty, plus the hypocrisy in allowing the nations of Earth (a celestial object from Mars' perspective) to claim territory on its surface are only a couple points of contention.
Although, given that the colonies of Mars have been independent for about a century and a half by the contemporary setting of the series, it may be a moot point, although one that Earth still likes to bring up whenever they want to stir up resentment toward their former colonies for political reasons.
The question of "who owns this is that" that is raised in this video for some reason makes me embarrassed to be human. I mean, it's a sensible thing to address, but demonstrates our hubris. I fear for the fall that is likely to follow such pride in thinking we have some natural claim to all things.
Grow up
Thank you for the episode. Great as always, just like Giant Space Monsters.
Our pleasure!
Space lawyer would look good on the resume.
“I forgot my space wallet bro. Can you cover me?”
YAAY!! Happy Arthursday!
Another informative episode as always Isaac.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Breakfast with a side of SFIA? Yes please!
Much nuance. Thanks for the upload!
I make it Saturday lunch with SFIA. The video might be available on Friday, but I wait until I've got a nice, quiet Saturday to actually watch it.
Wait, you're a lawyer/judge and you just do this for a hobby? I do love intellectual insight and debate, so thank you for a being a professional and a nerd.
The laws of the sea an ICOA(International Civil Aviation Organization) will be good baselines
thank you so much for these videos sir you really make me wonder about space...
Another area worth discussing and under-studied.
Thank you, Isaac.
It's done on purpose. Given how volatile geopolitics is today, it's best not to add more fuel to the fire. However, this topic will need to be discussed. I'm surprised that we managed to convince the Soviets to some kind of agreement. Today? Not a chance in Hell.
Great video as always, Isaac!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you for all this information you give us.
Honestly if your talking about giant space monsters I would love to hear your opinion on Shin Ultraman. You don't have to watch the series it's spawned from but I can't help but think of your videos when I watched it.
Everyone Knows that CONCORD will hammer down its might upon you when you break space laws In high security space.
Laws not backed by force are just guidelines. Space will belong to whoever has the force to police each area
The law belongs to whoever can enforce it. We may not like that principle but that is where we are.
That crashed platinum asteroid will be under the protection of marshall Bravestarr and his shape shifting sentient uplifted horse.
And if the rest of the universe doesn’t accept our concept of ownership?
The area of what is now Kentucky had areas that no tribe believed was owned.
I always feel bad for the natives
Love your stuff! Like so many, your work helps me think realistically when worldbuilding and plot designing for my scifi and science fantasy stories. Crazy how rife with story possibilities that basic problems with regulation is
The way I see things is that a law only exists where it is enforced. As such all laws will be based around these principles. For example: an asteroid belongs to whomever is operating a sufficient operation there, and extends as far as can be defended, the land can thus be divided to the owners discretion. Violations are likely, for the near term, to be penalized via the parent companies or countries as they can exert the influence to do so.
I see it very similar to early colonial americas. What’s theirs is what they get there hands on and can keep. This unfortunately means battling for influence, often literary, and lots of politicking to get you way in whatever arbitrating body, even unfairly and unethically.
And when it comes to the definition of the borders of a solar system, I think the main stelar body’s gravity influence zone makes the most sense. Is this system’s star or the other’s exerting the most gravity at this point?
Your optimism makes me weep sometimes.❤
0:10 i vote for you for space sheriff
I'd be the first person to invent FTL if someone tried to give me that badge, in my haste to get out the door :)
Back in 1950-ies space laws were seen as probable result of the first large-scale atomik war in space. Everything else were considered written worm of good intentions. =8-Ъ
From what I understand unpaid debts and crimes would be handled by a group of unaffiliated bounty hunters generally looked down upon and called Cowboys 😂
I wonder which country will break the Space Treaty first
Block chain law enforced by bounty hunters each ship is a node that must declare its orbit
I use your videos for sleep and then watch them again so I can actually listen the next day. Your voice is the reason I get my 8 hours, king.
About there not being much precedent for nations having an exit clause, for an example of something similar look at the end of the British empire. Countries like Canada gained independence gradually, with Britain's consent, and now we're a country in our own right!
Damn, so untold decades of corporate wars in space. Super cool in anime, but sux for the people living through it. "World WarIII , pshh hold my drink Solar War I" this is gonna be bad
I am hoping for a united earth where everyone lives in peace
Out past Mars, ain't no speed limits.
An international panel can agree on terraforming Mars, with the staff being selected from the entire world.
The only space authority I respect is Sparks Nevada, Martial on Mars!!
Yeah, no. When I get a spaceship, I stop following laws or regulations.
This is a court of the year 2079!
My short story, Exo to Barnard, covers the steps taken by regulatory bodies to prevent contamination of Earth and her colonies. Embedded observers who are neutral to the colony's desires scrutinize their efforts to explore and settle a world around a Red Dwarf.
So you're selling stories, this being only one having any ratings. Just observation. Others don't need to google.
There's no such thing as neutrality; even Switzerland abandoned the concept.
@@tondekoddar7837 Can you elaborate on what this comment means?
@@RainenAvernathyNot any clearer, sorry. It was just first time I noticed an ad in YT comments, and an ad to sold stories in amazon, only sold this one stody by this author, ever as far as I can see.
@@tondekoddar7837 I'm the author. My story uses concepts I learn and discuss from this channel.
Isaac, today I’m just commenting to let you know that we love your work, and by all means never stop producing these amazing pieces of documentary! 💙 We dream of a spacefaring civilization as much as you. Big blessings 🙏🏼
Thank you! Will do!
I think nobody has the authority to make any rules or laws in space, but i do accept that at some point who ever first lands on other planets will have a say in the rules of that location, i guarantee at some point companies will own planets and it will be because no sole government should be given that much power to control not only earth, but the rest of the system.
I assume all the aliens in this universe are happy with a bunch of old earth men making the rules up for them ?
I went into space to get away from regulations. I guess there really is nowhere to hide from the taxman.
@All - When A.I has matured, I think artificial intelligence should. I think the best what should be done at the moment is safety proofing concepts. Can you safety proof space travel?
Who's going to stop me buzzing a planet at 100km at 99.9999% C if they can't even see me coming?
Illegal blueshift detected.
That's a lot energy to dump into something discreetly, but you can actually mine a system specifically against ships moving above a desired speed, and if they hit anything bigger than a grain of sand at that speed they're vaporized.
@@isaacarthurSFIA I knew sand mines were a thing, I just didn't know that's what they were! ;)
@@isaacarthurSFIA If a spacecraft can move at such speeds then there would be systems in place to protect the spacecraft from something like a grain of sand. I'm assuming interstellar space would be as "dirty" as our solar system. If I remember my Star Trek lore correctly, technology like the navigational deflector would solve that problem. However, if we were to dip into Star Wars lore, you'd need technology like an interdiction field to pull passing ships out of or prevent spacecrafts from traveling FTL.
@@isaacarthurSFIA it could be passed, but it'd need one hell of a sheilding system/device
wild wild SPACE west!
We're not ready for space if we're still stuck in the mindset that a man with a gun and a very fine hat gets to decide what you're allowed to do.