quadibloc on December 01, 2009, 01:54:55 am
Great story line idea - just from this second page of the story, the first in which the type of plot is revealed.

Strangle the livelihood of Ceres by using their own respect for private property against them!

Apparently someone on Earth is diabolically clever. It will be interesting to see how this works out.

deliberatus on December 01, 2009, 07:12:03 am
the most dangerous export is ideas.
The second most dangerous export is financial entanglement.
The third most dangerous export is firearms for hot head minorities.

Azure Priest on December 01, 2009, 07:40:20 am
It would be such a hoot if his name really WAS relentless. Just like Guy's name is "Guy."

Sean Roach on December 01, 2009, 08:13:19 am
So, now we get a storyline clarifying the problems with allowing for state ownership, or corporate ownership since a state can be described as a corporation of its subjects.
Possibly also the argument that raw materials can't be owned until they are improved.

Just thinking.  I suspect there are more interesting rocks in the belt than there can be ships in all of the EFT universe.  Just what is necessary to secure a claim?  Here it looks like the claim was secured by a sentient on site.  I can't see that as the only way, as the claimholder needs to leave occasionally to pick up supplies, although posting a claim could be done by tanglenet.

What is the minimum improvement to change a claim to a steading?  An airtight hull anchored as a HQ?  A navigation buoy?

quadibloc on December 01, 2009, 08:24:01 am
Possibly also the argument that raw materials can't be owned until they are improved.

Yes, I'm (somewhat) expecting that one. After all, it's the usual reply to one of the standard arguments that occurs to people when they first confront this strange new idea of Libertarianism: if you believe in private property so much, why aren't you trying to give the country back to the Indians?

KBCraig on December 01, 2009, 11:12:22 am
Possibly also the argument that raw materials can't be owned until they are improved.

Yes, I'm (somewhat) expecting that one. After all, it's the usual reply to one of the standard arguments that occurs to people when they first confront this strange new idea of Libertarianism: if you believe in private property so much, why aren't you trying to give the country back to the Indians?

Who, it must be said, had no concept of ownership of land.

Rocketman on December 01, 2009, 11:20:11 am
Possibly also the argument that raw materials can't be owned until they are improved.

Yes, I'm (somewhat) expecting that one. After all, it's the usual reply to one of the standard arguments that occurs to people when they first confront this strange new idea of Libertarianism: if you believe in private property so much, why aren't you trying to give the country back to the Indians?
  ;D  ;D  ;D Great idea!!!  Let's start by giving them back Washington D.C.!!!  ;D  ;D  ;D

quadibloc on December 01, 2009, 06:39:01 pm
Who, it must be said, had no concept of ownership of land.

True, but they still could tell whether or not it was possible to hunt buffalo on their hunting grounds or not.

They could distinguish between being free to live where they had been living, as they had been living, and being rounded up and put in reservations, with limited land area, in which significantly more labor would be required of them to produce the food they needed.

Some tribes were, of course, guilty of aggression against peaceful European settlers, but other tribes which were not implicated in such acts shared the same fate.

jrl on December 01, 2009, 10:48:40 pm
I suspect that under Cerian law (such as it is) United wold does not have standing to claim an asteroid.

Corporations are abstract entities given some of the rights of individuals by the state. Where there is no state, corporations can not exist.

United world is a special case of a corporation, a state, which for most intents and purposes claims a right to existence by divine right, a right which Cerians clearly deny.

The war crime trial made that clear: Only individuals can act. Only individuals have responsibility. No one can take responsibility for another's actions.

Azure Priest on December 02, 2009, 09:50:02 am
And now we have the method by which a claim is staked. Marker beacons, with a maximum 500 km "sphere" of territory. I suspect our good captain has met this situation before and is expecting hostilities from captain "Darling."

Brugle on December 02, 2009, 10:18:06 am
500 m, not 500 km.

SandySandfort on December 02, 2009, 08:43:32 pm
Great story line idea - just from this second page of the story, the first in which the type of plot is revealed.

Strangle the livelihood of Ceres by using their own respect for private property against them!

Apparently someone on Earth is diabolically clever. It will be interesting to see how this works out.

So you think you know where this story is going, do you? I think you may be surprised.   ::)

SandySandfort on December 02, 2009, 08:54:34 pm
Who [American Indians], it must be said, had no concept of ownership of land.

Depends on which Indians. The plains Indians generally fit your assertion. The Indians of the Canadian west coast didn't and don't. They are very proprietarian. When it came to land, there was and is very little, if any, communal land.

SandySandfort on December 02, 2009, 09:09:16 pm
I suspect that under Cerian law (such as it is) United wold does not have standing to claim an asteroid.

Actually, anarchists recognize collective entities such as joint stock companies. Whether or not 1st Officer, Darling was making a claim for the UW or not, he was making a claim. In the US and elsewhere, mining claims are defined and controlled by law. Where there is no formal law, it is still in everyone's interest to have some standard for what constitutes a claim. In the case of EFT, the standards established by ISO are followed by Belters. It serves the purpose of those seeking control over unclaimed resources and serves to greatly reduce conflict.

The war crime trial made that clear: Only individuals can act. Only individuals have responsibility. No one can take responsibility for another's actions.

You have got the essence of the lesson from Emilie's decision to execute Harris and Young. However there was no "trial" nor were there any "war crimes;" just crimes.


PT on December 03, 2009, 02:37:45 am
Quote
In the US and elsewhere, mining claims are defined and controlled by law. Where there is no formal law, it is still in everyone's interest to have some standard for what constitutes a claim.
Indeed, in the American west, before there was any law the miners would get together and declare a mining "district", then write bylaws regulating the making and holding of claims. These bylaws were recognized by federal and territorial courts and eventually formed the basis of federal mining law. One thing that's been there from the beginning is the need to do a certain amount of development to hold a claim - $100 worth a year, which was about 28 days labor in the 19th century. If you don't do the work (or nowadays pay a fee to the BLM) the claim lapses and anyone can relocate it. I'm sure Ceres would be aware of this aspect of Earth history and organize along similar lines.