[FoRK] lazy QR code

Lucas Gonze lucas.gonze at gmail.com
Wed Jun 20 08:46:23 PDT 2012

Why have dominion over the AR overlay on a place be distinct from land rights?

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Damien Morton <dmorton at bitfurnace.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 04:13:42AM -0400, Damien Morton wrote:
>> > Hmm, I was just doing some rough calculation on this.
>> >
>> > At $1 per m^3, there is enough potential in this business concept,
>> selling
>> > to Americans only, to almost double the GDP of the United States, from
>> $15T
>> > to $30T, and this is assuming only small areas with volumes extending
>> above
>> > 1m.
>> Plenty of m^3 at mere ~AU in the local system.
> 1e60 m^3 in the galaxy, most of it low-value
> You'd want a set of relative coordinate spaces, and this would increase the
> potential for monetisation.
> Earth-relative addressing, moon-relative addressing, sol-relative
> addressing, L4-relative addressing, and so on and so forth.
> Starting with earth relative addressing, you could increase the potential
> for monetisation by having different top-level-domains, for example, a
> .gov.us.earth.location domain would 'own' all of the volume representing
> the united states, but would co-exist with .com.us.earth.location  Like the
> current (expanded) top-level domain system, each top level domain
> administrator would be responsible for managing the policies that govern
> that domain.
> And, each signed m^3 location domain would be able to sign location
> subdomain certificates
> Essentially, each of these earth-relative location domains would be an AR
> overlay governed by different policies.
> Of course, each top level overlay could create sub-overlays, for example, a
> nasa.gov.us.earth.location overlay.
> Here's a question for the hive-mind : is signing meter sized voxels the
> right way to go for this virtual land office? I mean, differential GPS goes
> down to cm-level resolution these days, and signing cm-sized voxels
> seems unwieldy.
> Might some kind of geometric representation be a better way
> to delineate space. Or, perhaps some kind of octree representation, in
> which the resolution of voxel signing is infinite be the way to go.
> _______________________________________________
> FoRK mailing list
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

More information about the FoRK mailing list