Compare two futures
Who governs, who benefits, and which terms remain open?
Compare any two entries. Their differences are editorial descriptions, not distances on a common scale.
Life and institutions
Those who stay keep the shared tools. Elsewhere, settlers face questions about dependence and return. The arrangement can divide lives without settling who has final power.
Residents can move between communities under an agreed mobility regime. Some communities use AI rule, others human government. Disputes about borders and shared dangers do not disappear.
Practical authority
Human self-government on Earth; authority elsewhere and over successor AI varies with the offer.
Several polities, with different internal constitutions.
Benefits and costs
Different paths can coexist without depriving those who decline. Separation and dependence may make a nominal exit difficult to reverse.
Different communities and practical movement between them. Coordination, border disputes and unequal community resources.
Practical human governing authority
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Earth retains human government, while settlement authority and the successor-AI veto depend on the offer.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Human final authority depends on the internal constitution; it is not guaranteed throughout this arrangement.
Revisable governing mandatesDifferent or incomplete terms
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether people can effectively replace governing mandates.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. The power to replace governing mandates depends on the institutional settlement; it is not guaranteed.
A practical right to leaveDifferent or incomplete terms
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Return terms and the practical ability to leave settlements depend on the offer.
People have a practical exit right
Additional project hypothetical. The authored mobility regime explicitly lets residents move between communities.
Several self-governing communities
Several communities exercise their own rule
Additional project hypothetical. Earth governs itself while settlers pursue another path; more than one community is an explicit project premise.
Several communities exercise their own rule
Additional project hypothetical. Several self-governing human and machine polities are the defining authored premise.
A guaranteed material floor
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Shared tools remain, but maintenance and distribution are not uniformly guaranteed.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Provision can vary with the settlement; a universal material floor is not guaranteed.
Private ownership of productive resourcesDifferent or incomplete terms
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether private ownership organizes productive resources.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. The economic settlement may use private or common productive ownership.
Continuing biological humanity
Biological humanity continues
Additional project hypothetical. The project stipulates biological travel and continued human life, without uploading.
Biological humanity continues
Additional project hypothetical. Biological humans remain participants alongside artificial persons.
Others’ choice to transform themselvesDifferent or incomplete terms
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether feasible substantial transformation is legally permitted.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Transformation rules depend on the settlement; neither permission nor prohibition is guaranteed.
Standing for artificial personsDifferent or incomplete terms
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether artificial persons have institutional standing.
Artificial persons have recognized standing
Additional project hypothetical. The authored federation includes artificial persons as political participants, with differing internal constitutions.
Enforced limits on selected capabilities
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. The successor-AI veto changes between offers.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Capability restrictions depend on the governing settlement; no uniform ceiling or absence of a ceiling is guaranteed.
Visible exercise of governing power
People know who exercises governing power
Additional project hypothetical. The departure offer and Earth’s human government are publicly acknowledged in the project scenario.
People know who exercises governing power
Project editorial inference. Named polities openly negotiate borders and movement; the project reads their governing roles as visible, without assuming all operations are disclosed.
Practical independence from a technical provider
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Earth and settlements have different dependencies; the provider’s terms remain contested.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Infrastructure may offer practical alternatives or create an indispensable provider; the settlement does not fix this.
Open questions
Enforceable return, settlement government and the successor veto.
A common enforcement body and the rights of children or those unable to move.
These are authored descriptors. An unresolved feature is not evidence of a guarantee, a conflict or equivalence. Consult The Departure sources or Human–Machine Federation sources.