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
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.
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.
Practical authority
Several polities, with different internal constitutions.
Human self-government on Earth; authority elsewhere and over successor AI varies with the offer.
Benefits and costs
Different communities and practical movement between them. Coordination, border disputes and unequal community resources.
Different paths can coexist without depriving those who decline. Separation and dependence may make a nominal exit difficult to reverse.
Practical human governing authority
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Human final authority depends on the internal constitution; it is not guaranteed throughout this arrangement.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Earth retains human government, while settlement authority and the successor-AI veto depend on the offer.
Revisable governing mandatesDifferent or incomplete terms
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. The power to replace governing mandates depends on the institutional settlement; it is not guaranteed.
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether people can effectively replace governing mandates.
A practical right to leaveDifferent or incomplete terms
People have a practical exit right
Additional project hypothetical. The authored mobility regime explicitly lets residents move between communities.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Return terms and the practical ability to leave settlements depend on the offer.
Several self-governing communities
Several communities exercise their own rule
Additional project hypothetical. Several self-governing human and machine polities are the defining authored premise.
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.
A guaranteed material floor
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Provision can vary with the settlement; a universal material floor is not guaranteed.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Shared tools remain, but maintenance and distribution are not uniformly guaranteed.
Private ownership of productive resourcesDifferent or incomplete terms
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. The economic settlement may use private or common productive ownership.
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether private ownership organizes productive resources.
Continuing biological humanity
Biological humanity continues
Additional project hypothetical. Biological humans remain participants alongside artificial persons.
Biological humanity continues
Additional project hypothetical. The project stipulates biological travel and continued human life, without uploading.
Others’ choice to transform themselvesDifferent or incomplete terms
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Transformation rules depend on the settlement; neither permission nor prohibition is guaranteed.
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether feasible substantial transformation is legally permitted.
Standing for artificial personsDifferent or incomplete terms
Artificial persons have recognized standing
Additional project hypothetical. The authored federation includes artificial persons as political participants, with differing internal constitutions.
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether artificial persons have institutional standing.
Enforced limits on selected capabilities
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.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. The successor-AI veto changes between offers.
Visible exercise of governing power
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.
People know who exercises governing power
Additional project hypothetical. The departure offer and Earth’s human government are publicly acknowledged in the project scenario.
Practical independence from a technical provider
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Infrastructure may offer practical alternatives or create an indispensable provider; the settlement does not fix this.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Earth and settlements have different dependencies; the provider’s terms remain contested.
Open questions
A common enforcement body and the rights of children or those unable to move.
Enforceable return, settlement government and the successor veto.
These are authored descriptors. An unresolved feature is not evidence of a guarantee, a conflict or equivalence. Consult Human–Machine Federation sources or The Departure sources.