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.

Imagine work, care and invention organized through contracts among beings with very different capabilities. Access to productive resources becomes a central political question.

Practical authority

Several polities, with different internal constitutions.

Distributed owners and institutions; human final control is not assured.

Benefits and costs

Different communities and practical movement between them. Coordination, border disputes and unequal community resources.

Many ways of living and producing may coexist. Unequal bargaining power can make formally voluntary contracts hard to refuse.

Practical human governing authority

Variant-dependent

Depends on the variant; no single answer

Unresolved. Human final authority depends on the internal constitution; it is not guaranteed throughout this arrangement.

Variant-dependent

Depends on the variant; no single answer

Unresolved. Different kinds of owners coexist; the project leaves their relative governing authority open.

Revisable governing mandatesDifferent or incomplete terms

Variant-dependent

Depends on the variant; no single answer

Unresolved. The power to replace governing mandates depends on the institutional settlement; it is not guaranteed.

Unspecified

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

Present

People have a practical exit right

Additional project hypothetical. The authored mobility regime explicitly lets residents move between communities.

Unspecified

The scenario leaves this condition unspecified

Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether people have a usable right to leave.

Several self-governing communitiesDifferent or incomplete terms

Present

Several communities exercise their own rule

Additional project hypothetical. Several self-governing human and machine polities are the defining authored premise.

Unspecified

The scenario leaves this condition unspecified

Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether several communities govern themselves.

A guaranteed material floorDifferent or incomplete terms

Variant-dependent

Depends on the variant; no single answer

Unresolved. Provision can vary with the settlement; a universal material floor is not guaranteed.

Unspecified

The scenario leaves this condition unspecified

Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether everyone receives a guaranteed material floor.

Private ownership of productive resourcesDifferent or incomplete terms

Variant-dependent

Depends on the variant; no single answer

Unresolved. The economic settlement may use private or common productive ownership.

Present

Private ownership organizes production

Linked source premise. The linked Libertarian Utopia premise makes property rights central to coexistence.

Continuing biological humanity

Present

Biological humanity continues

Additional project hypothetical. Biological humans remain participants alongside artificial persons.

Present

Biological humanity continues

Linked source premise. The linked premise includes biological humans alongside other beings.

Others’ choice to transform themselvesDifferent or incomplete terms

Variant-dependent

Depends on the variant; no single answer

Unresolved. Transformation rules depend on the settlement; neither permission nor prohibition is guaranteed.

Unspecified

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

Present

Artificial persons have recognized standing

Additional project hypothetical. The authored federation includes artificial persons as political participants, with differing internal constitutions.

Variant-dependent

Depends on the variant; no single answer

Unresolved. Coexistence and property rights do not settle shared political standing for artificial persons.

Enforced limits on selected capabilitiesDifferent or incomplete terms

Variant-dependent

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.

Unspecified

The scenario leaves this condition unspecified

Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether institutions enforce a ceiling on selected capabilities.

Visible exercise of governing powerDifferent or incomplete terms

Present

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.

Unspecified

The scenario leaves this condition unspecified

Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether people know who exercises governing power.

Practical independence from a technical provider

Variant-dependent

Depends on the variant; no single answer

Unresolved. Infrastructure may offer practical alternatives or create an indispensable provider; the settlement does not fix this.

Variant-dependent

Depends on the variant; no single answer

Unresolved. Contractual exchange can sustain independent providers or concentrated dependencies; neither is guaranteed.

Open questions

A common enforcement body and the rights of children or those unable to move.

Exit enforcement, equal political standing and remedies for extreme dependency.

These are authored descriptors. An unresolved feature is not evidence of a guarantee, a conflict or equivalence. Consult Human–Machine Federation sources or Libertarian Utopia sources.