| ocean.builders | project | interference | Thai Government |

| Seasteading | seasteading couple death threat | Thai Government | ocean.builders | Chad Elwartowski | Nadia Summergirl | lessons to learn | better setups | ocean colonization | oceanic business alliance™ | nautilusmaker® | TSI | paradigm change | reality check | media hype | solving the ocean colonization technology bottleneck | what needs to be done to make seasteading investment worthy | freedom of the seas | floating city | floating familiy home | seasteading caribbean | cholon cartagena project | technology bottleneck | submarine yacht |

Official Statement about the sinking of the first seastead

We at Ocean Builders would first like to thank all of the people who have sent their support and help. We do appreciate it.

It has been reported that the first seastead, XLII, has been or is in the process of being demolished by the Thai navy. It is also being reported that our first residents, Chad Elwartowski and Nadia Summergirl are being held responsible for building the seastead and putting it in its current location.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Chad and Nadia were volunteers excited about the prospect of living free. They took pictures and videos of the whole process and posted it on social media. They spent a few weeks on the seastead and documented their adventure.
They were in no way involved in the design,

construction, decision on where it was locatd or any funding for the construction of the seastead. If you read the Reason article that describes the seastead accurately writes the facts:
” The team surrounding the project were early adopters of bitcoin, and with wealth acquired that way it has spent around $150,000 on the project “
Other news articles took this to mean that Chad Elwartowski funded the project because he was also an early adopter of bitcoin. Chad did not spend any of his own money on the project other than perhaps some sheets for the bed and he brought all of his own dishware when he moved in.

Chad and Nadia are safe for now but understand that Thailand is currently being run by a military dictator. There will be no trial if they are caught. They already demonstrated that by being judge jury and executioner of the historic very first seastead.

The reason Thailand was chosen was due to the large amount of tourism, its relatively calm seas and also because all of those involved love the Thai people and their culture.

It is claimed by the Thai navy through their media mouth pieces that the seastead is in a shipping lane. This makes it sound like there is heavy cargo traffic coming to Phuket. If anyone knows Phuket, they have one cargo port that gets maybe one or two cargo ships a week. They also admit that the seastead is in international waters, at least 12 nautical miles from land. This would infer that they are 12 nautical miles from land on either side of the seastead which would put the shipping lane at at least 24 nautical miles. The seastead is 6 meters wide. It has a very bright anchor beacon and has a registered AIS beacon which can be detected by any boat with any sort of navigation in the vicinity.

The area is a heavy fishing area with many many fishing boats trawling the water there daily. The fishing boat captains used to wave at Nadia and Chad as they passed by. They were in no way bothered by the floating home. The seastead takes up less space in the shipping lane than a fishing boat.

Needless to say. This event has doubled down our efforts and we can all clearly see that seasteading needs to happen now as tyranny creeps ever more deeply into our governments to the point that they are willing to hunt down a couple of residents residing in a floating house in middle of nowhere.

We hope this issue can be resolved diplomatically with the Thai government and are ready to talk to anyone in charge at any time. We have tried several times to talk to anyone but were always told that we have nothing to worry about because we are legally in international waters.

The April 15th sale of seasteads is to be postponed until we can get everything straightened out and figure out the best path forward for everyone.

Agressive Move of the The Third Naval Area Command against Chad Elwartowski…Thai media outlet…


The Third Naval Area Command has filed a police complaint against an American man and his Thai wife who set up a floating living platform 12 nautical miles off the coast of Phuket, a practice also known as seasteading.

Staff judge advocates from the command were sent to lodge the complaint at Wichit police station in Phuket on Saturday, according to a source at the command. They accused Chad Andrew Elwartowski and his Thai wife, Supranee Thepdet, with an English alias of Nadia Summergirl, of breaching Section 119 of Criminal Code.

The section concerns any acts that cause the country or parts of it to fall under the sovereignty of a foreign state or deterioration of the state’s independence.

It is punishable by death or life imprisonment.

ocean.builders forum



• It is not necessarly convenient to tout everything in the media (was the same in the Honduras and Tahiti projects)

• Spar is a suboptimal design as it takes away the mobility card. A design with a certain mobility like the ramform design or the | ocean sphere design | would just lift the anchor and go somewhere else at the slightest sign of hostile interference intended. The importance of the mobility card was clear since the “Lozman Case”… | Lozman lost a fortune to defend legally against a city that did not want his houseboat on its waterfront - although he won in Supreme Court his houseboat was destroyed anyway by the city authorities - he could have solved the matter more conviniently by moving up the coast 2 miles and live happy ever in his still existing houseboat…)

• Outside the 12 miles zone is a not so good location choice for a lonley family home, it makes you vulnerable on many levels as long as the project is so small. Outside the EZ starts to make sense when you have a mile of diamenter and gained the status of a floating city, port and economic center of your own right and standing.

  • A location in a bay where the shore population is tuned to strong support may be a better choice .

  • we had this in the early discussions of “seasteading rincon”. Where the location in front of a extended Farm that has no use for the beach was proposed.

  • The uselessness of papermousing legal aspects was shown (again) it does not matter what the UN and UNCLOS say about your case - what matters, is what the local politician who runs the local politics game will do.

  • if people feel vulnerated by your project they will shut it down - even if there is no “legal base” to do so - they will invent one - the Thai government already showed its cards - they will use this ridicoulus law that was probably dead law for centuries for good reasons, and they will claim the spar was inside their 12nm zone - it will be impossible to prove the contrary when the spar is gone.

• As the lozman case shows you can fight such things to supreme court and even win it on paper in the end - it is a project killshot anythow…winning in court does not get your home back and less the money invested.


Is the freedom of the ocean divided in zones ?

evolutionary process of seasteading



• The Thai Government is well aware that it has no legal base to do what they have done - this is why the upfronted the hairbrained shiping lane argument…nevertheless they will get away with it - no doubth.

... their own police chief already told the promotors of the 119 code argument, that he sees "no base to prosecute along this code" unless some substantial evidence for support (that Chad is part of a conspiration to break Thailand apart) is found on the seastead itself. ( That is probably how far a Police Chief can go in telling another branch of the state authority "don´t be ridiculous")


Legal standing matters little - economic standing matters a lot. ( A thought paradigm change is necessary at TSI ) less politics is more - get practical - the floating wharf, jetty, breakwater, installations of today are the seasteads of tomorrow…

context: | mulberry harbor | monaco floating breakwater | nkossa barge | 3 phase development plan |


When building your home on the ocean you should not papermouse legal frames but better have a clear strategy how to deal with that kind of interferers.

The factor that your home stands there " appearently claiming something " and even worse resembling a bouy or a beacon, (marking something) creates much more trouble than a mobile thing, that can be taken as a weired ship…anybody is familiar with the general rights and standing of ships on the ocean, and how to deal with ships - weired or not - this is a good and “low conflicting” starting point. (this is also the reason why those fishing boats althoug larger are not molested in the same area)

• Important rule in phase 1 of seastead development - don´t push people out of their comfort zone. They tend to react hostile.

(CT Indradat) Could you please Take that stupid big finger ??? in the middle of our ocean back with you to your country or wherever the fuck you come from !!! . Thanks a lot asshole! And never return to Thailand anymore…

(user comment that explains the Thai feelings and in consequence the flaming hostility of the Thai Navy about the project )

The real key is to be useful and convenient for those in power - like a marina or a floating port - local politicians would prefer to have it instead of having it not. So given the choice - shall we stay or do you want us to leave - they will opt for stay. A spar falls really short on that it has no usefulness to the local landlords and is suspect to become a “pain in the arm” to their claim of being king in town - down the road by default. So “authorities” tend to eliminate it by default as a first reaction.

check the VENICE business model - POWER BROKER is the key concept - marine intermediary - place of exchange - place of commerce - profitable come along.

| i don´t think Chad and Nadia are in some kind of danger. The Thai government is well aware (the fishy excuse of shipping lane) that they acted outside the existing legal frame (freedom of the seas) so they will play it under the rug instead making a public spectacle out of it…i just hope that the 150K investment lost is broadly distributed among the enthusiasts supporting the project (the article indicates that) and does not come from Chads pocket.

Actually i am glad that they are out of harms way now - a 25 m wave (draupner style) in a storm night crashing into a structure that was designed for 5m maximum waves could be worse than the Thai Government abusing power as usual…

Postulate: A structure for the open sea should be “Reasonably Draupner Safe” by default. (and reasonably Draupner safe means 60m high instead of 5m high for a Spar design - this is why spar is not a great choice for a family house - only for a oil rig…which can meet those criteria… in spar design SIZE matters a lot - the project seems to lack understanding for that simple engineering fact…)

Postulate: Seasteading should never depend on a single project but instead go for a broad project pipeline in global multiple locations - fail cheap - learn fast - recover - forge ahead. This is how project development works. If things never fail you are not innovative enough. You learn more from failure than from success. Life goes on - the next thing (including past experiences) is in the pipeline already - this is a normal process - let´s learn from it - do it better in the next round.

Thanks to Chad and Nadia for this instructive piece of seasteading experience shared with the community.

Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn…

There is a long history of 1200 years of shore governments hostile interfereing with floating developments written by the TANKA people and the Sea Gypsies -

( if this was a "first " is a question of view angle - for our group it was a repetition of an experiment that failed earlier in history in much the same way - “escape to sea living” - failed for the Tanka - but succeeded for others - like Venice )

We just have to do a proper read up of history, and look up from the TSI plate.

What we know already is, that there are forms to do it right, and ways to do it wrong - so the project design and setup is of ESSENCE.

It does not only matter what it IS it also matters what it LOOKS like.

While Unclos is irrelevant, the perception of the shore dwellers in your neighborhood (yes even a 12nm seastead has still a neighborhood) is extremly relevant.

It is certainly not the case that any kind of floating project is a equally good starting point.

The interesting question is:
The Tanka live supressed and subdued by land governments, for 1200 years in their floating developments.


Venice “the floating city” free and independent (1500 years) with only 300m shore distance - so what was the difference ? -

What do we learn from THEIR failed and successfull experiments going on for at least 1500 years ?

Is there a need to repeate those ancient experiments, or can we just learn from history, and build something based on this knowledge. That works and prospers Venice style .


In our group we believe that the Cholon Project is such a thing.

shore distance - less is more

If there is one thing that Chad and Nadia made abundantly clear it is, that shore distance beyond 12 nm does not make you safe from hostile governments.

• Smart cooperation and power brokering does (Venice did it that way).
• The mobility factor does.
• Be in harmony with the shore politicians and interestes does.

If you think that trough it means that if you are 300m from shore the protection and support of the local mayor can be enough to keep you going.

If you are 12 miles offshore the protection of a local mayor and his councel may not be enough.
It becomes a “navy thing by default” - and a international border issue - means “military and hostile in essence”.

So on contrary to the believe in seasteading discussion forums less shore distance can be politically safer in practice - as your presence is in a bay that is traditionally fully controlled by the local mayor who might be seasteading friendly and a nice guy. If he becomes hostile the mayor controlling the bay a mile up the shoreline may be friendly. So you have plenty of options when playing this local on a relative mobile platform - instead of international and defiant on a fixed platform. In general the navy will not interfere nor show any kind of interest in shore near tourism developments ( project cholon ) and certainly nobody will claim a shipping lane so close to shore with the port miles away - it would be too obvious laughable. If you are 12nm out there it is less laughable as out there “the whole ocean is a shipping lane” - in some way…

Draupner Impact Safety

Living on a small sailboat - technically your living space bubble is made of resin in spherical curved shapes what has the same structural integrity as a rescue pod. So if you get hit by a Draupner in a stormnight you will be rolled over - possibly several times - you loose your mast - possibly your keel - get some bruses, but what is left still floats and you can survive months in it until you get rescued. So small sailboats are actually “reasonably draupner safe” therefore people can use them for oceanic voyages with reasonable safety factors.

The flat panels of the spar model presented do not inspire a similar confidence. But it looks they had plans to upgrade that to something that looked very much round and enhanced impact safe. So basicly a rescue pod on a stick - that would be safe i assume.


The flat very light panel design - not very wave impact safe…



rescue pod on a stick design - similar safe at draupner impact as a small sailboat


| bubble cluster structure | much more economic to build | skip the stick | start in a bay | grow to a convenient size | keep the “12 mile option” open with draupner safe bubble cluster structures | but stay aware that 12 miles is not a “magical safe realm” that brings you out of interference | UNCLOS is weak - and basicly irrelevant in marine practice | although UN spin doctors try to make the world believe it is something solid - it is not | no UN court will condem the Thai Government for what they did to Chad - count on that | UN courts to deal with that kind of incidents do not even EXIST … less are they practical … or influencial…or relevant…or respected…or trustworthy in any meaningful sense.

So the baseline you are looking for is doing your stuff with a wide margen of options independent of any political structure.

This means you keep the following options open:

• The project can relocate to any part of the world ocean that is convenient and leave unconvenient places inmediatly and on short notice - mobility is key.

• Keep politics out

• Make return on investment fast and inmediate

• Have deep thoughts about convenient press handling

| bubble cluster structure seasteading |



| oceanic real estate | shore near | high price | competing with land fill | what are the existing real estate markets seasteading has to compete with, to make seasteading investment worthy | floating real estate in Monaco - a parkhouse and a shopping mall inside a floating breakwater |

| floating rock | advanced cement composite | seasteading | NemoToken™ | why did ancient marine powers not build cities infrastructure hubs and ports at sea | solve the ocean colonization technology bottleneck | get something that is affordable and floats for hundreds of years | floating rock is the solution |

| advanced cement composite test piece |