That's about correcting the ground stations' coordinates. It doesn't help keeping your house's GPS coordinates fixed. If the tectonic plate your house is built on moves a meter over the course of a decade, then your house's GPS coords will change in the lower decimals, and eventually your government's land registry will need to update those values.
Hopefully there are still governments that don’t keep such in detail land registries, or any land registries at all, for that matter. Some of us don’t want the State to see everything, at almost every moment in time.
If you want to keep your land then you need to keep it in such detail in some registry.
Else it's trivial for someone to claim it or parts of it. Before such registries tons of people lost their land, lost part of their land, went bankrupt trying to save it, or murdered each other over their plots of land border dispute.
There are lots of records a state shouldn't have. Something fixed and stationary that needs protection from encroaching, like land limits, doesn't seem it should be one of them.
You made the very wrong assumption that land possession is mostly an individual thing, and second, that the State would be happy to award “common” ownership to communities big and small, and as such that it would allow said communities (in many cases much older than the State itself) to decide who gets to use what land inside of said communities. And the main reason is that the State doesn’t like, nor want, any sort of competition in this domain.
>You made the very wrong assumption that land possession is mostly an individual thing, and second, that the State would be happy to award “common” ownership to communities big and small, and as such that it would allow said communities (in many cases much older than the State itself) to decide who gets to use what land inside of said communities.
I made neither assumption, and both arguments are irrelevant to my point.
Take the current rights of anyone to one or more plots of land they own. As those are today, and also as they change while some are sold and bought etc.
To protect those rights of those onwers (of citizens and businesses and municipalities and so on) a registry or plots and their boundaries is very useful.
>to decide who gets to use what land inside of said communities
That's a totally irrelevant point, one that I didn't bring up.
I never said the state will happily "award “common” ownership to communities big and small, and as such that it would allow said communities (in many cases much older than the State itself) to decide who gets to use what land inside of said communities". In fact, for the purposes of my argument, whether the state will do that doesn't concern me at all.
Just that the state keeping a registry of plots and their boundaries helps keep track of ownership. Not transfer it to communities, to give it to someone else to administer: to keep track.
It's true in all countries to the extent that it's true in any countries, but it's only partially true to begin with. The reality is that ownership doesn't exist. What actually exists is a credible threat to use violence if certain conditions are violated. In a civilized society this comes from the state. In a failed state it comes from somewhere else.
