Private school is child slavery!!!

[cunicula]

Boys getting caned... Libertarian paradise... it could only be Singapore.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding!  

Should I run your slogan by the tourism marketing committee?

[1715381333]

1715381333

[1715381333]

1715381333

[1715381333]

1715381333

[1715381333]

1715381333

[MoonShadow]

Nobody else has any other problem with intangible rights being property.

I do.  I have never (personally) met anyone willing to call himself a libertarian that did not.  And, by definition, any flavor of 'anarchist' (Myrkul is an AnarcoCapitalist,IIRC) no form of 'intellectual property' is enforcible in the absence of a state.

[myrkul]

Boys getting caned... Libertarian paradise... it could only be Singapore.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding! 

"Libertarian paradise" my ass. Statist hellhole, more like. I'd rather move to Somalia.

[cunicula]

Boys getting caned... Libertarian paradise... it could only be Singapore.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding!  

"Libertarian paradise" my ass. Statist hellhole, more like. I'd rather move to Somalia.

Oh, you must be a poor libertarian.  If you were a rich libertarian, then it would be paradise.  

I encourage you to try out Somalia. I'll donate BTC if we can get a libertarian blogging about his AnCap society in Somalia.

[MoonShadow]

Boys getting caned... Libertarian paradise... it could only be Singapore.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding!  

Should I run your slogan by the tourism marketing committee?

Singapore is far from a libertarian paradise by any metric beyond lax enforcement of child prostitution laws; and for myself, I'd consider the protection of orphans from sex-starved foreigners one of the very few legitimate functions of a state apparatus.  A loose business regulatory environment is not the only condition of a libertarian "paradise".

[MoonShadow]

Boys getting caned... Libertarian paradise... it could only be Singapore.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding!  

"Libertarian paradise" my ass. Statist hellhole, more like. I'd rather move to Somalia.

Oh, you must be a poor libertarian.  If you were a rich libertarian, then it would be paradise.  


I encourage you to try out Somalia. I'll donate BTC if we can get a libertarian blogging about his AnCap society in Somalia.

Any place one might desire to reside is a paradise, if you are wealthy enough.  That includes Somalia.

[myrkul]

Singapore is far from a libertarian paradise by any metric beyond lax enforcement of child prostitution laws; and for myself, I'd consider the protection of orphans from sex-starved foreigners one of the very few legitimate functions of a state apparatus. 

And if state force were the only way to get that done, I'd agree with you.

I encourage you to try out Somalia. I'll donate BTC if we can get a libertarian blogging about his AnCap society in Somalia.

How much we talking about? If it's enough to hire some mercs and set up a protection agency, I might consider it.

[cunicula]

Boys getting caned... Libertarian paradise... it could only be Singapore.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding!  

Should I run your slogan by the tourism marketing committee?

Singapore is far from a libertarian paradise by any metric beyond lax enforcement of child prostitution laws; and for myself, I'd consider the protection of orphans from sex-starved foreigners one of the very few legitimate functions of a state apparatus.  A loose business regulatory environment is not the only condition of a libertarian "paradise".

Hey that's libel! Human trafficking laws are strictly enforced [provided that the trafficking involves Singaporean citizens].

The 'dark and dirty' [that's a Singlish expression for citizen of a neighboring state] should not be protected and supported using our tax dollars. You bastards with your entitlements that you think justify theft. I don't know what you mean by child prostitution anyways. Such workers are called 'entertainers'. In your country I understand that entertaining in this way is prohibited. LOL statist slave!

True, our companies hire bonded labor from developing countries. True, the gov't taxes the low wages paid to foreign bonded labor at about 50%. That's not a real tax though, those are foreigners. True, bonded labor is not legally entitled to time off. Not even one day per year. True, employers of bonded labor are liable for crimes committed by their charges. True, bonded labor is prohibited from communicating with members of the oppositie sex. True, female bonded laborers are tested for pregnancy every 3 months. In case of a violation, such criminals are deported. Employers forfeit the bond they placed on workers good behavior and become responsible for hunting down any runaway. Failure to locate a runaway means additional fines. Thus, the private repatriation companies. They search for and seize absconders, and load them on to cargo planes. All very efficient and free market.

I don't see any contradiction between any of this and libertarian ideals. Look how the evils of limited liability have been corrected in our employment arrangements! How can you fail to applaud this example of voluntary exchange and freedom of contract.

My apartment is even equipped with a small, windowless compartment that locks from the outside. It can accommodate one or two third-world nationals (if you use a bunk bed, as many do)
The other day I debated with a colleague whether bonded labor deserves a bed or not. He contended that offering a bed raises expectations for working conditions which leads to poor service.

(completely serious).

[cunicula]

Singapore is far from a libertarian paradise by any metric beyond lax enforcement of child prostitution laws; and for myself, I'd consider the protection of orphans from sex-starved foreigners one of the very few legitimate functions of a state apparatus. 

And if state force were the only way to get that done, I'd agree with you.

I encourage you to try out Somalia. I'll donate BTC if we can get a libertarian blogging about his AnCap society in Somalia.

How much we talking about? If it's enough to hire some mercs and set up a protection agency, I might consider it.

Maybe do a kickstarter? I'll contribute US$1k minimum. You have to blog and take photos, videos, etc. though.
I want footage of the mercs in action.

[myrkul]

Nobody else has any other problem with intangible rights being property.

I do.  I have never (personally) met anyone willing to call himself a libertarian that did not.  And, by definition, any flavor of 'anarchist' (Myrkul is an AnarcoCapitalist,IIRC) no form of 'intellectual property' is enforcible in the absence of a state.

This seems to explain the recent hand-wringing and articles insisting that Bitcoin is tangible, in some obscure way that I can't quite put my finger on. At least my philosophy is more consistent: all property is intellectual property.

Bitcoin is no more tangible than EVE ISK. Or USD in a bank account. It's all just bits on a computer somewhere.

[myrkul]

I encourage you to try out Somalia. I'll donate BTC if we can get a libertarian blogging about his AnCap society in Somalia.

How much we talking about? If it's enough to hire some mercs and set up a protection agency, I might consider it.

Maybe do a kickstarter? I'll contribute US$1k minimum. You have to blog and take photos, videos, etc. though.
I want footage of the mercs in action.

Well, $1k is far from enough to run on until I'm profitable. I don't know how much it would take, but I know it's much more than that.  

What about you, blatherblatherblather? Want to put your money where your mouth is? How much would you contribute to getting me to put my ideas into practice?

(For AnCaps and libertarians: I'll take your money, too, and if I get enough "Yeah, I'd give money to that," I'll actually get to work on figuring out how much I'd need, and set up the kickstarter. "I'll come help" counts, too)

[myrkul]

Nobody else has any other problem with intangible rights being property.

I do.  I have never (personally) met anyone willing to call himself a libertarian that did not.  And, by definition, any flavor of 'anarchist' (Myrkul is an AnarcoCapitalist,IIRC) no form of 'intellectual property' is enforcible in the absence of a state.

This seems to explain the recent hand-wringing and articles insisting that Bitcoin is tangible, in some obscure way that I can't quite put my finger on. At least my philosophy is more consistent: all property is intellectual property.

Bitcoin is no more tangible than EVE ISK. Or USD in a bank account. It's all just bits on a computer somewhere.

Of course that's tangible. How is "bits on a computer" any different from numbers on a "fancy scroll of parchment" telling you the co-ordinates of a piece of land you supposedly own?

Edit: and the parchment has a special "header" section, explaining what it is and saying that "_______ owns such-and-such a piece of land at the following co-ordinates".

Well, aside from being on paper, as opposed to stored in ones and zeroes on a computer, there isn't any difference. Of course, that land deed is just the paperwork. It, by itself, no more grants you ownership of a piece of land than does drawing some lines on a map.

1) Begging for money already, eh?
2) It's Blablahblah.
3) What ideas? We're just trying to send you to a place with no Internet.

1) I was offered money. I was just seeing if you wanted to get in on this "fabulous investment opportunity"
2) I like my version better.
3) Somalia's got some of the best cell reception on the continent. Failing that, there's always satellite. Everyone's always telling me, "You want to live in a stateless society, move to Somalia." I figured you guys would jump at the chance to actually make that happen.

[myrkul]

Of course that's tangible. How is "bits on a computer" any different from numbers on a "fancy scroll of parchment" telling you the co-ordinates of a piece of land you supposedly own?

Edit: and the parchment has a special "header" section, explaining what it is and saying that "_______ owns such-and-such a piece of land at the following co-ordinates".

Well, aside from being on paper, as opposed to stored in ones and zeroes on a computer, there isn't any difference. Of course, that land deed is just the paperwork. It, by itself, no more grants you ownership of a piece of land than does drawing some lines on a map.

OK, so the paperwork/electronic bits are just a formality -- the storage medium. Then what does grant you the real ownership?

We've been over this, I know we have...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_principle
(or you can buy or inherit it from someone who homesteaded it, or who bought/inherited it from someone who homesteaded it, or from someone who bought/inherited it from someone who bought/inherited it from someone who homesteaded it, etc.)

[cunicula]

Of course that's tangible. How is "bits on a computer" any different from numbers on a "fancy scroll of parchment" telling you the co-ordinates of a piece of land you supposedly own?

Edit: and the parchment has a special "header" section, explaining what it is and saying that "_______ owns such-and-such a piece of land at the following co-ordinates".

Well, aside from being on paper, as opposed to stored in ones and zeroes on a computer, there isn't any difference. Of course, that land deed is just the paperwork. It, by itself, no more grants you ownership of a piece of land than does drawing some lines on a map.

OK, so the paperwork/electronic bits are just a formality -- the storage medium. Then what does grant you the real ownership?

We've been over this, I know we have...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_principle
(or you can buy or inherit it from someone who homesteaded it, or who bought/inherited it from someone who homesteaded it, or from someone who bought/inherited it from someone who bought/inherited it from someone who homesteaded it, etc.)

When you drop down in Somalia with your team of 'Mercs' is that what is called 'homesteading'?

History question: My statist high school textbook referred to "the conquest of the Americas". However, I understand that, in many cases, affected native people's did not believe in private rights to land. Where no private rights taken, it is clear that conquest did not occur. Would the proper term be "the homesteading of the Americas" or would "the voluntary resettlement of Americas' native inhabitants" be more accurate?

[myrkul]

When you drop down in Somalia with your team of 'Mercs' is that what is called 'homesteading'?

No, we would most likely purchase a building from one of the locals. No need to go out and find land in the middle of nowhere when you're going to be serving a city (I actually thought I would start small, something unlikely to be missed by TPTB).

History question: My statist high school textbook referred to "the conquest of the Americas". However, I understand that, in many cases, affected native people's did not believe in private rights to land. Where no private rights taken, it is clear that conquest did not occur. Would the proper term be "the homesteading of the Americas" or would "the voluntary movement of Americas' native inhabitants" be more accurate?

In some cases, conquest would be accurate, in others homesteading would be. How the Europeans treated the native populations was by no means uniform, and certainly not uniformly kind. The US government made, and subsequently broke, so many treaties with them, that it would be funny, if it weren't so sad and infuriating.

A notable exception is that of William Penn: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn%27s_Treaty_with_the_Indians
Interestingly, Pennsylvania experienced a nearly 10-year period of peaceful anarchy after Penn "temporarily" suspended all taxation, and the people living there decided they'd rather keep it that way: https://mises.org/daily/1865

[myrkul]

It's your memory, you slippery weasel! In order to 'own' something, it's a fundamental requirement for you to remember that fact. Otherwise you will forget about it, and someone else will eventually stake a new claim of ownership on it. So how is your 'tangible' property not fundamentally an intellectual idea in your head?

Is that so?

Let's posit an amnesiac, who wakes up on the beach in front of a beautiful house with a dog licking his face. He follows the dog into the house, which he bought a decade ago, but does not remember.

Are you saying I could come along, and kick him out of that house, simply because he doesn't remember it's his?

[Richy_T]

Win.  Did I guess right?

I wish I could tell you. I don't killfile on principal but that doesn't stop my eyes glazing over at rampant idiocy.

[myrkul]

It's your memory, you slippery weasel! In order to 'own' something, it's a fundamental requirement for you to remember that fact. Otherwise you will forget about it, and someone else will eventually stake a new claim of ownership on it. So how is your 'tangible' property not fundamentally an intellectual idea in your head?

Is that so?

Let's posit an amnesiac, who wakes up on the beach in front of a beautiful house with a dog licking his face. He follows the dog into the house, which he bought a decade ago, but does not remember.

Are you saying I could come along, and kick him out of that house, simply because he doesn't remember it's his?

I don't have time for this. Familiarity is still a kind of memory, and if that fails, one could argue that the property gets passed onto the next-of-kin who does remember, i.e.: the dog.

Oh, so it's the dog's house, now? 

to quote:
You're always dreaming up new examples after the fact to rationalise your pre-existing beliefs. In other words, you're bullshitting, and deep down inside you know that I am correct.

And another pertinent quote:

Do me a favor, and read your posts out loud before you hit "Post." It will save you from moments like this.

[myrkul]

It's your memory, you slippery weasel! In order to 'own' something, it's a fundamental requirement for you to remember that fact. Otherwise you will forget about it, and someone else will eventually stake a new claim of ownership on it. So how is your 'tangible' property not fundamentally an intellectual idea in your head?

Is that so?

Let's posit an amnesiac, who wakes up on the beach in front of a beautiful house with a dog licking his face. He follows the dog into the house, which he bought a decade ago, but does not remember.

Are you saying I could come along, and kick him out of that house, simply because he doesn't remember it's his?

I don't have time for this. Familiarity is still a kind of memory, and if that fails, one could argue that the property gets passed onto the next-of-kin who does remember, i.e.: the dog.

Oh, so it's the dog's house, now? 

Yeah, why not...

You know, Sometimes I think that the only reason I click that "show" link is for the humor value... You certainly do keep me laughing.

to quote:
You're always dreaming up new examples after the fact to rationalise your pre-existing beliefs. In other words, you're bullshitting, and deep down inside you know that I am correct.

Yup.

Thanks for admitting it.

My point still stands:
All property is fundamentally intellectual in nature. Clearly you're trying to "lay down the law" on how the different kinds (whether it's art, digital coins, private nude pictures, or land, etc.) are allowed to be treated, yet you don't want a rulebook. Cognitive dissonance much?

No, I'm not "laying down the law" on how things should be treated. There's only one law: No person has the right to initiate the use of force, threat of force, or fraud upon another person or their property. That includes their computer harddrives. If I want to arrange the ones and zeroes on my harddrive in a specific way, you cannot force me not to. Plain and simple. Ergo, "intellectual property" is not property.

[MoonShadow]

My point still stands:
All property is fundamentally intellectual in nature.

No, all property is fundamentally an agreement in nature.  If I do not agree that your authorship gives you claim to the series of bytes that may render your authored work on my computer, then you do not have ownership of them, I do.  I can agree that you produced the work all day long and still not agree that you have ownership of it.  If you had kept the work on your own systems in such a way that I had to have broken it in order to aquire such information, you might have a point, but if you published the work in any manner you can't claim tresspass.  You wrote the work, but the copy is mine regardless of whether or not I aquired it in a manner that you might approve of.