15 Matching Annotations
  1. Jan 2024
    1. 1:15 violence, rape, murder, ... executive order to dissolve chaz and restore order.<br /> too bad, murder is exactly where my fun starts. but this world is ruled by militant pacifists,<br /> who only replace serial murder with overpopulation and mass murder every 100 years, aka "war".<br /> they only replace death with accumulated "debt"... idiots. idiocracy is here and now.

  2. Jul 2021
    1. it is also clear that there would be no need for copyleft licences to govern the exercise of copyright in software code by third-party developers at all if copyright did not guarantee rightsholders such a high degree of exclusive control over intellectual creations in the first place

      This is simply not true. The unique character of software under the conventions that most software is published (effectively obfuscated, albeit not for the purpose obfuscation itself, but for the purposes of producing an executable binary) means that reciprocal licenses like the GPL are very much reliant on the existing copyright regime. Ubiquitous and pervasive non-destructive compilation would be a prerequisite for a world where copyright's role on free software were nil.

  3. Feb 2021
    1. During those years, Baker began reading the books of anarchist philosopher Emma Goldman, political scientist Hannah Arendt and civil rights leaders Malcolm X and Angela Davis, his friends said. He drifted from the conservative ideology of his upbringing and embraced an anarchist worldview, advocating for bottom-up systems with decisions made by community consensus. Conflict with his family and firsthand experience with the shortcomings of public institutions pushed him to rely more on his surrounding community, said friend Jack Fox Keen.

      One of the only times I've heard Anarchism explained as not akin to chaos.

  4. Apr 2020
  5. Feb 2017
    1. Right, well of course people don’t look up product information now because the government regulates that for them. In a real libertarian society, they would be more proactive.

      Most people don't care, or trust the big companies. I do that. I also think that the existence of some government regulation incentive companies to not sell poisoned food.

      On the other hand, there is certification, independent certification, and these are being used today and trusted by people today. It's reasonable to supposed independent certification would be much much greater in a libertarian world.

      Of course certification would not cover every field, every product and every possible problem, but neither does the State.

    2. For a boss to fire a worker is at most a minor inconvenience; for a worker to lose a job is a disaster. The Holmes-Rahe Stress Scale, a measure of the comparative stress level of different life events, puts being fired at 47 units, worse than the death of a close friend and nearly as bad as a jail term. Tellingly, “firing one of your employees” failed to make the scale.

      Because of State labor laws, stupid. They make it hard to change jobs, hard to fire workers and hence hard to hire workers. In a libertarian world this would in principle be much smoother.

    3. Once the employee is hired, the boss may ask on a moment’s notice that she work a half hour longer or else she’s fired, and she may not dare to even complain. On the other hand, if she were to so much as ask to be allowed to start work thirty minutes later to get more sleep or else she’ll quit, she might well be laughed out of the company. A boss may, and very often does, yell at an employee who has made a minor mistake, telling her how stupid and worthless she is, but rarely could an employee get away with even politely mentioning the mistake of a boss, even if it is many times as unforgivable.

      Here and after the author treats as a libertarian problem what happens today under the rule of the State labor laws.

      In a world without State labor laws, contracts would apply. Contracts could evolve and have all these situations expected in their clauses. Also, this seems to me to be a case for actually working law (which the criticism imagines as unexisting in a libertarian society): https://hypothes.is/a/PBirDvnYEeaWvjeIs4H9kg.

    4. The classic libertarian solution to this problem is to try to find a way to privatize the shared resource (in this case, the lake).

      This is a hard problem, but the lake must have an owner, or some bizarre magical special juridical property that someone must come up with. Anyway, this whole example treats it as "public" resource, hence the tragedy of the commons follow.

      Ok, it seems that the lake may be owned by someone and the rivers that go into it owned by other people, so the problem arises. This seems to me to be a case for law: https://hypothes.is/a/PBirDvnYEeaWvjeIs4H9kg.

      Probably there could be a way for the lake owner to sue the people who are damaging the lake, or these sue the lake owner for their lack of productivity.

    5. 1.2: But aren’t there are libertarian ways to solve externalities that don’t involve the use of force?

      Well, this article forgets about law. Law and justice still would exist in a libertarian society.

      I haven't read the rest of the article, but this is probably the answer to most of his criticisms of libertarianism, and it is fair that this guy is missing it, because law is difficult and most libertarians forget about it or think that purely monetary transactions between persons would solve everything, thus making libertarianism a crazy creed (as I've done myself for a time).

  6. Jul 2016
    1. To put it plainly, no reputation system is resistant to a Vendor purchasing their own items and making false-positive ratings.This is especially true of a pseudonymous decentralized marketplace, where Buyer identities are — by default — undisclosed. Even a web-of-trust model, which is excellent at detecting suspicious islands of ‘reputable’ users, will not be able to distinguish between real and fake ratings of a Vendor.

      Maybe all reputation schemes that try to assign a globally valid rating to users will be bad. Perhaps the only solution is to let the context fall and do not perform any kind of calculation/assignment.

    2. This is also important.

    1. Another important theme. Moderators are arbiters, judges. Filming the opening of a package as a means of proving to the moderator.

  7. Nov 2015