bullshit, someone needs to do the work. That someone are workers. There is no way around this. No one ever got in a position of power without manipulating people into doing work, and taking most of the value of the labor for themselves. Things don't "just happen", but the answer I always get, is the only thing that really counts as "work", in the sense it should be universally rewarded, is capacity for investment. This is the only real "work" in capitalism

try institute private property, especially with a pretty large gap between haves and have nots without a pretty large coercive government, because thats what it takes. Capitalism is not compatible with Libertarianism.

which is a type of socialism acutally. Its not a bad thing either.

I seriously hope your fucking joking. Lazzie Faire capitalism has been tried once, I presume thats what your talking about, in the 19th century in both Europe, and in the United States, and it didn't last long before the owners requested and demanded a large state to protect themselves and property from unhappy workers and a growingly dangerous underclass.

Order was only restored by implementing tiny bits of socialism, and the biggest problem in today's society isn't socialism, but the non-socialist parts of society, i.e. those operated for greed(capitalist/liberal), or those operated by some stuck up self-appointed wanna be despots(third position/fascism),

Unless you want to call your newly concocted version of capitalism with misappropriated language and terms from early libertarian socialist movements a completely diffrent thing(along with all our favorite authors: Paine, Spooner, Orwell, Proudhoun, Baukin), you've got this almost completely backwards.

Now, I don't care what you choose to believe in, but please, lets get facts straight, or at least be honest in terms. Or at very least, Socialists where the first to scream "not really socialism", again, something that "libertarian" capitalism more or less adopted.

And the whole time we are super worried about North Korea, and Russia....

if the threat was supposedly North Korea, made by some anonymous jackasses on the internet, pretty tough actually.

Of course, after all, we all know how impotent they are, and everyone is just itching to convert to democracy the instant a gun is not at their heads, and all that other jazz.

I'm waiting for it to be pirated

not neccarily. the government has many assets.

convienantly there are many trolls and script kiddies in Anonymous who would like to have their sentances reduced.

you live in a strange world if you think that would actually happen.

No one is scared of anyone, I am just sick of hearing bitching and complaining from the anti-poettering, and anti-systemd crowd about trolls. They are the trolls, and have gone as far as to issue poettering death threats. Once we fought back, like a typical reactionary bully, they cried of being oppressed. Fuck them

Its good to see a few of them are actually putting their money where their mouth is. The beauty of open source is that it gives the loudmouth enough rope to hang himself. He doesn't get to bitch that anything was forced on him, or he had no choices.

But you see how this ends, if they were any bit good a system design, or even system administrator, they wouldn't be bitching about systemd or poettering in the first place, because if they were any good, they'd understand there are other options, and installing something else isn't hard. If you're a decent sysadmin that is. But if they had the skills to run a diffrent init system, they wouldn't be bitching.

No one is forcing anything on these people, its simply the more technically competant people who work for distros are more technically competant. So, after years of bitching they finally did something, and do you know what is going to happen to Devuan? Nothing. Its going to fizzle because maintaining a distro isn't as hard as making death threats and bitching, and if they actually had the skill and dedication to learn something new, most likely they'd be systemd fanbois

You're making the basic assumption that cameras are set up, and maintained in good faith, when they are not. Cameras are set up to make the town money, and accordingly. Cameras are set up to make money for the town, by taking it from the people. They do not make people safer.

1. Short yellows, the town decreases the amount of time the light is yellow in order to get more people to run the light. This makes intersections more dangerous, but the goal isn't saftey, its money
2. The towns also mistime the cameras, so you can be ticketed for running a light when you either went through on a yellow, or stopped
3. You can also be ticketed for technical violations such as being an inch over the line, where no cop would ever cite anyone.

This hurts the poor for two reasons: 1. Its a regressive tax, used to pay for services, that the town imposses instead of real taxes. Paying taxes carries no penalties and can be reasseted based on demands of the society.
2. The poor have less money for lawyers to fight the tickets, and violations wind up as points, which increase car insurance rates, and have a harder time paying the tickets, most of which are bullet.

The whole saftey issue is fairly bullshit, because there never has been an issue with drivers running red lights in this country. Redlight cameras are highway robbery, and the poor are hit hardest.

Strawman:
Mistating the fact that red-light cameras work, and that everyone who gets finded by a red-light camera actually did run a red-light. Even the ones that do, %90+ of the violators simply moved an inch past the sensor, both otherwise stopped

putting words in my mouth:
Asserting that I think that anyone was more likely to run a redlight, when i was merely suggesting they would have a harder time paying a fine, which most likely is totally bogus and would have never been given out by a flesh and blood officer, to anyone.

implications of the cameras is that they are a regressive tax that hit the poor, especially minorities, the worst.

that is not a liberty, but job description of "police officer". Liberty != job of person.

because of the "war on drugs, war on crime", they got a whole people scared into giving up their civil rights decades ago, and we now think this is normal. Anytime someone gets a group together to oppose this, they are harrassed by the cops using the same techniques, and made an example of. We are taught in schools, and re-enforced in the media, there is no line between dissent, and rebellion, rebellion and crime, and crime and oppression. The government is our friends, and all critics are criminals. We give a really wide benefit of the doubt to cops.

We create a whole list of fear words like junkie, terrorist, psycho, of which we see a whole underclass ready to swallow society, and the government's wrongs, slight and only exiting to protect us from imaginary enemies. We have TV news shows telling us how we are all the privledged class, and social justice is aimed as us, not the system, while simultaneously misdirecting citizens at eachother.

Our political movements create conspiracies against eachother, and exhonorate the guilty.

Truth is, you're more likely to be shot by a police officer than a crazy on a spree shooting. More likely to die from a hand gun than an infantry rifle, and more likely to be killed by obeiseity than recreational drug use.(3 times as likely)

congradulations, you figured it out. They are allowed to smoke a bowl with you, then arrest you for it. Is it technically legal? no. Can they do it and get away with it? yes. Will they? most likely not. When will they do it? Lets say they used you to get in bed with someone else who they actually wanted to arrest. They befriended you, and used you to build the trust of someone else. They supplied you with drugs and did them with you to build your confidence in them. Now, they just might arrest you and charge you with drugs to keep you fucking quiet, on whatever police misconduct you might witness that would tear apart their trial.

entrapment? Entrapment means the crime is "not in your nature", which is highly speculative. If you're considered a "looser", than any petty crime is within your nature, especially if you're a minority.

I am going to copy this, because its a good reason I am not a voluntaryist, and ditched being a libertarian capitalist a few years ago. Its not voluntary if they trick or coerce you.