A libertarian who decides they want no government control is an anarchist.

If they want limited government control they are libertarians.

They are similar but differ on a key issue, government control. And that’s the biggest issue for anarchists.

If I say I am an anarchist it means I do not want the government in public libraries at all.

Now if you need to rip the bandage off fast or slow is debatable, but there is no debate on if the bandage needs to come off completely for an anarchist.

If I say I am a libertarian it means I want the government limited in public libraries.

Again, how fast it needs to change is debatable.

They both rely on the goodness of the people rather than a government. They both share pretty much the exact same ideology, other that anarchists are for “No Authority” and libertarians are for “Limited Government”

Personally, I don’t think a public library would exist in today’s world without the government.

You want me to donate money so people who cannot afford books can go and check out physical copies of books they can look at digitally for free?

I’m better off donating to a homeless shelter or another cause.

Libraries are only good for homeless and poor now because we currently do not give them better options.

It would make sense for bars with ice chests that served bottled beer in glasses

You can’t call yourself a communist and only want socialism.

What you’re describing is libertarianism

Limited government control (Against Anarchy). Highest personal freedom (For Anarchy).

Both anarchists and libertarians would argue that the people would fund a “public” library if the government didn’t. That has not been tested.

Anarchists are against public ran and funded libraries.

If anarchists got their way there would be no state to run the public library

You could make the argument that something like “free little library” or just people supporting the idea of neighborhood free libraries is proof

But no true anarchist is going to be happy paying taxes to a state for the state to decide what books are available to them.

Planned obsolescence would be if they made their bricks break on purpose so you had to buy replacement bricks.

Scarcity marketing? I don’t know what the exact term would be that you’re referring to. But with retirement.

I think it has to do more with Lego not being able to produce thousands of thousands of different sets.

Like you don’t just simply ask the Lego printer to make Margaret Hamilton Lego sets for a dozen people then tell it to go back to printing the newest set.

Lego couldn’t make every set available if it wanted to

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:English_terms_suffixed_with_-phile

erotophonophile - A person with a paraphilia for committing lust murder.

Eye-Dee-eR

Or

Eye-Dee-Uh

I.D. is Eye-D

It’s missing a last syllable

Most people I know say Eye-Dee-Uh. And the Uh is exaggerated.

I.D.er works.

Bouncer: You have to show me your I.D., I’m the I.D.er

Hillbilly: You’re what idea?

Dicapriophile. Sub 25 age

Ephebephile. 16-14 age

Hebephile. 14-11 age

Pedophile. Sub 11 age

There it’s in ABC order

Hebephile. 11-14 age

Ephebephile. 14-16 age

Pedophile. Sub 11 age

Dicapriophile. Sub 25 age

A laptop with a screen on both sides would have its niche.

Shuting it would be like a tablet.

You could do something while a person across watches.

If you could rotate the screen you could swivel the screen to swap between two physical screens. I prefer two monitors over an ultra wide or trying to digitally swap between two screens. Rotating screen would have the problem of not being able to see both at once.

However, if you made the screen on the back hinge forward. You could flip the screen towards you and have a second physical monitor.

Sounds expensive and not really needed. But it wouldn’t be a bad design

Step 1: Limit e-bike speed

Step 2: Enforce minimum speed limit

Step 3: Profit

Dang you would have gotten BoobSmiles too

I get that

I wouldn’t buy diamonds or gold hoping they increase in price just as much as I wouldn’t buy bitcoin to do the same.

If you offered me 1USD in Gold, Diamond, or Bitcoin.

I would take the gold. It has the most intrinsic value.

The probably that gold hits 0USD is less than bitcoin hitting 0USD.

The only reason you’d take bitcoin is if you think that it has a higher ceiling. Intrinsic value is the floor. But that is gambling

Craps is almost a team game.

If everyone plays the Pass Line (Shooter, the person throwing the dice has to play it) then everyone wins/loses together.

Everyone at the table playing the Pass Line is pulling for the shooter to make his point.

Now imagine if you have one person out of 8 playing the Don’t Pass. The person playing Don’t Pass line is hoping the other 7 players lose so that they can win.

It’s almost equivalent to everyone at the roulette table playing black. And you walk up and say “I hope it comes red”. Like why don’t you just hope it comes black so you can win when everyone wins?

My brother takes the dice and rolls the point. Everyone places their chips. I place my chips. The dealer asks me, “Did you mean to put your chips on the Don’t Pass Line?” “Yes, that’s exactly what I meant to do.” Silence. Then my sister: “You’re an asshole.” My brother rolls again: seven. The Don’t Pass Line wins me a couple bucks.

This doesn’t make any sense

1. Once the point is established by the shooter on the come out roll, you cannot play Pass or Don’t Pass lines.

So after your brother takes the dice and rolls the point. You cannot place your chips on Pass/Don’t Pass. Maybe why dealer was confused?

2. Don’t Pass Line pays on shooter rolling 2 or 3 on come out roll. You’d lose if he rolled a 7. Pass Line wins if shooter rolls a 7 on come out roll.

Second roll was a 7?

You’d have bet Don’t Pass before your brother ever rolled the dice for a second roll 7 to win the Don’t Pass

Bets after the shooter’s first come out roll are usually Come/Don’t Come bets.

If you made a Don’t Come bet instead of a Don’t Pass (Dealer was confused from your illegal play and considered it a Don’t Come bet.) You’d still lose if a 7 were rolled second. So that doesn’t make sense.

If your first bet was after your brother rolled once. The only way you’d win with him rolling a 7 on his second roll would be to play a SEVEN bet. Which would be an even bigger dick move than Don’t Pass because it’s a one turn bet that your brother was going to roll a 7.

I guess most likely you played the don’t pass before your brother ever rolled

But if that was all we used it for, the price of gold would be a tine fraction of what it is

That’s intrinsic value.

Gold and diamonds have intrinsic value

Gold is needed for computer parts, and diamonds are used for cutting

They are more than just shiny

Their value will “never” hit 0 (Bitcoin would be worthless without gold for computers)

Yes, we could find substitutes in the future, but for the substances to not be useful somehow is so low and would have to be an apocalyptic scenario. And in an apocalypse, gold could even be worth more.

deleted by creator

Oh there are worse methods which is the crazy part

Crucifixion is more “show” when compared to other torture/execution methods. It is horrible don’t get me wrong. But its intention is not to inflict maximum pain or torture but to show maximum pain or torture to those witnessing it

Like let’s just say Christians wouldn’t be wearing a bull around their necks if it happened that way. And that’s even a milder one.

Crucifixion is death with some torture

There are torture, torture, torture, …, death methods

You can always add an “And then”

You could hack a futuristic firmware upgradable power knife, but how do you hack it to hack off fingers?

Aliens had the supernatural power to be the machines

A self driving tesla trapping people in a gas station is 100% more believable than the semi.

Something is there…