I say that ownership is granted by the possession of information necessary and sufficient to exclusively control a resource (the thing owned) in absence of a conflict. When conflict occurs, possession may become divorced from ownership temporarily, as the aggression causes a divergence from the libertarian counterfactual. In a free society, such divergences tend to be made whole after some time and tend to not happen extremely often in the first place.
The thread you shared here has a very different concept of property than I have, believing instead in the law of the jungle, might makes right.
Bitcoin is not designed as a complete libertarian solution. It cannot enforce the property rights that I talk about on its own, except in that it is one of the most basic tools for that job: having clearly defined rules and the power to enforce continued possession (which is useful in a free society as it makes property rights less complicated to enforce). We cannot use Bitcoin as our only tool to free the world. We need private defense firms, speech, guns, philosophy, ethical people, curious people, and a thriving culture of personal responsibility.
