Replying to Avatar Kevin's Bacon

**Private property** is a resource that is exclusively controlled by an economic actor. This actor could be a consensus system of a group of people, an android, or a single human. What matters is that the actor is a rational actor that pursues ends according to a prioritized value scale and manipulates its environment to exchange or transform resources in its universe in accordance with these ends. The corallary of possessing exclusive control of the resource is the private posession of information, in the context of the universe and the information in it, sufficient to exclusively control the resource in the respect in which the resource is owned.

For example, a Bitcoin UTXO is owned in, among other respects, the respect of dispensing any portion of bitcoin up to its nominal value into the possession denoted by any public key or public key hash, provided a sufficient fee is deducted from the total value and passed out of ownership. This exclusive control exists exactly because the private key for the address and the knowledge of how to use it—the information required for control—is possessed exclusively by the owner of the UTXO, in the context of a universe with a functioning Bitcoin network.

Information may be dispersed, localized, distributed, marked on a ledger, intrinsic to the state of the matter within spacetime in the universe, denoted in the owner's mind, denoted in multiple people's minds, what have you. The operative principle is that it is information in a configuration necessary to control the property and that this control (and thereby part of the information) is exclusively possessed by the owner.

This definition also implies that for all conflicts between actors over the control of the resource in the respect in which the owner does control it, the conflict is resolved in favor of the original owner, as this is the only way that the control is exclusively attributable to the owner. In the event a conflict is resolved in favor of a latecomer, the property ceases to be the private property of the owner. Voluntarily relinquishing exclusive control also releases the resource into nature or into another actor's control and thereby terminates private ownership by the original owner.

Ethics can best be considered and analyzed starting from this positive account of private property. As a preview of such a discussion, Natural Law would imply some restrictions on the ethical use of private property, such as one ought not control resources in such a way as to violate the physical integrity of another's property or to violate informed consent.

My #definitions

#economics

#austrianeconomics

#humanaction

#praxeology

#privateproperty

----

ABSOLUTE DICK LICENSE, version 0.00:

©Kevin's Bacon 2025 under the terms of the ABSOLUTE DICK LICENSE

You may reach the author at/give credit to: nostr:nprofile1qqsrmkj9qz9q8ywhjvlp4e7v8wzyhlv3eykaalg02h8x4lgz2am09kcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ehx7um5wghxyctwvshszythwden5te0dehhxarj9emkjmn99uuqk9wh , alt nostr:nprofile1qqs8cx6mg3u9st644nmwefk7449ph3f3mdhsev0k55xt59pktt2940sppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7ltn70w

You (the Possessor(s) of a copy or substantial portion of this intellectual work) may copy this work or do whatever the F you want with it, provided you do not violate the Non-Aggression Principle and you follow these terms:

Include a copy or representation of this license in full or a reference or link to it, alongside any copies or substantial portions of the intellectual work (Copies Of The Work) which you distribute or display to others.

If you don't respect these terms, that is ok too. I (the author(s) of the work, or Author) don't actually possess the ability to stop all potential violations of the terms without initiating force, and therefore do not truly and exclusively own this copyright in any ethically justifiable manner in so far as enforcing it would violate the Non-Aggression Principle. This holds true in spite of my use of authorized symbols such as the copyright symbol ("©"), which here rendered looks like a baby face just like the babies it is meant to coddle, and in spite of the existence of explicitly proclaimed, so-called, "intellectual property laws" in multiple government jurisdictions. I do, however, truly own and reserve the right but not the obligation to call you a "JERK", a "CUNT", a "VILE FIEND", or an "ABSOLUTE DICK" if you do violate these terms and I catch you having done so. I own and reserve the right to engage in similar acts of non-aggressive speech which renders you on some people's shitlists, for any reason whatsoever.

THIS WORK IS PROVIDED AS IS, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. THIS LICENSE DOES NOT IMPLY OR CONFER ANY RIGHTS OR PRIVILEGES UPON ANY OF THE POSSESSORS OF COPIES OF THE WORK, WHO MERELY POSSESS THE NATURAL RIGHTS TO DO AS THEY WILL WITH SAID COPIATING FORCE, BY NATURE OF HAVING OBTAINED THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE WORK OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE WORK, AS ANY OWNERSHIP OR RESPONSIBILITY ON THE PART OF THE AUTHOR OF COPIES OF THE WORK NOT IN THE AUTHOR'S POSSESSION ARE HEREBY DISCLAIMED BY THE AUTHOR. SUCH AN IMPOSITION OR CLAIM OF LIABILITY AGAINST THE AUTHOR MAY BE CONSIDERED AGGRESSION AND MAY RESULT IN YOU BEING REFERRED TO AS AN "ABSOLUTE DICK" IN ADDITION TO RETALIATORY MEASURES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ARBITRATION, LITIGATION, AND PUBLIC HUMILIATION VIA MEMES.

My small contribution to science. Combined with my goofy contribution to copyright licenses.

nostr:nevent1qqsxlcfwk7042nvqutkuv5ek8tksvfpd0pd6cw8cgal6jqwlahutvyqpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtczyq7a53gq3gper4un8cdw0npms39lmywf9h006r64ee406qjhwmedkqcyqqqqqqgmrnzl2

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.