[dragonwriter]

> your opinion is the polar opposite of everything I believe and quite different than the libertarianism tech grew up with.

> Laws should always be challenged and dismantled whenever possible.

That's a rare belief for a libertarian; like most other ideologies, libertarians usually believe only laws which conflict with their ideology should be challenged and dismantled.

The (capitalist) model of property rights libertarians prefer is itself supported by law, which is quite possible to challenge and dismantle (I can point to organized groups who challenge it everywhere and would dismantle it if they had adequate support), but libertarians don't generally participate in that challenging and dismantling.

[malvosenior]

I think we spent a lot of time challenging and trying to dismantle digital property rights in the early consumer internet/P2P era.

You're correct in that the laws most likely to be challenged are those in the way of technological progress. I'd also say the laws that empower a growing state apparatus are also likely to be targeted.

The regulations in question here look like an obvious overstep of government into consumer affairs and a resistance against technological and market progress.

I still don't know how anyone who has ever taken a pre-Uber taxi could make an argument against Uber. The market forces alone they've created have improved service 10X in even non-Uber options.