Also, I've written and thought more about this than I should have really. If this article hadn't been praised so much I wouldn't have even read it based on the title. I cover my issues with it in other comments. I have heard all this before. Really started coming up around 2016.

On positive / negative rights specifically the issue libertarians have with positive rights is that they require some sort of action from others. If rights are to be protected (that seems to insinuate negative rights btw) and the right requires resources to provide, then how do you get those resources? Well, if people choose to give that fixes that. But that is hardly a right if it is voluntary. A positive right in my view requires a state or entity to use the threat of force to provide it.

We could get into consent and contracts but I don't want to spend all day thinking and writing about this. I'll just say there is a lot written about this. The curious libertarian can go read on these topics and they mostly predate the libertarian movement.