"lawlessness" <> "outside of society"

The clear implication of your original statement was that it is possible to not owe society anything by not taking anything from others. To do that requires a level of self-sufficiency that only a very small fraction of people possess.

No, I said:

“For many, society doesn't provide any advantages and so they choose non-compliance and all the consequences that come with it.”

So what I mean is you can choose to live outside of society, meaning not complying with laws. That is lawlessness, it’s a life of crime.

Living as a sovereign citizen outside of any legal structure in such a way that you neither depend on any legal structure nor do you infringe upon any legal structure is very difficult, and available only to a very small number of people.

But anyone can choose lawlessness at any time.

And I’m saying that people who do that are ethically compromised in general, and dishonest if they think they are “outside of society” while still benefitting from mains electricity, mass-produced goods, etc.