Wrong, a human being takes a lot of time to develop and during this time the things it can tolerate are different. As a person grows it gets stronger and best prepared to deal with the world. A child is not ready to deal with sexuality, neither his mind nor his body are ready for that.
So, a person 5 years old is not the same as a person 30 years old and is not the same as a person 90 years old. The things that can harm them are as different as the things they can take without any danger.
You can argue all day about the exact number of years to put the line but you just can't say there is no difference.

It is also uninteresting for software developers so you have a system without malware and almost useless because you just don't have any software to run on it. Also you can't comunicate with other peoples systems because yours is incompatible and different. Unfortunately the malware is the price we have to pay for having access to such a big network. If we had hundred different incompatible systems it would be a nightmare to write any software that runs on all of them (be it good or bad software). With some sort of common standard is easy (for certain values of easy) to develop software that can run everywhere, good software and evil software.

Where I come from we write it dd/mm but after some thinking about it I realized that mm/dd is just easier to sort and compare.

Do you really believe this? I think is just the opposite. The field is not leveled, there are (and always be) few people with a lot of power and a lot of people with little power. Without rules the ones standing on the top would remain there and increase their advantage over the others. Free markets leads to monopoly in most cases, and we know how that benefits us all.

Forget the overhead on the justice department, just tell me how can someone know if what he/she is doing is legal, should everyone ask a partner a full psicological examination before having sex?

I think the point of putting Linux to do quick tasks is that it can let you do those tasks faster, not slower. So even if they see Linux as the limited choice it should be the faster way of doing those tasks. Besides if people start actually using Linux they may discover two important things: the Windows way is not the only one nor the easiest one; and Linux is a usable OS for them.

You forget something really important about the average person: they don't make decisions, they just do what they are told to do. More so in areas they don't understand. The average person goes to the store and buys a computer, he doesn't know what an OS is and doesn't care. At work he uses whatever machine the company gives him. So when you think about what the average person uses you have to think about what the tech/boss/vendor tells him.

There are infinite mistakes they could make that won't lead to a massive destruction and we could learn from all of them. Maybe there are some chances that something really bad happens and the earth or humanity is destroyed, there are also some chances that nothing bad happens, and then you have a lot of middle ground. We can learn from this experiment just as we learnt from many others, all of them dangerous.

Maybe because it would be the fastest, easiest and probably only way to do it. Historically it was the only way to really expand man frontiers, to take big risks. Even to die trying. If we keep thinking the way to go is with all the safety conditions and guarantees we won't be going anywhere. Of course everyone involved should be aware of the dangers and chances of success.