Agreed. If you're worried about getting internet to people who don't have clean water, or are worried about the local militia rounding them up, you've got your priorities wrong.

Around here, you can educate them yourself by opening your own state approved school and following certain rules. That's what homeschooling looks like here. You can't just "teach them yourself". Obviously, things may differ in your jurisdiction.

The downside is having to prove that they didn't hire you for that reason. Who the best candidate is is subjective. Did I not hire tlambert because he has $DISEASE, or because the other guy was a better candidate?

And as the other reply points out, lawsuits take time. I don't know about you, but I actually need money regularly. Sitting on my butt while a lawsuit wends its way through court is not something I can afford to do.

Cite, please.

The whole reason we vaccinate is because it's been shown that fewer people get sick or die when we do. Yes, there are sometimes adverse reactions, but it's worse when we don't.

Also, the "free" education is neither free nor voluntary. You pay for it in taxes. You send your kids or you go to jail, unless send them to a different, approved school.

We don't ban alcohol because there are alcoholics. We ban gambling because some people are using the law to enforce their own dubious moral code.

Right, so when you get a disease that people are irrationally afraid of and no one will hire you, then what?

The whole throw away privacy argument relies on everyone being more or less rational. Even if everyone is, maybe you get diagnosed with a disease that's going to kill you in a few years, but you'll be functional up until the end. Plenty of people won't hire you just because they won't hire someone who is only going to be there for a couple years regardless of the reason.

We aren't taking the status quo, building a whole new layer on it, and pretending it'll work. That's how it's different.

http://theppa.org/

Unfortunately (if you're a poker player), it's not an issue the general public cares much about, so not much has happened.

Personally, I think it's stupid that I can go blow $20 on a movie and popcorn, or $more drinking in the bar for a night, but if I want to put $50 on a poker site and play it for months, well, that's just gotta be stopped!

It is never gambling when the odds are biased in one sides favour, then it is fraud and losing.

Absolute nonsense. It's might fraud if they tell you the odds are even. They don't.

Ironically, some of the worst odds you'll find are in state run lotteries.

Do you really mean to tell me that the IRS uses an email system that keeps the only copy of a user's email on the user's PC, and the user's PC isn't backed up? In the era of records laws, retention requirements, etc?

I read about this working in a medical research lab 20 years ago.

That's not profit, that's theft.

He spent $150,000 to make $10,000. What profit?

But, see, it's not going to happen. At least not anytime soon, because it won't be as safe as you think it will be.. Do you have children? Ask yourself: Would you really put your child(ren), alone, in a driverless vehicle, and send them off to Grandma's house?

Ok, that's fair. If it's not as safe as I think it'll be, then I don't want it either, and you and I don't actually disagree at all. My entire argument is conditional and predicated on that. IF and only if automated transportation is significantly safer, I want it. If it's ridiculously safer, by which I'm thinking 10 to 100 times safer or more, yeah, I don't want you to have a choice. Or at least I want to be able to travel on a different set of roads than you do. Maybe you're the best driver ever, but I see plenty of idiots every day, and I see 3-5 accidents a week on my 20 mile, mostly interstate commute.

And yeah, absolutely I want to put my kids in a driverless vehicle if they have many fewer accidents per mile than I do. I don't see it as any different than putting my kids on a plane. I *feel* safer driving them. I'm in control. I trust me. Nevertheless, they're statistically less likely to die going from A to B on a commercial airliner, so I relinquish control and let them be a little safer.

I really don't see it as giving up mastery at all. I hope to get in a car someday and say "drive me to work", then take a nap or read a book. My car will still be absolutely my servant, I just won't have to help it out so much.

Actually, I have 3 dogs. I just don't let them chase people.

I hate to break it to ya, but you live in a world where your actions affect other people. It just doesn't work to say "I'm going to do what I want!" and have me say the same thing when we want opposing things. There has to be some compromise. Or someone has to lose. I don't know a better way to handle that than majority rule. To be clear, I'm not proposing some sort of dictatorial regime where I or someone else gets to make that choice for everyone. I think it should be a consensus. If and when enough people want human driven cars off the roads, yeah, I think it should happen.