Unfortunately, any law can be abused. Just look at the drug laws. Even though minorities use illegal drugs less, they make up a majority of the arrests. I agree there are serious problems with these laws and they need to be modified or eliminated. However, we also have laws that allow confiscation of property if there is suspicion of that the property was or will be used to commit a crime. Even if no charges are filed, people are forced to sue to get their property back. Enforcement of laws can be and often is subjective. We need good laws and good people to insure that the laws are enforced fairly. Ensuring both is not an easy task.

My experience with my children is that AP and accessible do not go together.

We have not done so well natural intelligence. I'd be willing to give artificial intelligence a try.

I would make the fine at least triple the back wages owed, 120,000 plus the back wages. We should also throw the executives in jail. If anybody stole $40,000 they would face serious jail time. I do not see this as being different from stealing.

When educational programs first start they almost always have better than average results. Part of the reason is that the creators are committed to making the programs work. Once the programs are widely used, the results decline because the teachers are not as committed. While these results merit further trials, there is no guarantee that the results would be sustained when widely used.

We all may need to sign up for this. Once net neutrality goes away, it might be the only social network that has good service.

The airwaves, phone, and Internet are a public resource and should be treated as public utilities. If these companies are not willing to maintain net neutrality then take away their licenses. I am already paying more for bad service and slower speeds than other countries. Given the level of service and speed, most of these companies should have had their licenses revoke years ago.

"Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world."

Wrong! Since the results are required to be independently reproduced and verified, science always requires more than one person to be right. One person, however, can be proven wrong.

Great! Now if I have an accident I can claim I was improving your car by making it more aerodynamic.

Municipalities should be allowed to build their own networks. I guess the ISPs are afraid of their competition.

The Internet does not deserve any special tax privileges. If my phone service can be taxed, so could my Internet service. Goods brought on the Internet should also be subject to the same sales taxes as goods bought locally, because, otherwise, Internet stores have an advantage.

That being said, I hate sales taxes because they are so regressive. I also despise that income is taxed differently. Wages should not be taxed more or less than other income. For example, the carried interest classification is unfair and horrible. Personally, I would like to get rid of sales taxes and most other taxes and fund most things with progressive income taxes.

"Can you sue the financial industry for losses in the market." - Unfortunately, apparently not. While I appreciate this person's point, it misses the mark.

In this case I think it is more can you sue television stations for having ads for companies that caused the financial turmoil. such as AIG, Goldman Sachs, etc. Perhaps we could sue the FCC for allowing those ads. Generally, the answer to that question is no, and I do not think it is fair to sue Tor because somebody uses their product for bad purposes. If somebody purposely crashes a car into people, you cannot sue the automaker.

As to the main point, for too long, rich and powerful companies have suffered no consequences for their bad behavior, and often others suffer the ill effects. So it may not be possible to sue the gun makers when somebody uses a gun to kill somebody, yet often these companies support laws that make it easier to buy guns. We could, however, apply Milton Friedman's concept of "Neighborhood Effects" and make companies pay for their bad actions. In the case of gun makers, we could charge them every time somebody is killed with a firearm, say $20,000. Every time somebody is injured, we charge $10,000, and for crimes committed with firearms, we charge $5,000. This gives the companies an incentive to keep guns away from bad people.

For the companies that caused the financial crisis, we could limit the CEOs' pay to $100,000/year until we get back to employment at pre-2008 levels.

Obviously, there are many ways this principle could be applied, and we do need to find a way to make companies and individuals pay for their bad actions.

What happens if the GPS is wrong and how do we make the car go to the right location? Just recently, I went to a store and the GPS routed me the wrong way. I also have had many case where the GPS misses the address by several hundred feet. I think before we go robot cars the routing needs to perfect, and that has not been achieved yet.

Snowden used his sysadmin privileges to assume the user profiles of top NSA officials in order to gain access to the most sensitive files. His sysadmin privileges also enabled him to do something other NSA users can't — download classified files from NSAnet onto a thumb drive.

Perhaps my standard of brilliance is different, but having a sysadmin who knows how to take the identities of other users and does so does not seem particularly brilliant. Then, also using his privileges to download to a thumb drive does not seem particularly brilliant. I would expect any sysadmin to be able to figure this out.

If this is the standard for brilliance at the NSA, then it has a real problem.

So if my daughter, who goes to college in Boston, rents books there, and then brings the books home during a vacation, she if violating the contract. That is ridiculous.

As for taxes, the online sellers should definitely have to pay sales taxes, but there is a more general issue. I hate sales taxes because they are regressive. If I had my way, the only taxes I would have would be income taxes. The tax rate would be base on amount of income regardless of source. This means that wages, dividends, capital gains, etc. would all be taxed at the same rate. I would eliminate FICA taxes as separate taxes, and allocate a percentage of all taxes paid to pay for Social Security and Medicare. The same strict rules would apply to corporate taxes, and all income, including offshore earnings would be taxed. Companies like GE would have to pay their fair share of income taxes. (GE has avoided paying any federal income taxes for several years.)

If I screw up, such as being late with a payment, I get charged a fee. The insurance executives had almost four years to solve the problem, but have no incentive to fix it. They get more money with the status quo. Meanwhile, people go without medical care or go bankrupt from medical costs. It is time to penalize the executives, so limit their pay to a maximum of $400,000 until they solve the problem. Also, for any family that has to pay more than $12,700, each company involved should pay $500 fee for each incident, and three times the amount over $12,700. I bet they solve the problem really fast.

Actually, we (the United States) should just get rid of the insurance companies and implement a single-payer system. Everybody would be covered. Nobody would die for lack of health care. Patients would have more freedom and could choose any doctor they want. Copayments and deductibles could be eliminated, and there would be no medical bankruptcies. The country would save $592 billion in 2014 if we went to a single-payer system.