Civilizations follow patterns. China and India have most often been the "invadee". The Greco-Roman-Euro-US and the Persian and the Turkic (and sometimes the Egyptian) cultures have frequently been invaders.

So no, I think the old Persian culture still lurks in Iran, and given the right conditions, this once great nation could again be an aggressor.

I can almost sympathize! The money spent getting all these treaties and legislation enacted would have bought a Porsche in SF or maybe Riviera house, or maybe even an apartment for when they are next in Paris, France.

Buying all those pollies must be costing them a shitload of money. And I am not sure (on a technical level) whether they are blocking it at dns level or tcp/ip level. And even if they get them both, stopping the Onion (Tor) would be a much harder problem.

I suspect that they will develop such negative Karma that customer preferences will go to "liscence free" product.

Um, would you like to buy an ap that blocks that software?

Very cheap Only $1 per month.

(Until Intel offers me more:)

Here is the cite from "The Australian". http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/judge-wants-data-on-wealth-before-he-rules-on-apple/story-e6frgakx-1226389535095

A reviewer judge has called for info on how much investment Apple has in Oz also how many ppl were affected.

The first "petitio principii" is "coito ergo sum" (apologies to Descartes).

The second is "libertatum super omnes".

And "libertatum" as in article 4 of "the rights of man"

http://www.barvennon.com/~liberty/Declaration_of_rights_of_man.html

If somebody's words do you injury, then the right place to seek restitution is before a jury of peers. Not in legislation.

False analogy = true.

"Inciting to harm" should not be a crime. Doing harm is the crime.

It is the difference between assault and battery.

Thank you for that correction.

No copyright = no GPL.

"Inciting to harm" should not be a crime. Doing harm is the crime.

  It's like the difference between "assault" and "battery".

With assault, you are not harmed. At the limit, you feel threatened with harm.
With battery, there are bruises.

Thank you. The insult was deserved.

Going back to point 1. The Germans are, of course, devolved Anglosphere.
2&3 Lets leave it as a grey area. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derryn_Hinch#Sexual_Relationship_With_Underage_Girl This radio commenter was jailed for (ultimately) the "hate crime" of publicly identifying a pederast.
4. In some cultures (Aboriginal Australian, even 50 years ago) children under 6 or so ran around in public, naked. Look in National Geographic a few decades ago. Finding something to be "pornographic" is largely cultural. (OTOH Finding something to be sexually arousing is personal and partly cultural.) No violence whatsoever. Free speech is publishing images & words.
5. This is the reverse Jailed for free speech about Muslim beliefs. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/20/three-muslims-convicted-gay-hate-leaflets

Your criticism of evidence is fair. In defense, I usually note things in passing, and forget details, so cannot substantiate anti-muslim activity jailings.

points
1. Not crime to deny holocaust in Anglosphere. conceded.
2 & 3. Rather a fine legal point there between inciting "hate" and "violence". Not conceded.
4. That is a cultural question. Not conceded.
5. Good lawyers in the US can cite (is it the first?) amendment. But In my country (AU) you better have the capacity to fight. Partly conceded.
6. But what is HS doing closing down wikileaks and copyright websites? And don't people get into trouble at airports? Reckon it's happening but we don't get to hear of it. not conceded.

So fines (that can lead to incarceration) can and does happen without violence in 2, 3, 4, 5 (AU) and 6.

I would mod you up to 5.

In childrearing, my philosophy was let them do anything they wanted, with the limitation that "only so long as it is not too much trouble to keep a watch that they don't kill themselves" (or someone else).

" Is there no line that can be crossed between holding an opinion and seeking harm to others?" I think the line is the infringement of the other's liberty.

From "The Rights of Man" 1789. Article IV "Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one else; hence the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society the enjoyment of the same rights."

As for enforcement. I do not think there is such thing as "a right to privacy in public space".

To control violence I would have all public space under continuous (webcam) observation with facial recognition and AI watching for any developing situation.

Your generalizations about Electric v IC engines are inaccurate. For instance the torque capacity of the two most common electric motor types (induction v synchronous) vary more from each other than does either from an otto cycle.

Both capacitors and batteries store electric energy. One important difference is the power discharge/recharge rate. Another is the energy density (J/Kg). Batteries are about twice as good as capacitors. At least according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Energy_density_in_energy_storage_and_in_fuel