You can't give people freedom, you can only help them to free themselves.

The problem with pointing to failed stated like Rwanda or Somalia as examples of why anarchy doesn't work is that they're full of people who didn't set themselves free. They're slaves who were unfortunate enough to have had their masters disappear on them, with the predictably ensuing chaos.

A people who choose for themselves to live as a society based on relationships of mutual consent and free of coercion would be an entirely different story.

Look, I'm a crazy anarchist (anarcho-capitalist specifically) and you're a statist tool. We're not going to come to an understanding, the ideological rift is too wide.

You think you're presenting a side of the argument that I haven't heard before?

This may be hard to fathom, but not everyone believes that government control and compulsory taxation are necessary to have a functioning society.

Answer me this, how is compulsory taxation qualitatively different from extortion by organized crime?

It may work for you, but not everyone is eager to fall into line as a good sheep. The ethics of slavery just don't sit well with me.

Don't be afraid of a little self promotion. I like supporting authors and publishers that aren't dicks.

What are your books and who is your publisher?

I want to see a constant reminder of how much of my money is going to taxes with every transaction and on every receipt. As soon as taxes get rolled into price tags, they become less visible and easier to jack up. Same reason income tax withholding is evil - people lose track of how much is being stolen and get excited just to have the government give some of their money back to them.

Whoever the blame lies with, my choice is the same - I don't buy DRM.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=32abc0b0-802a-23ad-440a-88824bb8e528

I wasn't aware what the the progressive left desires is perfectly reflected by current law, nor was I aware that the progressive left exists exlcusively within the United States.

There have been hate crime laws already enacted and struck down by the USSC ( example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._A._V._v._City_of_St._Paul ), and there are plenty of hate speech laws in other countries that wouldn't pass constitutional muster in the US.

Almost all my ebooks come from Baen. They may cost a little more, but they are 100% free of Apple-style dickery, including DRM.

I've seen quite a few members of the progressive left argue for silencing global warming deniers, and I'd call the majority of hate crime laws state censorship of ideas.

Lobbyists aren't always bad, they don't always achieve their goals by unscrupulous means, and they don't always represent corporate interests with tons of money to throw around.

Lobbyists are an exceptionally effective means for people to communicate with their elected representatives, being a sort of representative themselves. They can provide a clear voice for large groups of similarly minded people, who would otherwise be lost in the noise.

Just because a lobbyist has no legal authority doesn't mean they're powerless or without influence.

Did you learn everything about politics and government from Schoolhouse Rock?

Sure, but they don't need to worry about that in China.

What about if there's a power cut? Should a UPS be installed on every critical robot, together with a requirement for a backup generator?

Uh... yeah, I'd say so. Isn't that pretty common for hospital equipment?

If the hospital/clinic/whatever fails to take reasonable precautions against power failures during surgery I'd say they're probably going to be held liable for the consequences.

Kinda depends on why the robot fucked up, doesn't it?

If it wasn't used properly, the human surgeon/operator.
If it had a manufacturing defect or programming error, the manufacturer.