Ok, I apologize for the stream of conciousness style of my posting but there were a couple of issues that I just didn't get.
First, OK, NAT IS THE DEVIL. But the authors security argument about NAT was that people were using wireless lans and getting in through the backdoor to attack the PC's. IPv6 doesn't do anything to mitigate that.
Second, the idea that having every object in your house have a two way freeway to the internet has to be a ddos attackers dream come true. Sure I can see my 67 year old dad setting up a firewall to keep his web enabled toaster from sending out bad and evil packets onto the internet. Right after he wins the XPRIZE for that orbital Refrigerator he has been working on. Get real, most users can't figure out what an icon really is, and now they will be the key to securing this brave new world.
Third, does this not let ISP's charge more now that we will be using 100's of IP addresses?
4th, think of all the applications that haven't even been thought of yet. Come on. At least with the new ipv6 we will be able to watch his daughter go to college, and probably follow her on dates and to the bathroom. PROGRESS? Not meant to be an insult, but the purient aspects of all this technology just floors me sometimes. I guess I am a Luddite.
So in closing, I think it will happen and I for one don't care if we (the US) lags behind. In the long run that will make it cheaper for us and the pioneers can take those arrows for us. And as for using up most of the ipv4 address space, what can be said but "WE RULE"!!!