farble, I'm impressed by Bruce's patience in not smacking you down earlier. Google and looking at UIDs are your friend before you go wading into a fight with a legend.

Cynical translation: Advertising to consumers should be illegal, that way only doctors can be advertised to, in the form of kickbacks and invitations to "conferences".

I see a large difference between the government forcing two parties to do business vs a single business forcing a customer to go elsewhere.

From the sounds of his interviews, I think he believed that the information would carry more weight if the source was know. If these were just anonymous leaks, they would be easier to discredit. It seems like he was fully aware of the dangers, and what he would be giving up, and decided it was worth it.

I think he was right, the leaks carry more weight with a name behind them, and further, its clear to the public that he wouldn't put himself in this position just for the "fun" of releasing false information.

Why do you assume the government will always be as tolerate as you suppose above? The average American commits something like 3 felonies a day, unwittingly. Sure, these laws, just like laws on sexual practices, should be struck down, but enabling better surveillance doesn't help strike them down.

The reason you should be in favor of a less invasive government is to protect yourself when the people you don't agree with are in power. Because it will happen eventually.

Interesting idea. I wonder how much demand would drop. Technically we could all be renting time on Amazon servers instead of owning our own machines, but instead the thin client never worked and we buy millions of computers.

You can call a taxi in may small cities if you are willing to wait 10 minutes for one to show up. Would automated drivers really speed that up? People own a car so they can be independent.

Yes, because there are more people starving today, or without heat, or other basic necessities than there were 50 years ago. Has inequality increased? Yes. But you can't ignore the fact that that the average person in the bottom 20% is better off today than in 1960.

And that's just in the US. Around the world millions have been raised out of poverty through the productivity increases from technology in manufacturing and agriculture.

In what universe were the equity holders of GM wiped out? The stock never dropped below 28 and now the UAW owns the largest piece valued at $4.8 billion. That the bond holders got a haircut rather than the equity holders was a travesty of contract law and an under the table handout to the union.

Not that the bailout of the banks was any better, but to suggest that the handling of GM is the correct method is crazy.

How about Combat Flight Sims? Seems like pretty slim pickings lately. Mostly more Arcade style than proper Sims like Falcon. And what about Formula 1, is GP4 still the best that can be done?

To use your example of diabetics, I'm sure many people could learn to better listen to their bodies, especially with a training aid such as a real time read our of what they are trying to listen to.

I'm sure many people have certain "feelings" in their body, either moods, or energy levels, that are familiar to them, but they can't correlate it with hydration level, blood sugar, or 10s of other things that might affect how your body feels.

But with a read out, we could learn that "oh, that feeling means a lower than normal (for them) level of testosterone", with out looking at the meter, and know that its time to get some exercise in.

But calibrating your "feelings" is very difficult at present, with out lots of trial and error, or training in sport. This might lead to wider availability of an athlete's level of body awareness.

How is it a "race to the bottom" when states compete provide the best services for the lowest price (tax burden)? To attract companies, states, and countries, must do two things. 1) Keep taxes low enough to attract business and employees, 2) Provide the services and infrastructure which will attract the best employees. Neither of these entail bending laws to benefit business. It is not about favoring business over people, or the other way around. It is about removing favoritism and letting people get on with improving their way of life.

Is this hard? Of course it is, welcome to the real world where there is no free lunch.

Make no mistake, if our states do not start competing for business, then other countries will.