I'll continue to assume you have no evidence as you continue to not produce any. ==Exactly so there is no need to regulate information or opinion coming out of

I'll continue to assume you have no evidence as you continue to not produce any. ==Exactly so there is no need to regulate information or opinion coming out of a essentially a robot.== Two comments ago it couldn't be regulated because it would "stop people from voicing their opinions, or expressing satire, or discussing politics"; now you say they are just robots. Which is it, people or robots? Your stance is equivalent to believing Samuel Clemens couldn't be held liable for something that "Mark Twain" did/said. If you build a bot and that bot commits fraud, you have committed fraud. ==This has been a fun conversation but I am done speaking on it as for nothing we discuss will change anything or either's opinion. == You are speaking for yourself, not me.