I think there's a fundamental moral issue about whether it's right for a machine to decide to kill a person. It's bad enough that people are deciding to kill people, but at least they have perhaps some moral argument that they're doing it to ultimately defend their families or prevent some greater evil.

One of the main things we have been looking at is, how can we get a robot to think about situations it's never seen before?

I think that Election Day is the closest thing we have to a civic sacrament, when people meet their neighbors at the firehouse or the school and they vote at the same time.

I think it's important that campaigns be aired all the way through, that people aren't voting three weeks before, before debates are held.

Now it's become sort of a - you know, just sort of a casual thing, and you can vote any time at all. It doesn't increase turnout. It hasn't increased turnout, really. And I don't think it's a healthy development. I sound like an old fogey here.

I think we have reached such saturation levels, the money at this point doesn't swing election.

I think that, from Vaclav Havel own experience, he knew if we all paid attention to what was going on, the chances were that even the most horrible dictators wouldn't execute people.

I think he [Vaclav Havel] is one of the great figures of the 20th century. He is one of the people that was able to be a part of overthrowing a dictatorial system by talking to people and understanding what the elements of democracy really are and respect for each other and elevating.

I think he [Vaclav Havel] felt that he could speak more truth, in a way, through writing plays.