> I could hardly imagine a better display of the solipsistic assuredness of the denizens of HN, libertarian or otherwise, than that so many have just assumed that that the article sided with libertarianism and proceeded to discuss from there, apparently without even having skimmed.

There are currently 4 top-level comments (one of which is yours) and 25 total comments. None of the top level comments make such an assumption (some speak kindly of libertarianism, but do not claim that the article does), and as far as I can see neither the most (if any) of the non top-level ones.

What was it that you said about solipsism?