|
|
|
|
|
by dionidium
2001 days ago
|
|
Not only is what I’m suggesting not insane, it’s inevitable. As we gain more and more technological control over deadly machines like cars the insane thing will be not to install the tech that makes them far less deadly. Geofencing a car on public roads doesn’t eliminate any legal uses of the car. It doesn’t violate any rights or freedoms. It doesn’t involve any interesting tradeoffs or compromises. It’s a commonsense banality. This claim shocks people, but that’s just because we used to live in a world where you’d have to do something objectionable to achieve these kinds of goals. But that’s increasingly not true; our intuitions just haven’t caught up to this new reality. (Obviously, by the way, that’s why your examples aren’t equivalent. I don’t want to chip your brain or your computer, because that would entail an objectionable limitation. Preventing you from speeding in your car on a public right-of-way does not require any objectionable limitation. It only seems like it might, because we’re used to thinking there’s no way you could prevent these kinds of things without doing something objectionable.) |
|