Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm basically writing in agreement with bigiain. I want to specifically look at this quote:

> Either something is okay, in which case it's okay to do with a machine, or it's not, in which case it's not okay to do at all.

Let's reflect that it's fairly easy, in the grand scheme of things, to bring explosives on board an airplane and take it down. The reason that doesn't happen more often isn't because screening procedures are so effective -- it's because very few people want to do that.

Now, people generally don't like the idea that the government, or stores, or unfriendly neighbors, or their daughter's boyfriend, might track their every movement day and night without end. And if you proposed that it should be allowed, you'd poll a lot of "it's not okay to do at all". The reason it's happening now is because it was "okay" before, which led people to do it as soon as it became possible. But, and this is where the cost structure becomes relevant, the reason it was "okay" before is not that society made a considered judgment that this sort of thing should probably be allowed. The issue was never considered at all, because the practice was impossible and therefore considering the issue was pointless. All kinds of things are legal right now only because they can't actually be done, but that's not a compelling argument for letting people do them even if they could be done.

http://archive.boasas.com/?c=59



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: