6 ms·
So the more powerful a technology is in changing our capabilities as human beings, the more unethical it inherently is, because poor people will have less acces
by runeks 10y ago
So the more powerful a technology is in changing our capabilities as human beings, the more unethical it inherently is, because poor people will have less access to it (assuming it costs money)?
I'm not arguing on the validity of this world view, but it does seems very negative to me, since it can be applied to any powerful technology (that isn't free of charge).
I mean, computers and internet access also costs money, so does this mean that the introduction of these technologies presents an ethical problem, because the poorer part of the population may not be able to afford it, thus increasing inequality?
- oxide 10y ago>computers and internet access also costs money, so does this mean that the introduction of these technologies presents an ethical problem, because the poorer part of the population may not be able to afford it, thus increasing inequality? some folks argue yes, that internet access should be a basic human right.
- paulddraper 10y agoPoor wretched souls of the previous millennia...they all were denied their basic human rights.
- joesb 10y agoPoor slaves of the previous century .... they all were denied their basic human rights.
- paulddraper 10y agoYes, they were. And this is insensitive to say, but at least it was just the enslaved minority denied basic rights, rather than every single human on the face of the earth.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- jlgaddis 10y agoJust today there was an article in the newspaper of a nearby town stating that the school system there would be moving to "paperless" report cards; that is, report cards would be entirely online. (It did mention that parents could request a printed copy of their child's report card at any time.) My first thought was "not everyone has Internet access" -- especially in this relatively small city -- and the possible ramifications of that. Will those parents have to request a paper copy every time a report card is issued (four times per school year)? Will they eventually stop doing so? Will they stop paying attention to their child's academic progress and will the child's academic performance then suffer? Will the child slowly begin to perform worse and worse (academically) over time? Will this "digital divide" simply continue to worsen?
- milcron 10y agoInternet access should be a public utility.
- Esau 10y agoSome people can't afford public utilities either.
- int_19h 10y agoThen perhaps that is a problem that we should tackle, instead of going all Luddite about fairly basic tech because someone cannot afford it? I even wouldn't be surprised if it resulted in a net economic benefit, because the reduced overhead of new tech is less than amount of money you need to spend to make sure that everyone has access to it.
- bitJericho 10y agoLibraries already tackle this. As well as other organizations. For example, when I was a kid my main internet pc was at the state extension office.
- salamisultan 10y ago
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- digi_owl 10y agoThese days a homeless most cherished thing is a outdated mobile phone. This because job listing etc has moved online. Damn it, in most parts of the world these days healthcare handled as a public utility.
- sokoloff 10y agoI can certainly imagine why you'd want a mobile phone, but at least in our area, internet access is readily available at all public library branches as well.
- tomrod 10y ago> I mean, computers and internet access also costs money, so does this mean that the introduction of these technologies presents an ethical problem, because the poorer part of the population may not be able to afford it, thus increasing inequality? Actually, yes, there are inherent ethical problems here. In this case (computers/internet), the divide it causes is not so large that it cannot be overcome by training, savings, charitable donations, etc. However, "designer baby" technology, if not available to whomever wants it, results in an increase in feudalism to society. With a computer, anyone can become a programmer as the technology gets cheaper and more widely adopted. Designer babies and similar technologies may not have the same increasing efficiencies with adoption; such considerations should be made.
- int_19h 10y agoIt may result in more stratification, but I don't see how that translates to feudalism.
- tomrod 10y agoI view feudalism as the result of prolonged, accepted stratification. David Brin talks a bit to this in his essay The Dogma of Otherness[0] [0] http://www.davidbrin.com/dogmaofotherness.html http://www.davidbrin.com/dogmaofotherness.html
- paulddraper 10y agoAccess to computers and the internet is not quite as permanent as genetics. Were they bestowed at birth by your parents and could be acquired no other way, then you may have a case.
- peteretep 10y ago> the poorer part of the > population may not be able > to afford it, thus > increasing inequality? I am currently in Bangkok, Thailand. I walked past several people sweeping streets today who all had smartphones. I can't imagine they're getting paid above the $9/day minimum wage. Notably one was packing an iPhone 4. If 3rd-world street sweepers can get online, I believe someone in America can too, without breaking the bank.
- hueving 10y agoBut we wouldn't be in a smartphone world if people applied this 'ethical' argument to the relatively higher cost of getting online 10-20 years ago.
- tkxxx7 10y agoIt's better if you think of "designer babies" as a separate, er, product, than the biotech being discussed.