We shouldn't ban any technology. However, we should ban a technology when it is used for _____. The ban should cover the use, not the technology itself. It's fi

We shouldn't ban any technology. However, we should ban a technology when it is used for _____. The ban should cover the use, not the technology itself. It's fine to make building a nuclear bomb illegal, but studying radioactive elements should not be. Similarly, the technologies this article describes "identification, correlation and discrimination" should not be outright banned, but maybe they should be when their use conflicts with other important values (e.g., due process in criminal prosecution, privacy rights). Recent targeting of facial recognition does not "miss the point", the reason it has become an issue is because it has started being used in the criminal justice system. No one really gets upset when it's just used to tag your photos. I know developers love abstractions, but we should not try to build abstractions of technology and regulate those. To borrow from the article, identifying a person based on their "gait" is not nearly as serious an issue as facial recognition, even if abstractly they may seem similar to a developer. Instead, focus on the direct problem at hand, regulate it, and only after the passage of time when commonalities become clear, build an abstraction.