“Interesting” logic. “We eradicate HIV. So what? Malaria will occupy it’s place in the list of deadly diseases. We stop serial killer A. So what? Serial kille

“Interesting” logic. “We eradicate HIV. So what? Malaria will occupy it’s place in the list of deadly diseases. We stop serial killer A. So what? Serial killer B will become number 1. We stopped all burglars. So what? Cyber-crime becomes the leading threat! It’s too late, the idea of the crime is out of the bottle! What do you want, to start global brainwashing operation to tell people that stealing is bad?!” Well yes. Why not start a “global brainwashing program” of explaining to folks that burning a noticeable share of world’s energy to create a mechanism that is outside of control of (ideally) democratic and therefore accountable governments and is to a good degree under control of shady groups is not such a good idea? Additional note for those interested. A while ago I watched a lecture by Francis Fukuyama where he talks among other things about states which collapse simply because they’ve lost effective control over part of their territory. That’s actually pretty scary and makes you think. It’s good when a government is able to control a certain thing but doesn’t. And it’s a different story when a government simply cannot do anything. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKq_YvC1R14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKq_YvC1R14 P.S. Drugs are actually a bad example. Most of them haven’t won at all. And in many places they were practically driven out (including alcohol). Their price increases when you prohibit them. Their effectiveness does not depend on the number of users, etc.