The thing is, almost all technology is a double edged sword. That doesn’t do much to alleviate the responsibility of those who do it to understand the ethics of

The thing is, almost all technology is a double edged sword. That doesn’t do much to alleviate the responsibility of those who do it to understand the ethics of the world, but usually that’s beyond our ability. I’m sure few working on consumer drones in the beginning anticipated their use on the battle field. The internet itself is a great example of how much benefit can come from access to knowledge, as well as the ability to how limitless (mis)knowledge can be simultaneously used to destroy societies. Ultimately bad actors will do bad things regardless with whatever they have access to. Of course new bad things can come along, but what metric should we use to decide whether an idea is worth perusing? Who should make the cost benefit analysis, when the reality 20 years down the road is often unknowable (bad and good)?