3 ms·
> We don't know scientifically. Expect to find out in two decades, when its too late for you to do anything about it! The alternative is for humanity to introd
by judge2020 4y ago
> We don't know scientifically. Expect to find out in two decades, when its too late for you to do anything about it!
The alternative is for humanity to introduce layers of bureaucracy and regulation for all new technology to prevent them from being used until it's been proven to be safe across decades of use. This is both impractical and inefficient (we might focus research on speculative tech nobody ends up caring about, new tech is often prohibitively expensive until it's mass produced, etc).
- forgetfreeman 4y agoImpractical from the standpoint of someone who's looking to profit off the invention surely, but explain why that should be the primary driver and not general wellbeing?
- inkcapmushroom 4y agoWhen we are using the entire world's population as a guinea pig, and the stakes can be as high as "we accidentally sterilized/killed/crippled a large part of the world's/our nation's population", I don't know that having a less sticky cooking pan now instead of 20 years from now is worth it. I agree that a ban on new untested inventions seems impractical at the same time. I don't know what the "right answer" is in this case, but maybe there should be more regulation on testing potentially dangerous chemicals a start.