Your reasoning logic, applied consistently, would consider almost everything we have today dystopian. For example: "Using the Hindu-Arabic numeral system inste

Your reasoning logic, applied consistently, would consider almost everything we have today dystopian. For example: "Using the Hindu-Arabic numeral system instead of the Roman numeral system is the most dystopian thing I've heard about in a while. Prison Planet Earth, where everyone is uniquely identified by a number, perhaps surgically implanted on an RFID tag? How much compute resource would be needed to create an AI minder for each and every human on top of that, constantly updating their social credit score on a daily basis?" It's the slippery slope argument taken to an extreme. The way to fight the slippery slope fallacy is to fight against the things that may be dystopian/bad. Not argue that anything that is good/neutral is bad because it may potentially make some minor dystopian/bad outcome slightly more likely. If you do want to make such an argument, then you have to weigh the pros vs the cons. And it's very hard to see how a word problem to illustrate the Birthday Paradox comes anywhere close to the bad outweighing any possible benefit from it.