33 ms·
If we follow this analogy further, why should we keep the concept of car doors if particular car locks can be made with bugs in them? Doesn't the possibility of
by belorn 3y ago
If we follow this analogy further, why should we keep the concept of car doors if particular car locks can be made with bugs in them? Doesn't the possibility of bugs in locks means that there will always be a risk, even if we abandon specific locks that has demonstrated to have a bug in them?
- tptacek 3y agoWe should keep the locks that work and don't cause other problems, and ditch the other ones. Again, seems simple.
- smaudet 3y agoDepends whether locks can be made to work. Solutions exist within problem spaces, or "paradigms", a car lock is only useful for a specific set of things i.e. deterring thieves or unwanted entry e.g. at stop lights. What I really want is a force-field to keep people and highway debris out while driving around, and a secure storage solution while not in operation. If you could sell me a force-field car with a retracting tent, and it were safer/had less issues, I might not care to have locks on my car. See also - door-less/open air vehicles. Car door locks have some pretty serious issues. There are some problems they just can't solve.