On the ethics ... Kentaro Toyama talks about technology as an amplifier for human intent. Just as you could tighten a nut with your hands, you can tighten it

On the ethics ... Kentaro Toyama talks about technology as an amplifier for human intent. Just as you could tighten a nut with your hands, you can tighten it so much more with a wrench. Whether that nut is employed in a machine that will bring bounty for a village, or it's employed in a machine whose output by law belongs to its private owners is entirely up to the inhabitants. Will the villagers band together and build their own machine? Or will the authorities give the private creator of the machine exclusivity of the land the machine runs on and its output, leaving the villagers bereft? Whatever state our world is in is a result of our peers decision, not "good" or "bad" technology. Humans will legislate: "good" and "bad" uses are up to them, and later on up to the executive and judicial system. Pro-social (*not the same as socialist) cultures will share the wealth, others will hoard it, and you get the effects you dread: unemployment, poverty, etc. Now, a better question is: is a technology too powerful or misunderstood that it might be misused, regardless of the creator's intent?