ub3rh4x0rz

There's literally a black mirror episode that explores this messed up idea. I'm sick of people disguising social control as technical innovation, essentially using a technical intermediary to remove the sense of moral responsibility or human fallibility from the equation in people's minds while it remains in actuality.

I see this going one of two ways:

1) this remains a purely "opt-in" tool, in which case the sociological condition of morbid curiosity prevails.

2) this becomes a mandatory feature of browsers, at which point it's a mechanism for automated client-side censorship. Do you then arrest people for using non-compliant devices?

U first

Dismissing/opposing geo engineering seems a bit irresponsible. It reminds me a bit of anti nuclear power extremism and Germany burning coal for >30% of their energy, which is far, far worse than nuclear.

Shouldn't we care more about efficacy than ideological purity? It's way too late in the game, and the stakes are too high.

That blanket claim isn't really convincing. So I guess ideological purity it is, got it.

Edit: discounting an active area of scientific research, increasingly focused on mimicking natural processes with significant data showing downstream effects, is wildly irresponsible in these times. Even the loftiest of emissions reduction pledges have been shown to be insufficient in staving off climate change. Lump this in there with blanket rejection of GMO, stem cell, and other science that could help us get on track if responsibly stewarded. Saying it's all good or all bad is taking yourself out of the arena and being content with noble sounding but doomed plans.