Would the destructive tech be more, less, or equally ethical if it was closed source?
And is one group having access to weapons of a more destructive type than other groups better for the world? Or just better for the better armed group? And is their use of the superior weaponry more moral in any way?
No one should have open source access to destructive tech
I highly disagree, and regardless of my personal opinion this assertion is impossible to enforce anyways. It’s far too easy to create a gun or bomb (i.e. destructive tech) out of common materials and tools you find in a hardware store. Trying to supress any and all destructive would put us back to the stone age
I was challenging that open source is always ethical tech. No one should have open source access to destructive tech, for example.
But is that a quality of the open source?
Would the destructive tech be more, less, or equally ethical if it was closed source?
And is one group having access to weapons of a more destructive type than other groups better for the world? Or just better for the better armed group? And is their use of the superior weaponry more moral in any way?
I highly disagree, and regardless of my personal opinion this assertion is impossible to enforce anyways. It’s far too easy to create a gun or bomb (i.e. destructive tech) out of common materials and tools you find in a hardware store. Trying to supress any and all destructive would put us back to the stone age