“distrust in capitalism and our pseudo-democratic plutocracies, the profit motive to replace the human workforce, the reckless criminal-incompetence of its implementation, and apparent stupidity of the average hairless primate”

I have hair, thank you very much, but seriously get out of my head. The hubris these days is unbelievable.

A lot of people are making well-reasoned arguments about human nature, the nature of a dangerous tool, defining responsible use, and the challenges inherent in any sort of ban.

The points that look the best to me definitely include tagging, but I haven’t seen suggested any method of gatekeeping as to who has access to the means of dissemination of software. Because the damage by the tool is determined by the one who wields it, only people who have established trustworthiness should be allowed to contribute.

A perfect example of a tool used responsibly vs a tool in the hands of an idiot. There’s nothing that can be done to make idiots stop idioting.

It is just a tool, but human nature makes it a net negative. There are a lot of tools like that, and history shows that once the cat is out of the bag, humanity just has to live with the damage that tool causes. There’s literally nothing that can be done to stop it on a large scale, but small communities can always dictate what they will tolerate.