Oh I completely agree, humanity has been trying to figure out how to deal with guns for centuries, but what about the other technology in Final Notice. They created a way for people to know ahead of time that they were going to die. Their innocent thinking is this allows people to say their goodbyes wrap up loose ends, etc. But instead the loose ends wrapped up are people's lives. Do we need some kind of think tank to try to think of the worst potentials of new technology and advise governments what to be concerned about?Sarah Tariq wrote: ↑02 Mar 2018, 02:42 No doubt, every new innovation has it's pros and cons. Now it's on us how effectively we use the particular technology for the benefit of mankind. Gun is an important innovation. But it is the negative use, which is devastating society. There should be an effective control on gun's usage to avoid its harms.
How do we allow scientific innovation without ruining the world?
- AbbyGNelson
- Posts: 301
- Joined: 18 Jan 2018, 17:50
- Currently Reading: Heir to the Empire
- Bookshelf Size: 839
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-abbygnelson.html
- Latest Review: Asa's Gift by Isaac Green
Re: How do we allow scientific innovation without ruining the world?
-
- Posts: 67
- Joined: 12 Feb 2018, 04:48
- Currently Reading: The Surgeon's Wife
- Bookshelf Size: 47
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-stedape.html
- Latest Review: Puffy and the Formidable Foe by Marie Lepkowski and Ann Marie Hannon
I totally agree. Additionally, this is where laws come in. A society without laws would only become chaotic. I believe laws are the primary way to guide technology and its use in the right path.Sarah Tariq wrote: ↑02 Mar 2018, 02:42 No doubt, every new innovation has it's pros and cons. Now it's on us how effectively we use the particular technology for the benefit of mankind. Gun is an important innovation. But it is the negative use, which is devastating society. There should be an effective control on gun's usage to avoid its harms.
- Emie Cuevas
- Posts: 368
- Joined: 07 Aug 2017, 19:03
- Currently Reading:
- Bookshelf Size: 107
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-emie-cuevas.html
- Latest Review: Trumpism: A Cultural Psycho-Genesis by Michel Valentin
- Reading Device: B00JG8GOWU
If the scientists are brought up with a clear set of morals that include harm no-one, then they will create things to help everyone. Unfortunately, in a world that still thinks it needs a military presence in every country that is not going to happen.
Perhaps it's time the human race became extinct and let the machines have a go.
or you Think you can't,
You are Right
Napoleon Hill
- HouseOfAtticus
- Posts: 221
- Joined: 05 Nov 2017, 10:12
- Currently Reading:
- Bookshelf Size: 38
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-houseofatticus.html
- Latest Review: Heartaches 3 by H.M. Irwing
-
- Posts: 41
- Joined: 27 Feb 2018, 11:59
- Currently Reading:
- Bookshelf Size: 14
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sepicatt.html
- Latest Review: Sigfried’s Smelly Socks! by Len Foley
- Mouricia Allen
- Posts: 396
- Joined: 01 Jan 2018, 15:49
- Currently Reading: Covet (Fallen Angels Series #1)
- Bookshelf Size: 79
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-mouricia25.html
- Latest Review: The Life Inside Maggie Pincus by David I. Billingham
- Reading Device: B01N3UC27N
- Samy Lax
- Posts: 1101
- Joined: 30 Jan 2018, 01:40
- Currently Reading: 100 Ways to Motivate Yourself
- Bookshelf Size: 156
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-samy-lax.html
- Latest Review: Chats with God in Underwear by Eduardo Chapunoff
Balancing innovation with creating a better world, I think, should involve changes in the forces that drive
scientific and technological innovations—the funding systems, the military, and business
interests, and consumers. What's also needed is greater transparency of scientific and technological
enterprises, enabling societal actors to better monitor, assess, forecast, and influence
developments at an early stage. Maybe I am asking for too much too soon. But then, if not now, then when?
― Gail Honeyman, Eleanor Oliphant is Completely Fine
- AbbyGNelson
- Posts: 301
- Joined: 18 Jan 2018, 17:50
- Currently Reading: Heir to the Empire
- Bookshelf Size: 839
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-abbygnelson.html
- Latest Review: Asa's Gift by Isaac Green
Genetic manipulation and actually building a robotic human are a bit different. Also, I understand why you would want to choose you child's hair and eye color, we live in an age of choice and customization. But even in that scenario I don't think you've thought about all of huge potential downsides to genetic manipulation. I really don't want that to become a thing.brunettebiblio wrote: ↑02 Mar 2018, 09:32 This is a question that's been (and will be) posed for a very long time. Certain technologies can alter human life completely, but at what cost and to what reward? When do things go from natural to unnatural? I think it really depends on the technology. I'd love to be able to choose the hair and eye color of my future child for example, but I would never want to be involuntarily resurrected as a cyborg. It really comes down to who has the final say in whatever that technology is, I think, and how much will it alter their life for both the positive and the negative, to answer whether or not a technology is ethical.
If you can choose eye and hair color, can you choose for you child to not be pre-disposed to any diseases, can you choose for them to be stronger or smarter, etc. What about people who cannot afford to *update* their child. This will make class divisions more striking and make it more impossible for impoverished people or third world countries to catch up, so to speak. If you've ever seen the movie, Gattaca (great movie) then you'll know what I'm talking about. These are some of the unintended consequences that people don't think of just like in this book Final Notice.
- AbbyGNelson
- Posts: 301
- Joined: 18 Jan 2018, 17:50
- Currently Reading: Heir to the Empire
- Bookshelf Size: 839
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-abbygnelson.html
- Latest Review: Asa's Gift by Isaac Green
Oh I completely agree with you, I don't want to make everything illegal. But have you heard about some states/or cities make sugar taxes so that soft drinks are more expensive, or maybe banning bump stocks/other devices that make guns able to kill people faster. I think there are a few more nuances than yes you can have it or no you can't. There are incentives you can give people to change their actions, or peripheral objects that can be made illegal.kfwilson6 wrote: ↑02 Mar 2018, 10:22 There are so many things we could take away from people because they don't use them properly, for the greater good, or in moderation. The government could ban the production of donuts because of how much sugar they have and they could cause obesity which leads to other health issues which leads to death. Should everyone be denied donuts because some people can't control their physical urges? I'm of the belief system that guns don't kill people and forks don't make people fat. Unfortunately the benefits do not always outweigh the negative outcomes but that is a result of CHOICES.
Currently in some states you can go to a court, argue that a person is not in the mental state to have guns, and the court can order their guns to be removed from them for a time while they figure out if that person is in the right place to keep them. In this universe of Final Notice could they do something similar, once you find out you are going to die you have your guns taken from you? What do you need them for in the last weeks of your life?
- CheyenneR
- Posts: 179
- Joined: 11 Feb 2018, 23:37
- Currently Reading:
- Bookshelf Size: 21
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-cheyenner.html
- Latest Review: World, Incorporated by Tom Gariffo
- AbbyGNelson
- Posts: 301
- Joined: 18 Jan 2018, 17:50
- Currently Reading: Heir to the Empire
- Bookshelf Size: 839
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-abbygnelson.html
- Latest Review: Asa's Gift by Isaac Green
I completely agree with you! Is there any way we can try to think ahead and see potential bad behavior before it happens?
- Scottrita0729
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 04 Mar 2018, 03:43
- Currently Reading:
- Bookshelf Size: 2
- MrsCatInTheHat
- Posts: 3817
- Joined: 31 May 2016, 11:53
- Favorite Book: Cry the Beloved Country
- Currently Reading:
- Bookshelf Size: 376
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-mrscatinthehat.html
- Latest Review: Marc Marci by Larry G. Goldsmith
- Reading Device: B00JG8GOWU
- Publishing Contest Votes: 0
Well said! I remember hearing my parents talk about the people fearing credit cards for those reasons. I can also remember people being concerned about cell phones causing communication issues.... there are some, but the good far surpasses the bad.kandscreeley wrote: ↑02 Mar 2018, 16:23 I feel like this is an age old question that there's really no good answer to. People didn't even want credit cards when they first came out because they thought they were the "mark of the beast" or unsafe or something. There has to be a happy medium between allowing scientific innovation and educating people on the horrors what some of the inventions can do.
I just don't think that we can throw the baby out with the bath water on this one. There will always be evil people. We could get rid of all scientific innovation, and they would find a way to be evil.
- kandscreeley
- Special Discussion Leader
- Posts: 11686
- Joined: 31 Dec 2016, 20:31
- Currently Reading: The Door Within
- Bookshelf Size: 487
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-kandscreeley.html
- Latest Review: The Elf Revelation by Jordan David
Thanks. I kind of felt like I was babbling at the end.CatInTheHat wrote: ↑04 Mar 2018, 06:06Well said! I remember hearing my parents talk about the people fearing credit cards for those reasons. I can also remember people being concerned about cell phones causing communication issues.... there are some, but the good far surpasses the bad.kandscreeley wrote: ↑02 Mar 2018, 16:23 I feel like this is an age old question that there's really no good answer to. People didn't even want credit cards when they first came out because they thought they were the "mark of the beast" or unsafe or something. There has to be a happy medium between allowing scientific innovation and educating people on the horrors what some of the inventions can do.
I just don't think that we can throw the baby out with the bath water on this one. There will always be evil people. We could get rid of all scientific innovation, and they would find a way to be evil.
—Neil Gaiman
- AbbyGNelson
- Posts: 301
- Joined: 18 Jan 2018, 17:50
- Currently Reading: Heir to the Empire
- Bookshelf Size: 839
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-abbygnelson.html
- Latest Review: Asa's Gift by Isaac Green
Thank you for this comment, and this is why I'm asking. I agree that slowing down invention and innovation really seems like the wrong way to go. All we can do is set our own moral limits and try to do the best we can to just be good people. And vote for people/politicians who believe similarly to how we do.CheyenneR wrote: ↑03 Mar 2018, 14:18 I think that if we spend too much time thinking about what bad things could possibly happen, we will never actually reach out and try to invent things that could have the potential to help. I think there should be a moral limit to what we do and how we do it but I don't think we should just stop or slow down our scientific research and discoveries because of what might happen.