Would you buy a house with a locked room in it, if the home-builder retained possession of the key? Does the de facto ownership of the contents of the locked room transfer with the title to the house, or with possession of the key? Is the owner of the house justified in removing the lock and opening the room? Is the builder justified in rigging explosives inside the room to go off if the lock is bypassed?
Ownership means that you don't need to ask permission to do what you want. No matter how many warning signs you put up to protect idiots from their own idiocy, at some point, you are going to have to finally let someone that wants to drive off a cliff go over the edge. You have to let someone destroy their own engine. You have to let someone own their own device.
I have ethical concerns.
Would you buy a house with a locked room in it, if the home-builder retained possession of the key? Does the de facto ownership of the contents of the locked room transfer with the title to the house, or with possession of the key? Is the owner of the house justified in removing the lock and opening the room? Is the builder justified in rigging explosives inside the room to go off if the lock is bypassed?
Ownership means that you don't need to ask permission to do what you want. No matter how many warning signs you put up to protect idiots from their own idiocy, at some point, you are going to have to finally let someone that wants to drive off a cliff go over the edge. You have to let someone destroy their own engine. You have to let someone own their own device.