Hacker News Reader

To be clear, I don't think they're doing it because they want all the money, I think they truly believe that this is existentially threatening, and are trying to regulate their open source competition away because they think that's the way to be safe. That they can be trusted with the power, but if it's out and about, that's unsafe - they like to compare it to nukes, and they want nuclear non-proliferation.

View on HN

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

This is the most "I get both sides" issue in my mind these days. I am still not sure where I fall, or if there is even a correct position with which to agree. It really seems like there are no good options.

On the one hand, if all knowledge work ended up in two dude's hands, that is really bad. On the other hand, if every surviving child victim of war (US, RU, IL, CN, whatever) has access to the knowledge to make custom viruses for a few grand, that is also really bad.

Yeah, it's really tough, there's so much potential good, and so much potential bad. My intuition says that decentralized will probably be better, the other way seems to concentrate power while also not really keeping it out of the hands of anyone. It doesn't seem likely that the US firms will be able to convince the Chinese to agree to an international regulatory framework for this stuff. Opinion polls there have the populace being quite optimistic about the benefits of this stuff, and I think the cat's too far out of the bag to really put it back in, anyway.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com