If you've ever lived in a large city with shitty drivers you'd know they made the right call. Most people can't even stay between two lines on the freeway without almost killing each other. I don't need them crashing through my roof because they wanted to buy one more drink at the bar instead of paying for an uber home and back to pick up their flying car. Just because we can doesn't mean we should.
Why stop there? Why not go full totalitarian if liberty is such a threat? Maybe cars should be made illegal and everyone should walk, for safety. Also let's require all walking pedestrians to wear mandatory helmets, since people are so dumb and someone might fall. If you follow your uneducated opinion to its logical conclusion, perhaps one day you will see the error in your logic. Freedom is the answer... What's the question?
Now you're talking. Remember the coof lockdown and mandatory mask and shot supporters? "If it only saves one life it's worth it". It's the same exact logic with banning private cars or other modes of transportation.
Most people can't even stay between two lines on the freeway without almost killing each other
At the beginning it will he a disaster. Yes. But it is a great cleanup of society from dumbfucks. Today, dumbfucks kill much more people just staying alive. Flying cars will guarantee dumbfucks will die quickly.
Those who are ready to exchange some freedom for safety does not deserve nor freedom nor safety.
If my roof have to suffer for extermination of dumbfuck, then, so be it.
Just because we can doesn't mean we should.
This thought somehow applied only to technologies that gives more independence to the people, but never applied to all that shit elites push.
How is that?
Why flying cars "shouldn't" but inbreed arrogant and ignorant aristocracy "should"? That aristocracy is much more harmful for humanity than flying cars. But somehow I never heard that anybody say "We can allow aristocracy to exist and rule, but shouldn't"
There are ton of things we "can", but "shouldn't". And all of them, suddenly, one way or another would have been made people more independent and humanity in general smarter and cleaner. The things we "should", again, suddenly, only benefits elites and make humanity dumber, encouraging grow of dumbfucks percentage.
Your argument is valid but you should apply it to all things, including ones that "sholdn't" but "is". Then, may be you will find out that flying cars are not in that list. Because humanity have no dumbfucks, since things that "is", that create dumbfucks become "isn't".
Your approach is like prohibiting kitchen knives, guns and chainsaws, because dumbfucks use them for doing shit. Does knives, guns and chainsaws "shouldn't"t because of dumbfucks? Obviously not. How flying cars different?
Getting rid of dumbfucks is the solution, not "shouldn't"ing of flying cars, RITEGs, well, whole science and tech branches that could rise humanity to the next level.
If you've ever lived in a large city with shitty drivers you'd know they made the right call. Most people can't even stay between two lines on the freeway without almost killing each other. I don't need them crashing through my roof because they wanted to buy one more drink at the bar instead of paying for an uber home and back to pick up their flying car. Just because we can doesn't mean we should.
Why stop there? Why not go full totalitarian if liberty is such a threat? Maybe cars should be made illegal and everyone should walk, for safety. Also let's require all walking pedestrians to wear mandatory helmets, since people are so dumb and someone might fall. If you follow your uneducated opinion to its logical conclusion, perhaps one day you will see the error in your logic. Freedom is the answer... What's the question?
Now you're talking. Remember the coof lockdown and mandatory mask and shot supporters? "If it only saves one life it's worth it". It's the same exact logic with banning private cars or other modes of transportation.
At the beginning it will he a disaster. Yes. But it is a great cleanup of society from dumbfucks. Today, dumbfucks kill much more people just staying alive. Flying cars will guarantee dumbfucks will die quickly.
Those who are ready to exchange some freedom for safety does not deserve nor freedom nor safety.
If my roof have to suffer for extermination of dumbfuck, then, so be it.
This thought somehow applied only to technologies that gives more independence to the people, but never applied to all that shit elites push.
How is that?
Why flying cars "shouldn't" but inbreed arrogant and ignorant aristocracy "should"? That aristocracy is much more harmful for humanity than flying cars. But somehow I never heard that anybody say "We can allow aristocracy to exist and rule, but shouldn't"
There are ton of things we "can", but "shouldn't". And all of them, suddenly, one way or another would have been made people more independent and humanity in general smarter and cleaner. The things we "should", again, suddenly, only benefits elites and make humanity dumber, encouraging grow of dumbfucks percentage.
Your argument is valid but you should apply it to all things, including ones that "sholdn't" but "is". Then, may be you will find out that flying cars are not in that list. Because humanity have no dumbfucks, since things that "is", that create dumbfucks become "isn't".
Your approach is like prohibiting kitchen knives, guns and chainsaws, because dumbfucks use them for doing shit. Does knives, guns and chainsaws "shouldn't"t because of dumbfucks? Obviously not. How flying cars different?
Getting rid of dumbfucks is the solution, not "shouldn't"ing of flying cars, RITEGs, well, whole science and tech branches that could rise humanity to the next level.