A big ethical question is what happens after people stop using the device. Does it degrade the environment? Could it have been designed so it would actually be good for the environment?
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
When dealing in the technology, it becomes a question of whether you overuse something. I think that's worse than having something technologically available to you and not using it.
At the end of the day, if there are truly ethical considerations, those have to override scientific considerations.
Conserving energy and thus saving money, reducing consumption of unnecessary products and packaging and shifting to a clean-energy economy would likely hurt the bottom line of polluting industries, but would undoubtedly have positive effects for most of us.
In day-to-day life, you have stimulus to behave unethically, but in the long term, it always pays off to be ethical.
I'm always wondering: Have all these time-saving devices actually saved us any time, or have they just created a million fetishes and obsessions that keep us from the quiet half hour we should be taking to sit and do nothing every day?
The cellphone is humanity's biggest platform. If we can't use it to change education or health care, then shame on us.
In the south of France the phones cut in and out, the electricity isn't particularly reliable. I think many people would get very irritated with that life.
I don't find the technology threatening. A lot of people my age, my generation, find it difficult to immerse themselves. But I would never preclude the idea of using any technology if I thought it suited the end result.
There's an overemphasis on conservation and other idyllic energy sources that can be harmful in that it hampers new technology and innovation.
We should assume that the end product can be switched off by any consumer who is offended or frightened by it.