Should preemptive legislation be considered before new technology is introduced and takes root in our society… ?
On the one hand you can certainly make a good argument that preemptive legislation/regulation could potentially address some “common sense” pitfalls foreseen with the deployment of new technologies. Chris Warner, Executive Editor of Electronic Component News, makes a convincing case that regulation addressing the ergonomic use of cell phones could have saved the lives of hundreds or perhaps thousands of individuals who have become victims of motor vehicle crashes resulting from the inattention of distracted drivers. But, isn’t that somewhat in retrospect? What’s to say the right decision will be made before any given technology is fully developed, and would those decisions drive the technology in a direction that would limit its potential?
We can easily look back at the ill effects of dozens of new technologies and precisely devise a means of lessening or eliminating a particular effect. But, it’s not quite so easy when you’re gazing into the looking glass and trying to determine where a new technology might take you, let alone determine what effects may or may not manifest in the future. Could the designers of the QWERTY keyboard possibly have predicted the tens of thousands of users that would later suffer from carpal tunnel syndrome? And, had government regulators and legislators in the 19th century imposed design criteria and use restrictions back then, would we have ever gotten to today’s PC keyboard that drives today’s information age and allows me to put this blog on the Web in a matter of minutes. If Henry Ford had been required to meet NHTSA’s car safety standards in 1908 when designing his Model ‘T’, might we have saved the hundreds of thousands of lives lost over the years due to automobile crashes? Would the automobile industry be what it is today? Would it have survived at all?
Much of what has been speculated in terms of the use of unmanned aircraft (‘drones’) in the civil environment is nothing more than pure conjecture and has no basis in fact. Other technologies affording visual enhancements such as telescopes and binoculars have been around for decades. These devices allow the user to surreptitiously spy on or voyeuristically view a subject over a long period of time. However, history has proven that there’s been no pervasive abuse of this technology and there’s been no need to legislate or restrict a technology that provides an awe-inspiring view of the heavens and inspires millions of stargazers and aspiring astronomers.
Click the link and read Chris Warner’s article on PDD Net. … You decide
Should Preemptive Legislation be Considered Before a New Tech Takes Off?
Rich Hanson
AMA Government and Regulatory Affairs