A land mine can only be a landmine.

A hammer can build and destroy.

So it makes sense to ban mines completely, as there is no humane use case.

But for facial recognition, I do see valid use cases. So yes, I do agree with OP and rather have the bad use cases banned/regulated.

And your metric: "If everyone used this technology would we live in a desirable world?"

Totally depends on how it is used. I do see a potential world with facial recognition software and not be a dystopia. I mean, is all Sci-Fi now considered Dystopia?

How can for example robots really interact with humans without that technology?

Landmines are a non-trivial factor in South Korea's freedom. For a large portion of their existence the South had an inferior army and economy. Their current might is a more recent phenomena.

Without doubt, landmines are a effective and cheap killing tool.

But they kill or cripple anyone. And the person placing them, usually does not remove them anymore.. so lots of one legged children in the end, as normally (rightfully!) war places see peace again. But with mines being cheap to deploy and removing them beeing very expensive they tend to stay where they are, until your childrens children walk over them as boyscouts.

And south corea had US backing as far as I know.

At the time the landmines were placed the US was at a stalemate with North Korea (and China) - and even the stalemate was pure luck as NATO forces were close to full defeat at many points after China entered the war. US backing did not make their survival a sure thing.

Another interpretation is, that the mines cemented that border.

Yes it did. But the alternative border would have been a unified Korea with the north’s leadership in charge. Whether that is worth the trade off depends on your politics I suppose.

Or a tight border for some years and than a reunion like in my country, germany?

(even though there were mines on that border, too, but in a limited way that there are no more traces of them today)

Anyway, I am still highly sceptical to the claim, that mines prevented a total communist korea. Debating about that is not really constructive. Do you have studies for your claim?

A landline could prevent a burglar from walking on my property.

Or it could also kill a pizza delivery boy

Or yourself or the people helping you, after you had a stroke and don't remember anymore that and where your placed them.

Right, just like a hammer.

I will accept your metaphor as valid if you can present to me a moral use of land mines.

I agree with you about autonomous drones. They have many moral uses. Weaponized ones, not so much.

That depends on your mortality. I see it morally right to use it on my enemy.

How does one use them on one's enemy without also using them against the long-term population in their affected area?

By ensuring that they have an automatic deactivation.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-landmines/u-s-halts-u...

"While retaining stockpiles, the United States has not used persistent mines for some time. The last field of persistent mines under U.S. control was in Guantanamo, Cuba, and was removed in 1999, the State Department official said."

How about enforcing a DMZ?

Yes, same thing with all of that.

Or nukes?