Yeah I'm getting real sick of the stance that if something only fixes 80% of a problem and doesn't perfectly resolve every issue every person might ever encounter, it is a failure and should never be implemented.
If it is not causing more harm, and especially if there is a way to address unforeseen harm that might arise, awesome! Let's give it a go.
Because sending armed officers out to deal with any little thing that happens is demonstrably not working well right now.
I really want this phenomenon explained.
Slippery slope fallacies, concern trolling, whataboutism, pearl clutching, feinting spells, Copenhagen Effect (blame anyone who tries to help for the original problem), Alistair Cockburn's wisdom about organizational change (tldr: people really, really hate change, of any kind, for any reason).
Ad nauseatingum.
It's exhausting.
The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics
https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-eth... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10367855 https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/7qxhqs/is_i...
“God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.”
We’re way out of balance. Lot’s of courage, less wisdom, no serenity.