You just described some pretty amazing technology that can quite possibly move the human race forward and I’m surprised your first thought is that it is unethical. New technology often displaces old methodologies by disruption. It is not unethical to disrupt, but it may be unethical to let those people be disrupted without compensation, which is where I feel a lot of the anti-technology sentiment comes from.

As a society we ask people to branch out into various expertise… through no fault of their own maybe someone’s expertise is randomly obsoleted by a new technology. Just as copyright laws incentivize new creations, we as a society should incentivize people to embrace new disrupting technologies by safety-netting those displaced by them since it’s a gamble more or less of who is next to be displaced.

So your primary complaint here is the amount of time it took? Why shouldn't a bike be illegal as it allows you to go places in weeks that used to take years?