Avoiding questions because of theoretical potential outcomes of people knowing the answer is neither good nor useful. Knowledge is not implicitly dangerous or immoral.

Also, in this particular case, it seems that the people interested in that sort of thing could figure it out anyway. Obscurity isn't security.

I disagree with junto, game theory; the probability of it happening is feasible. What's not to say it hasn't happened before?

> Knowledge is not implicitly dangerous or immoral

Good phrase!

Sometimes I feel like half of my HN comments are about this guy, but Aaron Sorkin (writer/creator of A Few Good Men, The West Wing, The Social Network, and recently The Newsroom) wrote this line in a not-very-successful TV show 15 years ago called Sports Night, which is the same phrase but slightly nicer, and has stuck with me.

Dan is a TV host who did a Variety Fair interview in which he was semi-pro drug legalisation.

> Dan: The validity of your read on what most of the country thinks notwithstanding, Stanley.... Actions are immoral. Opinions are not. And I won't apologize for mine. Discussion is good, and for those of us fortunate enough to be the subject of magazine articles, it may be our responsibility from time to time to try and raise the level of debate.

Adam and Eve is a work of fiction.

which was the point.

Thanks for pointing this out. I could quite easily have invoked Godwin's Law and used gas chambers as an example, but I chose the fictional example instead. It seems that many people missed that, since I appear to be getting down voted for it.

Wish I could downvote.