One of our readers recently posted a comment about CRN's policy recommendations in a thread about science. Though off-topic, it generated a lot of discussion. So I'm creating this post where it'll be on-topic.
The original thread is here.
Some excerpts from the discussion, beginning with the post that started it...
Mike Deering: "I think you have gone well beyond what is necessary for safety and moved into the realm of politics. By this I mean, making recommendations designed to preserve the status quo in economic, political, or social structures is a political action unrelated to safety." He then criticized various possibilities we've mentioned for centralizing control of molecular manufacturing.
Jim Moore supported some of the restrictions we described, and suggested relaxing others. Mike answered: "the level of centralized control envisioned in CRN's plan is completely out of proportion to the threat, and way beyond what is required for safety."
Karl Gallagher pointed out that there are two separate aspects to MNT: 1) Kitchen-table manufacturing; 2) Low-cost manufacturing. And our restrictions would preserve low-cost manufacturing.
Then the discussion shifted to socialism; whether product design would provide mass employment; the effects of artificial intelligence on employment.
Then Mike came back with another question/criticism of CRN: that our policies are inconsistent with freely available space flight.
It seems unfair to quote Mike just for the purpose of refuting him, so I'll save most of my response for the comment section. But I'll emphasize one thing: Many of the restrictions we mention are not listed because we like them or think they should be implemented.