I think you're splitting hairs here.

Most things don't have the ability to moralize, but if they did, probably more would. There are restrictions on watching adult content in some jurisdictions. I've heard that copy machines will do watermarks (or something like that) if you copy currency. Some cars will brake automatically if they determine you're likely to hit something if you continue (maybe I'm trying to drive through the front of a bank!). Some cars are configured with breathalyzers that need to be passed to start. Etc...

▲

paimapi 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I wish there was more actual research on those 'moralisms' many of which boil down to public health safety features that have led to dramatic reductions in mortality rates.

On the one hand, I definitely don't agree with the logic of 'don't guardrail me if I don't want it.' I think back on that one video from the late 80s of people talking about how seatbelt mandates were horrible violations of their freedoms (and not like like one second of work and no real discomfort).

On the other, I'd love it if these companies actually produced real research about modern AI-assisted attacks in terms of damage and quantity, and whether or not guardrails even matter when tech like abliteration is in general use.

	▲	nsagent an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Seatbelts shouldn't be mandated. People should have the choice, you just have to make the case that it's worth it. In fact some places don't mandate seatbelts (New Hampshire doesn't, aligning with their motto "Live Free or Die"). That said, for those who cannot advocate for themselves, like children, I think it's entirely reasonable to hold someone accountable if they decide to forgo an appropriate safety mechanism that results in harm.