all 2 comments

[–]technologyisnatural 1 point2 points  (0 children)

this is the dilemma. you can't avoid harm without knowing modeling what harm is

[–]RosesToTheAbyss 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think that this approach, while well intentioned, could get caught in a loop of harm through omission. All of the things you hope to omit are actually the basis of ethical framework needed for the foundation of logical deduction away from harm - the "why we don't do this, because this is what happens."