>Is it really acceptable for a scientist, such as yourself, that indiscriminate use may be made of your findings?

Typically, all use must fall within the accepted norms of current law, or can only escape those bounds for a short time before legal action. Currently, as I see it, the biggest danger relates to who is writing the laws, and who is lobbying for them.

Let's call these "laws of acceptable use" (LAU).

I believe the the messy process of a democratic-based LAU is much preferable to a LAU that represents a group or consolidated power. Whether initially benevolent or not, I have yet to see a group with unchallenged oversight not become perverse and centered upon it's own interests after a couple of decades.

We might not like all of the consequences of the internal combustion engine, but consider how that development might be quashed if it were determined early on that it was undesirable? What would that type of policy look like in action? -I think the 'cure' would be worse than the 'disease'.

Once again, excellent links! And yes, the SRI worries me a bit, as I think it has a LAU agenda.