Captain America to your average Joe

As the US government commits $480million to technology, how do we propose the question of who is mediating?

With the chaos that occurred at London's Gatwick airport due to technology being in the wrong hands, my question is who mediates the access to technologies and whats the purpose.

Examples usually mean, its happened before...

It was the Thursday before Christmas and tens of thousands of high rolling jet-setters were grounded at one of the worlds busiest airports. Classed as a 'deliberate act' of disruption by local police authorities and with armed forces gathered to support, the defence secretary suggested that the military "have a range of unique capabilities" to be able to assist with the drone issue.

I believe that it is impossible to determine a solution for every possible scenario in advance. However when new technologies are being distributed and are accessible across the globe to the millions of people that grace our earth, who is responsible for the best and worse case scenarios with the use of a technology?

Within the last week media reports have surfaced that the US government has invested $480million to supply its military quarters with as many as 100,000 Microsoft HoloLens augmented reality headsets. Realistically in todays financial climate thats not a large amount of money, however when the employees of the company who created these wearables are calling for "stricter ethical guidelines" is it us as the average Joe who needs to back their voice? The U.S. Army developed a program called (IVAS) the Integrated Visual Augmentation System which adapts Microsoft's HoloLens headsets (a self contained holographic wearable AR computer) enabling night vision, thermal sensing, and monitoring of vital signs.

Microsoft employees, have voiced their opinions at the military's plans to gamify war through the product they engineered. The letter, states that "the application of HoloLens within the IVAS system is designed to kill people. It will be deployed on the battlefield, and works by turning warfare into a simulated 'video game,'

Having grown up in a town, made good friends and held detailed conversations based on reality with military veterans my fear is that this proposed US military mission is further distancing soldiers from the grim stakes of war and the reality of bloodshed." Who will be responsible, who is validating, what is the best case scenario, what will be the worst?

#technologyforthegood