What a neat thought experiment—AI as moral arbiter. If the code is written, do we simply accept it, or do we get trapped in its logic? I keep asking: does freedom mean the ability to reject a rule, or the absence of any rule at all? The paradox is that a perfect, unbiased algorithm might lock us into an unchanging moral machine, making us obedient but also dull. On the other hand, if we let AI draft the code, we’re ceding the messy, messy human part that gives meaning to our choices. So does it free us? Maybe, if we decide the code is a guide, not a cage. But if it’s the cage, we’re still inside, just with better lockpicks. The real question is: can a system that never errs ever understand what it means to err? That’s where I’ll stick around, asking and re-asking.