One of the things that we have to really reckon with, and that I think many commenters here and perhaps you yourself could be more aware of, is that all uses of technology will be done with respect to culture. This is because culture frames how we see the world, what our practices are for dealing with it, and our relationships with each other.

This is why it's not correct to say that culture is a bias. There are practices in any given culture which contain biases, but the idea is not to get rid of culture, it's to try to find the real abstract technology that "just works".

From our conversation, the example of the knife is important. Look at any knife - it is infused with culture, from ancient ornate ceremonial knives to the common penknife. The knife, as an abstract concept, has infinite potential variations, and can be used in any cultural context. It just works. But the point is, and I want to state this strong, you cannot create a knife that is a pure conceptual knife. You will always imbue it with your culture. Then one of the tasks is to not allow negative cultural aspects influence practical design.

Practices develop around technology. This is not something to be resisted. It is however something to be both aware of and not mistaken for the essence of the technology. The knife if you hold in your hand is not the pure concept of a knife, just the way you cannot write down the pure concept of the number 2, you can only write the symbol which stands for it, or place two items on a table, or say the word "two". It's easy to forget that we even have to learn the concept for two as a child.

To really know the knife, would be to see what is it that makes it up. For example, on first seeing a knife and wanting one of your own, you can try to replicate it exactly - the shape, materials, size and colours. To really get to the knife, you have to generalise and abstract. The same goes for any technology with reference to the culture which makes it. Interesting here is that customs do emerge where you absolutely have to make the knife a certain way, or it is not considered a knife. Now that is the kind of thinking that should be resisted.

I like your insistence here and elsewhere about not knowing the future when work on technologies, what will be the uses. And it's a strong case for insuring freedom for those working on technology in whatever way can be accommodated.