BNW and "Can Science be Ethical?" Comparison

Having read both, there's a lot of correlation between the two that question the moral and ethics of society. Ultimately, I believe that our ethic and moral codes change with that of society's. Therefore, moral and ethics are not stoic and are subjective. It is safe to say, that the general consensus that BNW is considered unethical with their practice of mass producing humans, purposefully depleting oxygen to retard mental and physical development. This also raises with ethical concerns of today's world in animal testing and genetic engineering, specifically stem cell research. Is the use of human embryos ethical? They're humans after all. Is the cost of few  human deaths to benefit the good of society ethical? John and the Director can be seen as extremists in the the ethical values they hold (how ironic, considering John is his son, which will be his downfall to his "empire.") John values the traditional "american" ideology while the Director prefers adult infants, ignorance, and lust. The director seems to represent vice itself. Dyson makes a point that technology that helps the general people are "good" technology. We can argue that the Director's use of technology is therefore "good" technology.