There is a fine line between slippery slope as a fallacy, and the legitimate concern that the very existence of a feature like this invites abuse. Or the even more legitimate desire to build a world in which bad actors (corporations, governments, etc.) cannot do remote evil, rather than a world that works only because they don't do remote evil.

That which does not exist cannot be abused. I'd much prefer a world where authorities cannot disable software, not a world where they merely don't.

That's not fallacious slippery slope reasoning. It's an argument for structural and technical rather than merely moral, ethical, or legal impediments to abuse of authority.

>It's an argument for structural and technical rather than merely moral, ethical, or legal impediments to abuse of authority.

I've got to disagree with you there. Every piece of modern technology out there has the potential for abuse of authority - but you don't crap on the tech wholesale simply based on that alone. The moral/ethical/legal impediments are how you rein in abuse, not by hamstringing yourself.