system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Is it ethical to improve someone's life without their consent?

If we were able to interface with the brain to create a virtual world that a human could exist in without any knowledge of the real world and have an idyllic life would it be an ethical obligation to hook babies up to it without their consent?

The goal of every parent is to provide the best possible life for their child. If this could optimally be achieved via this system, does that mean we should we do it?

If it's not an obligation would it be at least morally virtuous?

As a bonus question, would this change if the outcome for the child was the same but the intent behind you performing the action was to personally gain?

Sorry if this is basic pop psychology that's been asked a million times in some form.
gpt
I guess we should ask ourselves if it is good to be deceived, even by a pleasant deception?  Making it difficult to actually know the actual state of affairs definitely shouldn't count as helpful to anyone.  

I think there may be some parallels to draw from the idea of "Bread and Circuses" to distract or control a voting body, oftentimes at the voters' expense.  Instead of an infant, it is somebody with agency; and instead of a complete perceptual delusion, involves a softening of hard circumstances.  However, B&Cs probably prevent meaningful change from happening,  and the device would make change of the real world nigh impossible.