Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New ethics courses in computer science

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 156 posts

Re: New ethics courses in computer science

#81

Post by burkaman »

subroutine wrote: post #12

Whenever I hear about these ethics courses I'm mainly curios about what non-obvious substantive content being taught (because there is apparently enough to fill a semester-long course). Anyone who has taken one of these courses care to share something they learned that, before the course, had never considered?

My school had a required Computer Ethics course for CS majors. It was a bi-weekly discussion section with readings and a final essay, so not really a full size course. We covered intellectual property, privacy (SOPA was in the news at the time), net neutrality, and free speech/social networks.

These are all obvious subjects, but the idea was to get people to read about them and debate them, rather than just have an uninformed opinion and never discuss it.

Re: New ethics courses in computer science

#82

Post by batmansmk »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #49

I grew tired of arguments supporting fleecing the users that were basically "We aren't making them do this, they choose to do it." I have heard them put forward at nearly every company I've worked at, at various levels and through various departments. At Google it was always "We don't take an editorial stand, this might be just what some of our customers want." That has been the most interesting aspect of their recen…

I signed one oath in my engineering school in France to get my degree. I loose my title if I'm caught not respecting it. The title gives me access to a few jobs that require it (state, secret services, C-level of a few companies) as well as a special tax cut for companies using employees with the title.

Re: New ethics courses in computer science

#83

Post by kbenson »

theoh wrote: post #79
kbenson wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But all this is irrelevant to his original point, and how blockchain was referenced within it. People are reacting to the word and their preconceptions and ignoring the point, which is a real shame because those same preconceptions actually strengthen the point being made.

There's no need to police the direction the conversation takes. I was responding only to the GP, as a matter of fact.

You're right, my comment was better aimed farther up-thread than yours. I wasn't attempting to police the direction, just note that the tangent started with little explanation and possibly some misinterpretation.

Re: New ethics courses in computer science

#84

Post by jakelarkin »

great, but how about also focusing on the MBAs and non-tech background managers/execs that fill out the 5-10 levels of hierarchy above line engineers at any BigTechCo. Not like bottom-of-the-rung SWEs necessarily have visibility or control of the company selling some ads to customers using them for dis-information campaigns. Or how about teaching fact-checking & propaganda skepticism to ALL citizens.

too often the problems currently ascribed to "tech" are problems of society as whole.

Re: New ethics courses in computer science

#85

Post by kerkeslager »

artificial wrote: post #67
ChuckMcM wrote: post #49

I grew tired of arguments supporting fleecing the users that were basically "We aren't making them do this, they choose to do it." I have heard them put forward at nearly every company I've worked at, at various levels and through various departments. At Google it was always "We don't take an editorial stand, this might be just what some of our customers want." That has been the most interesting aspect of their recen…

>if we forced some liability on companies for what the software they sell does, that would change a lot of things fairly quickly. Absolutely that would change things, especially the cost of software.

I'm so tired of people saying stuff like this as if I should care. Go ahead, raise prices. If your product is solving a real problem, people will pay for it. If not, well, we didn't need you anyway. This is, incidentally, how capitalism is supposed to work.

If your business model doesn't work without you doing bad things, then it shouldn't work. You don't have a god-given right to make money and if you can't make money doing prosocial things, you don't deserve to make money.

Free software has been doing the right thing for decades. The internet of the 90s before everything was carefully tracked and to addict and display ads was better. There are lots of incentives besides money out there and if money is the only one you care about, I'm not on your side.

Re: New ethics courses in computer science

#86

Post by zombieprocesses »

We already have ethics in the philosophy department. I'm was CS major and I took ethics and liked it so much I double majored in CS and philosophy.

Ethics has no place in CS, nor more than ethics is required in biology or physics or algebra.

If universities want students to learn about ethics, then make ethics 101 a "required elective".

Re: New ethics courses in computer science

#87

Post by TeMPOraL »

kazinator wrote: post #69
ChuckMcM wrote: post #49

I grew tired of arguments supporting fleecing the users that were basically "We aren't making them do this, they choose to do it." I have heard them put forward at nearly every company I've worked at, at various levels and through various departments. At Google it was always "We don't take an editorial stand, this might be just what some of our customers want." That has been the most interesting aspect of their recen…

Indeed, there is a problem with the "they choose to do it" argument: namely that if enough clueless people around you choose something that you don't want, the choice may be foisted upon you by social forces.

And, from another side, if you only have few providers (economy of scales, network effect, or other barriers to entry for competitors), it's the providers who choose, and users only get to pick from what little is available.

Re: New ethics courses in computer science

#88

Post by mulmen »

kbenson wrote: post #71
ChuckMcM wrote: post #49

I grew tired of arguments supporting fleecing the users that were basically "We aren't making them do this, they choose to do it." I have heard them put forward at nearly every company I've worked at, at various levels and through various departments. At Google it was always "We don't take an editorial stand, this might be just what some of our customers want." That has been the most interesting aspect of their recen…

> At Google it was always "We don't take an editorial stand, this might be just what some of our customers want." It's an interesting choice for companies, and Google in particular. Either be proactive and get accused of forcing your customers behavior or having ulterior motives based on money (e.g. Google's ad blocking program), or let them do what they want and get accused of turning a blind eye because it makes mo…

I'm curious, what value does your ticket brokerage create?

Re: New ethics courses in computer science

#89

Post by commandlinefan »

purple-again wrote: post #4

Always a losers game. You implement it with ethics in mind, I do not. I win and you fall into obscurity. The law is all that matters. If I can not lose what I take, there is no reason for me not to take it (so long as I'm still chasing the 'fuck you money', morals are great after you have it). I understand it, lots of people have dreamed big dreams of how great the world would be if everyone else was just like them t…

Well, lawyers can be and have been disbarred for behaving unethically - but that does depend on a few fundamentals: lawyers can't legally practice law without a license, ethics are well-defined, and there are hearings to determine claims of unethical behavior. To apply "ethics" to software, we'd have to have (at least) all three of these in place.

Re: New ethics courses in computer science

#90

Post by jakelazaroff »

artificial wrote: post #67
ChuckMcM wrote: post #49

I grew tired of arguments supporting fleecing the users that were basically "We aren't making them do this, they choose to do it." I have heard them put forward at nearly every company I've worked at, at various levels and through various departments. At Google it was always "We don't take an editorial stand, this might be just what some of our customers want." That has been the most interesting aspect of their recen…

>if we forced some liability on companies for what the software they sell does, that would change a lot of things fairly quickly. Absolutely that would change things, especially the cost of software.

> Absolutely that would change things, especially the cost of software.

In other words: the current cost of software is artificially low because companies treat users unethically.

Post reply on HN