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

Microsoft President: We Need a Hippocratic Oath for Software Engineers

capitalandgrowth.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 544 posts

Re: Microsoft President: We Need a Hippocratic Oath for Software Engineers

#441

Post by frobozz »

AmericanChopper wrote: post #283
frobozz wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So does abortion and euthanasia, and probably plenty of other practices as well. A less controversial example would be something like chemotherapy. In fact, a lot of treatments for terminal and chronic ailments are pretty harmful.

All 3 of those examples are actually covered by the “original” Hippocratic Oath (which probably wasn’t written by Hippocrates, incidentally). > Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course. Similarly I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause abortion. Chemo is obviously a bit different though, because the potential harm caused by denying abortion or euthanasi…

That was essentially my point. With euthanasia and abortion you will find plenty of people who would call them unambiguously harmful and think they should be banned outright, regardless of context.

You'd be hard pressed to find people who want to abolish the entire field of oncology on the grounds that the treatments are horrible.

It's absurd to take the above-stated "requirement to abstain from causing harm" as a hard restriction out of context without taking into account the main point of the profession which is to help the sick.

The logical conclusion of considering "do no harm" as inviolable above all else is that doctors would have to restrict their treatments to homeopathy and compassionate smiles.

Re: Microsoft President: We Need a Hippocratic Oath for Software Engineers

#442

Post by danShumway »

kazagistar wrote: post #428
danShumway wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter if it's a good freedom, the chances of the US repealing the 1st Amendment any time soon are basically nil. You'd have a better chance of getting Apple/Amazon/Google to voluntarily split up their own companies out of the goodness of their own hearts -- it just isn't going to happen. The only argument that actually matters here is whether or not restrictions on corporate structure actually do violate…

Antitrust doesn't violate the first amendment, so clearly limits on corporate scale aren't unconstitutional, so the legal defense is insufficient and the moral question stands.

Like I wrote:

> I'm reasonably skeptical that they do, given that the 1st Amendment hasn't stopped us from enforcing antitrust and monopoly legislation in the past. Yeah yeah, Citizens United and all that, but we regulate companies all the time.

> But I'd still want an actual lawyer to weigh in on that, I wouldn't feel confident saying that there aren't limits on how far we can go in that direction.

It doesn't necessarily hold that because one thing is legal, everything is legal. For example, we have 1st Amendment restrictions on threats and libel, but in the US hate speech is still protected speech. 1st Amendment exceptions are generally pretty narrow and specific in the US.

In the same way, clearly some corporate regulation is OK. It does not follow that there's literally no limit on what the government can dictate about how a company can operate. I would prefer to get input from a lawyer before asserting that so confidently.

Re: Microsoft President: We Need a Hippocratic Oath for Software Engineers

#443

Post by coding123 »

So reading the comments. I am on the side of having business owners taking some kind of oath, not software engineers. If a software engineer was programming IE around the time that MS was hit by regulators years ago, and this "software engineer" oath was in place, would the software engineers being asked to code a web browser be at fault for the wrong-doings of the company?

It just seems wrong for someone that has been asked to "write a web browser" to be at fault for anything.

What about someone asked to code up a voice prompt on something that answers the phone for a telemarketing company. And said company later uses the code to do illegal spam robocalls instead of what they told the developer they were doing with it?

What about if a software developer that writes code to turn off and on a sprinkler system by phone is later convicted of writing the code for a bomb that blows up a building?

What about if a software developer writes code that matches human faces for the purposes of automatically unlocking his door at his home, ends up being open sourcing it, but the developer is arrested for that software being deployed on a drone that murders specific people?

What about if a software developer that is asked to install the above Face Rec system on a drone but is told it's designed to take pictures of people it knows at a birthday party, and is later switched out to trigger a machine gun.

Re: Microsoft President: We Need a Hippocratic Oath for Software Engineers

#444

Post by nicoburns »

imtringued wrote: post #358
nicoburns wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Software engineers are accountable to their bosses before their users, no matter how high minded we like to pretend to be. Isn't that what a hipppocratic oath would solve. They'd be accountable to the oath before their bosses, and that would give them reasonable grounds to refuse unethical work.

How do you guarantee that the boss will cooperate with the software engineers and tell them about all the unethical business practices that are currently happening?

Well if it's something that the software engineers are expected to implement, then they're going to have to be told about it. If it's not, then it seems out of the realm of software engineering.

Re: Microsoft President: We Need a Hippocratic Oath for Software Engineers

#445

Post by jacquesm »

A better thing would be if CEOs would take that oath. Software engineers tend to be told what to do, they are more like soldiers than like doctors.

What would be good if we took a leaf out of the book of the real engineers and started caring out what we put out there as though lives depend on it. But that starts with getting rid of all of those disclaimers. No other industry gets away with accepting such little liability as the software profession.

Re: Microsoft President: We Need a Hippocratic Oath for Software Engineers

#446

Post by Balgair »

The Order of the Engineer is instructive here: https://order-of-the-engineer.org/

The oath states:

"I am an Engineer. In my profession, I take deep pride. To it, I owe solemn obligations.

As an engineer, I pledge to practice integrity and fair dealing, tolerance and respect, and to uphold devotion to the standards and dignity of my profession. I will always be conscious that my skill carries with it the obligation to serve humanity by making the best use of the Earth's precious wealth.

As an engineer, I shall participate in none but honest enterprises. When needed, my skill and knowledge shall be given, without reservation, for the public good. In the performance of duty, and in fidelity to my profession, I shall give my utmost."

The Order of the Engineer started in Canada in 1925 as the Iron Ring. It was imported into the US in 1970, with many changes.

Worn on the pinky finger of the working hand (depending on dis/ability), the ring is meant to drag on drawings and leave subtle marks as it ages and rusts. It's facets are meant to be noticeable, to remind engineers of their duties and obligations. Though I cannot find the source, I have always heard that the original Canadian Iron Rings were made out of steel from a collapsed bridge that was lethally designed.

The US version is significantly different, as engineers are licensed very differently in Canada and the US.

The US based Order of the Engineer is fairly accommodating to change and updates. Bioengineers are welcome to take the oath, for instance.

Perhaps the US based rings for software engineers should be made of the Uber car that killed that poor woman in Arizona, Therac-25, or Theranos machines.

Re: Microsoft President: We Need a Hippocratic Oath for Software Engineers

#447

Post by seattle_spring »

I think a lot of folks on HN supporting this might be disappointed to find out what it actually covers. While you may find it unethical to work for Palantir or Facebook, or require JS to view a page, this particular law isn't going to be on your side.

Re: Microsoft President: We Need a Hippocratic Oath for Software Engineers

#448

Post by jki275 »

dTal wrote: post #380
imtringued wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my limited information the MCAS code was primarily causing problems in association of incorrect readings by damaged sensors. Of course one could argue that this is an engineering failure because the MCAS failed to account for wrong sensor input but when you consider the legal implications of a MCAS fallback there is actually not much that can be done on the software side. The MCAS is an optional component that r…

>The MCAS is an optional component that reduces certification and training costs No. The MCAS was a "necessary" component for pitch stability - without it, a 737 MAX in a pitch-up attitude would, in the absence of correcting inputs, pitch up further and further until it stalled. Without it, the airframe is uncertifiable, full stop.

Cite?

I'm certain that's not correct, everything I've read on it has said MCAS was specifically a software modifier put in place to allow the plane to respond substantially the same as a regular 737 without the larger engines, in order to avoid having to have additional training for all 737 pilots worldwide.

Most aircraft, in a "pitch up attitude" will increase their angle of attack as thrust is applied. The issue was that the MAX would do so in a more radical way than the regular 737 did, and so the software was put in place to limit that so it flew like a regular 737 as far as the pilots could see.

Conceptually, MCAS wasn't a bad idea. The execution and using it as a replacement for training and not informing pilots of the flight characteristics changes between the models was stupid.

Re: Microsoft President: We Need a Hippocratic Oath for Software Engineers

#450

Post by watwut »

What about Hippocratic Oath for Management and Leadership.

In all seriousness, ultimate decision making, hiring, firing, promoting, rewarding, punishing and culture building are all on management and leadership. Microsoft President happen to be on top of it. If they think companies use engineers in an unethical way, what about building management culture that ensures this wont happen.

Post reply on HN