Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft President: We Need a Hippocratic Oath for Software Engineers

capitalandgrowth.org

461–470 of 544 posts

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

#461
post #129

It's hard to see this as anything but a way for executives to foist responsibility upon software engineers when things go wrong (and of course, claim credit and profit when they go right) as other commenters have pointed out. That said, this might actually work! If a software engineer can suffer personal harm by working for a business with iffy ethics, then they are incentivized to play it safe by avoiding working fo…

Wouldn't offshoring lower liability? If you can blame the developer why not offsource that or better outsource and remove any responsibility from the company.

[deleted]

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

#462

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…

> he works at wants to use the MCAS for a non ethical purpose (namely operate and hide the existence of MCAS even when it is unsafe to do so). You think a programmer, handed a spec and asked to implement it, can be expected to know that their employer (or the employer's customer) wants to use it for a "non ethical purpose"? Again, I can't know for sure, but I doubt the programmers who wrote MCAS (who most likely didn…

> You think a programmer, handed a spec and asked to implement it, can be expected to know that their employer (or the employer's customer) wants to use it for a "non ethical purpose"?

No imtringued does not.

imtringued wrote:

> This is basically a reverse audit but the software engineer has no authority conduct such an audit and even if he was allowed to, the business has no obligation to give him the necessary information to determine whether the MCAS will be used unethically.

imtringued is saying that it would be impossible for a software engineer to determine whether what they were asked to do was ethical or not.

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

#463
Sure, let's let the decision makers off the hook because they're untouchable anyway thanks to the system they created - a system we keep agreeing to everytime we buy their products and vote for their puppets.

But it's not the decision makers who should be targeted. The workers told selling the product aren't a problem. The workers marketing the product aren't the problem. No. The workers told to make the product.

These workers have such easy, stable, and wealthy lives that they cannot be pressured in any way to make something harmful. They are so intelligent, so smart, so perceptive that the truth can't ever be hidden from them. In a world governed by relative and fuzzy morals and ethics, with few absolutes and a plethora of grays, these guardians of the righteous should take an oath to be better; to take responsibility; to uphold these virtues; to lead by example; to let no more evil pass under their gold hands as they type in the language of the creators (perl).

All you have to do to become one of these divine creatures? Take an online programming course and tick a box stating you read and understood the ter... uh... oath. Yeah. Oath. Because that's what's gonna solve the problem.

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

#464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...then we can make some sizes and structures illegal before they stumble/march into devastating incompetence. Was with you until this part. Just hold them personally liable if someone gets hurt should they create an uncontrollable system and predictably fail to control it.

Right. My point was in response to excuses being made elsewhere that the nature of large companies mean these executives cannot be personally liable. So if we accept that the nature of huge companies is no one can be liable (I'm not convinced yet) then it would be time for capping sizes or outlawing structures. Keep in mind the US already has laws around corporate structures and conflicts of interest. (Even if they'r…

The nature of any size corporation is to have one person in charge. In terms of assigning responsibility I'd think that works better than the alternative you'd get by breaking it up. Namely a bunch of cooperating smaller firms only doing part of the job each, and able to point the blame at each other.

We heard the "too complex to understand" excuse a lot regarding the pricing of subprime debt. Except a lot of people did understand it was a problem. It's basically the "I'm too stupid to know what I was doing" defense. If we accept that defense and try to make regulation to protect them from failing (as was done in finance back then), we basically allow stupid people to continue to be in charge rather than being replaced as they need to.

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

#465
post #8

I’m not a fan of comparisons to the Hippocratic oath. The greatest risk to AI ethics is not the ethics of software engineers but the ethics of the software engineering process. By the time tasks are handed to engineers, most of the ethical decisions have been made by product managers, designers, and business stakeholders who are focused on their own goals. Software engineers are accountable to their bosses before the…

In sufficiently complex systems, you can always blame someone else if you're motivated to do so. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IssR_J0QWr4 But ultimately there's always a software engineer involved in the creation of software - and that's not true of any of the other roles you mentioned. Since software engineers are necessary and sufficient to produce software, they should always be held responsible, and any oath s…

> But there are software engineers today, including some on HN, who do things more harmful and unethical than medical malpractice...

I'm having a hard time trying to find examples of this, outside the field of armament development.

And in those fields where a software failure may result in death, e.g. aircraft development, proof of a software engineer willingly causing it, would likely result in jail time already.

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

#466
post #206
post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's completely the wrong comparison and context. The reason MCAS came about was because management wanted to try to fudge a larger engine into an outdated design created for a different purpose rather than do the engineering and certification necessary for the new requirements and to update the system. Management wanted to save money. Of course the engineering leadership did not want to fudge something -- they wan…

Which demonstrates the irrelevancy of a hippocratic oath for engineers. Because the complexity of the system is such that no single engineer understands it all, and thus no single engineer is (or feels) responsible. Blaming it on management is also irrelevant, since management merely takes the advice of engineers, and do financial/business trade offs to maximize profit. If the engineers cannot tell that MCAS system c…

Management isn't going to question things, even with engineering warning them it's a problem every day.

Management likes hearing things they like, and simply don't hear things they don't like. Then act surprised about it when it becomes public.

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

#469
post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very few software engineers in the US, despite receiving health insurance as compensation, do not have sufficient cash comp to purchase health insurance on their own should they need to. I believe that this is a red herring. Yes, the drone operator that pushes the button is a murderer, even if it was the POTUS that gave the order for it to happen.

I don't think the drone operator is a good example. There are situations in which unethical things must happen, no matter what. If wars could be fought without killing we'd be doing that already.

That’s called peace, and most nations are doing that already.

Just not the minority of violent ones.

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

#470
post #8

I’m not a fan of comparisons to the Hippocratic oath. The greatest risk to AI ethics is not the ethics of software engineers but the ethics of the software engineering process. By the time tasks are handed to engineers, most of the ethical decisions have been made by product managers, designers, and business stakeholders who are focused on their own goals. Software engineers are accountable to their bosses before the…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN