Live data from Hacker News

Tech Needs More Conscientious Objectors

nytimes.com

81–90 of 225 posts

Re: Tech Needs More Conscientious Objectors

#81

I wrote an article on why this kind of thinking is naive a while back. I still think it is naive. https://ctsp.berkeley.edu/ethical-pledges-for-individuals-an...

Yea I frequently see sentiments like “if only everyone would stop working for X”. It’s true but when we’re all locked in a game of the prisoners dilemma, moralizing isn’t going to get us to move, laws and changed incentives will. I think americans finally figured that out about climate change, which is why we’re looking at carbon taxes instead of just public pressure.

Re: Tech Needs More Conscientious Objectors

#82
post #57

"We are a small - as-of-yet unincorporated - nonprofit providing pro bono consulting on algorithmic and policy issues arising from the proliferation of: Statistical inference / Automated decision making - often called 'AI', ..." From the author's website, listed at the bottom. Imagine if journalists and other people posting to the www called "AI" what it actually is, instead of constantly portraying it as something f…

How would you rewrite that short passage in a way you think is optimal?

Re: Tech Needs More Conscientious Objectors

#83

This article is premised on the idea that basically everything the Chinese government does is unethical, which is debatable. For one, the Chinese government is largely supported by its population. There might actually be engineers working on Dragonfly who do not believe the project is unethical. It's not that black and white...

How would one know if the Chinese government was supported by the population or not, given that anyone expressing a contrary opinion is likely to be a thorn in the eye that is China's surveillance state?

Re: Tech Needs More Conscientious Objectors

#86
post #27

I think the imposition of this burden on engineers is the result of our belief that our legislators are too incompetent or unwilling to act in the fact of clear moral hazards. Tech has a very strong history of conscientious objectors. They're not the problem. Other institutions need to do their part.

It makes sense when you consider that labor is the root of political power, even that wielded by legislators.

See "Forces of Labor".

https://sites.google.com/view/tech-workers-coalition/topics/...

Re: Tech Needs More Conscientious Objectors

#87
post #5
post #3

I've long thought that tech needs like.. a guild or trade union, or a professional association of some kind. The problem though, is that it's so easy to get into, so there's no easy way to "police" ourselves, because tech has been democratized so well-- Anyone can do a code boot-camp and be up and running within weeks. Not that that's a bad thing, it just makes it harder to hold developers to a code of ethics or anyt…

Canada has a professional software engineering organization, at least in some provinces. That said, they talk a lot about ethics but then award first place at a local engineering competition to a team that tracks people's position and movements without them knowing using their cell signals (for use in airports), so maybe it doesn't do any good. Great technical work by them mind you.

The Candian Association For IT Professionals (cips.ca) administers the only nationally recognized IT designation, called the I.S.P (think of it like a P.Eng for computer scientists).

Their goal is to make this a requirement for the handling of certain types of sensitive data, as one needs to swear by a code of ethics in order to become a bearer.

Re: Tech Needs More Conscientious Objectors

#88
post #57

"We are a small - as-of-yet unincorporated - nonprofit providing pro bono consulting on algorithmic and policy issues arising from the proliferation of: Statistical inference / Automated decision making - often called 'AI', ..." From the author's website, listed at the bottom. Imagine if journalists and other people posting to the www called "AI" what it actually is, instead of constantly portraying it as something f…

I once saw a lecturer teach "AI" that turned out to be statistics techniques first invented circa 1925 written incorrectly in code.

"AI", if it means anything at all, is fast becoming a way of identifying snake-oil products. The explanation is necessary.

Re: Tech Needs More Conscientious Objectors

#89
post #23
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do people actually care about privacy or data collection these days, though? It's not clear that most do - see the amount of people who freely interact on Facebook, even though they surely must be aware that everything on that site will ultimately be something that Facebook knows about. Google just doesn't seem very different by that standard.

No, the only place I see the kind of rabid hatred of Google and Facebook for their data collection practices are here on HN. Of course these people want their services, actually expect them for free, continuously at the same standard. They just don't want to be tracked, don't want to pay for them, don't want to be advertised too and don't have any real solutions on how they would be paid for other than some handwavin…

Sweeping generalizations do not an argument make.

> these people want their services, actually expect them for free, continuously at the same standard.

Source? I'm sure most people would be willing to pay for a service in exchange for some reasonable level of privacy.

> don't have any real solutions on how they would be paid for other than some handwaving about breaking Google/Facebook up which apparently will solve everything.

The "breaking up Google/Facebook" argument is completely separate from the privacy argument. Strawman much?

> most people simply don't care about the level of tracking Facebook and Google do

Source?

> "No! If they understand how much they were tracked they'd care!", but I don't believe that's the case

Again, source? If you told the average person the amount of information that Facebook and Google have inferred from them, do you seriously think they would not care?

---

There's no doubt that the data collection practices of Google and Facebook or pathologic. There is nothing stopping them from taking a more privacy-centric approach like Apple does and still make a ton of money.

But people have the mindset that corporations should be exempt from morality and that this is grounds for tossing considerations like privacy out the window. I'm getting the feeling you feel similarly.

Re: Tech Needs More Conscientious Objectors

#90
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alberta too. The regulation is coming on very gradually since they're confused about how to define and regulate the title/practice. The regulation won't necessarily help anything but to outlaw a lot of smart people from being able to write certain software. It will put us further behind the USA in our ability to create tech companies that matter (or that can compete with offshoring) and lead to higher unemployment as…

> The regulation won't necessarily help anything but to outlaw a lot of smart people from being able to write certain software. It will put us further behind the USA in our ability to create tech companies that matter (or that can compete with offshoring) Has any of that happened with engineers in Canada? We still have plenty of engineers. A lot of this comes off as any industry wanting to hold onto the engineer titl…

> Software is not just some shit-tier SaaS app.

I think the fear is that the same restrictions will affect shit-tier apps as well as aeronautic control software. After all, it's not like you can't already say "to work on aeronautic software you must have credential X or Y". So what's the point of restricting the word "engineer" as a whole?

Post reply on HN