Live data from Hacker News

A Facebook request: Write a code of tech ethics

latimes.com

81–90 of 140 posts

Re: A Facebook request: Write a code of tech ethics

#81
post #5

Doctors protect life, and lawyers keep you out of jail. I guess software engineers can take an oath not to kill people or put people in jail, but after that it's your morals vs. mine, no? And if I work for the Department of Defense making missile guidance software, then it's OK to kill people, I suppose...

Making missile guidance software is wholly unethical and is what we should be striving to prevent engineers from working on.

I want to put aside the question of whether this claim is true for a second, and just point out that it is - obviously, as proven by the response here - controversial among engineers. On that basis alone, it's never going to be part of an effective professional code of conduct. A code which starts with that condition will not be widely adopted. A popular code which tries to add it will fail, or be mired in controversy and lose members. A licensing regime which attempts to keep people who disagree out of the industry will be broken by (government-abetted) defectors or competing licensing.

The number of doctors or prospective doctors who deny the medical code of ethics is very nearly zero. Almost all debate around it centers on subtle questions like defining 'harm' in self-determination cases (e.g. assisted suicide). The number of lawyers who would reject a given the legal code of ethics is perhaps larger, but the code is accordingly narrower. Lawyers are for instance free (and in fact obligated) to support "not guilty" pleas by clients they know are guilty. The boldest parts of the code (e.g. that lawyers cannot actively lie on behalf of clients, or mingle personal business with professional work) are also the the parts which are regularly broken.

Striving to avert something you consider immoral is a sensible decision, even if other people dispute that ethic. But doing so with a professional code of ethics is not only a doomed task, it's one which dooms the rest of the code in the process.

Re: A Facebook request: Write a code of tech ethics

#82
post #70
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect that if people could rely on that the weapons they make are used defensively, many more would be willing to make weapons. In many countries, you can't rely on that, and making tools that reduce risk increase the leaderships willingness to use force more offensively. And of course there's a large unclear area where one persons long-term defensive measure is another persons justified intervention, and another…

Personal I think a country needs to produce defense weapons but I would draw a line at selling to unstable countries for profit. Defense should not be a profit center

Whole hearted agreement about selling to unstable countries for profit.

But selling to our friends/allies? I like the French, I'd be overjoyed if they thought my weapons were so chic/dangerous that they'd protect their countrymen in their most perilous times. Same thing if the Germans, Canadians, Japanese, etc bought my wares. Why not?

Saudi Arabia... not a fan, I don't think that's wise at all, I think that's going to come back to bite us in the ass and that it's a mistake in progress.

The system isn't perfect, I admit.

Re: A Facebook request: Write a code of tech ethics

#83
Not needed, we hackers - more or less - already have one for about 35 years:

1) Access to computers - and anything which might teach you something about the way the world really works - should be unlimited and total. Always yield to the Hands-On Imperative!

2) All information should be free.

3) Mistrust authority - promote decentralization.

4) Hackers should be judged by their acting, not bogus criteria such as degrees, age, race, or position.

5) You can create art and beauty on a computer.

6) Computers can change your life for the better.

7) Don't litter other people's data.

8) Make public data available, protect private data.

Originally penned down by Steven Levy in "Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution" and slightly modified by the CCC after that.

Source: https://www.ccc.de/en/hackerethics

Re: A Facebook request: Write a code of tech ethics

#84
Professional ethics is not the right approach to fixing the problem with user data. As the Equifax hack shows, the problem is not limited to the tech industry, and it's a problem of incentives at the corporate level, not the individual contributor level. We need corporate regulation.

User data is an asset, because you use it to make money, and it is a liability, because it can be stolen and misused. Companies currently get all of the benefit but very little of the risk. If user data had to be insured then there would be a financial incentive to only keep what's needed, and to treat it more carefully.

Re: A Facebook request: Write a code of tech ethics

#85
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is what the parent wrote: > and socioeconomic forces means that black people face systemic barriers to getting access to that education (versus whites, indians, asians, etc.) My contention is that the exact same socioeconomic forces exist across racial lines. There may be historical factors that vary by racial group, or sub-groups therein, but the problems are universal.

I can tell at a glance if you are black. I cannot tell at a glance if you are rural white. This is significant because white is the majority. It means that if I, as a member of the majority, wish to discriminate against those outside of the majority [1], it is easy for blacks. I can just avoid all of them. For whites who aren't the "right" kind of white, I can't just use a simple rule. I actually have to look into th…

> I can tell at a glance if you are black. I cannot tell at a glance if you are rural white.

Sure, but that only works up until you open your mouth. I can tell poor-rural from wealthy-urban quickly.

Out and out racism is still at some level a problem, but the parent comment specifically states there exist socioeconomic problems that exist only for blacks attempting university that do not exist for other groups. I would love to know what problems exist specifically for blacks attempting university that are specific to that one group.

Having spent my youth in a place with a surprising amount of socioeconomic diversity I can tell you the wealth blacks had wholly different problems and outcomes than the poor ones did just like with the whites, and Hispanics. I couldn't tell you about other groups, we didn't seem to have any of them in the "poor" category.

And while whites haven't exactly had historical problems in the workforce solely based on skin color, this isn't a rule. My father is a blue-collar worker in the construction industry, and during the Recession he lost his "good" job and ended up working on a crew entirely comprised of poor blacks. I spent my summers and breaks working with him, performing unskilled manual labor. While not the rule, there was absolute "us" vs. "them" bullshit racism coming from the majority group.

This isn't a class of problem that is relegated to one particular group, and to pretend it does is simultaneously racist and patronizing.

Re: A Facebook request: Write a code of tech ethics

#86
post #37

I don't disagree that perhaps software developers should be on board with a code of ethics, but this is a false dichotomy between the decisions of doctors/lawyers when providing services, and the decisions of technology companies on the whole. Companies that exist to make profit, in this case generally by monetizing user data in some (often questionable) form. It seems to me like the ethical responsibility bit lies m…

I frequently see people dismiss this with "programmers have an obligation to think about the possible uses of their work". That's not false, but I think it seriously underestimates the depth of the problem.

The simplest difference between professions with clear ethical codes (doctors, lawyers, civil engineers) and ones without is that professions with strong codes provide outcomes. A doctor treats a specific patient, a lawyer litigates a case, a civil engineer builds a specific bridge. Even indirect work like medical research has specific recipients and a fairly clear course for future use. Programmers, like chemists or machinists, frequently create tools.

Alfred Nobel famously created his prize in atonement for the destruction caused by his invention, but he invented and marketed dynamite for use in mining and construction, where it provided real benefit to humanity. Edward Teller spent the second half of his life championing civilian uses for nuclear power and atomic bombs, having seen the world reshaped by fear of a weapon he hoped would be demonstrated to prevent future wars.

The beauty of professional codes in medicine and law is that they achieve moral good without taking heavily-disputed moral stances; if doctors do no harm and refuse instructions to do so, harm will generally be prevented. A chemist studying nitrates or a programmer designing GPS guidance has no such guarantees; the same work is very likely to create both good and bad in uncertain amounts, depending on where it's put to use.

Re: A Facebook request: Write a code of tech ethics

#87
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent quite literally wrote > (versus whites, indians, asians, etc.) This is saying those problems don't exist for another group. You are either poorly trolling or unable to read.

No, what they are saying is that those groups don't face inherent socioeconomic challenges simply due to being a part of that group, in the same way that for example black and Hispanic people do. That doesn't mean nobody else can face socioeconomic challenges.

What socioeconomic challenge, in this day and age, applies to American blacks but not American asians, whites, or any other group who are applying to university?

Re: A Facebook request: Write a code of tech ethics

#88

Professional ethics is not the right approach to fixing the problem with user data. As the Equifax hack shows, the problem is not limited to the tech industry, and it's a problem of incentives at the corporate level, not the individual contributor level. We need corporate regulation. User data is an asset, because you use it to make money, and it is a liability, because it can be stolen and misused. Companies current…

> If user data had to be insured then there would be a financial incentive to only keep what's needed, and to treat it more carefully.

Interesting thought, how would you imagine this would work in practice? Insurance against what? In the event of loss, who would make a payment to who?

There are "cybersecurity" insurance policies available to companies now but they really only cover the cost of mailing notification letters to impacted people and sometimes the cost of credit monitoring for a year. They're way overpriced and usually not at all worth it. I suspect that isn't really what you had in mind though?

Post reply on HN