6 ms·

If I can get paid 20K more designing an algorithm that adjusts prices on a more individual level, am I any less ethical than the person saving $2 by ignoring an

If I can get paid 20K more designing an algorithm that adjusts prices on a more individual level, am I any less ethical than the person saving $2 by ignoring any of the ethical concerns buying the cheaper shirts?

wpietri 9y ago
Definitely. Professionals carry a greater ethical burden than people do in everyday actions. Ditto for systems designers vs systems users. More power means more responsibility.
- BearGoesChirp 9y ago
  Have we considered the 'unethicalness' of the different actions? The pricing system is only going to be used by consenting individuals engaging in transactions of money for goods/services. Compare this to what goes into the cheapest clothing, perhaps involving forced labor, child labor, poverty wages, or lethal work conditions. This also seems to assume there is an inherent wrongness in discriminating what price is offered, which many wouldn't find unethical (especially if the discrimination isn't based on protected classes). I feel that the 'definitely' comes from a personal system of ethics that is by no means shared with others. A system that, at least to other systems, might be unethical to enforce on others. I don't see how a single course in an engineering degree can even begin to fix this. I aced my ethics course but consider it a waste of time, not because ethics is a waste of time, but because what the course presented was so light as to be useless. Imagine giving a one semester intro to programming with javascript to MDs; that's what it felt like.
  - wpietri 9y ago
    Heh. I will note that plenty of people will defend both cases on the ground of "consenting individuals". Including the things like indentured servitude, child labor, poverty wages, and dangerous work conditions. Anyhow, I agree that other people may judge the situation differently than me. (I'm sure that for a given ethical conclusion, there's always some ethical system that disagrees, so if you're after certainty, you've picked the wrong topic.) You asked; I answered. If you don't like the answer, just fill out the refund form. Intro courses aren't meant to fix anything. They're meant to wake people up to the topic and prepare them to dig further, either in other classes or on their own. If you're arguing that more should be mandatory, I could get behind that. If, on the other hand, you're arguing that no education is better than some education, I'm not persuaded.

wpietri 9y ago

Definitely. Professionals carry a greater ethical burden than people do in everyday actions. Ditto for systems designers vs systems users. More power means more responsibility.

BearGoesChirp 9y ago
Have we considered the 'unethicalness' of the different actions? The pricing system is only going to be used by consenting individuals engaging in transactions of money for goods/services. Compare this to what goes into the cheapest clothing, perhaps involving forced labor, child labor, poverty wages, or lethal work conditions. This also seems to assume there is an inherent wrongness in discriminating what price is offered, which many wouldn't find unethical (especially if the discrimination isn't based on protected classes). I feel that the 'definitely' comes from a personal system of ethics that is by no means shared with others. A system that, at least to other systems, might be unethical to enforce on others. I don't see how a single course in an engineering degree can even begin to fix this. I aced my ethics course but consider it a waste of time, not because ethics is a waste of time, but because what the course presented was so light as to be useless. Imagine giving a one semester intro to programming with javascript to MDs; that's what it felt like.
- wpietri 9y ago
  Heh. I will note that plenty of people will defend both cases on the ground of "consenting individuals". Including the things like indentured servitude, child labor, poverty wages, and dangerous work conditions. Anyhow, I agree that other people may judge the situation differently than me. (I'm sure that for a given ethical conclusion, there's always some ethical system that disagrees, so if you're after certainty, you've picked the wrong topic.) You asked; I answered. If you don't like the answer, just fill out the refund form. Intro courses aren't meant to fix anything. They're meant to wake people up to the topic and prepare them to dig further, either in other classes or on their own. If you're arguing that more should be mandatory, I could get behind that. If, on the other hand, you're arguing that no education is better than some education, I'm not persuaded.