6 ms·

> Auckland University computer science associate professor Ian Watson, said this was a problem because the mostly 20-something-year-old, caucasian males creatin

> Auckland University computer science associate professor Ian Watson, said this was a problem because the mostly 20-something-year-old, caucasian males creating apps were making race and gender divides worse. Oh, fuck you and the horse you rode in on. The tech industry has given everyone in the world access to nearly all of humanity's knowledge. It has enormously extended everyone's ability to communicate. It has made it easier to learn, to solve problems, to find a job, to start a business, to talk and trade and work with people all over the world. For less than $150 [0], you can buy a computer that is infinitely more powerful than the one I used to teach myself programming as a child, and gain access to all of the above. And we have to get dressed down by clowns who charge teenagers thousands of dollars to fill their heads with garbage, leaving them saddled with debt and with no usable skills? You have to be kidding me. Make no mistake, these maneuvers are not at all about "ethics". They are about a certain breed of parasites looking for new ways to latch onto a productive industry. That said, a basic liberal arts education (not taught by those clowns) would certainly be useful to engineers. Or to anyone, really (I studied the history of philosophy in high school, didn't you?). If nothing else, it would give them the confidence to rebuff this kind of nonsense. [0]: https://www.google.com/search?q=chromebook&oq=chromebook&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.1367j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#tbs=vw:l,mr:1,cat:328,pdtr0:966482|966483,price:1,ppr_max:150,init_ar:SgVKAwjIAkoKUggI0v46INP-Og%3D%3D&tbm=shop&q=chromebook https://www.google.com/search?q=chromebook&oq=chromebook&aqs...

fdavison 9y ago
This rationalization is a slippery slope. "Good works" does not entitle one to behave unethically. Seems close to these two from the Ethics Alarms website list of Unethical Rationalizations: 21. Ethics Accounting (“I’ve earned this”/ “I made up for that”) holds that someone can eliminate or mitigate wrong doing by loading up the good side of the ethics ledger so that the bad side looks puny by comparison. 11. The King’s Pass, The Star Syndrome, or “What Will We Do Without Him?” One will often hear unethical behavior excused because the person involved is so important, so accomplished, and has done such great things for so many people that we should look the other way, just this once. This is a terribly dangerous mindset, because celebrities and powerful public figures come to depend on it. Their achievements, in their own minds and those of their supporters and fans, have earned them a more lenient ethical standard. This pass for bad behavior is as insidious as it is pervasive, and should be recognized and rejected whenever it raises its slimy head. In fact, the more respectable and accomplished an individual is, the more damage he or she can do through unethical conduct, because such individuals engender great trust. Thus the corrupting influence on the individual of The King’s Pass leads to the corruption of others. https://ethicsalarms.com/rule-book/unethical-rationalizations-and-misconceptions/ https://ethicsalarms.com/rule-book/unethical-rationalization...
- Camillo 9y ago
  True, but that's not at all what I meant. I'm not saying it's ok for tech to do bad things because of other good things it has done. I am saying that it is wrong to accuse tech, on the whole, of "making race and gender divides worse". Universal access to information benefits everyone, with no distinction of race and gender. World-spanning communication networks help bridge the divide. Cheap electronics make these resources accessible even to the needy (think of the unjustly bemoaned homeless or refugees with smartphones - they are not a luxury, but a vital lifeline). Etc. Could we do more? Should we do more? Sure. But that doesn't mean others are justified in completely misrepresenting the history of this industry's contributions to the world.
rebuffme 9y ago
One marvels at the rigors of a "high school philosophy class" that prepared you to "rebuff" this article by cherry-picking, an appeal to Mussolini making the trains run on time, ignorance of the history of your own field, multiple straw hominids, and a hearty "fuck you" to boot. Clearly there are those who could perhaps benefit some from additional ethics education, and training in reasoning. Then there are your actual poster children for the need.
- dang 9y ago
  Please don't respond to a bad comment by making the thread still worse.
dang 9y ago
Would you please not rant like this on Hacker News?—regardless of how wrong someone else is or how bad an article. You've done this before, and it lowers the quality of discussion.
- kfhoeihfy38h 9y ago
  >it lowers the quality of discussion disagree. it's impossible to lower the quality of discussion below the article itself and when an article contains the racist bullshit talking about quality is laughable.
- Camillo 9y ago
  Sorry about that. Please go ahead and remove the comment, I can't.
kfhoeihfy38h 9y ago
it is indeed astounding how many useless people are trying to attach themselves to the IT. Anecdotally, it's already a useful heuristic that anyone making the 'ethics/social justice/diversity/equality' noise willingly is not worth the money they are being paid.

fdavison 9y ago

This rationalization is a slippery slope. "Good works" does not entitle one to behave unethically. Seems close to these two from the Ethics Alarms website list of Unethical Rationalizations: 21. Ethics Accounting (“I’ve earned this”/ “I made up for that”) holds that someone can eliminate or mitigate wrong doing by loading up the good side of the ethics ledger so that the bad side looks puny by comparison. 11. The King’s Pass, The Star Syndrome, or “What Will We Do Without Him?” One will often hear unethical behavior excused because the person involved is so important, so accomplished, and has done such great things for so many people that we should look the other way, just this once. This is a terribly dangerous mindset, because celebrities and powerful public figures come to depend on it. Their achievements, in their own minds and those of their supporters and fans, have earned them a more lenient ethical standard. This pass for bad behavior is as insidious as it is pervasive, and should be recognized and rejected whenever it raises its slimy head. In fact, the more respectable and accomplished an individual is, the more damage he or she can do through unethical conduct, because such individuals engender great trust. Thus the corrupting influence on the individual of The King’s Pass leads to the corruption of others. https://ethicsalarms.com/rule-book/unethical-rationalizations-and-misconceptions/ https://ethicsalarms.com/rule-book/unethical-rationalization...

Camillo 9y ago
True, but that's not at all what I meant. I'm not saying it's ok for tech to do bad things because of other good things it has done. I am saying that it is wrong to accuse tech, on the whole, of "making race and gender divides worse". Universal access to information benefits everyone, with no distinction of race and gender. World-spanning communication networks help bridge the divide. Cheap electronics make these resources accessible even to the needy (think of the unjustly bemoaned homeless or refugees with smartphones - they are not a luxury, but a vital lifeline). Etc. Could we do more? Should we do more? Sure. But that doesn't mean others are justified in completely misrepresenting the history of this industry's contributions to the world.

rebuffme 9y ago

One marvels at the rigors of a "high school philosophy class" that prepared you to "rebuff" this article by cherry-picking, an appeal to Mussolini making the trains run on time, ignorance of the history of your own field, multiple straw hominids, and a hearty "fuck you" to boot. Clearly there are those who could perhaps benefit some from additional ethics education, and training in reasoning. Then there are your actual poster children for the need.

dang 9y ago
Please don't respond to a bad comment by making the thread still worse.

dang 9y ago

Would you please not rant like this on Hacker News?—regardless of how wrong someone else is or how bad an article. You've done this before, and it lowers the quality of discussion.

kfhoeihfy38h 9y ago
>it lowers the quality of discussion disagree. it's impossible to lower the quality of discussion below the article itself and when an article contains the racist bullshit talking about quality is laughable.
Camillo 9y ago
Sorry about that. Please go ahead and remove the comment, I can't.

kfhoeihfy38h 9y ago

it is indeed astounding how many useless people are trying to attach themselves to the IT. Anecdotally, it's already a useful heuristic that anyone making the 'ethics/social justice/diversity/equality' noise willingly is not worth the money they are being paid.