5 ms·

>Every software engineer I’ve worked with has had a strong sense of personal values and ethics, but the organizations we work for can take actions that are at o

>Every software engineer I’ve worked with has had a strong sense of personal values and ethics, but the organizations we work for can take actions that are at odds with these. I’d like to highlight a few of the key challenges you’ll face and provide feedback for living your personal values. Most importantly, it’s critical that you think about the impact of your work and consciously set your personal values in advance of inevitable future challenges. I'd agree with this assessment of developers. However I've come into these exact moral dilemmas myself in the line of working for various companies doing web programming. How did I resolve them? By making the decision that affected my own bottom line favorably. When looked at in isolation, it's impossible for a single developer to say no to the incentives of doing "evil" work. It won't be until the field of software engineering really matures and develops a set of standards bodies like other professions that engineers will have some sort of protection. Physicians can refuse to perform a procedure they're told to in the name of protecting their medical license. A software engineer should likewise be held to the same standard.

SomeStupidPoint 9y ago
Nuclear missiles, land mines, biological weapons, torture research, etc has all been carried out by willing and often motivated engineers or doctors. I'm skeptical something that hasn't worked in other fields is going to fix our woes in software.
- goatlover 9y ago
  Probably because it was interesting and cutting edge, and so they rationalized it to themselves, like humans are so good at doing.
bendoernberg 9y ago
It is possible to say no to the incentives of doing evil work; I would describe those who say no as the people with "a strong sense of personal values and ethics". This phrase has no meaning if you apply it to people who routinely violate their own beliefs in order to make more money, especially in a highly-compensated profession with a booming job market and plenty of available positions that don't require unethical behavior.
- theparanoid 9y ago
  Every job I've had wanted to work me to the bone. I'd violate my personal ethics for stress-free work that'd pay my mortgage.
  - ejnulls 9y ago
    That's fine, but ultimately how can you look down on people like Trump, Ajit Pai, or the CEO of Comcast? They're sacrificing ethical decisions for money, same as you. Only difference is they're getting "fuck you" money and you're barely getting enough to buy a house. Kinda lame to sell out for so little IMO. As long you don't complain about these types of people, then whatever, but if you do you need to take a harder look in the mirror!
    - ejnulls 9y ago
      Ah, I get it. The "my leaders should have more integrity than me" mentality. Well guess what? One day you may be a leader...and you'll still have your crap, anti-social mentality.
59nadir 9y ago
> I'd agree with this assessment of developers. However I've come into these exact moral dilemmas myself in the line of working for various companies doing web programming. How did I resolve them? By making the decision that affected my own bottom line favorably. That would be _not_ having a strong sense of personal values and ethics. If your good morals always lose out to the promise of more money, that's you not having good morals. Just own up to it instead of pretending the real culprit here is a lack of governing bodies that should be protecting you from all the evil money out there.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  You cannot build the world based on the strength of individuals' moral spine, because a) there's plenty of people with weak ones who will happily outcompete individuals refusing unethical work, and - the more important - b) people respond to incentives. For instance, we have the law and the police even though people in general seem naturally good - they exist to counterbalance incentives that make people do bad things. Saying "just own up to it instead of pretending the real culprit here is a lack of governing bodies that should be protecting you from all the evil money out there" ignores the most basic fact about humans - people do respond to incentives. Moral dilemmas don't look like "do I accept this high salary for doing evil, or prefer a slightly smaller salary for not doing evil". Moral dilemma is what a hypothetical Jane faces, after one of her parents died and the second is unemployed, when she has to provide for the parent and her younger siblings, while also trying to start her own life with her fiancée. For her, abandoning a high-paying salary that is actually eaten up entirely to let two families live in stability and with dignity, is not a trivial problem. The idea of having support of governing bodies is to turn such life-quality-threatening situations into easy choices, so that people don't get severely punished for doing the right thing. Also: ethics can be, and is, used to abuse people. In Poland, we have this situation with paramedics, nurses and doctors on residency, who are severely overworked (to the point it's a serious health threat, and causes an occasional suicide), severely underpaid, and on top of that they're told by everyone that they can't protest because that would mean providing worse care for patients, which is obviously unethical.
  - dwaltrip 9y ago
oceanghost 9y ago
As a profession, we need a set of ethical standards. I tell companies I "Won't build products that hurt people." You wouldn't be surprised how many doors this closes.

SomeStupidPoint 9y ago

Nuclear missiles, land mines, biological weapons, torture research, etc has all been carried out by willing and often motivated engineers or doctors. I'm skeptical something that hasn't worked in other fields is going to fix our woes in software.

goatlover 9y ago
Probably because it was interesting and cutting edge, and so they rationalized it to themselves, like humans are so good at doing.

bendoernberg 9y ago

It is possible to say no to the incentives of doing evil work; I would describe those who say no as the people with "a strong sense of personal values and ethics". This phrase has no meaning if you apply it to people who routinely violate their own beliefs in order to make more money, especially in a highly-compensated profession with a booming job market and plenty of available positions that don't require unethical behavior.

theparanoid 9y ago
Every job I've had wanted to work me to the bone. I'd violate my personal ethics for stress-free work that'd pay my mortgage.
- ejnulls 9y ago
  That's fine, but ultimately how can you look down on people like Trump, Ajit Pai, or the CEO of Comcast? They're sacrificing ethical decisions for money, same as you. Only difference is they're getting "fuck you" money and you're barely getting enough to buy a house. Kinda lame to sell out for so little IMO. As long you don't complain about these types of people, then whatever, but if you do you need to take a harder look in the mirror!
  - ejnulls 9y ago
    Ah, I get it. The "my leaders should have more integrity than me" mentality. Well guess what? One day you may be a leader...and you'll still have your crap, anti-social mentality.

59nadir 9y ago

> I'd agree with this assessment of developers. However I've come into these exact moral dilemmas myself in the line of working for various companies doing web programming. How did I resolve them? By making the decision that affected my own bottom line favorably. That would be _not_ having a strong sense of personal values and ethics. If your good morals always lose out to the promise of more money, that's you not having good morals. Just own up to it instead of pretending the real culprit here is a lack of governing bodies that should be protecting you from all the evil money out there.

TeMPOraL 9y ago
You cannot build the world based on the strength of individuals' moral spine, because a) there's plenty of people with weak ones who will happily outcompete individuals refusing unethical work, and - the more important - b) people respond to incentives. For instance, we have the law and the police even though people in general seem naturally good - they exist to counterbalance incentives that make people do bad things. Saying "just own up to it instead of pretending the real culprit here is a lack of governing bodies that should be protecting you from all the evil money out there" ignores the most basic fact about humans - people do respond to incentives. Moral dilemmas don't look like "do I accept this high salary for doing evil, or prefer a slightly smaller salary for not doing evil". Moral dilemma is what a hypothetical Jane faces, after one of her parents died and the second is unemployed, when she has to provide for the parent and her younger siblings, while also trying to start her own life with her fiancée. For her, abandoning a high-paying salary that is actually eaten up entirely to let two families live in stability and with dignity, is not a trivial problem. The idea of having support of governing bodies is to turn such life-quality-threatening situations into easy choices, so that people don't get severely punished for doing the right thing. Also: ethics can be, and is, used to abuse people. In Poland, we have this situation with paramedics, nurses and doctors on residency, who are severely overworked (to the point it's a serious health threat, and causes an occasional suicide), severely underpaid, and on top of that they're told by everyone that they can't protest because that would mean providing worse care for patients, which is obviously unethical.
- dwaltrip 9y ago

oceanghost 9y ago

As a profession, we need a set of ethical standards. I tell companies I "Won't build products that hurt people." You wouldn't be surprised how many doors this closes.