5 ms·

Who gets to determine what is considered ethical?

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
tptacek 9y ago
In general, the individual engineers do. The point of ethics training is to recognize that you have ethical obligations that extend past your job responsibilities, and that when your ethics conflict with your work tasks, it's not your ethics that should compromise. For some of us, that might mean not working on a project that we could reasonably foresee would result in the deportation of children who don't speak Spanish and have only ever known this country to some foreign country. For others, it might mean not working on projects that assist women in obtaining an abortion. Obviously, there's no "class" that settles the differing ethical boundaries we all have (though better ethics education would allow us to recognize the huge subset of ethics that we tend to share). The point is to tune in to our own ethics and not let the noise of professional life occlude them. As a field, I think we've allowed ourselves to simultaneously believe that we're doing the most important work that's being done this century, while at the same time believing that we're powerless to shape the outcomes of our labor. But that's not true at all: if you believe the former, then it's likely that we have immense power over the latter! So, I think the point of the root comment on this thread is well taken.
- userbinator 9y ago
  For some of us, that might mean not working on a project that we could reasonably foresee would result in the deportation of children who don't speak Spanish and have only ever known this country to some foreign country. For others, it might mean not working on projects that assist women in obtaining an abortion. Unfortunately it seems a lot of engineers either don't have much in the way of ethics, or truly believe what they're doing is good. See all those willing to implement things like invasive telemetry, DRM, and walled gardens, for example. The "security" argument is pervasive and very convincing to those who don't realise that it's also a way for companies to enforce more control over its users. This also brings up another point: if you had to choose between not working on a project that goes against your ethics (leaving others to drive it toward its undesirable-to-you goal), or work on it but silently subvert it (as in subtly break it or otherwise impede its progress), which one would be the more ethical thing to do? In other words, "do everything you're told, just some things better than others"? Maybe I'm just optimistic, but the existence of jailbreaks, rooting, and flaws discovered in DRM schemes really make me want to believe that the latter exist.
  - tptacek 9y ago
    People have different morals and ethics. I don't have a problem with DRM, for instance, and even if we debated to the point where I had to concede some theoretical problem with it, it'd be pretty far down my list of ethical priorities. I'm not commenting to advocate for the notion that people should get an ethics education so they'll all turn out to be good Democratic Socialists. I'm saying, our field would be better off if people recognized that their ethics intersect with the field heavily, and they should do this work mindfully.
- refurb 9y ago
  Ok, so if I'm an engineer and I think the ethical thing to do is help build a better license plate scanning technology to protect everyone from terrorism, then what?
  - tptacek 9y ago
    Then I guess you build better license plate scanning technology. That isn't obvious?
    - refurb 9y ago
      So being ethical doesn't really change anything?
      - tptacek 9y ago
        No, that doesn't follow at all.
        refurb 9y ago
        Ok, maybe I'm misunderstanding. Problem: engineers working on things like license plate scanning Your solution: engineers should be ethical My comment: engineers can be ethical and still do things like license plate scanning Your comment: you agree From my vantage point it doesn't look like your recommendation changes anything.
        tptacek 9y ago
        I think if you re-read my comments, you'll see that you've left a bit out of that summary.
        tedunangst 9y ago
        Problem: engineers who think license plate scanners are unethical but build them anyway because "I'm not actually the person pulling the trigger".
matt4077 9y ago
As a first approximation, it would be beneficial to convince people of the concept‘s existence, and to get them to start questioning the implications of the work they do. As it is, too many in the tech community are willing to defend anything with arguments such as „if I don’t, someone else will“ or „technology is ethically neutral, it is the use...“.
dredmorbius 9y ago
Someone who is very good at it. There's a process for coming to group concensus on contended questions, in which individual volition and choice isn't possible. It's called "politics". It's messy, but I'm unaware of any better options.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

In general, the individual engineers do. The point of ethics training is to recognize that you have ethical obligations that extend past your job responsibilities, and that when your ethics conflict with your work tasks, it's not your ethics that should compromise. For some of us, that might mean not working on a project that we could reasonably foresee would result in the deportation of children who don't speak Spanish and have only ever known this country to some foreign country. For others, it might mean not working on projects that assist women in obtaining an abortion. Obviously, there's no "class" that settles the differing ethical boundaries we all have (though better ethics education would allow us to recognize the huge subset of ethics that we tend to share). The point is to tune in to our own ethics and not let the noise of professional life occlude them. As a field, I think we've allowed ourselves to simultaneously believe that we're doing the most important work that's being done this century, while at the same time believing that we're powerless to shape the outcomes of our labor. But that's not true at all: if you believe the former, then it's likely that we have immense power over the latter! So, I think the point of the root comment on this thread is well taken.

userbinator 9y ago
For some of us, that might mean not working on a project that we could reasonably foresee would result in the deportation of children who don't speak Spanish and have only ever known this country to some foreign country. For others, it might mean not working on projects that assist women in obtaining an abortion. Unfortunately it seems a lot of engineers either don't have much in the way of ethics, or truly believe what they're doing is good. See all those willing to implement things like invasive telemetry, DRM, and walled gardens, for example. The "security" argument is pervasive and very convincing to those who don't realise that it's also a way for companies to enforce more control over its users. This also brings up another point: if you had to choose between not working on a project that goes against your ethics (leaving others to drive it toward its undesirable-to-you goal), or work on it but silently subvert it (as in subtly break it or otherwise impede its progress), which one would be the more ethical thing to do? In other words, "do everything you're told, just some things better than others"? Maybe I'm just optimistic, but the existence of jailbreaks, rooting, and flaws discovered in DRM schemes really make me want to believe that the latter exist.
- tptacek 9y ago
  People have different morals and ethics. I don't have a problem with DRM, for instance, and even if we debated to the point where I had to concede some theoretical problem with it, it'd be pretty far down my list of ethical priorities. I'm not commenting to advocate for the notion that people should get an ethics education so they'll all turn out to be good Democratic Socialists. I'm saying, our field would be better off if people recognized that their ethics intersect with the field heavily, and they should do this work mindfully.
refurb 9y ago
Ok, so if I'm an engineer and I think the ethical thing to do is help build a better license plate scanning technology to protect everyone from terrorism, then what?
- tptacek 9y ago
  Then I guess you build better license plate scanning technology. That isn't obvious?
  - refurb 9y ago
    So being ethical doesn't really change anything?
    - tptacek 9y ago
      No, that doesn't follow at all.
      - refurb 9y ago
        Ok, maybe I'm misunderstanding. Problem: engineers working on things like license plate scanning Your solution: engineers should be ethical My comment: engineers can be ethical and still do things like license plate scanning Your comment: you agree From my vantage point it doesn't look like your recommendation changes anything.
        tptacek 9y ago
        I think if you re-read my comments, you'll see that you've left a bit out of that summary.
        tedunangst 9y ago
        Problem: engineers who think license plate scanners are unethical but build them anyway because "I'm not actually the person pulling the trigger".

matt4077 9y ago

As a first approximation, it would be beneficial to convince people of the concept‘s existence, and to get them to start questioning the implications of the work they do. As it is, too many in the tech community are willing to defend anything with arguments such as „if I don’t, someone else will“ or „technology is ethically neutral, it is the use...“.

dredmorbius 9y ago

Someone who is very good at it. There's a process for coming to group concensus on contended questions, in which individual volition and choice isn't possible. It's called "politics". It's messy, but I'm unaware of any better options.