4 ms·

I went to a university that required quite a bit of liberal arts education with the CS degree. I can't think of anything with a substantial relation to engineer

I went to a university that required quite a bit of liberal arts education with the CS degree. I can't think of anything with a substantial relation to engineering ethics covered in those courses. I don't mean that to be demeaning, but just the reality of what gets covered. I did take Intro to Philosophy (Can't say I learned anything new in it), but most courses were things like French Caribbean Literature, Art History, Civics, etc.

_bxg1 7y ago
French Caribbean Literature sounds pretty specific, but you really don't think Civics has any relation to engineering ethics?
- nitwit005 7y ago
  If you're working for the government, there are some relevant parts of the constitution, but otherwise the answer is basically no. At least, not in a single semester course giving a rough overview of how the government is supposed to work.
  - _bxg1 7y ago
    Maybe not if it's as simple as "how the government is supposed to work", but the general subject of Civics would have plenty to do with: - How social media might affect democracy - How AI surveillance could impact human rights - The emergence of tech companies with the resources of nation-states etc.
    - nitwit005 7y ago
      I mean, the answer is no, in that the course I actually took didn't cover any of that. You're essentially creating a course you want taught. You can go look at the descriptions of some civics courses for non-majors. I don't think you're going to find much discussion of AI surveillance. They have to cram what they can into a semester or quarter.
    - thu2111 7y ago
      But all that is very controversial and imbued with political bias. This is why CS ethics courses and the 'liberal arts' have a bad reputation: they claim to be teaching some sort of universal ethics but are actually just teaching left-wing propaganda. For instance, from a libertarian perspective I'd argue: - Social media makes democracy stronger because people can communicate more. There's little to say beyond that. - AI surveillance is no different to surveillance powered by people, except cheaper. It has no real impact on anything beyond scale, which may make a practical difference but makes no fundamental difference to any arguments about surveillance. A much better question would be how cryptography affects surveillance and human rights, but very few ask that except the politicians and investigators it actually affects. This is because questions in the media about "AI" are almost always standard leftist anti-capitalism targeting tech firms whilst posing as something new. AI is merely a prop to start tired old conversations, not a real interest. - "The emergence of tech firms with the resources of nation states" being the very next bullet after "AI" is just re-inforcing my point. You aren't interested in tech ethics. You want to debate capitalism itself, which universities and academics have wasted far too much time on over the centuries. The resulting "debates" have yielded no insight but lots of violence, subterfuge and general chaos. It's also - like the other question - based on false premises. There are no tech firms with the resources of nation states. A very few might appear that way if you compare arbitrary and incomparable statistics like GDP vs market cap, but those don't measure the same thing. As a simple example showing how false this is, tech firms can't make law or raise an army, which even the tiniest and most useless nation states can and do. However, good luck arguing any of these points in a paper required by such a course and not getting a fail grade. Universities are the absolute last places that should be trying to teach ethics.
      - collyw 7y ago
        > Social media makes democracy stronger because people can communicate more. There's little to say beyond that. Except when the platform censors one side of the debate. Reminds me of The Joe Rogan podcast with Tim Pool and Twitter execs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbTXqrS9l5E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbTXqrS9l5E
        7y ago
qwrshr 7y ago
I'm a philosophy grad student who is currently doing some data science classes. First, I think the connection might've been clearer if you had taken an intro ethics or political philosophy class. For instance, the free speech class for undergrads in my university has a session on issues like net neutrality and whether free speech on platforms like facebook should be limited. And second, as someone else below mentioned, a lot of the more general and theoretical things you might pick up on humanities classes can be used as a lens to think about tech-related issues, even if the professor or readings haven't actually explicitly done that. (In fact, if none of the readings have done that, trying to do that might make for a good final paper --- it's something that's at least worth talking to the instructor about.)

_bxg1 7y ago

French Caribbean Literature sounds pretty specific, but you really don't think Civics has any relation to engineering ethics?

nitwit005 7y ago
If you're working for the government, there are some relevant parts of the constitution, but otherwise the answer is basically no. At least, not in a single semester course giving a rough overview of how the government is supposed to work.
- _bxg1 7y ago
  Maybe not if it's as simple as "how the government is supposed to work", but the general subject of Civics would have plenty to do with: - How social media might affect democracy - How AI surveillance could impact human rights - The emergence of tech companies with the resources of nation-states etc.
  - nitwit005 7y ago
    I mean, the answer is no, in that the course I actually took didn't cover any of that. You're essentially creating a course you want taught. You can go look at the descriptions of some civics courses for non-majors. I don't think you're going to find much discussion of AI surveillance. They have to cram what they can into a semester or quarter.
  - thu2111 7y ago
    But all that is very controversial and imbued with political bias. This is why CS ethics courses and the 'liberal arts' have a bad reputation: they claim to be teaching some sort of universal ethics but are actually just teaching left-wing propaganda. For instance, from a libertarian perspective I'd argue: - Social media makes democracy stronger because people can communicate more. There's little to say beyond that. - AI surveillance is no different to surveillance powered by people, except cheaper. It has no real impact on anything beyond scale, which may make a practical difference but makes no fundamental difference to any arguments about surveillance. A much better question would be how cryptography affects surveillance and human rights, but very few ask that except the politicians and investigators it actually affects. This is because questions in the media about "AI" are almost always standard leftist anti-capitalism targeting tech firms whilst posing as something new. AI is merely a prop to start tired old conversations, not a real interest. - "The emergence of tech firms with the resources of nation states" being the very next bullet after "AI" is just re-inforcing my point. You aren't interested in tech ethics. You want to debate capitalism itself, which universities and academics have wasted far too much time on over the centuries. The resulting "debates" have yielded no insight but lots of violence, subterfuge and general chaos. It's also - like the other question - based on false premises. There are no tech firms with the resources of nation states. A very few might appear that way if you compare arbitrary and incomparable statistics like GDP vs market cap, but those don't measure the same thing. As a simple example showing how false this is, tech firms can't make law or raise an army, which even the tiniest and most useless nation states can and do. However, good luck arguing any of these points in a paper required by such a course and not getting a fail grade. Universities are the absolute last places that should be trying to teach ethics.
    - collyw 7y ago
      > Social media makes democracy stronger because people can communicate more. There's little to say beyond that. Except when the platform censors one side of the debate. Reminds me of The Joe Rogan podcast with Tim Pool and Twitter execs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbTXqrS9l5E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbTXqrS9l5E
      - 7y ago

qwrshr 7y ago

I'm a philosophy grad student who is currently doing some data science classes. First, I think the connection might've been clearer if you had taken an intro ethics or political philosophy class. For instance, the free speech class for undergrads in my university has a session on issues like net neutrality and whether free speech on platforms like facebook should be limited. And second, as someone else below mentioned, a lot of the more general and theoretical things you might pick up on humanities classes can be used as a lens to think about tech-related issues, even if the professor or readings haven't actually explicitly done that. (In fact, if none of the readings have done that, trying to do that might make for a good final paper --- it's something that's at least worth talking to the instructor about.)