4 ms·

I'm saying that we all have responsibility for the software we put out into the world, and we're complicit in how it's used. It's wrong to offload that ethical

I'm saying that we all have responsibility for the software we put out into the world, and we're complicit in how it's used. It's wrong to offload that ethical responsibility entirely to others. Things get better because we want them to be better, as people that build these things we have to care.

TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
Surely it doesn’t come as a surprise to you that there exist in this world who no only don’t think like you... There are people in this world who are happy to write cigs than can be weaponised against those they disagree with. So in that sense, I’d suggest you’re wrong. Software Developers are not a homogeneous while who do or should think like you. Whether or not we agree that way of being is reprehensible is a different matter, in which I tend to agree it is.
- fossuser 6y ago
  Sure - there are people that don't agree with me (often a lot of people). I think we actually agree more than we disagree on this. If people are doing what they think is ethical and they really think it's the right thing then at least that's consistent. I might not agree - I might think it's terrible even, but there's genuine disagreement there and genuine discussion can be had about it (assuming discussion is still allowed). What I'm arguing against is more about the people that know better, or are doing something that's in direct conflict with what they believe to be right. They rationalize it by off-loading that ethical responsibility to others (things like the legal framework of the country they're operating in, it's not my place to determine policy, etc.). They tell themselves their mere presence is helpful, or that if it wasn't them it'd be someone else who doesn't care as much as they do. They structure something like this in their mind for the purpose of being able to hold these contradictory opinions that enable them to do something they think is wrong. That's mostly what I'm fighting against. It's one thing to argue that censorship of citizens is a good idea (I obviously disagree), but at least that's a real position. These other ones are mostly rationalized bullshit. Evil triumphs when good people do nothing, but it also triumphs when good people do evil things while telling themselves it's okay.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
    Yep, ok, gotcha. Thanks for the conversation and your comprehensive responses.
- moksly 6y ago
  We have international human rights, we could enforce companies to follow those guidelines everywhere if they want to do business on our own countries. Fact is that the US government puts money over the very human rights it’s supposed to believe in. The US isn’t alone in this of course, but it’s where the majority of international human rights infringement companies reside.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
    Universal Declaration of Human Rights https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ind... Yeah, it’s only as good as the local laws and their enforcement. Something to strive for though.
    - humanrebar 6y ago
      Human rights don't need enforcement to exist. Part of the point of clarifying rights is clarifying wrongs when that happens. In other words, rights come from human dignity and inherent value. They do not spring into being by fiat from rulers and politicians.
  - cameronbrown 6y ago
    > Fact is that the US government puts money over the very human rights it’s supposed to believe in Big ol' citation needed.

TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago

Surely it doesn’t come as a surprise to you that there exist in this world who no only don’t think like you... There are people in this world who are happy to write cigs than can be weaponised against those they disagree with. So in that sense, I’d suggest you’re wrong. Software Developers are not a homogeneous while who do or should think like you. Whether or not we agree that way of being is reprehensible is a different matter, in which I tend to agree it is.

fossuser 6y ago
Sure - there are people that don't agree with me (often a lot of people). I think we actually agree more than we disagree on this. If people are doing what they think is ethical and they really think it's the right thing then at least that's consistent. I might not agree - I might think it's terrible even, but there's genuine disagreement there and genuine discussion can be had about it (assuming discussion is still allowed). What I'm arguing against is more about the people that know better, or are doing something that's in direct conflict with what they believe to be right. They rationalize it by off-loading that ethical responsibility to others (things like the legal framework of the country they're operating in, it's not my place to determine policy, etc.). They tell themselves their mere presence is helpful, or that if it wasn't them it'd be someone else who doesn't care as much as they do. They structure something like this in their mind for the purpose of being able to hold these contradictory opinions that enable them to do something they think is wrong. That's mostly what I'm fighting against. It's one thing to argue that censorship of citizens is a good idea (I obviously disagree), but at least that's a real position. These other ones are mostly rationalized bullshit. Evil triumphs when good people do nothing, but it also triumphs when good people do evil things while telling themselves it's okay.
- TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
  Yep, ok, gotcha. Thanks for the conversation and your comprehensive responses.
moksly 6y ago
We have international human rights, we could enforce companies to follow those guidelines everywhere if they want to do business on our own countries. Fact is that the US government puts money over the very human rights it’s supposed to believe in. The US isn’t alone in this of course, but it’s where the majority of international human rights infringement companies reside.
- TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
  Universal Declaration of Human Rights https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ind... Yeah, it’s only as good as the local laws and their enforcement. Something to strive for though.
  - humanrebar 6y ago
    Human rights don't need enforcement to exist. Part of the point of clarifying rights is clarifying wrongs when that happens. In other words, rights come from human dignity and inherent value. They do not spring into being by fiat from rulers and politicians.
- cameronbrown 6y ago
  > Fact is that the US government puts money over the very human rights it’s supposed to believe in Big ol' citation needed.