5 ms·

but you don't understand! I didn't create my face tracking software for surveillant capitalism!

dragontamer 4y ago
I'm not racist! I just chose to work under racist bosses, do what the racist bosses say, and build / design things that those racist bosses liked! Now replace "racism" with whatever other adjective is out there (face-tracking software, guns, etc. etc.) and its really the same thing. We engineers must ethically agree with the things we make, and their expected use. Its one thing if maybe our boss uses the device in a way we didn't expect. But on the other hand, Oppenheimer knew damn well what he was making. The people we support and work for are ethically and morally tied to us engineers. They can only do the things they want with our support. And we are tied with them, since their use of our inventions is actually quite predictable in most situations.
- jl6 4y ago
  This sort of moral principle is easy to apply in extreme scenarios, but most decisions are not so clear cut: a lot of engineers don’t have complete agency in choosing where they work, and a lot of engineers work on dual-use technology with plausible ethical use. As an example, if we assume Facebook is 100% evil (debatable but let’s go with it), then did the developers of React act unethically because their work furthered Facebook’s goals, or ethically because React is morally neutral (or even positive, as Free software) and it was other engineers who put it to evil uses? And furthermore, even nuclear bombs had a plausible ethical use (end the war sooner).
  - dragontamer 4y ago
    How hard is it for a React.js developer to find a new job elsewhere? If Facebook is 100% evil, then it behooves the workers to work for a less evil company, at a minimum. Of course, Facebook itself isn't 100% evil so things break down in your example. If you're a React.js developer and you're worried about internet privacy, intrusive ad-tech being used to track people (etc. etc.), then maybe... just maybe... you should find something else to work on in a company that matches your ethics better.
    - spurgu 4y ago
      Only siths deal in extremes. No company is 100% evil. But given you are the guy who brought up the "racist bridge" analogy I'm not surprised.
      - g42gregory 4y ago
        Just point out that the siths don't exist and we are not in the Hollywood movie. The reason I wanted to point this out is that Hollywood provides an extremely distorted view on the society and a lot of people are using it as reference frame as if it's something real. Having said that, I agree with the poster that no company is 100% evil. It's a good point.
  - matkoniecz 4y ago
    > And furthermore, even nuclear bombs had a plausible ethical use (end the war sooner). Some things have no real ethical use. At least in some cases inventors are unethical to invent some things.
    - jl6 4y ago
      Sure, and those are what I think are the extreme scenarios. What I’m saying is that nearly all scenarios are not so extreme and not so easy to judge.
      - matkoniecz 4y ago
        I would consider working on improving spyware for adtech as similar "definitely evil", though with massively smaller impact. Or working on better ads for scammers. Or trying to invent legal loophole to enable something evil.
        spurgu 4y ago
        Or giving an edge to the small player in the field with a better product trying to get it to the masses.
        matkoniecz 4y ago
        I would not treat it as self-evidently evil.
        spurgu 4y ago
        That was my point.
  - spurgu 4y ago
    This is why I brought up the atomic bomb as an example - nuclear fission has excellent non-warfare use cases. Creating a "racist bomb" would be a stupid example.
    - dragontamer 4y ago
      I think I can safely call the gas chambers the Nazi created as intended to be an anti-semitic weapon. Could they have been used in another manner? Yes. But we all know what the intent was, and any engineer who worked on that project knew damn well what was going on.

I'm not racist! I just chose to work under racist bosses, do what the racist bosses say, and build / design things that those racist bosses liked! Now replace "racism" with whatever other adjective is out there (face-tracking software, guns, etc. etc.) and its really the same thing. We engineers must ethically agree with the things we make, and their expected use. Its one thing if maybe our boss uses the device in a way we didn't expect. But on the other hand, Oppenheimer knew damn well what he was making. The people we support and work for are ethically and morally tied to us engineers. They can only do the things they want with our support. And we are tied with them, since their use of our inventions is actually quite predictable in most situations.

jl6 4y ago
This sort of moral principle is easy to apply in extreme scenarios, but most decisions are not so clear cut: a lot of engineers don’t have complete agency in choosing where they work, and a lot of engineers work on dual-use technology with plausible ethical use. As an example, if we assume Facebook is 100% evil (debatable but let’s go with it), then did the developers of React act unethically because their work furthered Facebook’s goals, or ethically because React is morally neutral (or even positive, as Free software) and it was other engineers who put it to evil uses? And furthermore, even nuclear bombs had a plausible ethical use (end the war sooner).
- dragontamer 4y ago
  How hard is it for a React.js developer to find a new job elsewhere? If Facebook is 100% evil, then it behooves the workers to work for a less evil company, at a minimum. Of course, Facebook itself isn't 100% evil so things break down in your example. If you're a React.js developer and you're worried about internet privacy, intrusive ad-tech being used to track people (etc. etc.), then maybe... just maybe... you should find something else to work on in a company that matches your ethics better.
  - spurgu 4y ago
    Only siths deal in extremes. No company is 100% evil. But given you are the guy who brought up the "racist bridge" analogy I'm not surprised.
    - g42gregory 4y ago
      Just point out that the siths don't exist and we are not in the Hollywood movie. The reason I wanted to point this out is that Hollywood provides an extremely distorted view on the society and a lot of people are using it as reference frame as if it's something real. Having said that, I agree with the poster that no company is 100% evil. It's a good point.
- matkoniecz 4y ago
  > And furthermore, even nuclear bombs had a plausible ethical use (end the war sooner). Some things have no real ethical use. At least in some cases inventors are unethical to invent some things.
  - jl6 4y ago
    Sure, and those are what I think are the extreme scenarios. What I’m saying is that nearly all scenarios are not so extreme and not so easy to judge.
    - matkoniecz 4y ago
      I would consider working on improving spyware for adtech as similar "definitely evil", though with massively smaller impact. Or working on better ads for scammers. Or trying to invent legal loophole to enable something evil.
      - spurgu 4y ago
        Or giving an edge to the small player in the field with a better product trying to get it to the masses.
        matkoniecz 4y ago
        I would not treat it as self-evidently evil.
        spurgu 4y ago
        That was my point.
- spurgu 4y ago
  This is why I brought up the atomic bomb as an example - nuclear fission has excellent non-warfare use cases. Creating a "racist bomb" would be a stupid example.
  - dragontamer 4y ago
    I think I can safely call the gas chambers the Nazi created as intended to be an anti-semitic weapon. Could they have been used in another manner? Yes. But we all know what the intent was, and any engineer who worked on that project knew damn well what was going on.