4 ms·

It's just wishful thinking. The way the industry is, if you won't do the job, your boss will just find someone else who will. And they'll probably be paid lower

It's just wishful thinking. The way the industry is, if you won't do the job, your boss will just find someone else who will. And they'll probably be paid lower too.

edrxty 3y ago
I think the goal is to make sure that there isn't a ton of available talent for evil projects. Obviously there are assholes who will happily build slaughter bots for a comfy lifestyle but if we minimize that pool, the economy as a whole will have a hard time getting enough people to build every evil project that anyone comes up with.
- kazinator 3y ago
  > make sure that there isn't a ton of available talent for evil projects AI will address that. Smaller talent can write more via prompt-drive code generation and refactoring; it just has to check that it's not garbage. > assholes who will happily build slaughter bots Chances are you live in a country that owns fleets of machines which fit that description, out of the taxes that you pay, under the direction of the government you elected.
  - mitt_romney_12 3y ago
    > Chances are you live in a country that owns fleets of machines which fit that description, out of the taxes that you pay, under the direction of the government you elected. I don't think that "We already make slaughterbots" is a good argument for why someone should build slaughterbots. Just because we do it doesn't mean it's a good thing
BurningFrog 3y ago
I'm not aware of any industry where doing the job you're hired for is optional.
- KirillPanov 3y ago
  CPAs, Lawyers, Civil Engineers, ... Basically every job that is called a "profession" is explicitly expected to refuse their paymaster's demands when they are unethical.
  - spacemadness 3y ago
    Or regulated areas like medical device design/firmware. You may end up in court and needing to defend yourself if you go along with business leaders who think ethics are just a blockade to profits.
  - kazinator 3y ago
    Yes, and there would be clear areas where programmers should do the same thing. Say you are are employed by some firm that does programming for banks, and you're told to put in some hack to take salami slices out of transactions. You're being asked to break the law; if you participate, you could go to jail. There can exist code whose only purpose, only effect is to perpetrate some harm or break the law. This article is saying that even if you hear that some innocent code of yours is being used in an evil program, you are obligated to do something. I mean, that even goes against free software. If I put out some innocent GPL or BSD licensed thing, and someone uses it for evil, and then I try to use my copyright holder position to wrangle the use out of their hands, it is no longer free software. Oh, and don't forget that non-free, closed-source software is what is unethical in some circles.

It's just wishful thinking. The way the industry is, if you won't do the job, your boss will just find someone else who will. And they'll probably be paid lower too.

edrxty 3y ago

I think the goal is to make sure that there isn't a ton of available talent for evil projects. Obviously there are assholes who will happily build slaughter bots for a comfy lifestyle but if we minimize that pool, the economy as a whole will have a hard time getting enough people to build every evil project that anyone comes up with.

kazinator 3y ago
> make sure that there isn't a ton of available talent for evil projects AI will address that. Smaller talent can write more via prompt-drive code generation and refactoring; it just has to check that it's not garbage. > assholes who will happily build slaughter bots Chances are you live in a country that owns fleets of machines which fit that description, out of the taxes that you pay, under the direction of the government you elected.
- mitt_romney_12 3y ago
  > Chances are you live in a country that owns fleets of machines which fit that description, out of the taxes that you pay, under the direction of the government you elected. I don't think that "We already make slaughterbots" is a good argument for why someone should build slaughterbots. Just because we do it doesn't mean it's a good thing

BurningFrog 3y ago

I'm not aware of any industry where doing the job you're hired for is optional.

KirillPanov 3y ago
CPAs, Lawyers, Civil Engineers, ... Basically every job that is called a "profession" is explicitly expected to refuse their paymaster's demands when they are unethical.
- spacemadness 3y ago
  Or regulated areas like medical device design/firmware. You may end up in court and needing to defend yourself if you go along with business leaders who think ethics are just a blockade to profits.
- kazinator 3y ago
  Yes, and there would be clear areas where programmers should do the same thing. Say you are are employed by some firm that does programming for banks, and you're told to put in some hack to take salami slices out of transactions. You're being asked to break the law; if you participate, you could go to jail. There can exist code whose only purpose, only effect is to perpetrate some harm or break the law. This article is saying that even if you hear that some innocent code of yours is being used in an evil program, you are obligated to do something. I mean, that even goes against free software. If I put out some innocent GPL or BSD licensed thing, and someone uses it for evil, and then I try to use my copyright holder position to wrangle the use out of their hands, it is no longer free software. Oh, and don't forget that non-free, closed-source software is what is unethical in some circles.