3 ms·
I just skimmed it, personally I'm not convinced by what I saw: the premise that professional ethics is not personal ethics, while true, is not really meaningful
by version_five 3y ago
I just skimmed it, personally I'm not convinced by what I saw: the premise that professional ethics is not personal ethics, while true, is not really meaningful to technical disciplines. In my engineering ethics and professional practice courses I never saw anything "nontechnical" in our ethics, most of it was don't do stuff you're not qualified for and awareness of applicable law.
The problem with ethics is that there is a vocal group that wants to turn their personal ethics into our professional ethics and impose on software a bunch of judgements that are super subjective (and thus outside the profession).
While I wouldn't be surprised to find professional conduct in other engineering disciples to be getting similarly hijacked these days, I think the only sensible way to professionalize software would be voluntary and technically grounded, not dealing with what you'd put in the realm of personal ethics at all.
- alphazard 3y ago> The problem with ethics is that there is a vocal group that wants to turn their personal ethics into our professional ethics and impose on software a bunch of judgements that are super subjective (and thus outside the profession). This is exactly right, and the word "ethics" pretty much encompasses all of this subjectivity masquerading as objectivity. If you had a rule about testing aviation firmware a certain way, it would just be a regulation, there would be no need to call it an ethical principle. Anyone who understands the relevant technology could understand why it was in place. The same cannot be said about most statements under the umbrella "ethics".