The feeling when you remember what was deemed paranoid fantasy in computing a decade ago and then thinking of today’s supply chain attacks, bot nets, great firewalls, xkeyscore and all that… and as a programmer I am disappointed in the kind of people that decide to work on these things.
Fuckers.
Now, you might argue that some programmers don’t have a choice. Capitalism and all that. This might be true in general, for poor people, but in the context of programmers, the ones I know do have the freedom to decide whom to work for and what to work on.
But even if you do know people in such circumstances – I’m not sure how to respond to this. I can go commit the No True Scotsman fallacy, or go back and qualify my statements with “most” and “the ones I know” and “it seems to me” – but at the same time I don’t know enough these people and their situations so let me put it this way: I hope they get back their agency as quickly as possible and that they will exercise their freedom as soon as they can.
And at the same time I will be thinking of Kant and the categorical imperative and where as I know that his statements are harsh and contested, he did argue that you should not lie, no matter what, because that is the foundation of our society. No excuses. And thus while I acknowledge the need to make compromises, these don’t exempt people from moral judgement. That’s why these are compromises and not good deeds.
#Programming #Philosophy
2020-05-09 Ethics and licensing
As a formal pilot who managed to get into law school (I didn’t start it) before pivoting to tech I can tell you it couldn’t be further from the truth. To date I’ve had far more training on subjects involving ethics for my degree in aviation than for anything else I’ve done, even my master’s degree in computer science. – Privacy or Accessibility... Most People Can't Have Both
Privacy or Accessibility... Most People Can't Have Both
The point I was interested in is that he got a whole lot of ethics training as part of his training to be a pilot, and definitely a lot more than in his training to be a programmer. As somebody who is saddened by the ethical shortcomings of my fellow programmers, and the lack of an organisation to enforce ethical standards, that speaks to me. I think more ethics training is necessary.
I remember how I was studying biology with an interest in genetics and developmental physiology and there an optional course in eugenics. Whoa! I had no idea in my early twenties. Biology came with a whole lot of baggage and I thought it was imperative for all of us to understand that. Perhaps, in future decades, people will point back at these early years of laissez-faire programming and be as confused about our denials and refutations as I was back then.
@katela@aus.social commented, quoting from Computing Papers on her site:
Crafting a Code of Ethical Conduct
Systems Administrators Guild of Australia Annual Conference, Perth, 1994.
Managing computer systems in those days was a lonely business and not for the faint-hearted, but the Systems Administrators Guild of Australia started up in 1993 to try to understand our roles in the new globally-connected Internet. SAGE-AU wanted a code of ethics and I ended up herding the cats of the committee, some of whom were vocal in their belief that the Internet was but a passing fad. Here is a code of conduct written in more innocent times.
Crafting a Code of Ethical Conduct
I'm happy to see that this code of ethics does not emphasize business, unlike the ACM code of ethics that says:
1.7 Honor confidentiality … confidential information such as trade secrets, client data, nonpublic business strategies, financial information, research data, pre-publication scholarly articles, and patent applications.
The order of these stake holders is also suspicious:
The dignity of employers, employees, colleagues, clients, users, and anyone else affected either directly or indirectly by the work …"
I think the priorities of the ACM code of ethics are telling.
The SAGE-AU code of ethics is also much shorter and it's commented. I like it!