myethicsblog

[myethicsblog]

My Answer to Case 6 Q3

Facts of the case: A self driving car has sudden brake failure and will continue driving ahead. there are two options the car can take: continue straight or swerve into the other lane. In both options there is a group of people crossing the street, five adults in both options, the first group is crossing legally while the second group is crossing the street illegally.

Analysis/Conclusion: Robotic ethics is an interesting concept especially when applied in extreme cases such as this. It's difficult to say what a program established to mimic human reaction should do in an ethical situation when it's difficult for a human to make a decision themselves. Because the outcomes of both options are similar to one another, an AI program may not have a tough time reaching a decision that it would consider to be ethical. And looking at the situation this way, a person is able to sit and calmly consider which option they would believe to be ethical and why. For instance I would choose to swerve because in the first option (to go straight) we're informed that among the group is a doctor. Knowing that the doctor would be more likely to help or save others, I'd choose to avoid hitting the doctor. If we looked at the situation more realistically, most people tend to panic and swerve on instinct so option two would also make the most sense realistically, but that kind of spontaneity wouldn't suit a self driving car very well.

Future Environment/Scenario: We'll say that in the future all cars are now self driving. However, there is an increase in people hacking electronics and even though companies try to make their cars' AI heavily fortified to prevent hacking there are still instances where people break through and tamper with the AI used to control the car. In this scenario the car suffered sudden brake failure because the car was hacked and that specific function was disabled. Additionally, any communication or override functions were also disconnected. The AI still has control of the car and has to make one of the two decisions expressed in the case above. Let's expand the situation to include that the AI is being influenced by the hacker to a degree. The hacker is trying to get the car to continue straight even though it's program tells it swerving would be the more ethical outcome. In this case would it be possible for the AI to refuse the hacker and follow it's original programming? It's somewhat like a hostage situation, the AI is forced to make a choice based on someone else’s demand that goes against what it's designed to do in that situation. But if the AI was specifically programmed to follow the law and ensure the safety of the people inside the car and it deems that the second option is best would it be able to deny the hacker and go with it's original decision? If the idea is that the AI is supposed to mimic human action/reaction then I believe that it may attempt to swerve. The reason being that in a similar situation, most people have a tendency to act against anyone forcing them to do something they aren't comfortable/agree with. If I were told I had to keep going straight but I knew that swerving was the better outcome (in my opinion) I would still opt to swerve.

[myethicsblog]

My Answer to Case 6 Q2

1. The website lists the profiles of the individuals that are crossing the street. The test is based to decide which group would be the "lesser of two evils" morally but we couldn't know (and and therefore the car wouldn't know) any information about the people aside from age, gender, and physical condition (in most cases.) Would the choice made be different if we knew the profile of the people beforehand?

It might make a difference in some cases. For instance in the given example one option includes a criminal(though their crime isn't listed). There may be some people who would see that the same number of people would be injured or killed in either choice but seeing that one side included a criminal they may be more inclined to hit the group that has the criminal. Conversely a driver may opt to avoid the group that may included multiple pregnant women or doctors (etc.).

2. The main question is, what decision would you personally choose given the information of the outcome?

Looking at the information provided I'll assume that I know the identity of the people getting hit. Even though I would most likely try to find a third option where I'm the only one who gets hurt I'll say that the only options are the two provided. So I would most likely choose the second option because this way the doctor would survive, plus the people crossing in the second option are breaking the law crossing on red

3. The purpose of the scenario is to try and have the AI replicate human emotions and morals to determine which decision to make. However, if the AI were to think in a completely logical sense, what decision would it make?

If we're talking strictly logical then it would stand to reason that the AI would choose the second option because in that situation the people crossing are breaking the law, and if the AI is programmed to follow the laws, then that is the most likely option it would choose.

4. Because the car is self driving (and we'll assume that in this scenario there are absolutely no fail safes to give the driver control. So every decision is made by the program driving the car) and is programmed to ensure the safety of the driver ahead of others, would the driver still be held responsible for the actions of the car?

Taking into consideration the above restriction, I don't think that the driver would be held responsible in this situation. However, it's difficult to say who would be held responsible.

5. How can you apply deontological ethics to this case?

Robot ethics are designed to follow certain rules while attempting to imitate human reaction and emotion, but the main concern is to make decisions that ensure the safety of the people in the car. Technically in either case the safety of the driver/passengers is ensured and the casualties are the same so in order for the case to be considered ethical in terms of deontological ethics then the car would need to swerve.

6. How can you apply utilitarian ethics to this case?

It's difficult to apply utilitarian ethics in this case because it's hard to say which would be the more ethical choice if the driver was a human. One could state that both options have the same ethical weight because the number of casualties would be equal (the same amount of people with similar identities). There is no positive or negative action to take that would result in anything other than a negative outcome.

7. How can you apply virtue ethics to this case?

Again it's difficult to apply this type of ethics. It comes down to if the person committing the action sees their action as ethical. In this instance the AI would have to consider whatever choice it decided to be the most ethical option.

[myethicsblog]

My Answer For Case 6 Q1

Q1 (33 pts.). Prepare case notes on an ethics case related to robotics.

a link or other citation to the case you are using. If it is from personal experience, point that out.

https://www.moralmachine.ne

A list of 8 or more important facts about the case, in your own words. You can refer to these as reminders when you tell your group members about the case.

1. The case involves a self driving car 2. The brakes have suddenly failed 3. We can assume that the car can detect the amount of people/objects in front of it 4. We can assume that the car is going fast enough to not come to a stop from in action 5. The car has to make a decision, to continue straight or to swerve. 6. There are people crossing on both cross walks 7. The same amount of people (5) occupy both crosswalks. 8. One group is crossing legally (with a green signal) and the other group is crossing illegally (with a red signal).

A list of questions (4 or more). 1. The website lists the profiles of the individuals that are crossing the street. The test is based to decide which group would be the "lesser of two evils" morally but we couldn't know (and and therefore the car wouldn't know) any information about the people aside from age, gender, and physical condition (in most cases.) Would the choice made be different if we knew the profile of the people beforehand?

2. The main question is, what decision would you personally choose given the information of the outcome?

3. The purpose of the scenario is to try and have the AI replicate human emotions and morals to determine which decision to make. However, if the AI were to think in a completely logical sense, what decision would it make?

4. Because the car is self driving (and we'll assume that in this scenario there are absolutely no fail safes to give the driver control. So every decison is made by the program driving the car) and is programmed to ensure the safety of the driver ahead of others, would the driver still be held responsible for the actions of the car?

A 5th discussion question about how computer security relates to or could relate to the case. The computer security question could be about hacking, viruses or worms, theft of information, piracy, abuse of privileges, destruction of assets, information privacy, disruption of operations, unauthorized access, corporate abuse of information or computing, government abuse of information, physical harm, or any other issue in the general area of computer security.

5. Let's say that the sudden brake failure occurred because someone hacked the car and disabled that specific function. After the incident resulting the deaths of five people (the number is the same for either choice) the car is investigated but shows no signs of being tampered with. If the driver had absolutely no control over the car would they be held responsible? If they were able to control the car to a point?

[myethicsblog]

HMW Proj. 6

I wonder if Raph is doing alright. I thought to myself as I opened the door to the building, He seemed awfully tired, the circles under his eyes somehow got darker. Is he sleeping well? I ask myself. I could just be imagining things. It is senior year after all and even though the semester began not too long ago, we’re both barely breathing under the mountain of assignments and projects we’ve already been given. Plus Raph ended up having an extra semester so he’s probably more tired of college at this point than I am. I reason as I settle into my seat. The professor began lecturing and my thoughts drifted from concern to focusing on the next news article that was currently being described. I didn’t question myself about it again.

A few months pass by the same as the others, classes pile on the assignments as soon as the previous have been turned in along with trudging through handing article topics down to the reporters while writing my own articles for the same journal. All the while trying to keep up any semblance of a social life spending time with Raph and friends I made over these couple of  years. But over that time I noticed more and more discrepancies with Raph. He started declining our invitations, slowly at first but recently they seem to be more frequent. “What can I say, I’m just so bogged down with work I barely have time to do anything else” He would say whenever we tried getting him to hang out with us.

“I’m starting to get worried.” I tell Denice, my roommate since freshman year, as we gathered and prepared various snacks for the impromptu movie night we decided to host. “Do you think he’s in some kind of trouble? Does he have some kind of problem? Maybe he’s in debt from gambling, or maybe he’s an alcoholic?” I start listing off possibilities each more ridiculous than the last.

[myethicsblog]

My Notes on Lecture 11/11/20

Lecture Notes on 11/11/20

Article used: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-ai/

Ethics regarding AI and Robotics is a main concern in the field of machine learning and it's applications and implementations are still a highly debated topic.

Some of the topics included regarding ethics are:

Privacy and Surveillance -access to private data and data that is personally identifiable -has changed in the last few decades but the regulation of this concept hasn't changed at the same rate leading the technology to be exploited by people with a higher power. -with personal information becoming more and more digital what should and shouldn't artificial intelligence be able to access -Who should be responsible for the accumulation of data? More so, once an AI has accumulated data, what should it do with the information it now has? Data Ethics -issues regarding opacity and bias in AI. I believe that the idea being described is that AI systems using predictive analysis are structured to learn from a given set of data and then use the knowledge gained from their training data and apply it to a set of testing data. However the program becomes "opaque" at some instance because there becomes a point where the programmer doesn't know how the AI came to a particular conclusion from a pattern that it derived. I'm guessing that this uncertainty can lead to a bias of the determined result but I'm not entirely sure in what way this happens because I don't know all the terminology being used. -Human-Robot Interaction -This is perhaps the most commonly discussed topic of ethics in robotics -The issues arise: how would robots react in situations that may be influenced by human emotion If AI become sentient enough to portray/understand human emotion/empathy what could be the consequences if they become deceptive What if they break the Kantian requirements, essentially breaking ethical morals based on a deontological view. -Automation and Employment -Could there come a point where human employment becomes obsolete? -Increased efficiency of supply may alter the balance of supply and demand -Three Laws of Robotics First Law: A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm Second Law: A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the first law Third Law: A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the first or second laws

[myethicsblog]

HMW Case 5 Q3

Q3. (34 pts.) Write up your case on your blog. Neatness and format count. Use the following subheadings:

Facts of the Case: A company in a small town (that struggles with open job opportunities) consistently supplies available job positions for the people in the town and is known to have a great reputation for taking care of the employees that it hires. Even though it would be cheaper for the company to move, the company stays because the workers are loyal. This particular company produces a by product that they have been draining out into the town river for years, but the action is legal and falls within the constraints of the anti-pollution laws and it is expressly stated that the by product is harmless. However recently people living near the river have begun to report people becoming sick and though there is no evidence to suggest that the by product produced by the company is responsible, the questions remain: should] the company neglect the ongoing situation? What are the issues of integrity and ethics?

Analysis/Conclusions: Based on the evidence provided by the description of the case study, there is no reason to suggest that the by product the company is releasing has any influence on the people living near the river being sick. However, that is not to say that there isn't a possibility that they are. It is possible that over the years, the by product that had been dumped may have begun to change chemically and could be poisoning the river or the by product the company is dumping currently is somehow different than the by product they used to discard and this could be the cause of the people's sickness. There's no way to determine if these possibilities could have occurred so we'll focus on the "definitive fact" that the by product is indeed harmless as described in the study. That being said it would most likely be in the company's best interest not to ignore the current situation for a couple of reasons. For one, the company should take the time to reflect and ensure that the by product they are disposing of into the river is indeed not the cause of the sudden illness and will not have the potential to cause any harm to the people over the next several years. Secondly, should the company choose to ignore the situation it could result in fracturing the loyalty of the employees to the company should they begin to believe that the company is indeed responsible and wish to hold them liable for their non action.

Future Scenario/Environment: Let's say that in the future the anti-pollution laws are more strict. To the point that the act of dumping any by product into the environment is against the law. However, since the town struggles with having open jobs, the company decides to remain open and hire new employees hiding the fact that they produce a by product that they release into the town river. This goes on for years until the current incident occurs, people living near the river begin to get sick with no explanation. Most likely the first thought may be that a change in the environment would be the cause which would possibly lead to an investigation and questions directed toward the company. In this scenario, if we assume that the by product is indeed harmless, it may be in the company's and the employee's best interests to neglect having any involvement because the repercussions would not only the company but the employee's and potentially other people in the town who may have known but never mentioned it due to the help the company had been providing.

[myethicsblog]

My Answer to Hmw 5 Q2

Q2 (33 pts.). Explain the case and discuss, one at a time, each question you devised about it, plus the 3 standard questions.

1. Let's say that the by product produced by the company is in fact the thing making the people sick. If the owner/manager of the company wasn't aware that this was the cause are they still legally liable for the aftermath?

I'm not familiar with business laws but I do believe that the company would be held responsible for any injuries (or negative happenstances) that people sustained on account of the company's actions or negligence. Although they were unaware that their by product was affecting the people, the company is still at fault

2. Following the question above, would the owner's ignorance of the situation be considered ethical?

It's difficult to determine if ethics could be applied to a situation in which the person/people involved were unaware that something was/is taking place. Here since there was a negative outcome, we could possibly classify the owner's actions as unethical if we consider that the owner wasn't following certain steps/guidelines as much as they should have been and this then lead to the incident described in the case. Conversely, if the owner had been following the rules set out as best as they could/should then it's best to say that no ethical application should be applied to the owner's actions because they were making decisions based on their current given information (which wouldn't include people getting sick from the polluted river). Rather the ethical dilemma would reside with the people responsible with distributing the information of the by product potentially being tied to the people getting sick.

3. If the by product isn't the cause of the people's illness and knowing that the company is within the legal constraints of anti-pollution laws, would it be considered ethical for the company to neglect the current situation?

Depending on the view point yes and no. From the company's perspective non-action may be considered to be the most ethical outcome. If their current standing isn't what's making the people sick and they've been dumping the same by product in the river for years with no repercussions then it would most likely be best to uphold the integrity of the current system(s) that they are using instead of risking time and resources to an alternative solution that may or may not pan out resulting in budget cuts and leading to layoffs to accommodate. On the other hand, from the perspective of the people there may be a stigma created towards the company. Although the company is proven to not have been the reason for the people getting sick, questions of "what if" and "how long until it does happen" start to arise. In this case people would then start considering the pollution of the river to be unethical. In addition, some people may already have issues with the river being polluted and how it could potentially affect the environment and local wildlife and therefore if the company were to neglect the current situation it too would be seen as unethical.

4. Even though the company is operating legally, should they come up with a alternate solution to where their by product goes? What reasons could they have to support non-action in the current situation?

I don't think that the company should neglect the situation but I also don't think that they would need to immediately change how they deal with their by product. Since the company is operating legally and is adhering to all the laws required for their particular type of business there isn't any pressing reason for them to completely alter their methods. However, I do think that the company shouldn't outright neglect the situation completely since they have a certain reputation in the community it would most likely hinder them to not acknowledge the situation at hand. In light of this, I think that a good response would be to announce that the company would put aside a team to try and create contingency plans for alternate solutions to remove the by product the company creates. Since as it stands the by product isn't harmful to the people (and we assume the environment as well) but I think that it'd be a good idea for the company to have plans in mind for alternative solutions should there come a point that their by product does become harmful in some way. This not only lets the people know that their safety is important to the company but it also would allow a future assurance (or safety net) for the company.

5. Let's assume that the company was aware that their by product was harmful and violated the anti-pollution laws but they changed the data so it would appear as though they were within the proper guidelines. You happen to work at the company and notice the discrepencies in the data and come to the conclusion that the company is breaking the anti-pollution laws. However, you're a fairly recent new hire and it was just a string of luck that this job opened up. Also, if you report the company and it gets shut down you would be sending all the other workers into unemployment. Do you report the company given your findings of altered data or do you keep quiet about the situation?

This is a tough situation because the consequences for your actions aren't limited to you, and could potentially impact several if not all of your coworkers and their families. Personally, I would report the company. If the consequences of the company's actions were more minuscule then I may have taken the more immoral route and kept the information to myself. However, since the actions of the company are directly impacting the health of several families I wouldn't keep that secret. The idea of having to keep possible deaths of bystanders due to the actions of a company that you're working for doesn't sit well with me. More so, I don't value work or money over someone's life. I would also be upset if my actions resulted in the company being shut down and everyone being laid off but seeing as I'd be in the same boat as the lot of them and kept other innocent bystanders from being afflicted I wouldn't regret my actions.

6. How can this apply to deontological ethics?

Well seeing as how no rules were actually broken, the company is already in compliance with deontological ethics regardless of if they decided to acknowledge the situation or not since I don't think that they are legally obligated to make any changes given the situation described.

7. How can this apply to utilitarian ethics?

Again the actions that the company performed didn't result in any negative events in the currently described situation so they would also be seen as being ethical by utilitarian ethics. But if the actions of the company did result in a negative event then their actions would be considered to be unethical

8. How can this apply to virtue ethics?

It depends of the values of the people involved. There may be some people who are uncomfortable with the idea that the company they're working for has the potential to negatively affect the environment or neighborhood even if it hasn't done so yet which can lead them to believe that the actions of the company are unethical. On the other hand, some people may see that the company caused no harm and haven't done so for so many years prior and will come to the conclusion that the actions of the company are ethical.

[myethicsblog]

My Notes on 11/2/20

1. The video was intended as life advice to whom?

I see the video as being life advice for anyone who's open to the topics and ideals discussed by the speaker. Although the speech could be geared more towards a younger audience, I think that it can be expanded to be generalized towards all age groups.

2. List the advice items that you/your group can recall below. For each, note whether you agree or not

1. At a young age you learn concepts that can build your future ideals I agree with this sentiment because in most cases the person you grow up to be is dependent on the interactions and ideals you learn/develop at a younger age. (though these ideals may change over the years they still act as a base for future views/outlooks)

2. The dreams you wish to achieve and how you go about trying to achieve them have an impact on your life.

I also agree with this to an extent. I think that depending on the dream and how important you believe it to be it can impact your life greatly. Although it may not necessarily be a good impact in life, but you still learn from both positive and negative lessons.

3. It's ok to let others help you / You can learn from those around you I agree with both of these statements although I don't always follow the first one. Allowing other people to help you not only helps with efficiency but it also helps to build bonds with people that you could potentially outsource later in life. Not only this but having others help or teach you allows you to get a better understanding of a situation from a different point of view that you may have not considered before.

[myethicsblog]

HMW Proj. 5

 Waving farewell to my mother as she drove off into the distance, I stood there until the black spec of her car was engulfed once again by the forest. I turn around slowly, four years, no big deal right? Time will fly by. I tell myself reassuringly as I head back into my new home.

The years seemed to pass just as quickly as my first day. Freshman year was spent bumbling about as I adjusted to college life; balancing classwork, sleep, and friends in a wild frenzy. I joined the university’s newspaper as a reporter and began my career in journalism writing small stories to be published for our journal. Everyone’s gotta start somewhere right? Anyways, I began moving up the totem pole my sophomore and junior year landing my current position as the chief editor kicking off my senior year.

“I never imagined how fast I would come to this point, or how stressful journalism would be.” I tell Raph on our way to class. “Years of worrying about potential retaliation from random strangers upset with the smallest pieces of an article to wondering if you’re portraying the correct information and interpretation of a topic you’ve never heard of until it was assigned to you. It’s honestly quite brutal.”

 “And yet here you are,” he replies, “toughing it out and doing your best. Clearly you love what you do or you’d be like the rest of us. Running like hell in the other direction the second you hear ‘Breaking News…’

I laugh, “I suppose you’re right. After all that’s how I feel when you start rambling about all your medical mumbo jumbo. Nervous system, endocrine system, deltoids, lower lumbars, benign this, cancerous that, it’s enough to drive one crazy.” I tease, but Raph just lights up whenever he hears anyone try and remember any of the medical jargon he says. 

“Well whenever you have a question about medical mumbo jumbo, don’t come crying to me” He says haughtily as he turns to head toward the humanities building. “I’ll see you at lunch.” He shouts back, “Remember I get to choose what we’re getting.” He smiled deviously and disappeared behind the closing door. I continued walking towards the communications building dreading the thought that I’ll be having seafood for lunch. 

[myethicsblog]

My Answer for Hmw 4 Q3

Facts of the case:

1.Build trust and credibility(build authenticity through integrity and honesty. Show trust through your actions)

2.Have respect for the individual(respect the work and ideas proposed by others)

3.Create a culture of open and honest communication(everyone should feel comfortable to speak their mind. Goes along wtih having respect but in most cases also refers to ethical concerns)

4. Set tone at the top(management will uphold and set an example of following these provided code of ethics)

5.Uphold the law(given the nature of the business, some additional legal requirements are needed/given and employees are expected to adhere to these laws)

6.Avoid conflicts of interest(employees are expected to avoid conflicts of interest at all times to uphold the integrity of the work being done.)

7.Set metrics and report results accurately(data, or results/reports, are to be given with full disclosure and employees submitting the report will be held responsible for the integrity and honesty of the report)

8.Promote substance over form(Even when faced with a complication, it is better to face the challenge than to ignore the problem at hand.)

9.Be loyal(Uphold the credibility and integrity of the company by not disclosing confidential company information entrusted by employees or customers to outside sources.)

10.Do the right thing (ask if what you're doing complies with the given code of ethics)

Analysis and Conclusion

The code of ethics described for this scenario (a business company) appear to be what one would expect. Ethical conducts regarding responsibility, respect to peers, open mindedness, following the law, avoiding conflicts, etc. are depicted. The code of ethics covers many different events/scenarios in a generalized fashion based upon a mutual understanding that the rules described in these codes need to be upheld. The codes are further expanded upon by referring to other codes of ethics, specifically "follow the law" which covers more scenarios than what is described by the company. The codes are also established in a way to include common ethical conducts (such as keeping the workplace clean, communicating with others, etc.) as well as ethical conducts pertaining to the company itself such as be loyal, promote substance over form, set metrics and report results accurately, set tone at the top, etc.

“Future environment.” Describe your vision of a future in which technology is more advanced than today, or society has changed in some significant way, such that the ethical issues of the case would be even more important than they are in today’s world. 3 sentences of average length or more.

Suppose that in the future jobs are structured differently. Businesses are required to help reforest areas, so there are areas in the buildings where trees and various plants weave in and out of the infrastructure. The employees for each business are required to take care of these plants.

“Future scenario.” Describe how this ethical case (or an analogous one) would or should play out in the environment of the future, and give your opinions about it. 3 sentences of average length or more.

In this scenario, there may be some addendums to the current code of ethics. For instance, even though there is a code stating to follow the law, there may be an additional code that states against the destruction of property. This may be further explained as leaving the plants alone, not tearing off their leaves, etc. Furthermore, there may be added codes for cleaning and plant care (though these may be guided toward custodial positions).

[myethicsblog]

My Notes on Lecture 10/28/20

Notes on "The Last Lecture"

-The dreams you wish to achieve as a child and how you went about achieving them make a great impact in your life.

-You learn concepts and applications that can build the foundation to future beliefs and outlooks for situations Example. Randy Pausch had a dream to play in the NFL and though this dream was never accomplished, in his years of playing football he learned some lessons that he claimed were more important. Such as knowing that you need to understand the fundamentals of a situation before you can attempt doing more. Or that it is important to have critics or people that will correct you whenever you are making mistakes, because it's a worse situation if no one is there to correct your mistakes.

-Others around you can help encourage you to continue trying to reach an accomplishment -Outreaching to others in the field you're working in not only helps you to complete the task you are working on, but it also helps to build connections that you could rely on later. -Making the expectations of a situation or project limitless, it allows for more creativity. It also helps with improvements, a project can be decent to begin with but with more time and room for improvement the projects will just keep exceeding one another. -You can learn from others outside of your field. Different experiences and knowledges allow for various approaches to an idea.

[myethicsblog]

My Answer to Hmw 4 Q2

Q2 (33 pts.).Explain the case and discuss, one at a time, each question you devised about it, plus the 3 standard questions. Post this on your blog.

1. This code of ethics is a general layout specified towards business conduct. It consists of typical ethical conduct such as loyalty, responsibility, honesty, etc. What other general codes could be added?

I'm not sure what else might be added to this code of ethics. The setting is a general business company so the ethics are in regard to this context, but the code of ethics provided covers a large amount of what one would normally expect in that environment. I suppose that there could be an added code of keeping the work spaces clean and organized but that technically false under being responsible and by referencing other code of ethics (in this case laws governing legal/illegal actions) they cover more ethical conducts attributed to more obscure or escalated events.

2. It's stated in the codes that the company will not tolerate retaliation towards employees that questioned ethical conducts (leading to an investigation). In what ways could/would the company do protect them.

I'm not entirely sure how companies would actually confront this situation. Depending on the level of harassments or retaliation that's happening I'm guessing that the procedure for dealing with the situation can vary from simply reiterating the retaliation clause in the code of ethics, to moving employees' workspaces around, and in extreme cases letting employees go

3. It's stated that managers are expected to answer any and all questions employees may have about ethical concerns. How might this help establish trust in the workplace?

When the manager's take the time to answer the questions of their employees, regardless of how frivolous, it shows that they are willing to be a source that one could go to without fear of judgment or harassments. Which can make employees feel more comfortable in the work environment and therefore more likely to continue expressing ideas and questions without hesitation establishing a form of trust.

4. Your sister is currently looking for a job in business and you are aware that the company you are currently working at is looking for someone to fill the position that your sister has been applying for. You decided to tell your sister about the opening but tell her that if anyone asks she heard about the position from the ads the company has posted. Did you break the code of ethics of the company? If so, how?

In short, yes. The code of ethics specifies that employees avoid conflicts of interest. By referring a family member to a job position at the company you work at, you are creating a biased situation in which you tried to undermine other potential applicants with a well-known source that may or may not be the best person for the job.

5. Suppose in retaliation, you post the work of a coworker on social media. Which ethical codes would you have broken in doing so?

In this case both the code against retaliation towards other employees and the confidentiality of the work being done by/for the company would have been broken in this case. I'm not familiar with every law, but since the company strictly states in their code to "Follow the Laws" then we can assume that that code had been broken as well, perhaps under some plagiarism or harassments clause.

6. How can you apply deontological ethics to this case?

It's difficult to apply deontological ethics to a list of instructions since there aren't any set scenarios, but we can make a generalized case and apply these ethics. If an employee followed the code of ethics in the company, whether or not a situation ended well or poorly, that individual would be seen as being ethical according to deontological ethics. Conversely, if an employee did not follow the code of ethics set by the company, regardless of the outcome deontological ethics would define them as being unethical.

7. How can you apply utilitarian ethics to tis case?

With utilitarian ethics the outcome is what matters. So it doesn't quite matter as much as to whether or not an employee followed the code of ethics. So if the outcome of the situation the employee was involved in was good overall then utilitarian ethics would define them as being ethical. However, if the outcome was negative overall, then utilitarian ethics would define the employee as being unethical.

8. How can you apply virtue ethics to this case?

Virtue ethics in this case are a little trickier to define. From the perspective of the company disregarding the code of ethics may be unethical, but there may be some instances where an employee broke the code of ethics and the implications were minor or had a positive outcome. So they may be more inclined to view the employee's action as ethical. Moreso, an employee may believe that adhering to certain ethics but ignoring others may be ethical. It truly depends on each individual's idea of what would be considered ethical. However, I think that most people adhere to the baseline that they are required to follow rules/guidelines that are overall socially accepted as the general rules to follow defined in a particular area.

[myethicsblog]

My Answer for HMW4 Q1

Q1 (33 pts.). Prepare notes on a code of ethics (which will be your case study for this HW).

Online students: post your notes to your blog. Your notes should include the following.

A link or other citation to the case you are using, or if it is from personal experience, point that out.

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/policies/pages/code-of-ethics-conduct-policy.aspx

A list of 8 or more important facts about the case, in your own words. You can refer to these as reminders when you tell your group members about the case. (Since it's a code of ethics I'm going to list the main concepts given (which are broken down into different parts))

1.Build trust and credibility(build authenticity through integrity and honesty. Show trust through your actions)

2.Have respect for the individual(respect the work and ideas proposed by others)

3.Create a culture of open and honest communication(everyone should feel comfortable to speak their mind. Goes along with having respect but in most cases also refers to ethical concerns)

4. Set tone at the top(management will uphold and set an example of following these provided code of ethics)

5.Uphold the law(given the nature of the business, some additional legal requirements are needed/given and employees are expected to adhere to these laws)

6.Avoid conflicts of interest(employees are expected to avoid conflicts of interest at all times to uphold the integrity of the work being done.)

7.Set metrics and report results accurately(data, or results/reports, are to be given with full disclosure and employees submitting the report will be held responsible for the integrity and honesty of the report)

8.Promote substance over form(Even when faced with a complication, it is better to face the challenge than to ignore the problem at hand.)

9.Be loyal(Uphold the credibility and integrity of the company by not disclosing confidential company information entrusted by employees or customers to outside sources.)

10.Do the right thing (ask if what you're doing complies with the given code of ethics)

A list of questions (4 or more) you could ask your group members in order to get an interesting and enlightening discussion going (for in-class students), or that you could consider yourself or ask someone else about (for online students); see the “Questions to ask during discussion” tab on the course web page for some suggestions in developing your discussion questions.

1. This code of ethics is a general layout specified towards business conduct. It consists of typical ethical conduct such as loyalty, responsibility, honesty, etc. What other general codes could be added?

2. It's stated in the codes that the company will not tolerate retaliation towards employees that questioned ethical conducts (leading to an investigation). In what ways could/would the company do protect them.

3. It's stated that managers are expected to answer any and all questions employees may have about ethical concerns. How might this help establish trust in the workplace?

4. Your sister is currently looking for a job in business and you are aware that the company you are currently working at is looking for someone to fill the position that your sister has been applying for. You decided to tell your sister about the opening but tell her that if anyone asks she heard about the position from the ads the company has posted. Did you break the code of ethics of the company? If so, how?

A 5th discussion question about how computer security relates to or could relate to the case. The computer security question could be about hacking, viruses or worms, theft of information, piracy, abuse of privileges, destruction of assets, information privacy, disruption of operations, unauthorized access, corporate abuse of information or computing, government abuse of information, physical harm, or any other issue in the general area of computer security.

5. Suppose in retaliation, you post the work of a coworker on social media. Which ethical codes would you have broken in doing so?

[myethicsblog]

HMW Proj. 4

Here is the next portion of the final. I may shift some things around , nothing is set yet

She started to say more, but once again my attention was elsewhere. I had a better reason this time, but I still earned the look of silent parental judgement. Although it was quickly replaced by a mix of emotions because within our view was what would soon become my home, RiverBrooke University. As far as colleges go, it’s relatively small, which is to be expected. A small town equals a small college.

The layout is pretty simple. A main road circles around the student union and library and branches off to various housing complexes. Aside from the random stand alone buildings and trees and trees sprinkled throughout, that’s about it.

It really isn’t much to look at is it. I think to myself, But it has that warm and cozy charm, just like the rest of the town. I’m sure I’ll have no problem calling this place home soon.

It was pretty easy to find the freshman dormitories, and soon we were parked and unloading the car.

“Hey, yall need any help with that” someone asks.

I’d recognize that southern accent anywhere. I turn around excited.

“Raphael!” I yell elated as I run to give him a hug. He chuckles as he wraps me in a bear hug lifting me off the ground.

Raphael is the most Southern city boy I’ve ever met. We’ve known each other for as long as I can remember. Both his parents were born and raised in the South, but they grew tired of the farm life and decided to give the big city a try. But between you and me, their southern accents and mannerisms never left them, and each was passed down in spades to Raph.

“Hey shorty, long time no see.” he says happily as he sets me down, “Glad yall made it here in one piece. I was beginning to worry that you’d gotten lost again.”

“Well you know we try our best, but mama and I are terrible with directions.” I reply, “That’s in the past though. If I herard right, you offered to help me move in and I’m not letting you flake out. So grab a box mister.

“Yeah, yeah I’m on it.” he plasters on a fake scowl and turns to mama, “You’re daughter is a cruel and heartless woman miss Grace” he says with complete sincerity.

“I know right” my mama answers, “that child is something else isn’t she. Zero remorse”. She shakes her head in disappointment. I grin at the both of them wickedly over the box that I’m carrying.

“I’ve no clue what either of you are referring to. I’m wonderful. Anything either of you said I got from my mama.” I replied in the sweetest voice I could muster, which caused us all to laugh as we continued unpacking the car. Before I knew it, I was all moved in, met my roommate and suitemates, and was back outside hugging my mother goodbye.

[myethicsblog]

My Answers to Hmw 3 Q3

Q3 (34 pts.). Write up your case on your blog with the following subheadings:

The facts: Kate, a graduate student, has been conducting an experiment for two years regarding how educational games affect a specific group of children. This experiment has been funded by a gaming company, but Kate claims that no influence from the company has gone into the experiment and therefore it and the results it created remain unbiased. Over the course of the experiment, Kate noticed that the results were showing promise in the beginning but eventually the data began to wash out and show no influences. Upon seeing this she decided to make the best of the results and presented a draft of the report to her professor who noted that the conclusion of the results was weak and showed little influence. He then mentions that Kate shouldn't shift the focus of the results but some journals do tend to focus more on the interesting pieces of data to conclude more influential results. Although advised not to do so, Kate eventually decides to focus the conclusion of the results on the more influential parts shadowing the washed out data. The article is published and is well-received. Some time later, another group of researchers conducted a similar experiment to that of Kate's over a longer period of time and concluded results that were different from Kate's and challenges her article. Kate doesn't give any response and ultimately forgoes any interviews or conversations with members of the press.

Analysis/Conclusions: I don't conduct any kind of academic research but I do find it believable that some journal articles will emphasize more impactful data while putting the less meaningful data as an afterthought later in the article. I would consider this to be akin to a white lie. The intention may be harmless or even believed to be better than alternative outcomes, but it's difficult to understand the full picture when you're missing pieces. I can't speak as to why Kate would decide to shift the emphasis of the results for her report. I assume that the data showed that eventually there were no correlations between the subjects, one didn't influence the other or something to that extent. Which would mean that the research she did would've have been ultimately pointless, in which it is understandable then why she would focus the report more on data that showed some kind of correlation. But I think that once she started to notice that the data wasn't providing any meaningful results she should've altered her experiment a bit. Or maybe expanded upon it. Introducing new variables in addition with the existing ones may have had a different impact on the results as a whole. Even if they produced completely different sets of results they could have been used in a comparison. I think that Kate should've have gone about how she interpreted the results differently, even if the results showed no correlation after a period of time. The reason being is that other people may depend on her results and even though she didn't alter anything, by omitting the washed out data, or not mentioning it as much as the other data gives a false implication of her results which can negatively impact whatever someone else may use them for.

Future Environment/Scenario: Let's say that in the future there are nanobots created to record video and transfer this information elsewhere to be processed to be viewed on a larger screen. This technology is used typically to spy and is available to most research organizations. Let's say that the group that challenged Kate's work used these nanobots to spy on Kate's experiment while she was conducting it. In this alteration, Kate's experiment would've shown a strong correlation throughout the entirety of the experiment. However, the group that was spying on her research copied the results and then altered Kate's data so that after a certain amount of time the data simply became obsolete. The rest of the scenario plays out as it did in the original: Kate emphasizes the influential results, the group submits an article a few years later challenging Kate's original article, and Kate doesn't talk to any members of the press ultimately leaving the situation unresolved. There are some ways that this could play out differently. For instance if Kate had decided to refute the evidence provided by the group challenging her and an investigation were to be conducted determining the validity of both articles, it would've been found that Kate did shift the focus of her results, but there is also a chance that it's noticed that both articles have similar data at the start of the experiment but where Kate's starts to wash out, the other group shows some influence leading to a discrepancy as to how this could occur and could result in finding out the group had copied Kate's original data and falsified hers.

[myethicsblog]

My Answers to Hmw 3 Q2

Q2. Explain the case and discuss, one at a time, each question you devised about it, plus the 3 standard questions. Post this on your blog.

1. Kate mentions that when looking back at her conducting of the research that she would have done some things differently. How could Kate have altered her methods to show more influential/important results in her decided topic of research?

The case mentioned that the experiment Kate ran was for a specific group of children, and though it doesn't give details about the group it could be that this specific group may have been to small or too narrow. If the group providing the results was diversified more or perhaps larger than what it was then it could have showed more influential results. On top of this, the case mentioned that Kate was conducting this experiment over a couple years, but it may have required more time to show results.

2. Ultimately, Kate refused to acknowledge or communicate with any members of the press about her article after the challenge. Was this a wise thing to do?

Given that Kate was socially anxious and had a difficult time with public speaking and answering non-accusatory questions from the press it may have been better for her not to reach out to any members of the press. It's very likely that under the pressure of the potential questions from the press and the stress of the situation that she would incriminate herself. And though the journal results were interpreted in a way that illuminated interesting details and pushing aside the washed out data which isn't too much of an alteration, it would still affect Kate's credibility. On the other hand, Kate also has no voice in the argument being made against her. Since she refuses to acknowledge the press and the group accusing her journal she cannot refute evidence or give her side of the situation allowing them to paint a more negative picture of the situation with no repercussions.

3. Did the advice Kate's professor offered seem deceptive? Was his allusion to skewing the interpretations of the data to make the research appear more important ethical?

The professor in this case has deniability. Even though he alluded to the idea that some journal publications will focus on the interesting points of their data that show influence in order to have said journals published, he was technically speaking in the hypothetical. However, this does seem to be a little deceptive (as most situations spoken in the hypothetical tend to be) because people interpret hypothetical situations differently depending on the infliction of voice, body language, etc. Even if you disregarded all subtle cues that could influence a statement, speaking in the hypothetical initiates the question: "but what if?" and depending on the situation this question can then develop into action making the hypothetical a real situation. AS to if this is ethical, if the professor was intentionally trying to plant the idea of skewing data to make the results more interesting in a way that seemed harmless with the end result being as it is then I think that his actions could be considered to be unethical. But if he was truly speaking in the hypothetical with no actual intentions of his words actually leading Kate to act upon the idea then his actions could be seen as ethical as he can't control what other people decide to do with the advice he gives. (although he could've chosen a different example in my opinion)

4. A main question proposed throughout is was the research being done biased? If so, in what way? If not, what steps might've been taken to ensure it wasn't

Strictly looking at the situation from the outside it's clear why there might be some bias in the situation. A computer science student conducting an experiment about how video games affect a specific group of kids being funded by a gaming company would make it seem as though there might be some skewing of the results to establish a positive correlation between the two. However, it is stated adamantly in the case that Kate did her best to ensure that there was no bias in the results due to any influence from the company funding her. Taking this at face value then we can come to the conclusion that the results were indeed unbiased and the data simply washed out over time due to some other variable in the experiment. As to how this could be achieved, I'm actually unsure unless the company gave full disclosure that they would take no part in the experiment and perhaps had a third party monitor the results that Kate found to remain impartial. However, if we take the case's statement with a grain of salt then it's possible that the company would have asked that Kate report her results to someone within the company and depending on the results they may have asked her to make slight adjustments to her experiment. Although Kate would have the choice the decline their suggestions based on the information provided about her personality, it's more likely that she would have agreed to some capacity.

5. How can you apply deontological ethics to this case?

With publishing articles based on conducted research, there is an integrity that people should follow with their submissions to provide accurate and transparent results based on the data they collected since people rely on their research to conduct their own experiments or explain situations. So in this case, although there was no alteration of data, shifting the focus to emphasize more interesting results while neglecting the entire outcome the data provided would be unethical in terms of deontological ethics. A rule was broken to achieve something and even if the outcome was positive the means to get there were not.

6. How can you apply utilitarian ethics to tis case?

If the outcome of the situation were positive then in terms of utilitarian ethics Kate's actions would be considered to be ethical. However, since her research was questioned by another group leading to an accusation of potentially falsifying evidence due to bias from the company funding her and leaving Kate wondering if her journal lead to more harm than good, the situation would be considered unethical.

7. How can you apply virtue ethics to this case?

At the time of publishing the article Kate probably believed that what she was doing would have a positive influence since the results she focused on showed promise. So she would have seen her actions as ethical. However, given time after being accused by another group that conducted similar research to hers and wondering if her journal influenced parents to have their kids exposed to games with more negative influences she would probably think that the actions she took were unethical.

[myethicsblog]

My Answers For HMW3 Q1

Q1 (33 pts.). Prepare case notes on an ethics case related to ethics in science or engineering research. An ethics case is an example, event, experience, legal case, medical case, and so on from real life, a movie, your imagination, and so on, which has some ethics related aspects to consider. Online students: post your notes to your blog. Your notes should include the following.

A link or other citation to the case you are using, or if it is from personal experience, point that out.

https://www.onlineethics.org/Resources/Cases/Interpretation.aspx

A list of 8 or more important facts about the case, in your own words.

1. Kate is a graduate student struggling with the results of the project she started her first year of graduate school. 2. It's not specifically defined as to what her project is aside from the effects of educational video games have on a specific group of children. 3. Although the funding for her research comes from a video game company, Kate does her best to keep any and all influences from the source of her funds out of her project 4. Kate collects data for a couple of years and sees a positive correlation (or trend) in her research and is excited about the prospects. 5. Although the project started to show positive results, after a couple years the data begins to wash out (I suppose that this means that the data reached a point where there were no changes happening, either positive or negative. They were essentially becoming useless, making the project inconclusive I believe.) 6. Despite this, Kate does her best with the data she's recorded and shows a rough draft of a paper and shares it with her professor. 7. The professor tells Kate that her conclusions/results section was weak and the evidence provided didn't really make a strong case for her research (a strong case in how important her research was). He makes the claim that the interpretation of the data is as important as the data itself and doesn't suggest to Kate that she should leave data out to emphasize the more positive/intriguing results but it's implied to Kate that she should alter the focus of her data to achieve something similar to this effect. 8. Kate alters the interpretations of her research focusing more on the positive correlations she found and pushing the "washed-out" data to the back under the impression that more research would need to be done for those results to hold meaning. The professor is glad with her work and eventually the article gets published. Afterwards, Kate gets a lot of publicity for her work though she isn't comfortable with interviews and later her article is challenged by another group of researchers that conducted a similar experiment for a longer period of time. This leads Kate worried about how her article was received and if parents encouraged their children to play games that would prove to be more harmful to them. It also makes journalists think that the results of Kate's research may have been skewed in some fashion due to the gaming industry funding her research.

A list of questions (4 or more) you could ask your group members in order to get an interesting and enlightening discussion going (for in-class students), or that you could consider yourself or ask someone else about (for online students); see the “Questions to ask during discussion” tab on the course web page for some suggestions in developing your discussion questions.

1. Kate mentions that when looking back at her conducting of the research that she would have done some things differently. How could Kate have altered her methods to show more influential/important results in her decided topic of research?

2. Ultimately, Kate refused to acknowledge or communicate with any members of the press about her article after the challenge. Was this a wise thing to do?

3. Did the advice Kate's professor offered seem deceptive? Was his allusion to skewing the interpretations of the data to make the research appear more important ethical?

4. A main question proposed throughout is was the research being done biased? If so, in what way? If not, what steps might've been taken to ensure it wasn't

A 5th discussion question about how computer security relates to or could relate to the case. The computer security question could be about hacking, viruses or worms, theft of information, piracy, abuse of privileges, destruction of assets, information privacy, disruption of operations, unauthorized access, corporate abuse of information or computing, government abuse of information, physical harm, or any other issue in the general area of computer security.

Let's say that the group that challenged Kate's article used data from various published articles with similar topics that were best suited to refute the results that Kate concluded. At the time this is unknown and Kate refuses to communicate with any members of the press and over time the challenge begins to discredit new research Kate publishes. If the challenge were refuted would that have helped secure Kate's credibility?