Voice of the DBA

Tag: ethics

  • Giving Computers Ethics

    I was reading a fascinating paper recently about autonomous cars. I’m actually excited about having a car that can drive itself, though I think this is likely quite a few years away, despite the hype. Ever since I read Red Thunder, I’ve thought that we would first get full time autonomous cars that would either be limited in where they were in use, or part-time autonomous cars that could only be self-driving in certain places. Dense inner cities, or maybe isolated highways might be good places to try this, in my mind.

    While we want to do some programming of these cars, we also have a lot of AI/ML systems in place that run models trained to react in certain ways. They identify things that are moving and stationary, trying to determine how the car should navigate and react. The systems aren’t quite as tightly programmed as many of us expect, with if this then that logic. Instead they have guidelines that are decided upon by the designers and then reactions to data inputs and analysis are a little more fuzzy.

    What are the goals? Well, in most cases they are just moving the car safely down a road. In crisis situations, it’s a little more murky. What happens when collisions are unavoidable? How should the car react? Humans often panic and do strange things, but we don’t want erratic behavior from automated systems, so what should we set as goals? There’s a bit of research that was done to ask humans what they would do when they can consider the situation a little more slowly.

    In short, humans make different decisions in different cultures. There are clusters and tendencies in different parts of the world, which is interesting. While people are people and behave similarly in many cases, we tend to value different things, depending on our views of the world. That can be problematic when we start to expect computer systems to be more consistent or predictable. After all, we should decide how computers react and be able to trust our decisions are followed. It is up to humans to imprint our ethical desires as a society on computer systems.

    This is an area where I feel AI and ML systems are moving faster than our ability to comprehend the implications. I would want to have a framework built for automated systems, certainly cars, and then expect all vendors of systems would implement that framework in their vehicles. However, this goes beyond cars, and in any places where we are using software, AI/ML based or not, we ought to publish a comprehensive outline of the way in which our system works.

    Computers have the capability to improve our world and reduce chaos, but only if we agree on the way in which these systems work, and disclose in a transparent way what data they handle and what decisions they make based on that data. I hope that we start to get better about informing the world the goals and operation of our systems. I’m not sure that will happen anytime soon.

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcast

    Listen to the MP3 Audio ( 5.6MB) podcast or subscribe to the feed at iTunes and Libsyn.

  • The Pressure to Compromise Ethics

    There have always been those that seek to defraud, deceive or mislead their customers. In order to do this, someone inside an organization has always been willing to pressure employees to compromise their ethics and morals. Construction companies may use substandard materials or ignore standards for construction. Financial companies falsify performance records of products. Medical professionals may order unnecessary tests to charge more. Perhaps one of the common areas many people feel cheated is with used vehicles, where there are numerous stories of deceit from companies and individuals. I’ve had my own experiences with cars to support this.

    It may be no surprise to you this is also happening in the digital world, which seem fundamentally more disturbing to me. After all, software is constantly changing in a way that many other industries don’t. We can fundamentally rewrite the rules under which systems work by deploying new code, something many of us do on a regular basis. What’s more, we have rules and regulations that fundamentally prevent us from disclosing how the systems work, limitations that don’t allow for anyone to easily audit or evaluate what the programming might be doing.

    This is different than a car, where we can examine the components and test them, or have a third party perform this for us. It’s different than health, where we can solicit second opinions. Even construction has inspections from independent groups that can verify some specification is met. However, none of that exists for software. In fact, our industry resists remotely attempting to implement any sort of ethics by limiting access to source code.

    There’s an article that lists some of the issues developers have encountered. It also talks about teaching ethics as a way to reduce the impact, which is a good idea. But without any sort of accountability or transparency into the actual code, I’m not sure ethics will help much. There are always people that need a job, and may be willing to write code that continues to provide a paycheck because they aren’t sure they can get another job. I know most of us would like to think we wouldn’t succumb to pressure, but it can be hard to be sure what you’d do until you are confronted with a particular situation.

    I do think this is a problem that will grow, and become more pervasive in the digital world, precisely because no one really knows what software is doing under the covers, and it’s hard to even determine what might be happening if you could access the source code. After all, can you be sure that code you get is actually what is running? You can, but not easily.

    What I’d like to see is some sort of framework that allows us to specify the behaviors of our software, along with the data movement and handling so that end users would have an understanding of how the software should work. Maybe some automated way of producing a “contract” based on the code. Then we could resolve disputes without ever needing to examine the source.

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcast

    Listen to the MP3 Audio ( 4.4MB) podcast or subscribe to the feed at iTunes and Libsyn.

  • T-SQL Tuesday #30 – Ethics

    TSQL2sDay150x150This month the topic is hosted by Chris Shaw, and his topic is ethics.

    The blog party is the second Tuesday of each month. There is a theme and it is hosted by a different blogger every month. I’ve got a complete list of topics on my blog if you want to read about the past entries.

    It was started by Adam Machanic and if you want to host one, let him know. It can be fun, though a little busy as you compile a summary of the posts from the month.

    Ethics

    I thought this was a great topic, and I’ve actually written on it before. Chris asks a few questions about ethics and they are good ones. I’d like to think that most people have a good code of ethics, but I also think many people haven’t really thought through what their ethics are on this situation. You should do your job, and do what you’re told, but I think breaking the law, or performing an action that violates your moral principles is a no-no.

    However when you get into more subtle issues, like the one Chris talks about with regard to security, what do you do?

    Overall you have to follow your moral compass and use The Test.

    • If you have any doubt about what you’ve been asked to do, seek a second opinion, and get a confirmation from your boss (or their boss) in writing.
    • If you are sure it’s wrong, don’t do it, give you reasons, and let them get someone else to do it.
    • If it’s illegal, you should report it.

    I know sometimes this puts you in a bad situation, and you may fear for your job. That’s natural, and understandable, especially if you are the sole breadwinner for your family.

    However you also have to live with your actions, and they reflect on your soul daily. I would ask that you make the right decision, even when it’s not the most popular, profitable, or palatable one.