Ethics Is:
— Rachel Thomas (@math_rachel) March 26, 2019
Promoting objective (but context & culture-dependent) conditions of human flourishing
Respecting the dignity of others
Promoting beneficial & just outcomes, avoiding and minimizing harm to others
A skillful practice of moral perception & discerning judgement pic.twitter.com/fB4B0ajv4V
What ethics is NOT:
— Rachel Thomas (@math_rachel) March 26, 2019
- Legal/Corporate 'Compliance'
- A Set of Fixed Rules
- A Purely Negative Frame: (“Don't do that!")
- Subjective Sense of Right/Wrong
- Religious Belief
- Non-moral Customs of Etiquette
- Uncritical Obedience to Authority@ShannonVallor @IEthics pic.twitter.com/2uaRS9oAJm
Tech ethical concerns:
— Rachel Thomas (@math_rachel) March 26, 2019
- increasing concentration of power
- surveillance
- algorithmic bias
- psyops/manipulation
- attention economy
- democracy vs tech solutionism
- digital Taylorism
- declining human accountability
- tech monoculture
- rising opacityhttps://t.co/Lrnwokpz6L pic.twitter.com/XdzCwJEPzV
IBM provided surveillance software & video analytics to a city government associated with Rodrigo Duterte as government-linked death squads carried out extrajudicial killings. Stunning reporting by @georgejoseph94. https://t.co/VyAEMWNU0e
— Matt Cagle (@Matt_Cagle) March 22, 2019
How many companies are relying on a magical and likely unachievable futuristic AI being the solution to a society destabilizing but profitable set of features?
— Smerity (@Smerity) March 19, 2019
Flash forward three years, and now Facebook is eliminating all sensitive ad targeting categories for housing, employment and credit. This is a huge change, and it will hopefully open up more opportunities for people who would otherwise have been denied them. /9
— Julia Angwin (@JuliaAngwin) March 19, 2019
It started with curiosity + expertise. In 2016 @suryamattu and I were curious about what Facebook knew about us. So he built a tool that let people see how FB had categorized them & noticed a racial category called “Ethnic Affinity.” /2https://t.co/fbKrDw9xnN
— Julia Angwin (@JuliaAngwin) March 19, 2019
100% with @reidhoffman It's easy to be dystopian. Let's makes sure we ask the deeper and harder questions to ensure we take advantage of what this tech can offer https://t.co/7JYZtqLwkQ
— dj patil (@dpatil) March 18, 2019
This op-ed by @paulkrugman is exactly right. The economic evidence is very strong that robots aren’t putting people out of work. The real problem is the massive power imbalance between labor and capital, which keeps driving wages down. https://t.co/eBvk4qn7ME
— Tim O'Reilly (@timoreilly) March 15, 2019
Personalised diets and treatments are one of the great promises of AI. As designers we should start advocating that this tech to be made available to everyone in the future, and that individuals have the right and resources to keep their data private and secure. https://t.co/2LUcZn8GwO
— Nando de Freitas (@NandoDF) March 14, 2019
Reminder that major tech companies spend a lot of money lobbying against privacy lawshttps://t.co/Mftvi3qZJJ pic.twitter.com/DZcODQSMzm
— Rachel Thomas (@math_rachel) March 11, 2019
Soooo.... the hospital and or doctor/staff ratted out this stage 4 cancer patient to the police?
— Bryan William Jones (@BWJones) March 9, 2019
What happened to do no harm? https://t.co/8rdp5Dsgoz
