Featured

Blog #13: Gamification

Gamification concept. Integrating game mechanics into website or app design. Customer engagement. Idea of competition. Isolated flat vector illustration

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat

Gamification Is utilizing the exciting elements from games for real-world applications. (Chou) It can make the real-world application more interactive and enjoyable. However, there are positive and negative consequences as a result of this.

This can be positive for participants as it can make participants more excited about a task as it can be made more engaging. It can also help people set goals, and it can give them a sense of accomplishment. (Brown) However, it can be bad for people as it can detract attention from important work. One gamification technique that is used is getting rewards after certain tasks are completed. (Brown) In a company, employees may be so focused on the rewards of a certain task that they do not focus completely on the task, resulting in sloppy work. Another one is exclusivity which gives status to people who accomplish something. This could cause a rift in a group if some people have that exclusivity and others do not.

The line between “play incentives” and addiction is when people are so focused on the game that it interferes with their daily lives. If they spend more time thinking about the game instead of other important matters, then it is an addiction. It is good for people to go back to games to have fun with the “play incentives”. However, if the games are a constant distraction, then it has become an addiction.

Companies should be notified of the severe consequences of overusing gamification techniques. If they have better knowledge of the impacts of gamification, then they can make better decisions in terms of how much gamification should be used. Ultimately, they want to maximize productivity. So, they will try to avoid addictive mechanics since they do not want productivity to go down because of this addiction.

Sources:

Brown, Ben. The Psychology of Gamification: Why It Works (& How To Do It!). 11 Feb. 2020, www.bitcatcha.com/blog/gamify-website-increase-engagement/.

Chou, Yu-kai. “Octalysis: Complete Gamification Framework – Yu-Kai Chou.” Yu, 9 Oct. 2019, yukaichou.com/gamification-examples/octalysis-complete-gamification-framework/.

Featured

Blog #12: Killer Cars

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat

We are living in the information age. With constant data being processed day by day, information overload, and exponential content creation, we have the sufficient amount of data, programs, processing power, and hardware to support autonomous driving. Although this is very exciting, we must take preventative measures to make sure that it is behaving properly and ethically without facing real life repercussions. As with the health industry, where software can make an impact in life or death situations, there is no difference when it comes to self-driving cars.

In order for autonomous vehicles to be in the hands of good ethics and best practices, we must ensure that it accounts for everything. When I say everything I mean everything. We should shape its model similar to defensive driving. “It’s better to be safe than sorry” is a way to put it. Instead of taking the invert risk of running that yellow light or going over the speed limit by a little, it must default into taking the safe option every single time in any given situation in order to ensure safe consistency.

We have previously stated “It’s better to be safe than sorry.” But what if we are put in a situations where “sorry” is unavoidable? How sorry should we be if presented by 2 situations we are inevitably going to be sorry for? Just like the “Trolley Problem,” it is no different when it comes to autonomous cars. With AI and humans, us humans are the architects of the AI model and ultimately could decide which algorithm to pursue in a unavoidable situation where we have to choose “the lesser of 2 evils.” Now the abstraction of ethics is at a high level and it comes back to a full circle as to what the developer of the AI system’s ethics and morals is.

It is our responsibility to do extensive testing to be confident that we have little to minimal percent error in case something DOES go wrong. And when it does, we are sure of the better choice in an inevitable situation. This of course, trickles back down to the question of “right and wrong” and moral values of the autonomous car’s source. Us. Because in the end, computers are designed to do exactly what a human designs it to do.

Sources:

Featured

Blog #11: Government Grade Software

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat

The existence of programs like Stuxnet, has a significant impact on intergovernmental relationships as it is a clear breach of privacy and considered as an attack on the country. If Iran were to link Stuxnet to the U.S. government then they would further distrust the United States leading to more tension. Existence of programs like stuxnet will make countries such as Iran much less willing to cooperate because they will view the program as a cyber attack. Using malicious software on another country’s software is a serious breach on the country’s software which will make the country unwilling to cooperate in the future as well as more hostile to the countries involved in the creation of the software. 

The existence of programs like the Prism program pose a significant breach of privacy of the citizens. The citizens of the country start to distrust their government and would also start to feel less secure. Distrust between the citizens and the government leads to problems across the board and citizens will be likely to protest a significant breach in their privacy. A program like the prism program will strain the relationship between citizens and the government because it also indicates a lack of trust from the government in their citizens. 

The use of technology like the two aforementioned programs leads to significant problems no matter the use. I personally believe that there is not a way to use such technology responsibly unless it is being used against terrorist groups or during war against other countries. Using a consequentialist framework the programs are ethical in that scenario because they are being used to take down an objectively malicious organization. The technology that is present and in use must be taken out of use in order to protect the rights of the citizens and to prevent a cyber-war from occurring.

Sources:

Ball, James “NSA Prism Program Taps in to User Data of Apple, Google and Others.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 7 June 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data.

Zetter, Kim. “An Unprecedented Look at Stuxnet, the World’s First Digital Weapon.” Wired, Conde Nast, 3 June 2017, http://www.wired.com/2014/11/countdown-to-zero-day-stuxnet/.

Featured

Blog #10: Hacktivism

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat

Along with the proliferation of technology and political advocacy, there has been the rise of a particular combination of the two: hacktivism. By misusing a computer system to spread political activism or social change, the ethicality hacktivism is called into question. In many cases, the morality is not clear cut; while it may seem unethical at first glance, many acts of hacktivism have been praised and upholding ethicality.

Hacktivists, in short, are trying to accomplish social change through the tools that are quite unorthodox. For example, protesters in the Arab Spring utilized techniques to allow protestors to access the internet for their cause through DDos attacks on governmental websites. However, on the surface, these techniques seem to be extreme, and perhaps when not necessary, hacktivism can be seen as unethical.

However, there are some cases that blur the line. One example is Edward Snowden’s act of revealing that the government was engaging in surveillance on the general public. In a utilitarian point of view, this benefited the most people, as many people were now more aware of realities. Unfortunately, this act of activism got Snowden in trouble, but he was hailed as a hero by many.

In the end, while hacktivism can be very unethical as a means of achieving a goal, perhaps sometimes the benefits can outweigh the cons. As a method of achieving social change or promoting political activism, perhaps sometimes there is no better alternative. In that case, hacktivism can be seen as a valid option.

Sources

Featured

Blog #9: You, Yourself, and Your Personal Data

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat

The line that should be drawn is that companies should not have any access to people’s personal information. Personal convenience should not come at the expense of people’s private information. Right now, companies can track your IP address, location, and cookie ids(CBS). This is too much information that companies can gain from individuals.

The effect of this trade is that individuals will have no online privacy at all. Companies will have access to everyone’s information. From a consequentialist framework, this will have significant negative consequences. No one will be safe on the Internet as there is simply no privacy. As of right now, Google has access to information about people’s wifi and GPS coordinates(Yanofsky). This could have lasting consequences if in the future, companies got a hold of people’s vital information such as social security number or bank details.If this were to happen, society would be at the complete mercy of big companies.

The tech companies role in these questions is tracking information of the individuals in society. Google, Facebook, and many other social media companies are tracking our information to help marketers advertise their materials.(CBS) From a duty-based framework, they should not be invading our privacy because it is morally wrong. Even if it is to help marketers, they should not do it at the expense of individual people’s data.

Data should be in control of the individuals. Companies should not have control of individual’s data unless individuals state that they can.Informed consent should include companies stating exactly what data they are using and what they will do with that data. The people that companies should take pieces of data from are individuals who are fine with that company’s data collection. Companies should not intrude on people who don’t want their data taken.

Sources:

Yanofsky, David. “If You’re Using an Android Phone, Google May Be Tracking Every Move You Make.” Quartz, Quartz, 27 Jan. 2018, http://qz.com/1183559/if-youre-using-an-android-phone-google-may-be-tracking-every-move-you-make/.

CBS News. “How You’re Tracked Online — and What You Can Do about It.” CBS News, CBS Interactive, 8 Apr. 2018, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-youre-tracked-online-facebook-google-amazon-uber-what-you-can-do-about-it/.

Featured

Blog #7: YouTube Has Responsibilities

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat

Youtube is responsible for providing a platform so that users can speak their mind and disseminate their views to the greater public. However, Youtube is also responsible for ensuring that the content that is being posted on their platform is appropriate and that the content does not cross any boundaries. If Youtube provides a platform for people that are not doing what’s right this creates a dangerous situation. Youtube is also responsible to the advertisers so that they play advertisements on videos that are in line with a company’s views. If advertisements for a company are played on inappropriate videos, this would be bad for the company’s image (Brodkin) . 

Youtube is responsible for the content that is placed on their platform which means they must moderate the content and ensure that it falls into line with what is on their company standards. However, the media is in charge of shaping the conversation about youtube and it’s content. If the media frames youtube’s content as inappropriate or extreme Youtube would lose credibility as a platform and lose both users and advertisers.

If Youtube moderated their content fairly and properly the business model would be considered ethical. But due to the ambiguity and lack of clarity with their standards, Youtube’s business model is not ethical as it discriminates against youtubers that create certain types of content while letting some extreme content stay on it’s platform (Albright). Looking at Youtube’s model from a consequentialist framework, it is clear that their model is not ethical as Youtube videos have a serious impact on how society perceives certain things; sometimes unfairly.

Youtube should not be able to make money off “fake news” videos and the user should not as well. These videos should be taken down swiftly as they pose a significant threat to society. Technology’s role here is neutral because Youtube has a plethora of videos that provide valuable tutorials and tips but also there are videos that abuse Youtube’s platform. 

Sources:

Albright, Jonathan. Untrue-Tube: Monetizing Misery and Disinformation, Medium, February 25, 2018.

Brodkin, Jon. YouTube loses advertisers over “wormhole into pediphilia ring”, Ars Technica, February 21, 2019.

Featured

Blog #6: Inside Amazon

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat

Amazon in recent times has had a meteoric rise in the retail industry, with a significant competitive advantage over many other companies also in the industry. By utilizing technology, Amazon has been able to reduce costs and improve efficiency. However, Amazon may have gone too far with technology, with many innovations utilized to track their workers. We believe that Amazon is overstepping the ethicality line by exercising overbearing controls on their workers, which is not a display of ethical leadership.

As a company that receives business subsidies and tax-break incentives, Amazon has a responsibility to help the local community and its employees. According to Yeginsu, Amazon has recently created a wristband that can aid workers to sort items faster and more efficiently. However, this compromises the privacy of its workers by giving Amazon information about where workers are at all times. While this may be for the benefit of efficiency, the privacy of the Amazon workers is completely disregarded. In a utilitarian point of view, this may maximize profits, but from a virtue based framework, this certainly is not the best possible course of action. 

In contrast, Amazon is doing their best for the community. Even though workers may be funneled into maximizing efficiency, on the flip side, the community does benefit. With the presence of technology, the consumers of products will be happy that their products can be delivered promptly. This product delivery enables Amazon.

Overall, the benefits do not seem to outweigh the cons of Amazon’s actions toward its workers in terms of ethicality. Therefore, their technology’s role is harmful. While this is an important part of society, it needs to change so that the workers are not constrained. While Amazon is trying to maximize their profits for the benefit of the community, it is throwing away its own ethicality in the process.

Sources:

Green, Dennis. “A New Study Found That 700 Amazon Employees in Ohio Are on Food Stamps.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 15 Jan. 2018, www.businessinsider.com/amazon-employees-on-food-stamps-in-ohio-2018-1. Yeginsu, Ceylan. “If Workers Slack Off, the Wristband Will Know. (And Amazon Has a Patent for It.).” The New York Times, The New York Times, 1 Feb. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/02/01/technology/amazon-wristband-tracking-privacy.html.

Featured

Blog #5: Boeing 737 MAX

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat

Although it was a combination of several factors, the most important of them that led to the crashes would be the design of the engines. It was discovered that the 737 Max aircraft had larger engines made than according to the designs, which “changed the aerodynamics of the plane.” (Gelles) This led to an improper design which fundamentally changed the physics of the plane, resulting in an ineffective machine.

One thing that a junior engineer could have done is to hold themselves to a higher standard. The engineer could make sure that whatever part they are working on is as flawless as can be. If the engineer finds out that other people are slacking off, then that engineer could try to confront them and try to persuade them to do their work correctly.

The employees are ethically obligated to take action if they find an error. From a consequentialist framework, they need to fix any error they find. Many people’s lives depend on the aircrafts being fully functional, hence the employees’ actions could have disastrous results if they are negligent in their work. There have already been instances where these horrific crashes have occurred, and in order to prevent such tragedies from happening again, the employees need to make sure they are producing properly constructed air-crafts.

One of the ethical issues that apply to this case is the concept of moral muteness. It is evident that this is occurring at Boeing. Several employees have commented on the corruption that lies in the company, yet many of them have not done anything to combat this injustice. (Yglesias) This culture of creating problematic aircrafts is so ingrained that it is difficult to speak up against it, which reflects upon the issue of moral muteness.

Sources:

Gelles, David. “’I Honestly Don’t Trust Many People at Boeing’: A Broken Culture Exposed.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 10 Jan. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/01/10/business/boeing-737-employees-messages.html.

Yglesias, Matthew. “The Emerging 737 Max Scandal, Explained.” Vox, Vox, 29 Mar. 2019, www.vox.com/business-and-finance/2019/3/29/18281270/737-max-faa-scandal-explained.

Featured

Blog #4: Women in Tech + Github

**This is a picture. Nothing is actually wrong**

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat

Don’t refresh your browser! Nothing went wrong! But in 2014, it might have for Github. Julie Ann Horvath, a highly regarded engineer at Github resigned after a series of unacceptable treatment by her co-workers internally. Contrary to Github’s initial environment with good intentions and a support system for women, Horvath felt very unwelcomed, claiming allegations of aggressive and biased behaviors against her in areas that shouldn’t be otherwise because of her gender and not due to the quality of her work.

On top of that, she would face pressure and harassment from the founder’s wife who was in the shadows of intervening with her passionate career at Github where she felt violated from the founder’s relative authority to the actual company. From a consequentialist framework, Horvath would endure the hostile environment around her to try to make Github appeal to other women and try to transform it to a more welcoming one so others could experience her passion.

Unfortunately, she would concede due to the continuation of harassment from the founder’s wife that HR looked the other way from that could perhaps be due to the “inherited authority” that the founder’s wife had over Github. In a duty-based framework, the founder’s wife fully exercised and asserted her authority over the whole company that would in turn would violate Horvath’s relationships with her colleagues and ultimately, her career, perhaps just to show dominance.

The founder’s wife was not thinking about how much scrutiny and bad publicity Github would exert by her actions and nonetheless, lose an invaluable employee. Such ignorance should not have been ignored by HR and the other founder’s in order to resolve inappropriate behavior in the work environment. If something had been done sooner than later, this could have been easily contained and flourished a better culture within Github’s workplace.

Sources:

Featured

Blog #3: Group Dynamics and Dilemmas

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat

From a very young age we have been taught to respect the members of your group and that working well in teams is essential. In the situation given to us, Bob clearly puts Carlos in a tough situation by not respecting Alice’s work. Carlos is in a situation where he must choose between Alice and Bob and no matter what he does, a rift will be created within the group. Alice definitely feels marginalized and disrespected by Bob’s actions as he not only discredited her work, but disrespected her in the process as well. This would have been less likely to occur if Alice was male, as many males are unfortunately inherently biased against the work of females.

The incident would have a significant impact on both the group and the individuals. Group productivity would decline. Also, this would most definitely change Alice and Carlos’s viewpoints as they would be more aware of the discrimination that exists against females in the computer science work environment. Being aware of this discrimination would make them more cautious with how they respond to certain problems and make sure that they are respectful to people of both genders.

The best way to handle this is to set up a meeting and go through the code with Bob and show him how it works. From a utilitarian and a virtue based framework, it would be best as it would both produce results and require virtuous actions. Carlos and Alice should work together and explain Alice’s code to Bob. Once this happens Alice’s code should be submitted. Alice should not respond aggressively as that would escalate the situation unless Bob is reluctant to change despite the explanation.

Featured

Blog #2: The Nature of Sexual Consent

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat
Yes, No or -maybe on Blackboard

The nature of sexual consent should be in an environment where both involved parties involved feel comfortable with responding with regards to their own desires and not due to pressure. An instance where either party might be unable to respond with regards to their own desires is a situation where there is “an abuse of power,” according to Carmon. In these situations, even if verbal consent is given, it may not be due to the person in question wanting to consent, but instead being forced to consent. In a deontological framework, if one party is forced to consent by the other, the oppressor is acting unethically as he or she is forcing upon the other party something against their will. 

However, it may be difficult for the oppressed, which are frequently women, to do much about their situations. It has become “a game for men to overcome a woman’s resistance.” What can be done by bystanders is to help prevent oppressive situations, but that might not be so easy. Instead, societal norms should be changed. According to Friedman, we need to correctly model sexual communication. In a virtue based framework, people should be taught to be virtuous in these situations. 

Technology is another outlet that can help with sexual abuse. The online #MeToo movement can connect victims of sexual harassment and prevent abuse from happening in the future. While it may be difficult to speak up in person, online anonymized forums can give people voices. Unfortunately, technology has also generated “sexting,” which leads to the problem of youth not knowing how to behave online, according to Madigan. In a utilitarian framework, the impacts of sexting are clearly negative in many circumstances, making it quite problematic. The result might include bullying, or harassment, when the photos and messages get shared beyond the intended recipient.

Work Cited:

  • Madigan, Sheri, et al. “Why Sexting Must Be on the Curriculum.” The Conversation, The Conversation, 6 Oct. 2019, theconversation.com/why-sexting-must-be-on-the-curriculum-96457.

Blog #8: Piracy!

Authors: Anvith Potluri, Kevin Li, Kevin Nguyen, & Varad Thorat

Piracy: “the unauthorized use of another’s production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright” (Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary). In a very fast consumer world, the technology sector suffers from pirating and consumers getting their hands on “cracked versions” of software. This in turn, could lead to millions of dollars of revenue losses for companies in general, and affect their ability to even survive as a company, especially if they are in the early stages of a company that dedicates distributing software products for the consumers.

Mainly, the consumers benefit from software or other digital media piracy, but who you are affecting is much much more in the grand scheme. In a consequentialist framework, a pirater would be inconsiderate on the companies, developers, and authors that they are affecting in a negative way and in a duty-based framework, their intention is solely on benefiting themselves and enjoying the developer’s hard work with unauthorized use without compensating the author.

By no means is pirating ever helping the authors, but for consumers, it is different and to their advantage, if they can get away with such an action. Technology has not done such a good job punishing piraters (such as ISPs sending copyright infringement notices but it is getting better) therefore, with the mindset that consumers could get away with it, consumers might consider this an option every time there is new software released to the public for sale.

The consequences for this type of behavior calls upon tactics used by companies, especially game companies, to account for this. Such strategies include pay-to-play and free-to-play games, providing a “subscription service” where you would have to subscribe to even get online support for the service (like Netflix) or even integrated advertising inside the software. These are just some of the strategies companies might use due to the nature of piracy. Companies/developers/authors will find a way to survive somehow.

Sources:

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started