Recent tech ethics reading
In support of a proposal and workshop I’m fleshing out, I’ve been back down the metaphorical tech ethics mines. They’re noisier now, and increasingly polluted, but there’s still some worthwhile nuggets to be found…
First: a WSJ interview with Paula Goldman, chief ethical and humane use officer at Salesforce. Advisory councils, employee warning systems, product safeguards. IMO Sf are near the forefront of Big Tech ethics in practice, so worth a read.
The Economist warns the techlash isn’t over, despite a Big Five 52% stock price surge. The next recession will kill jobs, with automation likely blamed. Regulatory experiments will coalesce, and resistance will grow to match tech’s ever-broader ambitions.
Johannes Himmelreich argues for political philosophy & a focus on pluralism, human autonomy, and qs of legitimate authority. Moral philosophy is individualised (‘how should I live?’), but this is really about how we should get along as a society.
‘Ethicists were hired to save tech’s soul. Will anyone let them?’ has done the rounds. Again, Salesforce-centric (recent Comms push?), but a fair piece acknowledging the realities of exec-level veto, the toothlessness of Yet More Card Decks, and IMO the tempting error of slotting ethics into existing practices.
Here’s Bruce Sterling, distrustful (as I am) of preemptive codes of ethics. ‘Technological proliferation is not a list of principles. It is a deep, multivalent historical process with many radically different stakeholders over many different time-scales.’
Tom Chatfield agrees. ‘We already know what many of the world’s most powerful automated systems want: the enhancement of shareholder value and the empowerment of technocratic totalitarian states.’ This is sociopolitical, not merely technological.
So is tech ethics a waste of time? LM Sacasas offers a welcome defence, arguing for a ‘yes and’ approach, pointing out that other courses of action – legal, political – still need ethical bases. Pull all the levers, as I often find myself saying.
