Notes

Computing and Software Engineering “Codes of Ethics” is a set of guidelines produced by IEEE CS and ACM which specifies ethical and professional obligations of software engineers, instructing them about the standards that the society expects. The Codes define ethical and professional behaviors in eight principals, including public, client and employer, product, judgment, management, profession, colleagues and self. It is also used as the standard for teaching and practicing software engineering.
So here we comes a question: are the Codes useful? I believe the answer is yes, but only up to a certain extent. As the Codes define the moral principles and professional behaviors, software engineers can use it as a basis to judge whether a certain decision is appropriate or not. When most of the people follow the Codes upon decisions, the industry would become more standardized, enhancing professionalism and hence uplifting the image of the industry. As a result, the public would become more confident and supportive to our professionals, forming a virtuous cycle to provide a concrete base for the industry to contribute to the human society.
Nevertheless, my concern is that the implementation of the Codes is highly depends on the moral qualities of people. It neither has a legal effect nor specifies the punishment for violations, it does not have enough deterrent to the members.
In 1986, space shuttle Challenger exploded 73 seconds after launch. It was a tragic that should not had happened because the O-rings, which sealed joints of the fuel tanks, were already known to be problematic since 1977. However, the designers defined this as an acceptable flight risk rather than redesigning the joint. The decision-making process that led to the launch of Challenger were strongly criticized as it was believed that Challenger were forced to liftoff due to the pressure from NASA, which the organization had to ensure the number of flights to achieve a certain standard in order to gather federal funding.
The incident has shown that the decisions of human can be affected by external factors, such as pressures and benefits. In this case, such factors had outweighed the moral qualities of the related people, resulting this flagrant violation of Code of Ethics. Therefore, I believe new strategies should be implemented to increase deterrent, for example, introducing a disciplinary committee, to look into every incidents reported and adjudicate appropriate penalties. This could give clear message to people that there are serious consequences to violate professional conduct. Engineers should always be reminded the importance of Codes of Ethics and Professional Conduct.
Among the eight principles in Codes of Ethics, the most important aspect is “public”, in my opinion. According to the Codes, this principle states that software engineers shall act consistently with the public interest. The reason for this is because consequences could be huge if public interests is not taken seriously.
Chernobyl disaster is one example that has massive consequences resulted by the lack of conciousness to public interests. On 26 April 1986, an explosion in Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant made the graphite moderator expose to the air, causing it to ignite. As a result, a large quantities of radioactive particles were released into the atmosphere. According to the investigation report, the power plant operators ignored regulations and turned off many key safety systems to speed test completion was the main cause that led to this disaster. The accident costed 18 billion USD to deal with the contamination, 31 people died as a direct result of the accident, and long-term effects like cancers and deformities are still being accounted for. The incident has shown safety can be threatened by flaw decisions, especially those related to safety issues. Therefore I think “public” is the most crusual part among the eight principles such that violating this principle is irresponsible. As stated by ACM, “the primacy of well-being and quality of life of the public is emphasized throughout the code.”
In consrast, “self” should be the least important amongst the principles. The principle states that “software engineers shall participate in lifelong learning regarding the practice of their profession and shall promote an ethical approach to the practice of the profession”. The decisions in this category would cause impact to oneself only, while decisions related to any of the other seven principles would have impacts to the others in various degrees. For example, whether an software engineer persuit on continuing education would imact on one’s professional achievements only, it is mostly a matter of whether a person is responsible for one’s self. Therefore the “self” principle is the least important in my point of view.