"Here's a tool that helps you think through [ethical] consequences and makes sure what you're designing is good for the world and good for your longer-term bottom line."
That's their checklist.
I wonder what activists deep into this stuff think about it!
The scenarios section of https://ethicalos.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Ethical-OS-Toolkit-2.pdf is by far the most concise realistic-bad-future reasons-to-worry that I've ever seen.
Of the scenarios, all but the neurotech implants one are realistic.
I actually think this stuff is the best I've seen for bringing these issues up with *anyone*.
@Manuela One thing that is a major cause of disagreement (particularly in the global south) is that ethical guidelines such as these sidestep completely the matter of "Intellectual Property". Silicon Valley startups and other institutions whose entire raison d'être revolves around this concept will always be at odds with a broader interpretation of what it means to be ethical. Then there is the inextricably linked matter of economic justice.
@Manuela There is absolutely nothing wrong in these guidelines, but depending on your vantage point, they will look fair and benevolent, or completely insufficient, and troubling that this is the entire extent of how "ethics" are defined, if we consider the performance and track record of Silicon Valley in recent times.
A serious grappling with the items they bring up inherently *leads* to these deeper issues though (such as "IP" etc).
They seem to be asking all the right questions and doing so in a great manner that people may be open to hearing.
I don't see how most VC-type startups could fairly and fully answer these things without deciding that the whole enterprise is unethical.
So, I don't see them as a soft-ball approach…
I don't see them as soft-ball, but I know that these unstated issues --because they aren't explicitly stated-- will likely make this guide look like the subject is being purposefully ignored (in the eyes of people for whom these unstated issues are, understandably, a top priority) **From their point of view**
I would keep in mind that a global audience could potentially react differently.
yes, this is also my main critique. I find it difficult that one or two silicon valley institutions define an ethical "standard". if doing so, it must happen in a constant participative dialogue with a most diverse group of stakeholders. but, I think the initiative is still valueable.
A Fediverse instance for people interested in cooperative and collective projects.