An Introduction to Software Engineering Ethics

Question 1.1

What kinds of harm has Mike probably suffered as a result of this incident?  What kinds of harm has Sarah probably suffered? (Make your answers as full as possible; identify as many kinds of harm done as you can think of).

Answer:

Due to this incident, Mike was unable to pay the fee of his daughter on time; he can’t fulfill a promise with his kid. Moreover, he lost trust on the banking system. This incident has caused Mike to suffer from psychological trauma. Despite his hard work through his life and making sure to get his kids in to good schools, this software issue has brought him into a helpless situation. This incident has caused him fail in fulfilling his promise to Sarah. In addition, Mike has lost trust in banking systems, which has made him, confused about where he should be saving his money to be safe as well as readily available when he needs it. Another harm to Mike is that the future security of his kids is at stack.

On the other hand, despite hard work, Sarah has also lost the chance to join the prestigious school in the current semester. This can also put her future at risk as the circumstances never remain the same. She might not be able to secure admission in such a reputable institution next time. This fear of losing the chance will also make Sarah suffer from psychological stress.

 

 

Question 1.2

Could the problem with Mike’s account have been the result of an action by a software engineer?   How many possible scenarios/explanations for this event can you think of that involve the conduct of one or more software engineers? Briefly explain the scenarios:

Answer:

Scenario (Result of an Action)

Software Engineer set longer transaction confirmation times. The software engineer, set delayed confirmation messages for transactions. That was the reason that the school got a message about transaction failure on the last day of the school. Had he/she set an instant confirmation message system, the school would have come to know about the failure sooner and would have informed Mike in time, to avoid this stress.

Scenarios (Result of No Action)

The system was tested for single transactions. Despite knowing the volume of parallel transactions in a financial institution, the software testing team did not test it for multiple parallel transactions.

Another situation can be that the software engineer did not test the system at all to check the reliability of the application.

One more scenario can be that the software engineer only tested the software for transactions within the boundary of the bank and did not properly integrated it with the internetwork to check its reliable communication with the remote users.

Question 1.3

Taking into account what we said about ethics in the introduction, could any of the scenarios you imagined involve an ethical failure of the engineer(s) responsible? How? Explain:

Answer:

All the scenarios explained shows that ethical failure of software engineers because they are ethically bound to test and confirm the software before practical use. It was the negligence of the software engineer.

All the scenarios related to “result of no action taken” are ethical failures of engineer(s). A software engineer must consider all the risks involved while developing a software system and must test the software to cater for all those risks. A good software engineer must not hand over a software system until and unless he/she is confirm about both the efficiency, effectiveness and reliability of the developed system.

Communication failure, lack of skilled testing and poorly coded systems are all a part of developers unethical behavior.

Question 1.4

In what ways could Karen potentially be harmed by this app, depending on how it is designed and how her shopping data is handled and used?  Identify a few harmful scenarios you can think of, and the types of harm she could suffer in each:

Answer:

In case of losing her IPhone, she would not be able to manage here shopping properly because she store all the data in IPhone, secondly is case selling the data by the developer to a third party would be a big threat to her privacy. It is also against the ethics of software development to sell the data of one to another one.

Question 1.5

Which if any of these harms could result from ethical failings on the part of the people who developed Errand Whiz?  How, specifically?

Answer

As a result of ethical failings on the part of software developers the privacy of the customers is in danger, it can decrease the trust of the customers on the use of such app, when their privacy is not in safe hands.

 

 

Question 1.6

What actions could the people behind Errand Whiz take to prevent these harms?  Are they ethically obligated to prevent them?  Why or why not?  Explain your answer.

Answer:

Yes, they should be ethically obligated. Their ethically responsible behavior will increase the trust of the app users and will use their app more frequently without any harm to privacy issue. This can also increase the reputation of the app developer and they can get more app development contract.

Question 3.1

Who are the various stakeholders in this scenario, and what do they each have at stake in your action?  Reflect carefully and deeply, and answer as fully as possible.

Answer:

In this case there are four main stake holders, government, public, the company and employees of the company. The local government is the most powerful stake holder, the public have to discuss the relevant issues and analysis the overall situation in which they living, the company provides the technical assistance to the law enforcement agencies and the employees are the individuals working in the company.

Question 3.2

What do you think is your ethical obligation in this situation?  What do you think an excellent software engineer would do in this situation?  Are they the same thing, or different?  Please explain your answer.

Answer:

In this situation an ethically develop engineer should not be a part of such a activity. He/she should discuss the issue with supervisor and need to convince the supervisor also to not be a part of such activity which is against the human rights. If the supervisor not wants to listen, then the engineer should quit the job there because it is not ethically justifiable to work against human rights.

Question 4.1

Which of the contributions in your answer to 2.1 are related to vital public good(s)?  What vital public goods might software engineers help to secure that you did not mention in your initial answer to 2.1? What general ethical obligations are software engineers under, beyond their distinctive professional obligations?

Answer:

Vital goods of public good are the overall wellbeing of the public and society. The software engineers should use their skills to provide efficient and effective services to the customers, to provide them such software’s which bring efficiency, give them opportunities, and make the life easy for them. The general obligation of software engineers is that they should work on very much ethically responsible way, they should develop such software which increases the well-being of the society and don’t harm the social norms of the society.

Question 5.1

 How would a conscious habit of thinking about how to be a better human being contribute to a person’s character, especially over time?

Answer:

It is very important and contributes a lot to the person’s character. It elevates the approach and thinking of human being, he/she think out of the box, which is not only important for the betterment and well-being of human being but also have very good effects on the person’s characters over time.

Question 5:2

Do you know what specific aspects of your character you would need to work on/improve in order to become a better person?  (Yes or No)

Answer: Yes

 

 

Question 5:3

Do you think most people make enough of a regular effort to work on their character or amend their shortcomings?  Do you think we are morally obligated to make the effort to become better people?  Why or why not?

Answer:

Yes, we all are morally obligated to make efforts to reduce and remove our shortcoming so that we become efficient and progressive members of the society. It is important for the future growth and career development of every individual.

Question 5:4

Who do you consider a model of moral excellence that you see as an example of how to live, and whose qualities of character you would like to cultivate?  Who would you want your children (or future children) to see as examples of such human (and especially moral) excellence?

Answer:

Yes, I think that such model of morel excellence is must. They work as an inspiration for and motivation factor for the morel guide line for future generation of human being.

 

 

Question 5:5

What would be the hardest part of living by the utilitarian principle of the ‘greatest good’?  What would be the most rewarding part?

Answer:

The utilitarian increase their happiness with actions and some time they ignore requirements of individual rights. The most rewarding part is those utilitarian’s fully enjoy the life and keep themselves satisfied by doing such action which give them happiness.

Question 5:6

What different kinds of pleasure/happiness are there? Are some pleasures more or less valuable or of higher or lower quality than others? Why or why not? Explain your intuitions about this:

Answer:

This pleasure may be the pleasure after achieving a goal, doing something remarkable, appraisal from the public, and respect. Yes, some pleasures are higher and lower because it based on the utility, if the utility of a goal is more the pleasure will be higher.

 

 

Question 5:7

Utilitarians think that pleasure and the absence of pain are the highest goods that we can seek in life and that we should always are seeking to produce these goods for others (and for ourselves).  They claim that every other good thing in life is valued simply because it produces pleasure or reduces pain.  Do you agree?  Why or why not?

Answer:

Yes, I agree with this because if have high level of pleasure and low pain in life I think it is more than enough. This provides us satisfaction in the life and one can enjoy life high level of pleasure and low level of pains.

Question 5:8

A utilitarian might say that to measure a ‘good life,’ you should ask: ‘how much overall happiness did this life bring into the world?’  Do you agree that this is the correct measure of a good life, or not?  Briefly explain.

Answer:

It is not correct, the happiness is not something absolute, it is relative measure and the standard of this may be vary from person to person and society to society and culture to culture. So it depends.

Question 5:9

How often, when making decisions, do you consider whether you would willingly permit everyone else to act in the same way that you are choosing to act?

Answer:

I will always permit other to act on the same way which I choose, because I have self-confident that the way I choose will be not a misleading.

Question 5:10

What are two other examples you can think of, beyond those given in the text above, in which someone is treated as a ‘mere means to an end’?

Answer:

The examples discussed above are about some extra ordinary situation which some time every one of us has to face. Like when the traffic police ask about license and we don’t have but still some time reply with a smiley confident face yes I have. When some time the parent ask from the Childs about the study the tell lies and say yes to avoid the anger of parents.

 

 

Question 5:11

Do you agree that human lives are of the highest possible value and beyond any fixed ‘price’? In your opinion, how well does our society today reflect this view on morality and justice?  Should it reflect this view?

Answer:

Yes, I am agreed that human lives have the highest value and nothing can be prices for it.  To give respect and importance to the society moral values one should be we should respect a human beings, the respect and justice are the two very important factors which boost up morality in the society.

Question 5:12

While each of the 3 distinct types of ethical frameworks/theories reviewed in this section is subject to certain limitations or criticisms, what aspects of the good life/ethics do you think each one captures best?    

Answer:

These include utilitarian theory, deontological and virtue theories of ethics. I think that the utilitarian theory is the best.

 

 

Question 6:1

Of these five moral habits and practices, which do you think you are best at presently?  Which of these habits, if any, would you like to do more to cultivate?

Answer:

I think that the Self- Reflection/Examination is the best one. This can give more fruitful and encouraging results in the ethically constructive habits, minds and action.

Question 6.2

In what specific ways, small or large, do you think adopting some or all of these habits could change a person’s personal and professional life? 

Answer:

As I already stated I think that the Self- Reflection/Examination is the best one. This can give more fruitful and encouraging results in the ethically constructive habits, minds and action.

 

 

Question 7

What might be the end goal of an ethical life as a software engineer?  What professional goals or other valuable ends could software engineer achieve by living well in the ethical sense? What personal goals or values could it help such a person achieve?

Answer:

The end goal of software engineer should be to serve the society in an ethically responsible way, to develop such soft wares which increase the overall wellbeing of the society. They should use fair mean for professional development and fair means of competition.

Question 8

How might the qualities of a ‘super professional’ engineer with practical wisdom, as described in this section, assists such a person in applying these codes successfully?

Answer:

A good professional should be highly analytical mind set, safety and public health aware, have very good competencies, issue public statements in a truthful and responsible way. He/she should be trustee and should conduct honorably, respectably, lawfully and ethically responsible.