Saturday, June 16, 2012

Ethics & Technology

The Economist's Tech Quarterly (June 2nd Edition) features an article titled "March of the Robots" reminds us of how intertwined life and technology have become, but more importantly, the absence of boundaries between the two.  Computers, have for some time, proven to just be better than humans in nearly every facet (think Deep Blue and more recently Watson).  Now computers are appearing side-by-side with military forces on the front-line. They are providing video surveillance, they are carrying cargo, and jumping over walls to assist their human counterparts in combat.  All reasonable tasks.  Computers are just stepping in where the human physical falls short.  However, are we now venturing into a world where computers will be programmed to make life and death decisions, determine right from wrong, and have an internal code of ethics? I guess the question is if we now believe that humans have developed enough of a fixed moral sense that the rules that govern our tough decision making processes can be formulaic. Or alternatively, maybe one person has achieved this higher level of morality, and a computer can simply adopt the "what would the virtuous person do" and can be built in the image of said guidepost.  What this conversation ultimately stirs up is the notion of accountability when it comes to technology and who will ultimately be held responsible for this human-like machines.  Computers will not be prosecuted or serve time in jail.   So, will it be the programmers, the developers, or the engineers who will be called to the bench?  While it may be a leap to apply the same notion to digital marketing, I would say that similar conversations have and will continue to take place regarding boundaries, pushing the privacy limits, and legislation that will answer the question of accountability in this truly nascent industry.  Who will be at fault when sensitive information is leaked to the public, or when breaches of privacy take place?  Right now, there is only the semblance of a line in the sand, meaning, we are relying on our gut reactions, on case by case basis, to determine whether things have gone too far.  Do I want to view recommendations from Amazon based on what I have previously searched for / purchased? Do I want restaurant ideas based on where my cell phone is?  Are we willing to compromise on our privacy for the sake of convenience?  For now, I'll continue to Yelp away...


http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/sponsorships/BMC75/20120602_techquarterly_verizon.pdf

No comments: