Group items tagged

Article on South Korean government drawing up rules on how to treat robots. Robots are something created by man, a robot is a computer and a technology and therefore does not have feelings. I do not understand why humans need to have a set of rules on how to treat robots. Additionally I feel that this whole article is pathetic because once again humans are placing technology higher than mankind.

Maybe there should be a change to women managing our companies to further help everyone, rather than merely trying to make profit.

Is it OK to copy software and then let others use it if they didn't pay for it? This article quotes the Golden Rule!

The right and wrong of computer ethics, or, the golden rule of computer ethics.

This article fits nicely with our discussion this week. It talks about adding a capital buffer. Some law makers say that without this, the banking industry could sink the economy again.

Securities and Exchange Commision approved a law that rewards cash for people that inform the SEC about a business who has commited illegal activies within the government.

This shows that Davis was right in his essay that most whistleblowers bring information forward at great risk to themselves. Most workplaces have a "Whistleblower Protection" rules somewhere (I know my job does) but they do not really want you to bring forward information.

The internet is comprised social media that could be detrimental to our youth as well as misleading information that cannot be seen as reliable. Media organizations are revising and reissuing ethical codes to address most of these problems.

The Era of Social Media

As far as I can see, it looks like this is a true story (and generally I trust NPR to have done their due diligence to test before they air a story). This guy is truely inspiring. Sometimes all people need is someone to get nice to them and treat them better than they think they deserve to be treated.

I think the opening paragraph says it all: "Discussions about ethical issues, not to mention attempts to encourage ethical behavior, are constantly derailed by the invocation of common misstatements of ethical principles. Some of these are honest misconceptions, some are intentional distortions, some are self-serving rationalizations, and some, upon examination, simply make no sense at all."

I do have to disagree with the author's example of consequentialism. Normally, saving a woman from being killed would be ethical, however, going back in time and disrupting the time line (in my opinion) was not. Had he not gone back in time, he wouldn't have had an opportunity to save the woman and in the end, the Nazi's would not have won WWII. Also, in relation to the fallacy of "It's ethical if it's not illegal" - I don't believe that everything that is illegal is immoral or unethical. That is why laws are able to be changed - sometimes the law is wrong or unethical.

I would not feel the need to belong to a bank that is going to charge me to keep my money with them. The article states that the rule (to charge $5 for every debit card use) only applies to banks with $10 billion or more in assets. If this is the case I would switch to a smaller bank or just use cash. Is this ethical? I would say no, because I have already given all of my money to the bank to lend to other people. How can this be ethical if I have already given them money?

This talks about all the fringe benefits that politicians get, I know every job has its perks, but I think their needs to be limits

Some advice from HBR on our topic for this week. 

Here is the ethic statement from the AMA (american marketing association)

This article gives a nice break down of the rules that some people should fallow when be sales men.

a $31.6 million settlement with Telecom over alleged discrimination under the Telecom Separation Undertakings - or rules of good market behaviour as a near-monopoly - that form part of the Telecommunications Act.