Vincent Mackenna's Philosophy Blog

As someone who would be considered a "rational egoist," I wouldn't whistle-blow under virtually any circumstance that would result in serious negative ramifications. That said, I find it disgusting that the term "whistle-blowing" even exists, but I'm not surprised that it does. If there is a flaw in a system that I was apart of I would want to tell the issue to my supervisor, but because there is no safe way to do so, I wouldn't do it. I think the primary problem with this lies in the consequence. There should be a power allocated to the government to stop companies from firing whistle-blowers. While the company would surely find some other petty way to fire the person, there should, at the very least, be a system that directly stops the firing of whistle-blowing. While wrongful termination does exist in the legal system, it always favors the corporations with the power and money to sue any of their employees into debt. This, as I stated a thousand tim...

Disregarding the magnitude of the responsibility seems incredibly disingenuous. The best analogy I can make is this: Alcohol surely may make you do something that you otherwise might not do, and consuming alcohol, by nature of knowing that, make me responsible for my actions. While I may do something that I may not otherwise do, I take on the responsibility of these intoxicated actions by drinking in the first place (and knowing at the same time that my inhibitions will be lowered by this action). If this logic is applied to engineering, it stunts growth. If the development of A.I. systems may  have negative consequences, why should an engineer take on the responsibility of such a feat? If I am the lead software engineer of an A.I. system that is used in self-driving cars, and an inconceivably low probability problem occurs that leads to the death of 10 people, in this line of thinking I should be responsible. I knew that such issues may occur, but I took on the task anyway. Whil...