Computer Ethics

Entire courses have been devoted to this topic. For more information, do a Google search by clicking on the title above. I also have a large file of articles and newspaper clippings; stop by my office if you want to browse through it. (If I can find it ;-)

Websites

1. AAAI's AI Topics website on Ethical and Social Implications of AI
   • A great site, with many links.

2. The Research Center on Computing and Society

Readings

Boldface entries are of particular interest or importance.

1. Lem, Stanislaw (1971), "Non Serviam", in S. Lem, A Perfect Vacuum, trans. by Michael Kandel (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1979).
   • Reprinted as:
     "The Experiment (A Review of "Non Serviam", by James Dobb)" [PDF], The New Yorker (24 July 1978): 26ff.

   • Reprinted in:
     Hofstadter, Douglas R.; & Dennett, Daniel C. (eds.) (1981), The Mind's I: Fantasies and Reflections on Self and Soul (New York: Basic Books): 296-317.
     • Also see:
       Hofstadter, Douglas R.; & Dennett, Daniel C. (1981), "Reflections [on Lem's "Non Serviam"]", in Hofstadter, Douglas R.; & Dennett, Daniel C. (eds.) (1981), The Mind's I: Fantasies and Reflections on Self and Soul (New York: Basic Books): 317-320.

   • This is must reading for anyone interested in either Artificial Life or in the moral/ethical implications of AI.
     An interesting philosophical analysis not unrelated to the Lem story is:
     • Bostrum, Nick (2003), "Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?", Philosophical Quarterly 53(211): 243-255.

   • Another "must read":

     Powers, Richard (1995), Galatea 2.2 (New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux);
     LOCKWOOD Book Collection PS3566 .O92 G35 1995

2. Moor, James H. (1979), "Are There Decisions Computers Should Never Make?" [PDF], Nature and System 1: 217-229.
   • On whether computers can make better decisions than humans, see:
     Heingartner, Douglas (2006), "Maybe We Should Leave That Up to the Computer", New York Times (18 July).
   Good articles to read in contrast to Moor's paper:
   • Friedman, Batya; & Kahn, Peter H., Jr. (1992), "People Are Responsible, Computers Are Not" [PDF], excerpt from their "Human Agency and Responsible Computing: Impications for Computer System Design", Journal of Systems Software (1992): 7-14; excerpt reprinted in M. David Ermann, Mary B. Williams, & Michele S. Shauf (eds.) (1997), Computers, Ethics, and Society, Second Edition (New York: Oxford University Press): 303-314.
     • The online version also includes pp. 313-314, containing "The Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics"
     • Friedman & Kahn's main point is that programmers should not design computer systems so that users think that the systems are "intelligent". The April 2004 issue of CACM has a whole section devoted to this:

       Miller, Christopher A. (guest ed.) (2004), "Human-Computer Etiquette: Managing Expectations with Intentional Agents", Communications of the ACM 47(4) (April): 30-61.

   • Johnson, George (2002), "To Err Is Human", New York Times (14 July).
     • Provides an interesting real-life case study of Moor's problem.

   • On the other hand, here are some cautionary counterexamples:
     Neumann, Peter G. (1993), "Modeling and Simulation", Communications of the ACM 36(4) (June): 124.

   • Brachman, Ronald J. (2002), "Systems that Know What They're Doing" [PDF], IEEE Intelligent Systems (November/December): 67-71.
     • Suggests how and why decision-making computers should be able to explain their decisions.

   • Aref, Hassan (2004), "Recipe for an Affordable Supercomputer: Take 1,100 Apples...", Chronicle of Higher Education (5 March): B14.
     • Suggests (but does not discuss) that supercomputers might make decisions that we could not understand:

       "As we construct machines that rival the mental capability of humans, will our analytical skills atrophy? Will we come to rely too much on the ability to do brute-force simulations in a very short time, rather than subject problems to careful analysis? Will we run to the computer before thinking a problem through?...A major challenge for the future of humanity is whether we can also learn to master machines that outperform us mentally."

     • On the notion of "our analytical skills atrophy"ing, you might enjoy the following science-fiction story about a human who rediscovers how to do arithmetic after all arithemetical problems are handled by computers:

       Asimov, Isaac (1957), "The Feeling of Power", reprinted in Clifton Fadiman (ed.), The Mathematical Magpie (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1962): 3-14.

   • Kolata, Gina (2004), "New Studies Question Value of Opening Arteries" The New York Times (21 March): A1,A21.
     • A paragraph deeply embedded in this article suggests that people find it difficult to accept the rational recommendations even of other people. The article reports on evidence that a certain popular and common surgical procedure has just been shown to be of no benefit:
       "Dr. Hillis said he tried to explain the evidence to patients, to little avail. "You end up reaching a level of frustration," he said. "I think they have talked to someone along the line who convinced them that this procedure will save their life." "

3. Moor, James H. (1985), "What Is Computer Ethics?, Metaphilosophy 16(4) (October): 266-275.
   • HTML format

4. LaChat, Michael R. (1986), "Artificial Intelligence and Ethics: An Exercise in the Moral Imagination" [PDF], AI Magazine 7(2): 70-79.
   1. Here are two good follow-up essays; Dietrich argues that we should build robots that will be more moral than we are (and then we should "exit stage left"):
      1. Dietrich, Eric (2001), "Homo sapiens 2.0: why we should build the better robots of our nature" [PDF], Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 13(4) (October): 323-328.

      2. Dietrich, Eric (2007), "After the Humans Are Gone", Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 19(1): 55-67.

   2. Fletcher, Joseph (1972), "Indicators of Humanhood: A Tentative Profile of Man", Hastings Center Report 2(5): 1-4.
      • HTML version
      • On "neo-cortical function" (discussed in the above article), see:
        Cardoso, Silvia Helena (1997), "Specialized Functions of the Cerebral Cortex"

   3. Frankenstein vs. Wiener

   4. A follow-up essay by LaChat, in which he argues that a "moral" robot "will have to possess sentient properties, chiefly pain perception and emotion, in order to develop an empathetic superego which human persons would find necessary and permissible in a morally autonomous AI":

      La Chat, Michael Ray (2003), "Moral Stages in the Evolution of the Artificial Superego: A Cost-Benefits Trajectory", in Iva Smit, Wendell Wallach, & Goerge E. Lasker (eds.), Cognitive, Emotive and Ethical Aspects of Decision Making in Humans and in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. II (Windsor, ON, CANADA: International Institute for Advanced Studies in Systems Research and Cybernetics):18-24.

5. 1. Clarke, Roger (1993), "Asimov's Laws of Robotics: Implications for Information Technology, Part 1", [IEEE] Computer (December): 53-61.
   2. Clarke, Roger (1994), "Asimov's Laws of Robotics: Implications for Information Technology, Part 2", [IEEE] Computer (January): 57-66.

6. Turkle, Sherry (2004), "How Computers Change the Way We Think", Chronicle of Higher Education (January 30): B26-B28.

7. Petersen, Stephen (2007), "The Ethics of Robot Servitude", Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 19(1) (March): 43-54.

8. Sparrow, Robert (2007), "Killer Robots", Journal of Applied Philosophy 24(1): 62-77.

9. Anderson, Michael; & Anderson, Susan Leigh (2007), "Machine Ethics: Creating an Ethical Intelligent Agent", AI Magazine 28(4) (Winter): 15-26.

10. 
    Choi, Charles Q. (2008), "Not Tonight, Dear, I Have to Reboot", Scientific American (March): 94-97.
    • "Is love and marriage with robots an institute you can disparage? Computing pioneer David Levy doesn't think so—he expects people to wed droids by midcentury. Is that a good thing?"