From the readings and in your opinion, are Codes of Conduct necessary for technology companies, organizations, and communities? Do they serve a valid purpose or are they just another form of political correctness?

 

• What do you make of some of the codes of conduct above? What jumps out at you as reasonable and what seems unreasonable?

• What do you make of the recent Google memo controversy? Are the arguments in the memo reasonable or unreasonable? What do you make of the reaction to the memo, the firing of James Damore, and the subsequent lawsuits?

• Should employees be fired for “violations of codes of conduct”? What sort of speech should be tolerated within the workplace? What responsibilities do you believe individuals have in speaking out against certain types of speech or in tolerating different viewpoints?

• Can you separate politics and beliefs from the workplace? Should you?

 

I believe that there are many credible arguments that can be made for and against the types of Codes of Conducts that are becoming more and more prevalent in technology today. I believe that it’s most basic form, we do need Code of Conducts. In a sense, laws are just Codes of Conducts for civilized society. Code of Conducts created by companies are simply an extension on this, and they aim to shape the behavior of the people who use their platform or work for their company. I think that companies have every right to create and enforce these types of agreements as I don’t think they should be required to host/support ideas or people that they fundamentally disagree with supporting. I think the issues with these types of Codes of Conduct comes when only a small percentage of people are dictating what should or should not be allowed. Similarly, it seems that based on some of the articles this week, many of these new Codes of Conduct go somewhat overboard on what they restrict. In a sense, I understand that this is most likely because it is better to go too far rather than not far enough with trying to protect people, however this can still create issues. Although I believe that these Code of Conducts are important and useful, I found the line, “You are not entitled to a change of perspective in somebody else” to be pretty powerful and convincing in arguing against these types of codes. These articles really convinced me that one of the most important types of diversity is the diversity of ideas and it can do more than good trying to restrict ideas and shape actions. All in all, it seems as if these Codes of Conducts are well intended, but may sometimes go too far.

 

One of the biggest cases as it relates to these types of Codes of Conducts recently was the case with James Damore’s firing from Google. When it comes to this case, I find myself sympathising with both sides of the issue. It seems to me that the memo Damore wrote, while controversial, was not written with ill intentions in mind. It seems like he was simply trying to express his opinion while trying to remain as measured and reasonable as possible. I did not get the sense that he was trying to hurt anyone with what he wrote. I believe that it is important to be able to express new ideas that may go against what many currently believe, even if the idea seems rather extreme like in this case. On the other side, I believe that Google was still in the right in deciding to fire him. Google has every right to dictate what their image is going to be and who they employ, and clearly they thought that this memo would hurt their image as it goes against the companies values and beliefs. Because of this, I do not fault Google for firing him at all. I think that companies are well within their bounds to fire employees for violating codes of conduct that they enter into when they begin their employment. As such, I think it is best to try to separate politics from the workplace as much as possible. Unless what you are doing goes directly and significantly against your politics/moral belief, you should try to avoid mixing politics with your work.

 

From the readings, what is the controversy surrounding the H-1B Visa program? What are the arguments for and against the expansion of the program? After examining the topic, where do you stand on the issues surrounding the program?

 

• If you are in favor of expanding the use of H-1B Visa guest workers, explain why it is beneficial for the United States. How would you respond to concerns about lowering of wages or loss of jobs for US citizens? Shouldn’t the country prioritize Americans first?

• If you are against the use of H-1B Visa guest workers, explain why it is is not necessary or potentially harmful to the United States. How would you respond to the idea that America is a nation of immigrants and that these guest workers are an effective means of tackling the problem of a tech talent shortage? What do you say to some of your classmates who will be applying to these programs?

• In either case, discuss whether or not you are concerned with competition due to foreign workers or possibly outsourcing. Should the US curtail programs like the H-1B Visa or rescind DACA in order to prioritize Americans? Or should it live up to its image as the land of opportunity?

• If you are non-US citizen, discuss how these issues impact you and your future plans as it relates to residency and employment in America.

 

In today’s political climate, few issues are more polarizing than the issue of how to deal with immigration. At the heart of this issue is the H-1B Visa program, which is a program that was created in the early nineties to allow highly skilled workers to come to America to get a job. These workers must hold a bachelor’s degree that would allow them to get a job in a complex field, and they are sponsored by businesses who enter a lottery to acquire one of these H-1B visas. After reading this weeks articles and getting a better understanding on the topic, I now am able to see the positives and negatives of this program.

 

The arguments in favor of the H-1B program are obvious and very convincing. First of all, this program allows us to gain more bright and talented people in our country. It is hard for anyone to argue against this point. H-1B visas allow us to take in more of these people, which in turn improves diversity, inclusion, and innovation in the United States. All of these people must be talented, and they use their skills to help increase the sales and profits of American companies, which improves our economy. Clearly, this is a very good thing for all Americans. Another big positive is that these immigrants often pay high tuition at American schools, which allow our schools to continue to grow and improve. Obviously, this program offers many positive things for our country.

 

On the flip side, the H-1B visa program is not without its problems. Visa receivers are often paid at lower wages than Americans are in the exact same position. Because of this, many argue that this system is largely a scheme for big businesses to reduce wages and improve profits. I thought the numbers presented in the article that argued against the program were striking, specifically the numbers about the average wage difference between American and immigrant software engineers at Facebook (138K vs. 80K). Many also argue that this program undercuts Americans by taking away jobs and giving them to foreigners rather than Americans.

 

After learning more about the issue, I would say that I am in favor of the system, although I do recognize that it has its flaws. I think that the diversity and talented people that this program provides makes it worth it for our country to have. In my opinion, the positives outweigh the negatives of the program. I believe that some of the negatives of this program can be fixed if we change some of our immigration laws so companies can’t really exploit this program and we can still allow people to come in and help improve our country. I don’t think we should be okay with these skilled workers going to Canada instead of the United States, as laid out in one of the articles.

 

As someone who is about to enter the software field after graduation, I would say that I am only slightly concerned about the increased competition with foreign workers. It may affect my job search, but I think the only thing anyone can really do about it is be confident in your own abilities. One thing that really frustrates me today as it relates to this program is people demonizing foreign workers for using this program.  I vehemently disagree with people who try to put the blame on immigrants for using this system as they are just trying to better their life just like everyone else. If anything, people who have an issue with this program should be mad at the businesses who are exploiting it rather than the workers themselves. I believe that this program should continue and the US should still try to live up to its image as the land of opportunity, but I understand that some changes may be necessary.

 

Where do you see your career headed? Do you plan on staying with one company or do you envision moving from job to job?

Is there such thing as company loyalty? Should you be loyal to your company and should your company be loyal to you? How do things such as non-competes and trade secrets influence your opinion? Are these contracts fair? Are they ethical? On the flip side, is job hopping an ethical practice?

 

As I begin my final year of schooling before moving on to the real world, I am not really sure what my future has in store for me as far as my career goes. I don’t have any concrete plans, but I do think that I have some sense of an idea of how I’d like my career to go. In general, I would say that I do envision moving from job to job as I start my career. I believe that going from job to job every few years will help me continue to learn and develop my skills as a software developer. Similarly, switching jobs every now and again will prevent me from getting pigeon holed into one specific type of software development. I would say that switching jobs can also help one become better at interviewing, which is important for career advancement. Although I think I will probably move from job to job, I would have no problem with staying with just one company if I enjoyed what I was doing and who I was working with.

 

When it comes to company loyalty, I think it does exist, however it is a lot more prevalent for an employee towards the company rather than the other way around. Company loyalty is a good thing to have because it means that you like your job and care about your work, but I don’t really think that it is something that everyone must have. Company loyalty seems to be a one-sided relationship, as shown by the stack ranking system of Microsoft and Yahoo where managers have to essentially fire people even if they are satisfied with their performance. Clearly, there isn’t much loyalty there. Company loyalty can be a positive feeling for someone to have, but I don’t think it’s necessary.

 

Although I think that having company loyalty should be a choice for a person to make, it seems as if non disclosure / non compete agreements attempt to legal require loyalty. I understand why these types of agreements exist, as there is a lot of sensitive information that can be worth a lot of money in the tech industry. I don’t blame companies for wanting to have these types of agreements, but I think that they should only really be used when absolutely necessary. I don’t really think that companies should issue blanket NDAs with every single engineer they hire, but rather just the higher ups who will really be dealing with important information. Similarly, I don’t believe that these types of agreements are an indication of mistrust in everyone they hire, but rather they are an acknowledgement that there is a very small number of people who may have bad intentions and it is better to be safe than sorry when hiring people.

 

I think that non disclosure / non compete agreements are ethical, but not necessarily fair in all cases. These types of agreements can put people in tough positions as far as future career options go. Because of this, it is very important to have a full grasp on the type of agreement you are making with a company.

 

From the readings and from your experience, what exactly is a hacker? That is, what are the key characteristics of the hacker archetype? Do you identify with these attributes? That is, would you consider yourself a hacker? What is your reaction to this characterization?

When I think about the term “hacker”, I think of a very skilled computer programmer who uses their skills to exploit bugs in existing systems. Right or wrong, I think that the term “hacker” has a negative connotation. In my view, I think of a hacker as someone who tries their best to remain anonymous and typically has malicious intentions. I think my view on this term has been shaped by how hackers are portrayed in entertainment as well as the news, such as the Russian hackers in the most recent election. In that case, the hackers committed a crime and tried to do it anonymously, so it goes right along with my existing view.

The articles for this week had some very interesting insight on hackers and made me think about how I view hackers. I thought that the articles about branding software development as “engineering” had some fair points against this designation. Typical engineering disciplines require strict rules and oversight, but software development does not. Similarly, it can be argued that the term “computer science” itself is too broad as it encompasses many different types of professions. As such, software developers may need a new title, and it seems like some are trying to make it “hacker”. I think it is very interesting how it seems as if Facebook and other notable figures are trying to change the connotation that many have with the word. The Facebook article notes that hacking is just “building something quickly or testing the boundaries of what can be done” and that hacking can be done with with either good or bad intentions in mind. I thought it was really interesting that Facebook seems to be so committed to changing the “hacker” connotation that they renamed their managerial style to the Hacker Way.

I think that the most realistic view of hackers and their stereotypes in society was presented by Sean Parker. Parker acknowledges some of the characteristics of hackers that many people many not like, such as the fact that many hackers are anti establishment and often use their skills for personal gains. Despite this, Parker notes how they are great problem solvers and have a strong desire to discover solutions. These qualities can then in turn be used to help out some of the biggest problems that the world faces, which is why we see so much philanthropy coming from major figures in the tech community. I thought this article was the most persuasive in trying to change the narrative on how hackers are viewed because it accepted some of the characteristics of hackers but described how these traits can actually be used for good.

Although the connotation with the term “hacker” is changing, I still wouldn’t really consider myself one. The negative connotation of hacker is too ingrained in my head for me to want to be one. I believe that this course is important because we will hopefully learn about the issues that many “hackers” may avoid, such as the security and privacy of others. While the term “hacker” may soon begin to mean something much more positive due to the efforts of people like Sean Parker and Mark Zuckerberg, I am not yet ready to accept that characterization.

 

How do you normally determine if an action is right or wrong? What sort of ethical or moral framework do you depend on or utilize? What sort of things do you consider?

 

When I need to make a decision about whether something is right or wrong, the thing that I rely upon most is my instinctual gut feeling. I believe that this gut feeling determination is based on an ethical framework that is established when we are younger and then hold onto as we get older. Like most others, my parents tried to pass on some of their own moral framework to me by directing me on what is right and wrong when I was younger. I would say that this is probably one of the biggest factors in my ethical framework. The morals that parents pass on to children can differ greatly from one person to another, which is a big reason why people have different views on what is right or wrong.

 

One thing to consider when determining if an action is right or wrong is the legality of an action. Laws are established in order to create some kind of uniform guide on how people in a civilized society should conduct themselves. At its core, a law is just a uniform decision by a society that a specific action is wrong. As such, it can be a good thing to consider when deciding on the morality of an action. On the other hand, it may not always be a good thing to only consider the legality of an action alone because some laws may be unjust, such as the laws that used to exist regarding slavery and women’s rights. Laws may go against a person’s religious beliefs or morals, so they may not weigh laws as heavily when determining if an action is right or wrong. Because of these issues, I think the best thing to do when determining if an action is right or wrong is to consider the legality of the action, but do not base your entire decision on that factor.

 

Another extremely important consideration when determining if an action is right or wrong is to think about how the action will affect others. I would say that in a very general sense I agree with the utilitarianist idea that an action is good if it helps others and bad if it hurts others. I think this is a pretty good but rather simple way of thinking about things. If an action is going to harm someone else, then it is most likely wrong. There is an issue, however, with this idea because you can have a situation such as the famous Trolley Problem where harming one person would help many others. Because there are situations like this, you can’t apply this utilitarian idea in every situation. I believe you should consider it in each case, but not rely upon it soley.

 

All in all, I believe it is important to weigh a variety of different factors when determining if an action is right or wrong. Morality is not a black and white issue, so it is rare that an action will be entirely right or entirely wrong. I believe that people should take many factors into account, and ultimately make decisions when thinking about these issues as a whole.

 

Hello, my name is Joey Spencer. I am a senior Computer Science major at the University of Notre Dame. I am originally from Mansfield, Massachusetts, which is a town about 30 miles south of Boston. I come from a family of 5 where I am the middle child. I have an older sister named Pam who graduated college last year and a younger sister named Lindsey who will be beginning college this year. In my free time, I like listening to music and watching TV. I am a big fan of the New England Patriots and the Boston Bruins, so I also like to watch sports.

 

When I entered college, I wasn’t really sure what I wanted to major in. Deciding what to major in always seemed like a big decision to make for me as a then-18 year old, so I didn’t want to rush the decision. As such, I was a Biology major in my first semester freshman year, but I wasn’t really set on that. As the semester went on and I began to realize that Biology wasn’t really for me, I started to realize that I would most likely want to major in something in the College of Engineering. I switched into the College of Engineering for my second semester, and it was in the Introduction to Engineering course where I discovered my interest in coding. I had never coded before that class, so my first exposure to coding was learning Matlab. I ended up liking coding so much, that I eventually decided to become a Computer Science major. Looking back on it, I am very happy with my decision as I have enjoyed my experience with the Notre Dame Computer Science curriculum so far. Some of my favorite courses that I have taken within the Computer Science Department are Software Engineering and Cryptography. While it hasn’t always been easy, I am all in all happy that I am studying Computer Science.

 

I am really looking forward to this course and hope to get a lot out of it. This course seems as if it will be unlike any other Computer Science class I have taken so far as it does not involve any coding. Despite this, I do think and hope that I will learn a lot. There are a lot of big issues that are facing society, and many of them relate to technology. These issues include things such as government surveillance, automation, and artificial intelligence. As a result of these issues facing society, it is very likely that we will all be grappling with these issues when we graduate and begin our careers in software. I hope that with the course we can all become more informed about these issues so that we will be able to make intelligent and thoughtful decisions about them. If everyone who deals with these big issues is fully informed and conscientious, then hopefully decisions will be made that will benefit society, not harm it. Another thing that I am looking forward to as it relates to this course is hearing the viewpoints of others. People have very diverse backgrounds, and will likely have views that I may not necessarily agree with or just haven’t heard before. I think it will be good to be able to hear varying viewpoints, as it will hopefully allow me to better understand the issues we will be discussing.