Technological Advances and Ethical Dilemma

https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2018/06/28/who-should-get-to-decide-whats-ethical-as-technology-advances/

The article discusses what options we as humans have to safeguard ourselves against unethical usage of technology and who gets to make decisions regarding it. There are many unanswered ethical questions regarding artificial intelligence, virtual reality, medical breakthrough, and many others. Many for-profit companies and academic institutions come up with new technologies every now and then that have the influence to impact the lives of many around the world. The question is how do we prevent these technologies from interfering with our moral and ethical standards. We could rely on scientists but their research can easily take several months if not years. Inventors and entrepreneurs cannot be totally trusted either as there are profiteers who are willing to sacrifice anything for their self-benefits. We normally expect government regulators to pass laws to keep things in check but regulators are often not experts in the field. Mark Zuckerberg’s congressional testimony regarding user data protection by Facebook proved this. Forming neutral external organizations whose responsibilities are to specialize in tech ethnics, and oversee tech companies, and make ethical decisions for the general public sounds tempting but who is going to appoint who? The author comes up with three suggestions to solve the ethical issues regarding technology:

1.       Understanding the consequences of the technologies we are already using

2.       Making information known to the public so that the public will make educated decisions based on what they know

3.       Requiring companies to dedicate their resources to make sure they better understand the consequences of their technologies

Technology helping people with diabilities

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/baig/2018/09/10/technology-improves-people-disabilities-firms-respond-moral-legal-demands/835232002/

The article discusses how new tech products are making life easier for people with disabilities.  The article mentions a Douglas Wakefield, a 76 years old blind person who is learning to write apps for the iPhone. He uses Microsoft’s Seeing AI app in his iPhone to distinguish one grocery from another. He can watch Netflix with audio descriptions together with his wife who is also blind. Some of his most useful tech devices include Amazon Echo, Google Home and Apple HomePod which he can tell to switch on household lights by voice. Inclusion of these features encouraged by tech companies’ desire to inclusiveness and their need to follow legal and market requirements. The article mentions that companies need to adhere to state and federal laws such as the 1990 Americans Disabilities Act and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act “which requires the federal government to make electronic and information technology accessible to people with disabilities.”

Cognition Crisis

            https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/322768.php

Technology indeed can have negative physical and emotional impacts on your life. For example, I uninstalled social media apps like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram from my phone because they were interfering with my daily life. They are addictive and time consuming. The article mentions that spending just a few minutes on Instagram could actually make you less productive and the small light reflecting form your TV could prevent you from falling asleep.  The negative mental impacts technology can have on you include but not limited to depression, anxiety, attention deficit, impact on productivity, relationships, compassion, and empathy. According to Gazzaley, the author of The Distracted Mind, humans forage for information like animals do for food. As such, avoiding technology altogether would not be a solution. I agree with Gazzaley that we must seek ways to make the best use of technology while refraining from using it excessively. Gazzaley suggests three solutions – the first is to control ourselves, the second to make tech companies accountable and third create technology that severs the well being of humans. 

Unethical Persuasion Techniques

https://www.vox.com/2018/8/8/17664580/persuasive-technology-psychology

This article in Vox contains an interview with a psychologist about technology companies using deliberate persuasive techniques to make children get addicted to technology. The article refers to Common Sense Media which states that children today have ten times more screen time than they did in 2011 and spend six hours and forty minutes on average using technology. I, myself, have noticed my young teenage cousins using their phones more than we did ten years ago. Whereas we spent playing and wrestling on the ground for hours, they do so on their technology tools today thanks to unethical persuasion techniques used by tech corporations for their own business interests. These companies hire mental health experts, psychologists and other behavioral scientists to create products that are addictive. We need not go further but look around ourselves to find out whether they are being successful or not. The forced addiction, as I would like to call it, is certainly an alarming issue affecting the lives of millions of people, both young and old, worldwide.

Apple's Ethical Issues

https://www.smartcompany.com.au/industries/information-technology/a-hostage-situation-why-apple-wont-address-its-unethical-supply-chain/

The article explains the working conditions of factory workers hired by Apple’s contractors in Asia where human rights, labor standards and environmental safety issues are prevalent. Apple has been accused by critics of the basis on which it operates: “an arm’s-length morality that imposes responsibility on others.” This encourages the suppliers in turn to shift their burdens on low-wage workers in unsafe working environments. Apple being one of the very richest and most profitable companies in the world, it is appropriate for the authors to claim that Apple should be held accountable for the ‘sweatshops’ under its suppliers. The authors make a great point by mentioning that Apple’s boards only focus on returning cash to shareholders who never supported the development of the company in the first place. I believe not just technology giants like Apple but also other major corporations in the developed world should be monitored closely for their moral and ethical standpoints in regards to working conditions of factory workers in the under developed world.