Week ThEthics

    Week three focused on ethics, specifically ethics in emerging technologies and the frameworks to navigate them. I’ll reflect more deeply on that later.

    For this week, I was supposed to revisit a study tip I mentioned struggling with last week. However, the Study Techniques website link did not include that option. Instead, I chose to review the section on critical thinking. This was a meaningful choice, since critical thinking is not only practical for academic work but also for making better decisions in everyday life.

    Thinking critically begins with examining an issue and reflecting on your own perspective. Ask yourself: Why do I believe this? How do I know it’s true? Write down your initial thoughts, then move on to the next step: seeking out other viewpoints. Consider the evidence others present, especially if their opinions contradict your own. By evaluating all sides of an issue, you gain a more comprehensive understanding of the issue.

    Finally, after weighing the evidence and perspectives, take a stance that seems the most reasonable. Critical thinking doesn’t mean avoiding decisions; it means making informed ones.

Ethics Reflections:

Reflection on "Ethics in the Age of AI" - Davos 2024:

    Watching the World Economic Forum’s session Ethics in the Age of AI left me both curious and uneasy. The conversation raised pressing questions: Will robots replace our jobs? Will algorithmic predictions in hiring or criminal justice lock in past inequalities? Is privacy already a thing of the past in the era of surveillance capitalism? And will deepfakes and disinformation further erode democracy? These are not distant hypotheticals; they’re challenges unfolding now.

    Beyond the practical concerns, the panel pushed deeper into what feels like the heart of the matter: Will technology change what it means to be human? Questions about authenticity, dignity, and presence lingered in my mind. For example, could resurrecting celebrities through AI for new roles really honor their art, or does it strip away the authenticity of performance? Could dating apps that match us with “perfect partners” rob us of the messy, human experiences that shape our relationships? And what about the concept of “virtual immortality,” where all your data is used to construct a digital version of you that continues interacting with others even after you’ve gone? Fascinating, yes, but also unsettling, it risks confusing simulation with presence.

    I find myself imagining both the promise and the peril of these scenarios. If automation were to eliminate the need for most jobs, some people would lose their purpose and dignity, but I think I’d embrace the chance. I’d spend time creating, reading, reflecting, skateboarding, exercising, and living more fully. In that sense, I might feel more human than ever. However, when it comes to algorithmic decision-making, I worry that it would steal something essential: our ability to make unexpected choices, defy the odds, and shape our own futures.

    Privacy feels like a battle already lost. Data tracking happens invisibly, and while we may cling to the illusion of privacy, surveillance capitalism makes it harder and harder to believe in it. Likewise, democracy will only endure if people learn to spot misinformation and think critically. I don’t believe censorship is the answer, but education and transparency, flagging manipulated content, and teaching media literacy could help.

    Ultimately, I find it difficult to shake the notion that technology is already transforming the way we connect. Social media creates an illusion of community, but it doesn’t replace the authenticity of face-to-face presence, the subtle cues, the mistakes, even the pheromones that make us human. Unless virtual reality one day perfectly mirrors the physical world, I fear we’ll continue to mistake digital interaction for connection, while losing something precious in the process.

    In the end, the session didn’t give me answers, but it gave me sharper questions. And maybe that’s the point: to keep asking, and to keep reflecting on what it means to stay human in an age where technology constantly pushes that boundary.

Reflection on the ACM Code of Ethics:

    What stood out most to me in the ACM Code of Ethics was the hierarchy of responsibility—from general principles, to professional responsibilities, to leadership principles. At its core, the code reminds me that computing is not just about technology, but about people.

    The general principles set the tone: our contributions should benefit society and human well-being. That means being intentional about avoiding harm, whether that’s protecting private information, being transparent about conflicts of interest, or ensuring fairness by not discriminating. Even something as simple as giving proper credit matters, because it acknowledges the community of thinkers and builders who make progress possible. The emphasis on privacy and confidentiality struck me too; technology handles so much sensitive information that respecting boundaries and consent feels non-negotiable.

    The section on professional responsibilities hit a little closer to home. It’s about more than following the rules; it’s about respecting the standards of the field and the people we serve. What stood out was the reminder that if I break a rule, even one I consider unjust, I must still accept the consequences. That feels like both a challenge and a reality check. Another piece that resonated with me was the call to accept and offer constructive criticism. Growth in computing, like in life, requires humility.

    I also liked the encouragement to share knowledge with society, raising public awareness about computing issues. It reminded me that expertise isn’t something to hoard; it’s something to use for the greater good. The point about not misusing access to data feels especially relevant today, as data is both powerful and vulnerable. Developing secure systems and refusing to proceed with harmful ones underlines that ethics is active; it’s about making hard decisions, not just following checklists.

    Finally, the leadership principles spoke to the ripple effect of influence. Leaders are reminded to prioritize public good, improve the quality of life for colleagues, and help others grow. To me, this ties everything together: ethics in computing isn’t just about personal conduct, but about shaping cultures and communities that uphold these values.

    What I take away is this: being an ethical computing professional is about maintaining constant awareness of people, their impact, and the choices we make. It’s about striking a balance between responsibility and humility, and remembering that behind every line of code, there are human lives that may be affected.

Reflection on The Many Many Things a Computer Scientist Needs to Know:

    After reading "What Every Computer Science Major Should Know," it is clear to me that computer scientists must build and continually expand a vast arsenal of knowledge. Because technology evolves at a rapid pace, this arsenal cannot remain static; it must grow and adapt alongside the field.

    The article posed several important questions, and while each could have many possible answers, a few key points stood out to me.

    To succeed as a computer science major, students should develop strong skills in presenting ideas, whether through tools like PowerPoint, Keynote, or LaTeX.

    To get a good job, it is essential to build a portfolio of projects and showcase them on GitHub or similar platforms. A strong resume is still necessary, but real-world contributions, especially to open-source projects, can demonstrate ability even more effectively.

    Maintaining lifelong employment requires both technical and communication skills. Computer scientists must be able to explain complex ideas to non-programmers, and they should also have a solid grasp of core data structures, including hash tables, linked lists, trees, binary search trees, and both directed and undirected graphs.

    Entering graduate school demands a solid understanding of theory, since it provides the foundation for advanced research.

    Finally, benefiting society requires developing a defensive programming mindset. Programmers need to think critically about how their code might be attacked or misused and design with security in mind.

    Overall, the article reinforced the idea that success in computer science requires not only breadth and depth of technical knowledge but also adaptability, communication, and responsibility.

Reflection on CSUMB CS Online Code of Integrity:

    The CSUMB CS Online Code of Integrity clearly states that while collaboration through sharing ideas and strategies is encouraged, all coding must be done independently. Rule 1 emphasizes that submitting another person’s work is plagiarism unless explicitly instructed and properly cited. Rule 2 prohibits sharing code with others, reminding me to protect my own work as well. Rule 3 requires giving credit for any assistance received, including AI or peer advice, as long as it does not involve actual code. Overall, the Code emphasizes the importance of honesty, responsibility, and trust, thereby ensuring fairness and preserving the value of our learning community.