1 / 14

Toward A Reasonable Programmer Standard

Toward A Reasonable Programmer Standard. Responsibility and Negligence in Software Design. Overview of Presentation. It’s an ethical issue – ask questions; make comments Why do we need a definition? New technologies = new legal issues Software, though not new, is applied in new areas

kass
Download Presentation

Toward A Reasonable Programmer Standard

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Toward A Reasonable Programmer Standard Responsibility and Negligence in Software Design

  2. Overview of Presentation • It’s an ethical issue – ask questions; make comments • Why do we need a definition? • New technologies = new legal issues • Software, though not new, is applied in new areas • What to think when software causes harm?

  3. Why a Definition? • Objection: you gain nothing by stating a definition • Objection: I know in advance that your definition is wrong • Objection: Standard of negligence doesn’t apply to software

  4. The Law and Negligence • “Failure to be sufficiently careful in a matter in which one has a moral responsibility to exercise care...” Online Ethics Center: The Online Ethics Glossary Center. (2003, March 21). • Classic example: leaving a rake on your walkway – kills the mailman • Failing to shovel snow; doctors who leave surgery tools in a patient; etc.

  5. When is a person negligent? • The reasonable person standard: “A phrase used to denote a hypothetical person who exercises qualities of attention, knowledge; intelligence, and judgment that society requires of its members for the protection of their own interest and the interests of others.”National Association for Court Management: Glossary of Terms. • Invokes different requirements in different societal roles – the reasonable doctor is very different from the reasonable homeowner • What is a reasonable programmer?

  6. Test Case 1: Freeware • Software is distributed freely and with a carefully worded license • What’s the worst that can happen? Computer crashes -> data loss • Holding a programmer responsible for the data is too demanding – not everything is negligent

  7. Test Case 2: Free Algorithm • Programmer posts implementation of a sorting algorithm • Algorithm doesn’t work on negative numbers • Company uses algorithm in air traffic control software • Moral intuition: company’s fault, not the algorithm programmer; notion of direct responsibility

  8. Test Case 2: Ethical Analysis • Company had contractual and moral obligation to test their software sufficiently • Programmer had no intention of using algorithm in critical environment – no obligation • Conclusion: expectations of performance derive from moral and contractual obligation

  9. Test Case 3a: Virus Junkie • A programmer Q gets high off of creating viruses • Q unwittingly unleashes virus, costing U.S. companies millions • Should Q be held responsible?

  10. Test Case 3b: Router • A properly functioning antivirus program at company C would have stopped Q’s virus • Is C in any way responsible for the harm caused by the virus?

  11. Test Case 4: Therac-25 • Atomic Energy of Canada Limited: faulty software leads to overdose of radiation -> death • AECL probably was ‘sufficiently careful’ – post-accident review showed many hours of testing • Contrasted with bug that fails to save internet books mark: serious consequences important to definition, as is amount of testing proportional to potential harms

  12. Test Case 5: Patriot Missile • Programming flaw -> system operates over 20 hours = failure -> military issues patch, deployment is slow • Barracks destroyed, software patch arrives the next day • Raytheon’s fault? Testing revealed the flaw • Army’s fault? Slow deployment of patch, vague memo on proper operation, project extended beyond intended lifetime • New definition: direct causation of flaw, or indirect causation of conditions that lead to flaw

  13. Final Definition • Unreasonable, direct failure to be sufficiently careful in software design and testing, or causation of such conditions leading to serious harm, wherein a programmer has a moral obligation to do so from a contractual or otherwise reasonable expectation.

  14. Test Case 6: More Viruses • Lots of subtle issues, what can we reasonably expect from each party?: • Obviously, punish those who create virus • OS designer let flaw propagate? • Owners and designers of networks that allow propagation? • User who downloads attachment with subject “Haven’t heard from you in a while!”?

More Related