Google is probably one of the most well-known companies across the world. Employing thousands of people, having hundreds of base locations, and serving countless people, Google faces many ethical decisions, which are rarely ever have a black-and-white solution. Ethics by itself is very complicated, and usually varies from person to person. It’s usually based on personal morals and values. In my opinion, ethics is just another way to exemplify personal morals and values. The actions you take and the decisions you make define your ethics. This extends to software engineering. The code you choose to write, the sources you get the code, the ways you handle consequences of code all boil down to your ethics.
In large companies such as Google, ethics gets even more complicated because there are many people involved. One person’s ethics may not align with another, so who makes the decision whether something is ethical or not? Furthermore, sometimes it is hard to foresee all the ethical issues that may arise when a decision is made. I think a mixture of these dilemmas is what caused the ethical issues behind Google’s Streetview feature on Google maps. Many people were upset by this feature because it invaded their privacy, creating an ethical dilemma. Now, going off of ACM’s code of ethics, I would have to agree the streetview feature is in fact unethical. Below are 5 points explicitly stated in the code that I believe Google violated, and how.
1.7 Respect the privacy of others. Given that you are able to see people leaving abortion clinics and bathing nude on rooftops, I would have to agree that Google is invading people’s privacy.
2.4 Accept and provide appropriate professional review. The fact that Google lied at first and blamed this issue on a “rogue engineering” before releasing the truth is far from professional.
2.5 Give comprehensive and thorough evaluations of computer systems and their impacts, including analysis of possible risks. This is getting into the grey region, but given the amount of negative feedback, it’s hard to imagine Google thinking fully about the possible risks and still releasing this feature.
3.4 Ensure that users and those who will be affected by a system have their needs clearly articulated during the assessment and design of requirements; later the system must be validated to meet requirements This ties along with number 2.5 – those who are affected (i.e. the people being shown on the streetview) were not asked how they would be affected, nor were the consequences of appearing on streetview taken into consideration.
3.5 Articulate and support policies that protect the dignity of users and others affected by a computing system. Personally, I think some of the people affected by this computing system may not have had a lot of dignity of what they were doing, and it was not Google’s place to expose them.
Given the amount of initial backlash caused by the streetview feature and the consequences such as burglary targets, I believe there was a massive ethical dilemma caused by this feature. However, I think there are precautions that can be taken that would allow the feature to keep is usability while being more ethical. For example, people can opt to have a specific image of their property shown at all times, so regardless of what they are doing on their property, they will not be seen.
The world of technology is ever expanding. New programs and applications continue to push the walls of what we know, which means the rules of ethics are constantly being questioned. To assume that new applications will never be unethical because there is a “code of ethics” is ignorant. However, it is the job of software engineers to be cognizant of the ethical dilemmas that may arise due to their code and to help create solutions to these issues so that their code remains ethical.