The rules [moral responsibility for computing artifacts]
2011-05-01

Summary form only given. The Poynter Center for the Study of Ethics and American Institutions held a workshop on 3-4 March 2010 on the topic of "Ethical Guidance for Research and Application of Pervasive and Autonomous Information Technology." (PAIT) The workshop of about 40 people was supported by the National Science Foundation (grant number SES-0848097)[1]. Ken Pimple of the Poynter Center was the director of the workshop, and Brian Schrag, also of the Center, was the codirector. During the meeting, Ken suggested a set of principles that could be used to better understand PAIT. Keith Miller was one of the participants interested in working on principles. However, Keith thought that establishing principles for computing artifacts in general (not just PAIT) was necessary before more specific principles for PAIT could be established. To that end, Keith starting writing what he hoped would be a short document, entitled "Moral Responsibility for Computing Artifacts." Early on, he asked Deborah Johnson, Chuck Huff and Joe Herkert (all of whom attended PAIT) for their opinions on the first drafts. Not long after the PAIT workshop, Keith sent a draft of what he joking called the "manifesto" (a joke that referenced the Manifesto for Agile Software Development [1]) to Ken. For several months, the number of people adding suggestions to various drafts of the document grew. By May 2010, in addition to Chuck, Deborah, Joe, Ken and Keith, the group included Colin Allen, Helen Nissenbaum, Noel Sharkey and Wendell Wallach (all of whom attended PAIT) and Jim Moor. On 30 May 2010, Keith sent out Version 19 of the document to the entire list of PAIT attendees, and on 28 July 2010 Keith sent out Version 22 to 77 people, many of whom had not attended PAIT. The plan is to allow the document to evolve as more and more people are invited to comment on the document, and to "sign on." The first version tried to set out "principles" for moral responsibility for computing artifacts, and included two principles. The next version talked about "rules" instead of principles, and there were three rules. The current version (Version 27) includes five rules [3]. In addition to the rules and their explanation, the document includes "meta-rules" about how the document can change. The document is designed to be a continuing work-in-progress, under the control of people willing to sign on to the document. The process uses a "coordinator" who is in charge of receiving suggestions for changes, combining these suggestions into new versions, and sending the versions out to the people currently "signed on." In order to simplify citations to the document, the "signers" are now called "The Ad Hoc Committee on Responsible Computing." By the nature of their work, academics in general and philosophers in particular do not always emphasize things on which they agree. This document started as an attempt to contravene that trend, at least for a moment, in order to make a statement about moral responsibility for computing artifacts. Because The Rules are not exactly a code of ethics, there are questions about their authority. The Rules are not a wiki, but they are a collaborative, Web-based project. The issue of responsibility is central to The Rules, but that concept is controversial in general, and it is particularly controversial with respect to computing. In this panel, the participants will discuss these aspects of The Rules, and its effect so far on the signers and others.