It is already the end of this course and while i am glad to have had the opportunity to talk about ethical issues in technology, I am excited for the end of college. The course was a great chance to discuss with my peers major issues regarding emerging technologies. I see now how vital it is to question the ethical impact of so many of the topics people brought up in their presentations and blog posts. I found much of the military issues to be quite interesting. The automated missiles and drone topics were the most memorable to me because there was lives at stake in them. If these types of weapons are not carefully approached with ethical reasoning, major issues regarding safety can arise.
The tech company side was also a interesting thing to explore. Automated cars being such a hot topic in many of the big companies minds (Uber and Google to name a few) it was interesting to see other college students thinking on the issue and have a place to voice my opinion on the subject as well. I found this class to be invaluable due to its unique structures which allowed me to take time to consider issues bigger than myself.
25 Comments
Josh Constine wrote an article entitled Did you save the cat or the kid? that addressed the real trolley problem that software engineers working toward autonomous cars are facing. MIT has created a game that Constine linked called the Moral Machine. It confronts users with the kind of problems that are ethically challenging such as , “Should pedestrians be saved instead of passengers who knowingly got into an inherently dangerous speeding metal box? Should we rely on the air bags and other safety features in a crash instead of swerving into unprotected pedestrians?”. I found it to be a really great resource for people to use to understand how difficult this future of self-driving cars will be to code. These decisions have to be addressed and it is quite hard to decide which is the most just. Constine wrote, “ Thinking about these tough questions is more important than ever since engineers are coding this type of decision making into autonomous vehicles right now.” I could not agree more. After spending 10 minutes looking through the decisions the Moral Machine made me choose, I do not really know how one will be able to make the right choice every time. My brain would like to find a way to rationalize a correct answer to this question but it seems too situational to concretely answer. With so many companies trying to create ways to make cars autonomous, I fear that without a great answer to this question; one of these scenarios may occur and spark major controversy in the morality of this tech. The general public will each interpret the situation differently and it may halt progress due to muddy ethics at the get go. I am quite excited about the concept of being able to not have to drive myself places. There is a lot of time that is wasted because of the commutes people must take everyday. I think that being able to use that time will increase productivity for many people as well as free up time we did not have otherwise.
Link
This week for my blog I wanted to dive deep into how the NSA needs to “Act Now” when it comes to data security and preparedness for quantum computing. Earlier in the week I was given the pleasure of reading an article by Jamie Condliffe, a writer for Gizmodo Magazine. In the article he references a statement done by the head of the NSA saying that they need to “Act Now” to ensure government data security in the coming years. This while not in direct reference to quantum computing, notes the first time the government has bumped up security since theses new fangled machines started getting more robust. I found this article to be pretty interesting and clear to understand how MIT’s computer is switching up the quantum computer space. The scalability is so important when it comes to these sorts of things so I was very impressed to see that they are thinking about new ways to approach this new computing style. I would have liked to learn more about this computer and how it really works because there was not a lot of information about it in the article itself. I know that MIT has published information on the computer so I will have to check that out and blog about that in the coming weeks. Overall, I think that it is great that MIT is doing something different when it comes to quantum computers and I hope to see more great news coming about from this computer and the team at MIT. I feel many thing when faced with news like this. I think many americans had suspicions that the government had this kind of power to monitor us, however when it becomes a reality it is far scarier. I have found myself second guessing what I do on my smartphone because of fear that I am being watched. While in all reality the government could probably see exactly what I am doing on my laptop just the same, I feel quite uneasy when it comes to my personal data security. I have also found that the article citing WhatsApp as a secure means of messaging is misleading to the consumer. WhatsApp is an application that was purchased by Facebook and is not as well trusted as Signal in terms of secure messaging. I would argue that your data is less likely to get in the hands of the government but you are just handing that information over to Facebook. I do understand that some would feel more safe in that case but this is one of those ‘pick your poison’ kind of situations. Link Link
This week I read an article from the website Digital Trends on Quantum computing. It was written by Brad Bourque. Brad has written many reviews on computer parts and seems to be knowledgeable on computers and tech parts. This article in particular was shining light on the recent news of MIT’s five atom quantum computer that they are developing. The fear of encryption was at the forefront of this article. Bourque talked about how encryption in its current form often comes down to factoring massive numbers. The reason for this is that factoring at that scale can not be brute forced in any realistic amount of time. He then touched on how quantum computers will dwarf the amount of time it will take to brute force the factoring in comparison to the best supercomputers. RSA in particular is the encryption that is most threatened by the innovation of quantum computers.This security algorithm was developed in 1977 and relies on two keys: one that is public and one that is private. The way the message is decrypted is by factoring the product of the two prime number. MIT’s current system is able to decrypt numbers of lengths up to 15 digits. This is quite the feat for a quantum computer. The ability to do this is impressive but the system they are developing is also modular. The ability to build a scalable quantum computer is far more useful because it makes the system more future proof than one that is not scalable.While MIT’s computer can not break RSA yet it is making large steps toward making this encryption model obsolete. I found this article to be pretty interesting and clear to understand how MIT’s computer is switching up the quantum computer space. The scalability is so important when it comes to these sorts of things so I was very impressed to see that they are thinking about new ways to approach this new computing style. I would have liked to learn more about this computer and how it really works because there was not a lot of information about it in the article itself. I know that MIT has published information on the computer so I will have to check that out and blog about that in the coming weeks. Overall, I think that it is great that MIT is doing something different when it comes to quantum computers and I hope to see more great news coming about from this computer and the team at MIT. Link
This week I read an article from The New Yorker about how companies have begun banding together to work on encryption that will be stronger than quantum computing. Companies like Amazon, Microsoft, and the like are aware of the risk that they are taking by not making precautions from this new computing reality on the horizon. I found the article to be very interesting because it framed the silicon valley companies as allies where most of the time they are seen as eachothers competition. It just goes to show that when there is a common goal, more heads is better than less. The article then goes into a term called Y2Q or “Years to Quantum. The current standard is that it will be standardized by 2026 and by then all of these companies want to have set a new standard for encryption. Google has allowed some of these newer algorithms to be tested on a small subset in the chrome browser to test it. Like I said before, it is great to see big companies working together to get something good for data security’s sake. Google’s chrome browser is among one of the most popular browsers used today so it seemed like a very practical place to test new encryption techniques. I am seeing a trend in most of the articles I have read on my topic. It seems that quantum computing is something that is not going to be stopped. We as consumers as well as organizations like the NSA and tech companies are just trying to be ahead of the curb so that the security of people’s information is not compromised when it comes. I have also seen that there is no real set year where people think that this encryption issue will arise. This article speculated 2026 but I have read in another article that it could be 30 years before we see this kind of technology having an impact on the average consumer. The quantum computer will still be a tool that is used by the elite and not something that will be as commercially available as let's say an iPhone. The preparation that we will need to take in order to keep data security and its integrity aline will be small but I am glad to see companies taking steps to maintain security as early as 2016. Actions like this make me as a consumer feel like the engineers are aware of the newer developments in their field and are willing to make adequate precautions. Link The article I came across this week was pretty similar to the one from last week. The article was written by Jennifer Chu and can be found on MIT News(Link). It began by describing encryption in a way that I had yet to see before. Chu simplified the idea of encryption to prime factorizations. The article talked about how finding the prime factorization of small numbers is simple but when the number becomes large (the example she used was 232 digits) the act of finding the factorization was far more difficult. So difficult in fact that she goes on to say it has taken scientist two years to find this factor using classical computers in parallel. I had yet to have come across the term classical computers but in this context she seems to be talking about non-quantum computers.
The article then goes on to talk about Shor’s Algorithm. In 1994, Peter Shor was able to use quantum computing to calculate prime factors more efficiently. While the algorithm was sound the ability to apply the algorithm has not been relevant until recently. A group of researchers from MIT were able to use atoms in an ion trap to correctly calculate the prime factorization of the number 15. Chu quotes one of the scientist involved in this breakthrough saying, ““We show that Shor’s algorithm, the most complex quantum algorithm known to date, is realizable in a way where, yes, all you have to do is go in the lab, apply more technology, and you should be able to make a bigger quantum computer,” says Isaac Chuang, professor of physics and professor of electrical engineering and computer science at MIT. “It might still cost an enormous amount of money to build — you won’t be building a quantum computer and putting it on your desktop anytime soon — but now it’s much more an engineering effort, and not a basic physics question.” This kind of breakthrough is a huge step toward making quantum computing a reality. I will be the first to say that being able to do something that a grade schooler can do with a really fancy computer is not a huge success but it is the implications of that level of engineering that will prove to be relevant in the coming years. One of the greatest strengths of doing computer processing the quantum way is its scalability. The article goes on to tell us that the factoring of the number 15 used 5 qubits rather than 12 in the other quantum computers that are being used. The way they did this was by using laser pulses. They used the first 4 atoms as logic gates and the last one was used to make the answer presented to the user. By using the qubits in tandem this way, the calculation took far less qubits than before. While the quantum computer is not something that is being used by everyday people, it is great to see MIT and other places of higher learning being willing to think outside of the box when it comes to qubits and quantum computation. Most would find that working with 12 qubits would be good enough but MIT seems to working on something even better than that. Hopefully we see more updates on this developing technology in the future. Link
I have recently shifted my focus for my blog to learning more about Quantum Computing and its implications on data security in the future. In my research I stumbled upon an article talking about MIT’s quantum computer and the major breakthroughs they are having in terms of scalability of the technology. MIT is one of the major places where research for Quantum Computing is taking place and it seems to be well on its way to becoming a way we compute in the coming years. RSA is one of the leading ways that we encrypt software today and it would take our current computers years to find the correct combination to decrypt the message when using RSA. Preliminary trials are trending positive when it comes to attempts at breaking RSA, but what does this mean for the consumers? The issue that is fast approaching is that these billion dollar machines are going to allow users of them to read almost anything they want. Not only will this affect the average consumer because nothing that you will think is encrypted will really be encrypted, but it will have a major impact on the global intelligence level. Countries that have access to this kind of computing power will have a major advantage when it comes to knowing plans of other countries. While the article did state that MIT’s machine is still not able to break RSA encryption, it is an issue that will need to be discussed in the coming years. One way to solve this issue would be to develop encryption methods that are more robust and thus make the quantum computing method less dwarfing in comparison. I as a user am afraid that I will not be able to keep my data secure in the world where quantum computers are commercially available. It will be a shift in computing that has not happened in quite some time and I am excited to have read the article and learned about this emerging technology but I am also terrified of its possible implications on data security as well as the Global Intelligence Community. Link Link It has been very present in recent news that a large leak known as “Vault 7” took place. NPR talked about one part of this leak involving the ability of the CIA to hack into smartphones and read messages even as the are being typed. It talked about people that use other applications to message other than standard SMS such as WhatsApp and Signal. The way this is done is not a weakness of the applications themselves but how the CIA hacks the smartphone itself. With access to the data being on the screen, the CIA can read these messages as they are being typed(before they are encrypted by the apps). The article goes on to talk about how this is changing the way that americans feel about their data security on their mobile devices. I feel many thing when faced with news like this. I think many americans had suspicions that the government had this kind of power to monitor us, however when it becomes a reality it is far scarier. I have found myself second guessing what I do on my smartphone because of fear that I am being watched. While in all reality the government could probably see exactly what I am doing on my laptop just the same, I feel quite uneasy when it comes to my personal data security. I have also found that the article citing WhatsApp as a secure means of messaging is misleading to the consumer. WhatsApp is an application that was purchased by Facebook and is not as well trusted as Signal in terms of secure messaging. I would argue that your data is less likely to get in the hands of the government but you are just handing that information over to Facebook. I do understand that some would feel more safe in that case but this is one of those ‘pick your poison’ kind of situations. In terms of the government’s actions, I think this is a major overstep of their power. I do understand that it will be argued that this is being a step to maintain national security. I think that it would be more well understood by the general public if they were up front about the way they were monitoring their citizens. One alternative would be to only look at messages that contain words that would lead them to believe the user was a threat. Users writing strings that sound like a threat to the president makes sense to monitor but me trying to coordinate what time my niece’s soccer game should not be a concern of the government and should be left alone. Link Link
Last year there was a situation in Dallas where gunman Micah Johnson shot law enforcement causing casualties and the ordeal ended when the Dallas Police Department used a robot to blow up Johnson. This killing is a first in terms of law enforcement using robots to inflict deadly force. NPR had a discussion about this action and the ethical dilemma we are faced with using robots in such a way. One of the most quoted statements that came out of this situation was from Dallas Police Chief David Brown. When asked about the ethical dilemma of using the robot to use deadly force, Brown replied, “This wasn't a ethical dilemma for me. I'd do it again to save our officers' lives.” The article goes on to talk about the difference in how the police are using robotics and how far we are from “killer robots”. One of the major differences was that this robot was taking commands from a user and was not working autonomously. The article goes on by saying, “ A killer robot would be something that was more autonomous, that was actually programmed and could do things on its own without human supervision.” What was used was the same type of robot often used for diffusing bombs but instead this particular robot was strapped with a charge of C4 which allowed the police to eliminate the threat. I think that this situation does not seem as important in terms of use of robots but I also see how this kind of decision making could change the precedent of using robots to take a life. Much of the reason that people tend to feel safer around police is because we know that they are another human being. The use of this kind of technology is taking the human aspect of dealing this kind of deadly force out of the equation which may make the decision of using it easier. I think while this may make people feel safe, it could end in the police abusing this method of eliminating threats in the future. Another issue is that later on in the article the writers talk about the issue of this type of robot being hacked during this kind of operation. The article later confirmed that , “If somebody disrupts that information stream - right? - they could potentially take over and command my remote robot or just make it not work.” This idea is scary because in a case like this, it could cause many unnecessary casualties. I think that the use of this type of force using robots is going to de sensitize communities about taking a lives. I think in this instance it saved people but I fear that this choice will be used later on to back a choice that may not be as black and white. Link LINK: http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/turkey-blocks-tor/
I read a very interesting article about censorship in Turkey. Turkey just recently had a failed coup of its government in 2016. The fallout of this coup put many citizens in jail due to their attempt to overthrow the government. Some of the main targets of these arrests were journalist that were putting out information that hurt the image of the now reinstated government. While talking about these issues was a tough thing to do, the journalist used avenues to keep their identity as anonymous as possible. Many used VPNS and Tor to remain anonymous while talking to citizens in regard to their story. Turkey has a watchdog group called Turkey Blocks that has blocked Tor anonymity networks and VPN services in Turkey. To directly quote, the article reads, “Our study indicates that service providers have successfully complied with a government order to ban VPN services.” This ban is affecting the flow of information via the internet in Turkey and has caused less freedom of speech to be available to the Turkish people. Certain websites have already been blocked including social medias such as Facebook and Twitter as well as Google Drive, DropBox, and Github to name a few. The internet in their country is beginning to look a lot like what we saw in class about China. This oppressive nature I feel is quite harmful to the country and hope that it is remedied soon. Ethically I believe that the flow of information should not be imposed on by a body of government. Some shady stuff is going to happen regardless so I do not think that causing harm to the general public in regards to how they and share information is not targeting your problem effectively. I hope to see Turkey’s government allow more freedom of speech in their country however, I do not think it will happen any time soon. |
AuthorThis is my course blog for CST373. |