Grady Booch on software morality

Booch: Here's an example. London's installing more video cameras per square mile on the street than anybody else. All right, not a lot of software there. But what happens when they couple that with facial recognition software so I can actually track individuals as they go through the city?

But that's not a question that the software developer gets presented with. That's something for the city of London to consider based upon its needs.

Booch: Yes, but at the ultimate level, the software developer can say, "Do I want to actually build a system that potentially could violate human rights?"

Using your logic, wouldn't it also be fair to say that somebody who was instrumental in designing the cell phone would have faced those same issues because a pedophile can use a cell phone for nefarious purposes?

Booch: The question is whether I, as a technologist, add features that potentially eat away at personal privacy but also enable the use of a law enforcement agency to track this person? Which way do I push this because, as a technologist, I have the ability to deliver things to people who don't know how to do that technology. Nonetheless, they are the ones who will make policy that would be impacted by what I create.

If computer scientists dig in their heels at even the possibility that their work might later get used by organizations that they politically find not to their liking, do you risk being called a Luddite? That is, you're willing to innovate up to this point and no more because peering over the abyss, you don't like what you think you're seeing.

Booch: Well, now you get to a wonderfully deep philosophical issue. Do I hold back? The difficulty is that science has this really sneaky way of oozing through all the pores...Even though I would personally prefer to make the decision to say, "No, I'm not going to do that," I still have the responsibility to educate those who are in a position in the policy-making realm, so that they understand the implications of what they're doing.

http://www.news.com/2102-1012_3-6213376.html