SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the sniff-sniff-I-have-a-very-bad-code dept.
Speaking at the Noisebridge hackerspace Tuesday evening, Chelsea Manning implored a crowd of makers, nerds, and developers to be ethical coders.
"As a coder, I know that you can build a system and it works, but you're thinking about the immediate result, you're not thinking about that this particular code could be misused, or it could be used in a different manner," she said, as part of a conversation with Noisebridge co-founder Mitch Altman.
Altman began the conversation by asking about artificial intelligence and underscoring some of the risks in that field.
"We're now using huge datasets with all kinds of personal data, that we don't even know what information we're putting out there and what it's getting collected for," Manning said. "Our AI systems are getting better and better and better, and we don't know what the social consequences of that are. The code that we write, the bias that you see in some of the systems that you see, we don't know if we're causing feedback loops with those kinds of bias."
[...] "The tools that you make for marketing can also be used to kill people," Manning continued. "We have an obligation to think of the tools that we're making and how we're using them and not just churn out code for whatever reason. You want to think about how your end-user could misuse your code."
Guns don't kill people, code kills people.
(Score: 5, Informative) by bradley13 on Thursday September 14 2017, @01:44PM (18 children)
Grishnakh Maybe a petty point, but you're mixing STEM with IT. STEM includes *all* technical and scientific fields, *including* medicine.
Anyway, for IT: There is still plenty of good work to be done, and good work happening. It's just not the sexy stuff that attracts Silicon Valley VCs. Helping companies manage their businesses better, whether by setting up their PCs or writing them useful business software. Old hat, but still needed by millions of companies from small to large. Those same companies need an online presence, which also needs to be secured.
Heck, the entire IoT world has massive potential to make people's lives better, if only we can figure how to make it secure, and to keep the marketeers from sticking their noses into people's private lives.
That said, you're right that too large a percentage of IT jobs - especially in the really visible companies - is currently evil. Most online advertising, marketing and big-data analysis could disappear overnight, and no one (except the newly unemployed) would shed a tear.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Thursday September 14 2017, @02:11PM (15 children)
But... that's simple**!!! Do not allow your device to communicate with a service that's not under your control.
If you don't have any server under your control, then change the IoT meaning to "the Internets of Thing" - that's right, each device in an Internet of its own. Done - as secured as any powered-on device can be.
(large grin)
---
** for certain value of simple - e.g. it's trivial for an IT-minded person
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @03:07PM (11 children)
Simple** indeed, particularly in view that many (most?) IoT gadgets require a remote connection to either function at all, or to provide the fancy functionality that distinguishes them from their less-chatty counterparts. Done.
** Note that I am disagreeing with you.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 14 2017, @04:23PM (7 children)
OK, so let's discuss a high efficiency clothes washing machine, connected to the IOT. You throw clothes into it, add some detergent, maybe some bleach, fabric softener, set it to do the extra-full thing with the water, extra rinse, extra-heavy duty dirt cycle, close the lid. Now, what extra functionality will I get if I allow it to connect to my router? Will it press and fold my clothes for me? Maybe carry my clothes to the bedroom, and put them neatly into the drawers? Beyond that, I can't think of ANY extra functionality it might offer.
In reality, the IOT doesn't offer any additional functions, to ME, the end user. The only "extra" stuff is all designed to benefit the manufacturer, and advertisers. If I didn't maintain control over my router, and thus my clothes washer, I would be spammed to death with adverts from the manufacturer's "approved" list of detergent, bleach, and softener manufacturers. Read "approved" to mean "has bribed the manufacturer for the opportunity to monitor my washing habits".
I like my dumb appliances just the way they are, and I like my smart appliances to remain deaf, dumb, and blind.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday September 14 2017, @04:31PM (2 children)
E.g. it may take the decision to start the wash cycle when your home battery is full enough to support the entire wash cycle (while you're away with other businesses)
But asking the battery does not need to go through the manufacturer's server.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 15 2017, @01:58AM (1 child)
Really, both of you missed it. It needs the Botnet of Things so that it can order laundry detergent for you from Amazon.com, automatically, no matter what Amazon is currently selling it for, at whatever price Amazon's software on the washing machine, that you can't edit, decides it wants to buy it for.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday September 15 2017, @03:04AM
They'd like you to think so, yes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday September 14 2017, @04:44PM (3 children)
The main thing IoT things can offer is connectivity when you are not at home. So an IoT thermostat, for instance, lets you see your house's temperature and adjust it, while you're at work (so you can have it set high while you're not at home to save money, but when you're coming home earlier than planned, you can override the thermostat's normal program which won't kick on the A/C until 6PM when you expect to arrive home). An IoT washing machine, for example, could let you turn on the washer remotely.
But honestly, these are dubious use-cases. The thermostat might come in handy once in a while if for instance you forgot to set your thermostat to "vacation" mode (i.e., keep the temp high constantly while you're on vacation) before you went on vacation, but the washing machine? Seriously, just do your laundry when you're at home at night. These benefits are so minor, they're really not worth the extra complexity and security risk and loss of privacy to some manufacturer's servers.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday September 14 2017, @05:09PM (2 children)
See? The IoT scenarios would actually become interesting if those devices can actually be LoT (LAN of Things) with a "personal home automation server" under your control. But of course it will never be so if awaiting this functionality from the companies - apart from money, they are out there to suck every bit of info they can about you.
However, the things start to change on the DIY path.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Thursday September 14 2017, @06:53PM (1 child)
DIY doesn't really work for stuff like this, mainly because these devices are all closed and proprietary. Sure, it'd be pretty cool if you could connect these devices to your home server, which you can then access remotely with your smartphone. But there's a lot of engineering involved there, and standards are required. Who's going to do that? You need some server software, which of course could be a Linux distro, but you also need a smartphone app, which would have to be on F-droid since the Play Store doesn't have FOSS. All this means only enthusiasts are going to bother, because we're already in territory that's much too difficult for non-technical people to bother with (e.g., setting up their phone to access F-droid, getting a PC and installing a Linux distro). But the missing link is being able to interface with the devices. You're not going to build your own washing machine obviously, so you need to modify an existing one to connect to your server using some API. It's all closed and proprietary, so that's not easy, plus every device is different, every manufacturer has totally different protocols, and they're changing every time they come out with a new model. Who's going to go to that much trouble for a washing machine? We still don't have great coverage for the FOSS Android builds like LineageOS (it's only available for certain models), and that's arguably far more useful than being able to remote-control your washer.
The home server thing is a good idea; it'd be great to have a Linux server under your own control, controlling your lights, thermostat, securicams, etc., but this would require companies in many different sectors to cooperate on open standards for this, and these companies have zero incentive to do so; they'd rather connect to their own cloud servers so they can track you, and consumers simply are not going to insist on the FOSS route as they're too stupid and/or don't care.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday September 14 2017, @08:53PM
You are, of course, right. I never said all consumers will DIY. I only said:
1. is not that hard to start tinkering
2. I think that LoT makes more sense than IoT (on the line of: "Here's an idea")
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Thursday September 14 2017, @05:01PM (2 children)
Either fall back on non-fancy devices (Runaway's solution) or build your own devices which you can control the connectivity of**.
Both solutions preserve your security.
** Hint: it's actually quite easy. Electronic components are cheap, the Internet is a good source of technical info (and porn, don't forget the porn, even if it does bear any relevance to the DIY IoT)
Compulsion to explain the obvious?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 16 2017, @05:21PM (1 child)
Riiight, so let's see your DIY version of Alexa.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday September 18 2017, @01:33AM
I don't need to go all the way Alexa/Siri/OkGoogle.
Grunting/squeaking/onomatopoeia-ing (AKA command recognition) is good enough for a personal home automation.
Now, wop-wop [xkcd.com].
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Geezer on Thursday September 14 2017, @04:31PM (2 children)
We're all nerds here. A little blob of solder or scrape of a path in the right spot can make any IoT device an Internet of Service Not Available.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday September 14 2017, @04:51PM (1 child)
You wish! Me too.
But... alas [soylentnews.org]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday September 14 2017, @08:16PM
Arrgh! Recursive comments! Now i can't leave this discussion until I get an error..
On-topic:
Most mass-produced stuff (washing machines, a/c controllers, security cameras) are made from small components, in factories, in different places (often countries) which are then press-fit assembled (as cheaply as possible), so that, when a small component dies on a main board, and the main board is no longer available as a part (5 year old washing machine? Neanderthal!) you get to throw out the whole machine.
Electronics with programming (most new stuff) is even worse. Th right to repairisn't enough. Open source code and visibility of data collection (what data is your IoT thermostat sending "home"?)
We need (Society needs) open design, transparent data (collection, use, correction) AND ee also need security and privacy.
Alas, we are but the disposable commodities for Big Business.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @02:47PM
Ha!, here in Ontario one of the software providers for patient medical records just got slapped for inserting coupons for drug companies into patient files, good luck in the "Helping companies manage their businesses better,..." department this stuff is going to infect every aspect of anything that touches peoples information
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Thursday September 14 2017, @07:21PM
Maybe a petty point, but you're mixing STEM with IT. STEM includes *all* technical and scientific fields, *including* medicine.
I don't believe this is correct. STEM, as the word is used in society and politics, doesn't seem to involve medicine at all; when people are complaining about the lack of women in STEM, they sure as hell don't mean medicine because there is no lack of women in medicine (in fact, it's the opposite, they probably outnumber men by a significant amount; even if you concentrate on doctors and overlook nurses, they're probably at parity). "STEM" is science, technology, engineering, mathematics. Medicine really isn't in there, even though it makes a lot of use of science. But plumbers make use of science and technology too, and no one considers plumbers to be STEM workers. Auto mechanics most certainly use technology in their work, but again they are not STEM workers. The medical researchers at pharma companies are part of the "S" in STEM, but the doctors who prescribe pharma drugs are not.
And IT is part of STEM, it's in the "T". You could argue that they're like plumbers and mechanics, but these definitions have political and sociological aspects to them, and in current usage IT is considered part of STEM whether it's technically correct or not.
Helping companies manage their businesses better, whether by setting up their PCs or writing them useful business software.
I'm sorry, I don't think I've ever seen *anyone* claim that enterprise software is anything besides a synonym for "crap". Heck, I was in a doctor's office waiting room a couple years ago, and a commercial for some enterprise software (SAP I think) came on, and some older lady, who I never would have guessed to be an IT worker, started bitching and swearing about what a piece of shit their software was.
Those same companies need an online presence, which also needs to be secured.
So they can advertise and track people more?
Heck, the entire IoT world has massive potential to make people's lives better, if only we can figure how to make it secure, and to keep the marketeers from sticking their noses into people's private lives.
That's impossible. There's no profit in setting up IoT in a way that doesn't involve invading peoples' privacy. IoT necessarily works by sending your private data to some cloud server that the manufacturer operates. If they do something nefarious with your data, you have no recourse; if they get hacked, your data is released to even more nefarious people. And if they shut down the service because the device is "old", your device stops working. There is nothing good about IoT, and there never will be. It could theoretically be done usefully and in a privacy-respecting manner (by letting you have your own home Linux server and communicating with the IoT devices through open APIs), but that will never happen because mfgrs won't profit that way, and consumers are too stupid to demand that. Consumers are still so dumb they happily use Windows 10 despite it being common knowledge that it spies on them.
That said, you're right that too large a percentage of IT jobs - especially in the really visible companies - is currently evil.
Exactly, and the ones that aren't blatantly evil, such as making boring CRUD apps for companies, aren't really helping the world any (we had better software decades ago than the bloated web-app enterprise garbage we have now). Smart people who want to actually help humanity, therefore, are ill-advised to go into STEM in the US; they'd be better off going into medicine, or leaving the country and doing STEM work elsewhere.