Like most significant changes in technology, Cloud Computing and Big Data along with their associated analytic techniques are claimed to provide us with new insights unattainable by any previous knowledge techniques. It is believed that the quantity of virtual data now available requires new knowledge production strategies. Although they have yielded significant results, there are problems with advocated processes and resulting facts. The primary process treats " pattern recognition " as a final result rather than using " pattern recognition " to lead to yet to be tested testable hypotheses. In data analytics, the discovery of a pattern is treated as knowledge rather than going further to understand the possible causes of those patterns. When this is used as the primary approach to knowledge acquisition unjustified inferences are made-" fact generation ". These pseudo-facts are used to generate new pseudo-facts as those initial inferences are fed back into analytic engines as established facts. The approach of generating "facts from data analytics" is introducing highly risky scenarios where "fiction becomes fact" very quickly. These " facts " are then given elevated epistemic status and get used in decision making. This, misleading approach is inconsistent with the moral duty of computing professionals embodied in their Codes of Ethics. There are some ways to mitigate the problems generated by this single path approach to knowledge generation.

Some of the disagreements that arise in computer ethics are based on approaching ethics from two apparently contradictory directions; one a virtue based ethics and the other a rights-duty based ethics. My recent experience with the development of the Software Engineering Code of Ethics and Professional Practice leads me to believe that if the differences between these ethical positions is made clear then some of the problems in reasoning about computer ethics will be reduced. The ACM and the IEEE-Computer Society have recently adopted the Software Engineering Code of Ethics and Professional Practice as the standard for the teaching and practice of software engineering. The ACM/IEEE-CS task force on Software Engineering Ethics and Professional Practices developed this code[ appendix 1] for a sub-specialization within the constituencies of both of the professional societies. The composition of the task force is multinational in both citizenship and in membership in professional computing organizations. There were two ethical approaches of by members of the task force to this project, but there was an achievement of consensus between them. Several of the ethical discussions about the Code are related to the relative position of rights/obligations based ethics versus virtue based ethics. This is reflected, for example, in different values placed on privacy. This difference between rights and virtue based ethics as a primary assumption was reflected in differing views on the actual and acceptable roles of governments in the software development process and reflected in different values or obligations related to the roles of government and individuals in protecting data integrity. The lessons learned from developing of the Software Engineering Code of Ethics (www-cs.etsu.edu/seeri) and relating these approaches to ethics provide indications on how to improve the ethics education of computer professionals. The observations in this paper were made during my tenure as chair of the task force developing this Code of Ethics. The generalizations in this paper, like all generalizations are subject to exceptions. With this cautionary word, I will now venture to blatantly categorize ethical approaches. The developme nt of the Code was an iterative process. The task force examined several existing codes of ethics from computing societies, engineering societies and other professions such as accounting. [1] We also considered the goals and functions of these codes and then, via e-mail, selected out various imperatives to be placed in the software engineering code. We also contributed new imperatives related to our knowledge of software engineering. There was immediately a discernable difference between North American and Northern European contributions and concerns. As we circulated early drafts to colleagues for comment, the colleagues' responses seemed to also reflect a difference their approach to ethics; one was a virtue based ethics and the other was a rights/obligations based ethics. The draft Code of Ethics that resulted reflected these two different approaches to ethics. The members of the task force did not mention these two schools of ethics, but their responses could easily be categorized as belonging

Many problems in software development can be traced to a narrow understanding of professional responsibility. The author examines ways in which software developers have tried to avoid accepting responsibility for their work. After cataloguing various types of responsibility avoidance, the author introduces an expanded concept of positive responsibility. It is argued that the adoption of this sense of positive responsibility will reduce many problems in software development.

This paper illustrates how to use the Software Engineering Code of Ethics and Professional Practice [1, 2] in three case studies suitable for computer science instruction. This code of ethics was approved by both the Association of Computing Machinery (ACM) and the IEEE Computer Society in 1998. Since then, the code has been translated into seven more languages, and adopted by organizations in many countries. The paper argues that instruction in ethics is vital in computer science education, and that case studies ...

Over the last 20 years the ICT industry has seen many developments and changes, such as faster and smaller computers, many new digital devices, the convergence of this digital technology, the internet, and operational aspects such as outsourcing. Governments and professional societies have discussed the issues related to these changes in the media, yet the Australian Computer Society's Code of Ethics has not changed. This paper discusses the need to change the ACS Code, the issues to be addressed, and procedures to be followed, if changes are to be made. These issues include, amongst others, the lack of specificity of the Code, and the absence of a way to decide between ethical principles which may conflict in some situations, and how to resolve such conflicts. With the focus on the Australian context, the ACS Code's relationship with international standards and codification of ethics are considered, and the paper discusses what lessons can be learned from overseas experience in modifying codes. The paper concludes by outlining the next steps to bring the ACS Code up to date.

There is a significant and previously unidentified ethics problem with many e-games; many of them are designed in such a way that they encourage and train game players to follow a narrow and dangerous model of decision making. It is argued that extending this model of decision making beyond an e-game's virtual reality has significant negative societal consequences. Unfortunately most e-game courses focus primarily on game engine design and other technical issues. E-game curricula and e-game designers need to follow standards which recognize this ethical concern and recognize that their work is not independent from the societal impacts of the technology they develop. Modifying design approaches can reduce the problems caused by the ethical decision making model.

This article introduces the SoDIS process to identify ethical and social risks from software development in the context of designing software for the New Zealand Maori culture. In reviewing the SoDIS analysis for this project, the tensions between two cultures are explored with emphasis on the (in)compatibility between a Maori worldview and the values embedded in the SoDIS process. The article concludes with some reflections upon the key principles informing the professional development of software and ways in which cultural values are embedded in supposedly neutral technologies, and reviews the lessons learned about avoiding colonization while working on a bicultural project.

Abstract This paper uses examples of realistic, ethically-charged decisions that computing professionals face, and explore how the the software engineering code of ethics is useful in making wise and creative decisions. We illustrate the ethical impacts of choice of software process model, architecture, and design patterns using real world examples including examples from Grady Booch. We practice some of the ethics training techniques that have successfully been used by some corporations in the computer-related industries.