You're probably wondering why I haven't updated my blog in a timely fashion, and the reason is because it's midterm week. Today I had a midterm in a course called Computers & Society. It's more of a fluffy course when compared with other computer science courses that I've taken in the past. Topics include ethics surrounding technology, privacy, social impacts of technology, etc. In short, it's more of a philosophical look at technology. Even though it's not a hardcore programming course, I would not discount the importance of such a course.
In either case, the course has a fairly interesting midterm. It's an oral exam with the professor and three students. You have to answer a question which is drawn at random, and once you answer it, your peers can offer comments or rebuttals. You're marked by the quality of your arguments.
The first question in the oral exam is the easiest, and it's meant to start you off on a positive note. The questions get progressively more difficult. For the first question we got, the professor said, "there aren't any wrong answers."
Evidently, there ARE wrong answers.
So one of the guys gets this question: "Think up some computerized device or program that does not yet exist, but that you would be very proud to help develop. Describe it."
The guy says: I would develop a chip which would be implanted in a person's brain when they're born which would control a person's ability to reproduce. Essentially, a person would not be able to have children until it passes a series of government tests which proves that the individual can care for a child. The tests would include having enough money to raise children, taking courses on parenting, spending time with other children to prove that you like children, etc. If a person cannot pass these tests, the chip would prevent that person from having children. If they really wanted to have children, then they could adopt a child from Africa since the planet is so overpopulated as it is.
While this guy was ranting, I couldn't believe what he was saying. I had to make an effort to stay quiet and wait for my turn to comment. There's so many things wrong with this that I was ready to fire back with a nuclear barrage during the rebuttal.
When the guy finished, the prof, who normally is fairly diplomatic, asks if the guy was serious. The guy said yes. The prof then asked, "and you would be proud of this device?" The guy said absolutely.
This answer was so bad that the professor didn't let us offer comments or rebuttals, but asked the guy to give a new answer.
In either case, this is a course that explores the ethical and social impacts of technology on society. Clearly he has not learned anything about ethics in the course. Firstly, the freedom to reproduce and have a family is a FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT. This guy has just flushed the U.N.'s universal declaration of human rights down the drain in his opening sentence! Secondly, it's quite scary to think that people would have their reproductive abilities disabled from birth without consent, and forced upon by the government. This is essentially state sanctioned sterilization of people. This is birth control forced upon by the state!
Heck, even communist China allows couples to have ONE child. The policy that this guy is proposing is even WORST than the communists. This is quite the achievement because I really hate communist China.
The worst thing that the guy says is that if you fail the parenting test, then you can adopt a child from Africa. This is incredibly insensitive. He's almost saying that because you're a second rate parent, you can get a second rate child from the third-world, here's your second place participation ribbon. That's awful.
Anyway, my blood was really boiling when this guy was ranting, and the scariest thing was that this guy actually believed in the things that he was saying. So, whenever a prof says that there are no wrong answers, that is bunk. Clearly there are wrong answers. Very very wrong ones.
