Killer Robot Proceedings

General
This case is fictionalized scenario intended to illustrate how
computing professionals can apply Code of Ethics as a framework
for analyzing ethical dilemmas.

In this case we have:

 Judges (3 Students)
 Prosecutors (14 Students)
 Defendants / Accusers (7 Students)
 Attorneys (14 Students)

Judges:
1-

2-

3-
 Name Role
1 Jan Anderson Jan Anderson :Former programmer
and analyst at Silicon Techtronics.
2 Prosecutor1
She opposed the use of the waterfall
3 Prosecutor2 model on the robot project and was
4 Attorney1 fired for her honesty.
5 Attorney2
6 Ray Johnson Ray Johnson :Robotics division chief
at Silicon Techtronics. He was driven
7 Prosecutor1
by the division's need for a successful
8 Prosecutor2 robot.
9 Attorney1
10 Attorney2
11 Randy Samuels Randy Samuels :Programmer. He
wrote the program code that caused
12 Prosecutor1
the Robbie CX30 robot to oscillate
13 Prosecutor2 wildly, killing the robot operator, Bart
14 Attorney1 Matthews.
15 Attorney2
16 Sam Reynolds Sam Reynolds :CX30 Project
Manager. Although background was
17 Prosecutor1
in data processing, he was put in
18 Prosecutor2 charge of the Robbie CX30 project,
19 Attorney1 much to Ray Johnson's chagrin. He
was committed to the waterfall model
20 Attorney2 of software development.
21 Max Worthington Max Worthington :Chief security
officer for Silicon Techtronics. He
22 Prosecutor1
monitored electronic mail
23 Prosecutor2 communications among the
24 Attorney1 employees and thus exposed Cindy
Yardley.
25 Attorney2
26 Cindy Yardley Cindy Yardley :Silicon Techtronics
employee and software tester. She
27 Prosecutor1
admitted to faking software tests in
28 Prosecutor2 order to save the jobs of her co-
29 Attorney1 workers.
30 Attorney2
31 Michael Waterson Michael Waterson :President and
CEO of Silicon Techtronics. He
32 Prosecutor1
placed Sam Reynolds in charge of
33 Prosecutor2 the Robbie CX30 project as a cost-
34 Attorney1 saving measure. He contributed
generously to Jane McMurdock's re-
election campaign, and hired Dr.
35 Attorney2 Wesley Silber to conduct an
investigation into software quality
assurance at Silicon Techtronics.
Laws
1- ACM Code of ethics-IEEE Code of Ethics
2- Theories of Ethics you studied. (Deontological – Utilitarianism - ….etc)

Framework (ACM guidelines)

In this analysis, we applied a four-step process denoted by the acronym CARE:
Consider (stakeholders and consequences), Analyze (how the Code applies to the
context), Review (possible actions), and Evaluate (decisions and future impact). The
CARE framework provides an outline for judging whether possible actions would be
consistent with both the letter and the spirit of the Code. These questions establish a
general approach to assist computing professionals in ethical decision-making.
• Consider: Who are the relevant actors and stakeholders? What were the anticipated
and/or observable effects of the actions or decisions for those stakeholders? What
additional details would provide a greater understanding of the situational context?
• Analyze: What stakeholder rights (legal, natural, or social) were impacted and to what
extent? What technical facts are most relevant to the actors’ decision? What principles
of the Code were most relevant? What personal, institutional, or legal values should be
considered?
• Review: What responsibilities, authority, practices, or policies shaped the actors’
choices? What potential actions could have changed the outcomes?
• Evaluate: How might the decision in this case be used as a foundation for similar
future cases? What actions (or lack of action) supported or violated the Code? Are the
actions taken in this case justified, particularly when considering the rights of and impact
on all stakeholders?
Proceedings
Investigations phase (Thu. 9-12-2019):
1- 7 work groups consist of (Defendant and his/her 2 attorneys in front of 2
prosecutors).
2- Prosecutors will ask the defendant questions to prepare their final accusations
list (using CARE methodology and LAWS).
3- Attorneys will prepare their defence according to the final accusations list (using
CARE methodology and LAWS).
4- Prosecutors and Attorneys will submit their documents to the judges/me.(due Fri.
9-13-2019)
The Trial (Tue. 9-17-2019):
1- Judges will study the submitted documents before the trial.
2- Judges will discuss each group (Defendant-Attorneys-Prosecutors) for 7 minutes
during the trial.
3- Judges will discuss together to decide who is guilty and why, for 10 minutes.
4- Judges will announce their decisions.