# data[].attributes.body
-Another example of dual use is  radio navigation systems-  in the military, radio navigation systems are used for tracking both allies and enemies and their given supplies. In the civilian world, we commonly use radio navigation systems as GPS (ie. Google Maps). One more example of dual use is remotely operated vehicles. In the civilian world, drones have use in filmography and photography for aerial views. In the military, drones and other remotely operated vehicles are used for surveillance, scouting, supply drops, and as armed vehicles (for dropping bombs and such)
-Halting the spread of nuclear weapons immediately following the Trinity test would have resulted in the absence of the atomic bombs being dropped in Japan. Even if the halt would have happened after Nagasaki, things like the cold war could have been prevented and some of the current tensions with North Korea could have been avoided as well- assuming no one ever tried nuclear warfare again. The scientist's reactions to the atomic bombs dropping belie their personal ethics and concept of dual use because they initially responded in celebration of their scientific success, but then began to consider the true impact of their scientific discovery which brought them back to their ethical viewpoints.
-The most concerning thing about nuclear technology to me is its dual use. I personally believe it has a lot of good implications in terms of its use as a source of energy. Nuclear energy can be very clean and very effective if used properly and has a lot of potential to, not only further quality of life on Earth, but help human-kind reach other locations within (and outside of) our solar system. However, its dual use as a weapon that is becoming more and more accessible is scary in terms of rising tensions between different countries.

# data[].attributes.body
-Social Dilemma Trailer Notes:
->Everything you do online is recorded and monitored
->Your psychology is used against you
->Technology is not necessarily great, especially for mental health
->Fake news spreads very quickly
->People do not really need to interact
->Social media is good for controlling people in one way or another
-For me personally, social media is a big part of my life. I very frequently interact with friends and family members through the use of technology. To be perfectly honest, I probably spend way to much time on my phone scrolling through one platform or another
The trailer emphasizes fragmentation and connection because it looks a bit at both the pros and cons of social media and compares the two
-Benefits of these systems include being able to identify race and gender based on an image, but by doing it by the masses. Drawbacks include lack of accuracy due to lack of consideration during the design process. This lack of consideration is a huge ethical problem because it shows society's lack of subconscious inclusivity. An algorithm cannot be neutral because it is human-made, and it is impossible for a person to be perfectly unbiased.
-I agree with most of the items on this list; however, I do not agree with number 12, which discusses the idea that most tech companies are able to avoid being in trouble. There have been several examples (most recently the investigation of Facebook user data) in which tech companies do not avoid persecution.
-Technology plays a large role in creating injustice by allowing the quick and wide-spread diffusion of misleading or incorrect information (most popularly called "fake news"). The creators of technology can enable a more just society by planning for different users during the design process. Unfortunately, it is impossible to be fully just in such a technologically dependent society without complete censorship across all social media and internet platforms.

# data[].attributes.body
-Genetic Engineering- preventative medical care for hereditary diseases
-Nanotechnology- advancement of medicine
-Robotics- eliminating the mundane tasks in life, medicinal purposes

-Genetic Engineering- misuse to eliminate certain traits, biological warfare
-Nanotechnology- potential exposure, environmental implications
-Robotics- literal robot soldiers

I would like to say I am both optimistic and pessimistic. I have a lot of hope for the potential in most technologies, however, I have trust issues when it comes to man's ability to not misuse these technologies

# data[].attributes.body
-Justice is the distribution of consequence proportional to the action(s) in question in order to provide a sense of reparation to the victim.
-In my opinion and in my experience, our society is fairly just. However, I grew up in a middle class neighborhood and I look white, so that could be different for so many different people. One thing that stops our society from being fully just is human difference in opinion. Everyone has their own individual thoughts.
-To me justice is fair and equal. It enforces the idea of all people being treated equally. Injustice looks like the opposite- it involves oppression and discrimination
-Looking back on the MIT "The Moral Machine" I do believe there was bias in my decisions. Unfortunately, as a human being, excluding bias from important decisions is hard
-These articles are speaking of both racial and sexual bias, catering towards the white male. The likeliness is that these were not done purposefully and turned out to be flaws in technology. However, they still could have been avoided. The soap dispenser, for example, could have been tested with people of various skin tones and lighting conditions to ensure that the sensor reacted in every situation
-I feel like all of the types of racism mentioned are about feelings and actions. People tend to be emotional beings and very frequently let their feelings influence their actions- for better or for worse. If someone (or a group of people) is racist, there is some sort of underlying feeling fueling their discriminatory actions/thoughts.
The philosophy of antiracism is actively deciding to fight against racism. It isn't just not being racist, but taking a stand against those who are racist in defense of your fellow human beings.
-I do have an obligation to stand up for my peers at Mines and to help make the university as inclusive as possible. I myself am Hispanic, but I look white, so I don't typically get feel racial bias towards me. However, knowing that there are other Hispanics who do just kind of hits home. Just because my skin is lighter, doesn't mean I should be treated any better than my Hispanic peers. And that can be said across every race too. Unfortunately, it seems as though this is both personal and institutional. These stories reflect the types of biases seen above in the sense that they probably aren't personal, yet the could still be avoided by a conscious effort to make Mines more inclusive and more welcoming to people of ALL races.

# data[].attributes.body
-I would put the tick mark at the very beginning of the design process. I feel as though it is important to consider the ethical obligations from the very beginning until after the implementation of the product. The policy regarding the project should be discussed at the beginning and adapted as the project progresses.
-The political polarization form 1994 to 2017 has greatly increased. There are significantly less people who identify as being moderate in 2017 than there were in 1994. I do believe this trend has continued.
- I liked the phrase "physical distancing" rather than social distancing
-A sentinel is "a soldier or guard whose job is to stand and keep watch."
-Agreed; experts are experts for a reason. We should listen to them, however, experts have an obligation to speak up sometimes too.
-You have to know how to interpret facts. Sometimes, facts can be interpreted differently and can lead to debate
-Every experience adds to our outlook on the world
-Roger Revelle- measured CO2 levels in the atmosphere. He concluded that increased atmospheric CO2 was going to alter the climate. He called attention to something that wasn't widely acknowledged, and he talked to everyone regardless of political affiliation. He helped get the Clean Air Act passed under the Nixon administration in 1970. He did not express nervousness or the idea that his career was on the line.
- Many scientists don't speak up because they are afraid to lose credibility as scientists among their colleagues. Many scientists believe they should stick to science and let other people talk about the policy.
-Policy relevant not policy prescriptive
-James Hansen- went to jail for speaking up about the change in climate.
-Many scientists think speaking up makes them an activist and that isn't what they signed up for. However, it is important to be a mixture of both scientist and activist.
-Nuclear weapons encouraged many physicists to speak up about nuclear weapon to inform politicians and policy makers about the dangers of nuclear weapons and their differences from other weapons (Niels Bohr, Einstein, etc, etc)
-Scientists, engineers, and experts have an obligation to speak up because we have the ability to provide facts.
-Epistemic proximity- the people closest to the knowledge are the best able to talk about it
-Yes, this is immoral because the neighbor owned the dog and it was not the family's right to take it regardless of it being alive. Regardless of that, the neighbor would be really hurt if they ever found out

# data[].attributes.body
-Technical problems can include things such as puzzles, math problems, etc
-Adaptive problems are more ethically related (ie carbon emissions)

-Skills necessary include the ability to think outside the box, think ahead, and work as a team

-Willingness to accept constructive feedback, listening skills, ability to explain thought process, and teamwork are important to be a good scientist/engineer

-I would

# data[].attributes.body
Moral relativism- The idea that different cultures and societies have different moral and ethical beliefs
Utilitarianism- actions are right if they are beneficial to the majority
Deontology- the study of duty and obligation
Virtue ethics- "normative ethical theories which emphasize virtues of mind, character and sense of honesty"
Liberalism- moral philosophy based on liberty, consent of the governed, and equality

While money can buy things that instate happiness, money cannot literally buy happiness. The feeling of happiness brought to us by materialistic items is temporary in comparison to genuine happiness associated with one's definition of success

# data[].attributes.body
-I would change the report because I have an ethical responsibility to tell the truth as I know it to be for the sake of science and morality
-Engineers and scientists are responsible for the immediate use of their developments, specifically the consequences that arise from an intended use. They should consider other potential uses for the object and account for those within the design process. After that, manipulations of the discovery and uses of said discovery are out of their control.
-The first document more adequately described the risks associated with the o-ring problem Boisjoly and Kapp thoroughly expressed their concerns with the o-ring and expressed their desire to dedicate a team to fixing the problem. The second document seemed to brush off the issue.
-A certain level of risk is necessary in everything we do in life. However, if a project has the potential to affect a large group of people, the morality should not be decided by one person. A large group of people (preferably from the affected group) should decide whether it is ethical to proceed.

# data[].attributes.body
1) Personally, I do not agree with the moral sphere layout. I would put my friends right after my immediate family, but before my extended family. My friends have more of an impact on my life. While I do not agree with it, I do believe this is what most people follow. Many people put family first simply because they are family.
2) Yes I do think it would be ethical to switch the trolley to hit just one person because it is the lesser of two evils. Pushing someone off of a bridge would be the same output as switching the track, however, the idea is completely implausible. There is no way a single person would stop the train.
3) I found this exercise a little ridiculous. Why is the specification of the person's size included? Also, in most situations, the same amount of people die. Assuming all lives are worth the same, most of the outcomes would result in the same tragedy.

# data[].attributes.body
-I disagree with this statement. A seemingly immoral action, if well thought out, can result in a highly beneficial outcome. The intention behind one's action and the action's resulting consequence are both important factors in determining the morality of said action.
-Again, the intention matters as well. Even if the outcome of one's action results in something good, a person's bad intention can negate the morality of the action.
-People are not born good or bad. Their actions and their intentions make them good or bad. At the same time, however, the perception of good and bad matters. Not trying to defend him, but Hitler thought he was doing the right thing, right? That being said, a bad person can do good things and a good person can do bad things.
-Nonhuman nature is valuable because humans are a tiny tiny part of the universe. In the long run, we are of very little significance to the greater intentions of the universe. However, in an infinite universe, everything is of little significance. Little significance is still some significance, though, right? So, everything that exists, regardless of where or when it exists, is valuable and important to the overarching universe.

# data[].attributes.body
Based on Dr Mancus's comments, in the future, I will need to make sure to state the year the article(s) I am referencing were written in. This is to provide some context to the reader and will also help provide some credibility.
I also need t make sure I reference discussion and topics from class and my reflection. This is to ensure I am taking what we talk about in class and applying it elsewhere.

# data[].attributes.body
I seemed to struggle a lot when it came down to choosing a topic I was passionate enough about to come up with an "I believe" statement. I actually ended up looking at an essay I wrote for a scholarship and using that as my inspiration.
Despite that, I still found it a little hard to write a full page about it because I would prefer to have a more specific topic.
Had I given myself more time to think about a topic (I procrastinated a lot), I would probably have been able to write a better paper on something I was more passionate about.