https://padlet.com/awinkelmann2/sx0fia3vlgjyusx1 Made with a curious mind en-us 2020-09-08 16:39:41 UTC 2020-09-08 17:34:18 UTC hello@padlet.com awinkelmann2 https://padlet.com/awinkelmann2/sx0fia3vlgjyusx1/wish/728097217 I would have a hard time deciding whether or not I would report tank. That being said, I would feel tremendous amounts of guilt if I followed the orders of my boss and left the tank out of the report especially because of the potential harm to the community. So, in theory, I would continue with the tank in the report in order to complete the thorough work I had put into this project in order to keep people safe. In reality, I do not know if I would have the moral strength to not pretend that there just wasn't a tank that nobody knew about. The consequences of doing the morally correct action really are serious and there would only be a one in a million chance of killing someone. In the end, I would like to think that I would report the tank, but in the moment I might follow through with the bosses orders.]]> 2020-09-08 16:41:25 UTC https://padlet.com/awinkelmann2/sx0fia3vlgjyusx1/wish/728097217 awinkelmann2 https://padlet.com/awinkelmann2/sx0fia3vlgjyusx1/wish/728139679 In engineering there is a a a problem known as duel use,  technology that can be used for multiple purposes with some purposes being ethical and others being unethical. I think scientists and engineers are responsible for the long term consequences of the technology they create to a small extent. It is the engineer's responsibility to define the use of the product and identify its other potential uses in order to warn of the improper or dangerous use of the product. If the engineer intended to make the product moral correct(and he knows that his morals are truly good) then I would say that the engineer has done his or her job. I would argue that if the engineer's product is later used as a weapon or unethically, that the original creator was not at fault, but it was the people who decided to use the product unethically that are at fault. The most the original engineer can do is to warn of other possible uses and dangers of the product. ]]> 2020-09-08 16:49:18 UTC https://padlet.com/awinkelmann2/sx0fia3vlgjyusx1/wish/728139679 awinkelmann2 https://padlet.com/awinkelmann2/sx0fia3vlgjyusx1/wish/728254561 The second document does not do enough to convey the risks involved in the Challenger launch. The document proposes solutions to the O-ring dilemma and it states that "the simple short term measures should be taken to reduce flight risks." This sentence alone does not convey the consequences of not implementing the solutions for the O-ring problem. This lack of emphasis on the problem with the o-rings is opposite to that of the first document. The first document states that if the problems with the field joint and O-ring are not fixed then there is a high risk of failure. Even then, the writing could use some danger signs and more exclamation marks. I think document used better writing than document two to convey the danger of not addressing the problem. The first document reads, "The result would be a catastrophe of the highest order - loss of human life." I think this line is enough to say that the document is heavily suggesting action be took to fix the O-rings, which cannot be found in the second document. ]]> 2020-09-08 17:10:28 UTC https://padlet.com/awinkelmann2/sx0fia3vlgjyusx1/wish/728254561 awinkelmann2 https://padlet.com/awinkelmann2/sx0fia3vlgjyusx1/wish/728336952 All scientific and engineering endeavors involve risk because that is what science is, going into the unknown. It should be a goal to make these endeavors as safe as possible, while still being able to get some scientific or technological progress out of the experiment/invention/etc. It should be a goal to make his endeavor the most safe it can be with the resources and time that you have and it should be made clear what the dangers and potential risks are tot the people involved. As long as everyone understands the risks and the rewards and voluntarily decide to do the the endeavor, and safety is maximized with the time and funds of the scientists working, then the endeavor is acceptable in the continued progress of science and technolofy. ]]> 2020-09-08 17:24:52 UTC https://padlet.com/awinkelmann2/sx0fia3vlgjyusx1/wish/728336952