An analysis of Principle 1.2 in the new ACM Code Of Ethics

TL;DR

This paper critically analyzes the updated ACM Code of Ethics, revealing that changes to Principle 1.2 create inconsistencies and ethical issues, undermining the code's integrity and moral stance.

Contribution

It provides a detailed critique of the new Principle 1.2, highlighting its structural flaws and ethical contradictions within the ACM Code of Ethics.

Findings

Principle 1.2 is now internally inconsistent.

It is externally inconsistent with Principle 2.3.

The changes condone broad intentional harm.

Abstract

The new ACM Code of Ethics is a much-needed update, but introduced changes to a central principle that have not been discussed widely enough. This commentary aims to contribute to an improvement of the ethical standards we want computing professionals to aspire to by analyzing how changes introduced to Principle 1.2, Avoid Harm, affect the Code as a whole. The analysis shows that the principle is now internally inconsistent in structure and externally inconsistent with Principle 2.3. It condones intentional harm too broadly and does not oblige those responsible to seek external justification. The existing Principle 2.3 clearly suggests that Principle 1.2 is unethical. As a consequence, the change introduced to Principle 1.2 in the new Code of Ethics nullifies the good intention of the code; counteracts the many good changes introduced in all three drafts; and places the ACM in a dangerous moral position. This short paper explains why and recommends concrete actions.