DocAndersen
One of the things that Technology does at times creates ethical situations. For example, the pilot earbuds do automatic vocal and voice translation from one language to another. With Travis, it is a handheld device, clearly being used to translate. With Pilot, they are earbuds. They look like any other earbuds you see people using while walking, running, and communicating to work. They operate like any other earbuds except they also translate what people are saying. What seems to be an important function for people, is something that will begin to create an ethical issue going forward. You see, these earbuds look just like any other set of earbuds.
I know many people that speak a second language so that others can’t listen to that conversation. I know my wife and I would often speak in Spanish around the kids to reduce them overheating what we were saying. With Pilot Earbuds that privacy goes away. I haven’t tried them yet in a noisy or public environment. I’ve tried them on a conference call (they worked about 80%). The system does not have the same effect as the Travis Translator is, but it does more. You can also use the Pilot system to receive cell phone calls and to listen to music or TV shows. Due to a mistake I made, we had to replace a tire on my son’s car over the weekend. I wish I had taken the pilot earbuds.
I could have watched the Derby instead of HG TV, Tobacco Barn Builders. I ended up playing games on my phone instead. The issue would be the reality7 of privacy of course. There was a conversation conducted by the person across from me in Spanish. I recognized the land gauge as is often the case; I phased out to not accidentally overhear. With Pilot, it would be translated for me, and that is an ethical dilemma. When is it right o hear what people not talking to you are saying? Never right, well except in emergencies and law enforcement, then it is not an ethical issue. But for me, wandering around at work, it could be considered an ethical issue. Not one that a lot of people are thinking about but one that may become a bigger deal!
-
Question of
Do you ever accidently listen when people are speaking another language?
-
Yes
-
No
-
-
Question of
Do you speak more than one language?
-
Yes
-
No
-
Hmm ..the same thing happens in a normal situation too when you walk into a room and hear someone say something you were not meant to hear. You feel uncomfortable.
Oh yes, that is very true. But even worse if you hear things you weren’t meant to hear because they are in another language.
Especially when the precaution was taken to keep you out of the secret. I agree . 🙂
Interesting thought – thanks I will have to consider that.
This is a fairly deep ethical problem. Do others who understand what I speak in my language in public areas in other countries violate ethics?
That is the question, not that I am going to do that personally but the door has been opened.
I think, if people want to talk about something personal or confidential, they must choose a place for that and not in the public area.
But what if they are speaking in a non-standard language (Spanish in the US, as English is the primary Language, or say Korean in your country)?
I will try to avoid hearing what people are talking about in other languages if their gestures show an effort not to be heard by others, or I will feel uncomfortable hearing someone say something private even if it happens accidentally. But what can we do about it?
You’ve reached the ethical question I am wrestling with. First, I speak enough Spanish to understand a few words. I can figure out what other words mean fairly quickly.
But if my headphones get much more translated than what I can natively, and many more languages than Spanish what does that do for privacy?
At least I can ask:
Do we (potentially) violate the law?
What would people say if what we did was aired in the mass media? or discussed by family?
Do we feel guilty?
If there is one “wrong” there, maybe we should get rid of the tool.
This is truly why I love talking to you.
I don’t think this is a right or wrong issue. I think this is a social issue. Is it ok to listen to conversations that were not intended to be overheard? Even, if it is accidental.
I ask those questions just because you talk about ethics. If the question is ok or not, I think as long as it is not intentional it should not matter unless we deliberately eavesdrop on people’s conversations, so it is not ethical to do so. Well, that’s merely my narrow point of view.
Intent becomes the real question. Then we have to ask if I wear my earbuds (that translate) to listen to music as I walk in a public space i am within the boundaries of being ethical, as long as I do not turn translation on.
That’s true, Doc. As unintentional and deliberate are different.
That is what worries me, as we move towards more and more automation of the tasks that humans struggle with, will we lose a bit of our privacy from unintentional actions…
if you’re speaking in public, you can have no expectation of privacy. just because you don’t think anyone in earshot speaks the language you’re using doesn’t mean they don’t understand you. it just means you’re profiling…
I wonder sometimes if the NSA doesn’t track specific things like this. It is an interesting problem.
the NSA has the ability to track anything, but even if they’re using some type of automation to sort, they’re massively prone to false positives and such. whether or not that sort of thing is even remotely legal is another issue entirely…
I wonder sometimes about the reality of false positives. If they are in an acceptable range (say we have 100 analysts and get, say 80 false positives a day, I wouldn’t care. The reverse, of course, would be 100000 false positives and only 10 analysts. then i would probably care).
it also depends on what they’re getting wrong
in fact, i think you are right. I don’t know for sure, I don’t work in that world. But it feels right.
think about it, if they get something wrong about money laundering it isn’t such a big deal. if they get something wrong about an assassination, it could be a disaster
I suspect you’ll find they struggle more with terrorist problems. Although if you look globally, and then back to the US. Chatter around school shootings would appear to be the enforcement hole we have now.
school shootings are only a problem because we chose to ignore them
The problem with school shootings is huge. I agree!
no other nation has a bodycount anywhere near the US. it happens once in any other place and they put a stop to it…
So, I don’t often disagree with you Alex but I have to this time. If you total the last four school shootings, they are still 40 deaths below the one incidence in France with a truck. The reality of terrorism is that 20, 30 and more people are at risk.
At some point in the US we have decided that the military cannot be deployed in the country. So Sri Lanka has a huge incident, and their response is deployed the military.
Yes, School Shootings are horrific. But the reality of global terrorism is you have to consider what you are trading for.
I don’t consider school shootings to be domestic terrorism, unless the shooters had a list of demands that were not met by their deadline…
A lot of people don’t.
1. The intent of a school shooting is…
(retribution for bullying, revenge for mistreatment)
2. The difference between domestic terrorism and a school shooting is…
(um, IMHO, nothing)
Knowing how terrorism is perceived in the world right now, focusing that energy on school shootings might end them sooner.
that’s my point- for me to consider someone a terrorist, they need to have an ideology. they need to try and force it on others, and threaten retribution if their demands aren’t met by a deadline. finally, they must take credit for their actions and it is generally considered good form to pass the blame onto the establishment and to promise further attacks
Kaczynski met all of those requirements, ergo I consider the unabomber to be a domestic terrorist. this is what differentiates an act of terror from random violence
ideology, not methodology is my deciding factor
I have not heard of these headsets yet. For privacy reasons, I would think carefully about whether to use them.
It is an interesting problem overall. I have to ask questions sometimes.
I only know one language so this is not as issue with me.
Kind of cool to speak Spanish so you kids can’t understand you.
Parents have to become creative for sure.
It forced us to practice our Spanish! We actually stopped when the kids figured it out!
I do not know this technology, but I’ve already heard of it … I understand more languages more talkative … but not grammatically
Language is always an interesting thing to consider thanks my friend!!!
In our country, it is usual that wherever you come, you have to adapt to … and if you do not know any language, you find yourself in trouble … knowledge of English and German is highly recommended
It is always interesting when you travel! Thanks my Friend that is good information.
It’s hard to ignore what is happening around you if you understand the language. I speak a few and I think what is hardest for me is when someone is learning sign language. It catches my attention and I have to literally turn away.
I always assume someone is listening when I am speaking.
I suspect that is the critical skill, to be able to look a way!
Yes I can speak more than one language and i consider it my extra skill
That is very good! i speak parts of three languages, but I am not fluent in two of the three.
I haven’t tried this gadget so I don’t have the first-hand experience on this. Privacy is one of the factors that would be affected by this new technology. Perhaps if there are sensitive things we need to discuss with, we should refrain from talking about those in public places.
I do agree – I just wonder if people haven’t used language as a barrier to create privacy.