Radiolab: Eyes In The Sky

I think the drone like camera used to catch murderers could be extremely helpful and even life changing. The data that was shown to catch the main location where over 1500 murders were being assembled was astonishing. The fact that they are able to zoom in and find these "tic tac's" of Cars and people and then find out the future and past movements beyond that point is also life changing. 

The podcast took a quick turn though. Out of nowhere the people chose to go against the drone after hearing all of the positives of the drone.

Although this technology can be very helpful, I understand why so many people are against these drones; but why so strongly? All in all these will be much more positively beneficial to cities than negatively towards people. The reasons for that is because of the capabilities of catching criminals and murderers. Do you really think they are going to use these drones to watch our daily lives? Highly unlikely considering it would be a waste of their time. Yes we will have to give the government a lot of trust to keep these from invading too much privacy but to me, I feel the drones can save more lives in the future than it can invade someone's privacy. In the end, I feel people are a bit too selfish about the topic than they are open to the benefits for our future. 

Source: http://www.radiolab.org/story/eye-sky/

A Framework for Making Ethical Decisions

After first reading the article, I immediately thought "Well there is a lot that goes into making an ethical decision." Do we really have to go through each question and choose which answer would best fit the ethical dilemma? I think for larger ethical dilemmas, yes, but for small ethical dilemmas, not so much. 

The first quote that jumped out to me was, "Kant argued that doing what is right is not about the consequences of our actions (something over which we ultimately have no control) but about having the proper intention in performing the action." The point about having the proper intentions in performing the action really resonated with me. I think it captures a lot of what the article was talking about in that you have to think about how and why you are choosing the answer to the ethical decision.

The second quote that jumped out to me was, "Nevertheless, it is not always advisable to follow our immediate intuitions, especially in particularly complicated or unfamiliar situations." I'm the type of person that goes with my gut and immediate intuitions. Like when you're taking a test you're supposed to go with your first answer and not change it because you're usually right the first time. After reading the article it does make sense that you do not go with immediate intuitions because you may not have the best answer right away for a difficult ethical dilemma.

Source: http://www.brown.edu/academics/science-and-technology-studies/framework-making-ethical-decisions