Ethical DisastersGroup 8

By Dominique Amos, Josh Seuss, Alex Finkelstein, Mike Hite, Kevin Hao

Ford Pinto

Designed and produced in the late 60s Went on sale September 11, 1970 Introduced after only 22 months of concept to

production Was conceived not to weigh an ounce over 2000 lbs

and not cost anything over $2000 Curb weight 2015-2270 lbs

The Flaw

Fuel tank placed on the underside of the car right behind the exposed bolts of the rear axle

The fuel tank would rupture in read end crash speeds of at least 25mph

Exposed bolts only cause further damage to the tank when it become pushed forward in crashes

The now leaking fuel now needed only a spark from the scraping metal of the crash to ignite

The Fatal Combination

Crashes at speeds of at least 40 mph would crumple the car in such a way that the doors would jam and be unable to open

This scenario along with the ignited fuel from meant that people would become trapped and burn to death within the vehicle

Fuel tank problem was discovered in early testing

Possible Preventions

Using the better designed tank of the Ford Capri

Not used because Lee Iacocca wanted the Pinto in showrooms by 1971

This cut down on production planning by over 18 months

This particular problem was never brought to Iacocca’s attention because any previous problems brought to him were quickly brushed aside

Another fix was a plastic shield between the tank and exposed bolts and a better designed fuel filler neck that reduced rupture rates

Ethical Violations

This negligence is a direct violation of the 1st rule of ethics in the IEEE in which engineers should accept responsibility in making decisions consistent with the safety health and welfare of the public and to disclose factors that might endanger the public or environment.

Ford decided against a last minute redesign based on a cost-benefit model

Calculated that selling as is and paying for customer damages would amount to ~$45 million

Calculated that a redesign would cost ~169 million Ford decided on the former and was hit with

lawsuits in the late 70s

Consequences

In one lawsuit in 1978 a California jury awarded $128 million in a lawsuit stemming from an auto accident

More lawsuits came after In 1978 Ford recalled 1.5 million Pintos Ford was this first company indicted in a reckless

homicide trial and acquitted Ford ceased production on the Pinto in 1980 after

the car’s reputation was destroyed

Three Mile Island

Combination of human, mechanical, and electrical failure Misconnected water hose due to poorly labelled fittings Failsafe was devised years earlier but never fully

implemented Design flaw in unit 2

Steam entered at an angle that blew water into condenser vacuum

Cased condenser to shutdown

Misread valve readings

L’Ambiance Plaza Collapse

Bridgeport Connecticut April 23, 1987 Was to be a sixteen story building with 13 floors of

apartments and 3 levels for parking. Midway through construction the plaza collapsed 28 Construction workers were killed

The Flaws

Disregard for safety standards Design flaws resulting from subcontracting Lack of accountability

The Collapse

Inadequate Design, improper building regulations, poor quality assurance Improper slab and shear design Inadequate concrete section No temporary bracing – stability problems Use of broken rock fill under footings Defective welding

Prevention

Design by single contractor

Accountability checks

Ethical Violations

IEEE and NSPE violations to public safety and high standards

ACM quality and effectiveness of work ACM professional review

Our Project – Malware Detection

Software Product No lives depend on it Ethical considerations are still important Price is not an ethical issue

Make sure the product is advertised so functionality is clear

Looking at meeting customer’s expectations through more than a business view

Our Project – Malware Detection

Make sure the product is advertised so that functionality is clear The System only detects malware; it does not

remove it. It is user initiated, so there is no continually

running process. The user must input what file/s they want scanned.

Our Project – Malware Detection

Meeting customer’s expectations through more than a business perspective Updating malware database

Newer malware will decrease the reliability of our system if it is not included in our database

To keep the product useful over the subscription period, new definitions are needed as new malware is discovered.

Customer could act against better judgement on our systems recommendation

Our Project – Malware Detection

Meeting customer’s expectations through more than a business perspectiveEnsure continued compatibility

Product works with Windows which has updates every day

Updates often cause issues with other softwareCustomer paid for a subscription to find that

the next update causes our system to no longer function