Month: February 2018

 

I first read the BBC News article that details some of the information in the millions of classified documents.  I wasn’t so surprised about learning that the NSA listens in on millions of Americans.  I was shocked about hearing that they also surveilled several UN Ambassadors.  But there were so many different pieces of information that I was reading about that I started to get confused.  I couldn’t figure out what his motivations were or why he chose these specific documents.  They seemed so broad that it clouded any ethical goal he claimed to have had and made it seem like he was just leaking the information because he could.  Then I read the Washington Post article about Edward Snowden’s impact.  They described everything I was feeling and put some reasoning behind it that made sense to me.

Eventually I was able to get a clearer vision of what his goal was.  He wanted to bring attention to the way that these government agencies were using Section 215 of the Patriot Act to justify and allow these surveillances and seemingly infringe upon our privacy.  This section specifically allowed “access to records and other items”.  Up until Snowden’s leak, this allowed the bulk collection of phone metadata by agencies by the NSA through phone companies like Verizon.  They were performing what they called third hop queries.  “A three-hop query means that the NSA can look at data not only from a suspected terrorist, but from everyone that suspect communicated with, and then from everyone those people communicated with, and then from everyone all of those people communicated with.”  In 2015, this section was not renewed when the USA Freedom Act was passed, which replaced the Patriot Act.  So in a way, Snowden was successful in making some sort of an impact on the way that the government goes about collecting information on people.

However, I think there are a lot of problems with the way Snowden went about this.  He stole over a million classified documents, without even reading them.  He just handed them over without knowing what exactly was in them.  If he had only leaked the information about collecting phone records, I think it would have been received a lot differently.  But then he also leaked information about the way the government surveils other countries.  Thank goodness we didn’t start any wars as a result of this, because I feel like that was a very real possibility!  At the very least he definitely hurt some international relations.  And I honestly don’t care that my government may or may not be listening to my phone calls if I happened to be “three hop queries” away from someone possibly connected to a terrorist organization.  That is exactly the kind of thing I expect the National SECURITY Agency to do if it helps keep me safe.

I do not think that what he did was beneficial to the public.  I do think he harmed the security of the United States and its allies.  I don’t think that these revelations impacted my views on government and national security.  I think that these agencies are doing what they need to do in order to maintain our security.  As far as my opinion of technology, I think it is smart of these agencies to take advantage of all of the information that is already out there and use it to gain intelligence.  I don’t think he should be pardoned.  There is a reason that leaking that type of information is illegal, and when you do something illegal you have to go to jail.  That is not an attack on whistleblowers, because I really don’t think that what he did constitutes as whistleblowing.

I believe one of the most important parts of our guide is the information on the different types of interviews.  When I first started looking for internships, I did not even know there were different types.  I figured that the types of questions they would ask you would differ based on the job you were interviewing for, but I did not have any idea that something like a technical or a case interview existed.  The best piece of advice I have ever received was to look at things like a company’s mission statement.  Being able to incorporate key phrases from that statement into a cover letter or interview answers really stands out to interviewers.  From my internships experiences, companies really try to encourage employees to take their mottos to heart.

I’m not sure if changing curriculums is our answer.  I do recognize that we are spending more and more time on job searches and interview prep.  But I believe part of that is because, especially in computer science, there are so many different paths you can take post-undergrad.  There is the software engineering route, which deals with heavy coding.  Classes like Data Science and Algorithms prepare us for the technical interviews.  There are also a lot of IT and consulting related routes.  Having technical background as well as soft skills are important for these types of jobs.  In addition, Notre Dame offers a CSE Case Study class.  And in addition to those two paths, there is always the option of more schooling by going into grad school and computer science research.  What we need is some resource that can tell us about the different paths that a computer science degree might best prepare you for.  And then, when it comes to computer science electives, which ones are best for which of those paths.

On January 28th, 1986, the Challenger took off at 11:38am, and promptly exploded 75 seconds later.  This horrible tragedy took the lives of seven people, including a high school teacher.  But worst of all, it was something that could have been prevented.  The night before the launch, a meeting was conducted to determine if it was safe to launch.  Issues were brought up due to such low temperatures; there were concerns that the O-ring seals would not hold in colder temperatures.  The coldest temperature they rockets were tested in was 54 degrees Fahrenheit, according to the engineering company who manufactured the rockets, Morton Thiokol.  The temperature that day was below freezing.  The decision to ignore these concerns and go ahead with the launch then caused the death of those seven people.

The night before the launch, a call did take place that was supposed to determine if the launch would happen or not.  But the call might as well not have happened.  Roger Boisjoly and other engineers alerted NASA to the risks with the O-rings in low temperatures.  He claims to have even reported this issue to managers the year prior, and an investigation reveals that NASA was aware of the issue as far back as 1977.  Although Boisjoly wrote a memo about the issue, “The result would be a catastrophe of the highest order — loss of human life”, and yet at NASA it was regarded as an “acceptable error”.  This disparity in categorization of this issues could have been caused by many things, one of them simply being culture.

The idea of “groupthink” is brought up in How Challenger Exploded, and Other Mistakes Were Made.  It is describes as a “mode of thinking” where in a tight-knit group, members are more inclined to have a unanimous voice rather than bring up opposing ideas and cause a disturbance.  From the readings, it seems that this could describe the environment around NASA.  When talking about that infamous phone call the night before the launch, Allan McDonald, who was also labelled a “whistleblower” for this incident, said “It wasn’t what they wanted to hear,” when talking about urging NASA to postpone the launch.  That idea that they needed to tell NASA what they wanted to hear is a huge concern.  Especially when pleasing NASA comes before the lives of people.  This was something that Boisjoly and McDonald wanted to be sure was brought to light.

Boisjoly and McDonld made a very brave decision when deciding to come forward with this information.  They risked their jobs and reputations, which ended up being a very real risk because they were treated as lepers and black-balled from the space industry.  I am thankful for the sacrifices they made in deciding to “blow the whistle”.  I believe in situations like this people need to be held accountable.  Before they went forward, it was looking like the O-ring issue was going to be swept under the rug, as well as the fact that it was brought up and then promptly ignored.  Situations like this should not occur in the future, although we already know that it did happen again with NASA and the re-entry of Columbia in 2003.  Even though it seems as though the Challenger events were unable to prevent something like Columbia from happening, I am hopeful that there have possibly been other engineering failures that were listened to, and would have otherwise been ignored.

 

I remember when the story about the engineer from Uber first came out and all of the emotions I felt at that time.  I was happy and proud of that woman for having the courage to speak out about her experiences.  At the same time, I was terrified.  Could I handle the tech world if this is what women in the field faced? It was one of the first times I felt fear to enter the workforce out of fear of harassment.  I had always known that technology and other STEM fields were ones dominated by men, and I had always felt that I was prepared to handle this because I knew I could prove myself if I needed to.  But how to deal with harassment was not something I studied in my engineering courses.

If you claim that a lack of diversity is not a problem in the technology industry, then I hope that you never have to experience what other women and minorities have had to go through in this field.  This opinion is part of the problem.  Some of the stories I read were shocking, like Susan Fowler’s story from her Uber experience, and others were not as surprising, like Bethanye Blount’s story of trying to give an interview.  The ones that were not as shocking were still difficult to hear.  The reason they were not as shocking is because it was the type of indirect sexism that even I am used to by now.

When I think about subtle sexism, I think back to my intro to engineering course.  I was a sophomore at Saint Mary’s at this time (for our engineering program we start taking classes at Notre Dame our sophomore year).  And even though I had only been at our all girls’ school for a year, I had become so used to working with only women.  During our monthly Saint Mary’s SWE meeting, the juniors in the program warned us that we might experience some “arrogance” from some of the incoming freshman boys.  Then, during our second project of the class, I was in a group with three boys and a girl, all from Notre Dame.  And overall, the project went very well and I have no complaints about my group members.  There was one day though, where we were figuring out some heavy math figures.  And me, being the sophomore math major who was currently in physics and had just learned all of the equations we were using, figured I could help with this task.  I struggled to get past two of the boys going back and forth arguing about two sets of equally incorrect figures.  Eventually I just sat back, quietly did all of the calculations myself, and waited for my chance to say, “oh hey are these the numbers you were trying to get?”  And suddenly it was like my invisibility cloak had been lifted.

Indirect sexism is the hardest thing to combat in our field.  While more severe forms of sexism like sexual harassment are definitely a very real issue, sometimes the more subtle forms of sexism are more dangerous because of their less obvious nature.  I’m sure the boys I was working with were not trying to make me feel like my opinion did not matter, but their intent is not the issue.  People need to be more aware of the affect their actions have on other people.  It is true that people have biases.  The only way we can begin to close that gender gap and work towards a more inclusive environment is by learning to recognize when we are feeling those biases, and then choosing to ignore them.

I have had a unique exposure to what work-life balance can be.  My father passed away when I was young, so my mom has been our sole caregiver for the majority of my life.  She has worked for the same telecommunications company for her entire adult life.  When we were hit with our tragedy back in 2002, they allowed her to work from home full time.  It was really the best option for her – it gave her the flexibility to be there for us if we needed her, and she was able to keep working and provide for us.  Growing up, I knew she worked a lot.  But I also knew it was a necessity for us.  She always wanted us to live the lifestyle we would have lived, had my dad been around.  So she worked harder and pushed herself to work longer hours, and to go the extra mile so she could get the best bonuses.

In recent years I have paid more attention to the hours she works and how she makes time for her friends and family.  Now that my brother and I are both in college, I hear of her making more trips to go see her friends.  And after years of being a single mom, I’m starting to hear about her being set up on blind dates.  While she misses having my brother and I at home, I am happy to see her have the chance to have more of a social life.  She tells me that for fifteen years, her only priorities were my brother and me, and her job.  I never knew of her having hobbies outside of her family or her job.  But, we did get to go on plenty of vacations as a family and we did a lot of things together.  Obviously I hope that I will not be forced to be my family’s sole caregiver like my mother was, but despite her not choosing this situation, I admire her for how she has risen to the challenge.  No matter what ends up happening in my life, I hope that I can perform as well as she has at her job, while being an amazing parent.

There is a lot that companies can do to promote a healthy work-life balance.  The United States is not known for having the best maternity or paternity leave policies.  By the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, companies are required to give 12 weeks of unpaid maternity leave to new mothers.  Numerous other countries give as many as 18 weeks of paid leave.  There are also more opportunities for fathers to take paternity leave.  And some companies do go that extra mile and give more leave than the required amount.  But most companies only give the bare minimum.  And, when it comes time for parents to come back to work full time, they may struggle to make the adjustment.  They may come back part time, which may cause them to fall behind at work.  Having more of a support system from employers would really help new parents to stay engaged and motivated at work.

I have heard information about vacation time from two of the companies I am considering for full time hire next year.  One of them starts off with 2 weeks of vacation, which I have heard is pretty standard.  Then, while doing an interview last week, one of the interviewers mentioned that as a new hire, he received 5 weeks of vacation time, that they encouraged their employees to take advantage of.  I think my jaw dropped in the middle of the interview.  I had never considered asking for more vacation time as a negotiating point, but I might consider asking for more from the other company.  I really liked that the company that offered 5 weeks encouraged their employees to take advantage of this vacation time and to have hobbies outside of work.  This would be nice to use for traveling while I’m young.  And looking into the future, it would be great to have that level of flexibility once I have kids.  I hope more companies take initiatives like this to make working for them more enticing.

We have three main sections to our code of ethics: integrity, community, and engagement.  As Notre Dame Computer Science students, we thought that we should all strive to be honest and hard working, in addition to making a positive impact on the community.  Our community section mostly had to do with how we interacted with each other.  We wanted us to be respectful and supportive and to work towards creating a better environment for future students.  The engagement section refers to engaging with each other, engaging in our work, and engaging in global issues.  We tried to address not only how to act while at Notre Dame, but to give guidelines on how to act once we leave this place.

While we cover many topics, we do have some weaknesses.  I think our organization of our ideas could have been more graceful.  There are many points that could fall under multiple categories.  We had a lot of ideas and found it difficult to place them under a single category.  I think having more categories that are more specific could have helped this.

I believe that having a code of ethics is useful.  Having a something to strive for in regards to how to conduct oneself.  And if everyone works together to create that type of environment, it will be a better place for everyone.  And if we all then take these ideals out into the real world, we could start to make a change in the world.  And all of this would be really wonderful, but only if we all actually took the time and effort to read and abide by our own code of ethics.  I believe it was useful to put into words the principles that were in my head.  That way, when I go out into the workforce, I can look for a work environment that embodies those same morals.