Can we say the software code of ethics is an inflexible pot-pouri of principles?
Human is infallible, viable of making errors so when it designs the product, the testing of the product is as essential phase as the designing. But the companies due to time lag are not able to devote the required time span to the testing phase. In Hartford incident, the programmer of the CAD software used to design the coliseum incorrectly assumed the steel roof supports would only face pure compression. This design was also supposed to be delivered on time, and thus the smallest designing flaw lead to the biggest disaster. ACM/ IEEE had created their cannons, but some of their cannons are overlapping. In order to fulfill client’s interest sometimes the firms are ready to compromise with essentials of public, product, management and judgment principles. There is no authority to check whether the code of ethics is being strictly followed or not. Similar failures of software had been repeated in history and had cause major loss to the society. This problem stated above is not only with
