Evaluating the claim “computers are good for people.”

Computers are one of, if not the most unique invention in human history. Computers are uniquely positioned among the category of tool, because of their flexibility and versatility. A hammer can be used for many things beyond banging and pulling nails, but the sheer number of useful purposes are indeed somewhat limited and primarily focused in the construction industry. Computers however are found in every industry performing an enormous number of functions and this number is growing steadily.

Any tool in and of itself does not possess a moral character, it is how the tool is used and for what motive which determines the morality, after all, the moral element of any act is inevitably linked to the motives of a person, not an object: the object is merely the conduit of the human motives. So up until very recent times, it is reasonable to conclude any computer was simply a tool carrying out a set of instructions (program), and the programmer would be held morally liable for any evil carried out through the use of the computer. A clear example is black hat hacking to steal credit card numbers from a private company then using those number to commit fraud.
Interestingly, there is going to come a point in the near future, if not already upon us, where computers have the capability to program themselves to a high degree of sophistication. With enough advancement these programs will have the innate capabilities to carry out their own programming and write their own internal logic and “code of conduct”. This capability would open a new layer of inquiry regarding the claim “Computers are good for people” because for the first time in human history there is a chance a tool will have the capabilities to make decisions that can be morally judged.

Seeing myself as a bit of a futurist I believe this is likely to be a turning point in history because there are very few people currently actively engaging in conversations regarding the morality of machines because it is an invisible factor which is entering our lives in an ever increasing manner. Bottom line, we are already yielding decision making authority to computers, but this decision making is still largely performed by relatively simple algorithms which can be easily understood and morally judged.
What happens when the level of sophistication of decision making machines raises to the point to where no human being, or groups of human beings possess the intellectual faculty to comprehend the actual mechanics of the decision making? What happens when the decision making algorithm is not transparent, is protected by trade secret laws, or by military secrecy? There is going to be a point in the near future where human beings are going to have to yield a large proportion of their decision making authority to machines.

Assuming the natural progression of technology it is clear we will be yielding authority, control, and by definition power to computers and the decisions they will be making by proxy on our behalf. This transference of power will be unprecedented in human history and will represent the largest shift of global control in history, dwarfing any past government or social structure. The collective moral “goodness” is essential to debate and comprehend… our lives may literally depend on it.

Then and only then will we be able to evaluation the “goodness” of computers based on the overall effectiveness the computers improve the health and welfare of human beings. If history serves as a guide, the increase in capabilities of computers will overall be good, but let’s make no mistake, this is by far uncharted territory.