Who's better to decide on the ethical implications of new technologies than those making it? It seems logical, but it's a grey area, like the mysterious mist over a morning lake.

Picture this: You're a tech expert, inventing something super cool (let's say a robot). This robot is programmed to help with domestic chores but has the potential to also be programmed for less friendly tasks, like warfare. You're not doing it, but someone else might. So, who's responsible? You, for creating it, or them, for misusing it?

A real-world parallel of this dilemma popped up with WikiLeaks, Edward Snowden, and Christopher Wylie (remember Cambridge Analytica?). These guys saw some shady stuff happening in the tech world and blew the whistle. But was it ethical? That's like asking if pineapple belongs on pizza – it's a tough question and opinions vary.

Okay, let's jump into our time machine and head back to 2018, when 4,000 Google engineers said, "Nope, we're not doing this". They protested against Google's involvement in defence-related AI technologies (Project Maven), which helped interpret video images of drone strikes. This action is a bit like the school going on strike because they didn't want the cafeteria serving mystery meat anymore.

The engineers had a bunch of reasons for their protest:

• No War Please, We're Google: They believed Google should avoid the "business of war". It's like a vegan working at a butcher's shop - doesn't really match, does it?

• Maven's Mess: The Project Maven used AI to collect and interpret data for the US Ministry of Defence. Imagine your science project being used to decide who gets detention - not cool!

• Employee Unease: Some employees were as comfortable with this as a cat in a swimming pool. They voiced their concerns to the company.

• Company's Counter: Google responded saying the tech wouldn't be directly used in warfare (like operating drones or launching weapons). But it’s like saying, “We’re giving you a car, but we’re not directly driving it to rob a bank.”

• Employee Rebuttal: The employees disagreed, as the technology was still being used for military purposes. It's like saying, "I won't throw the stone, but I'll hand it to the person who will."

• Risk to Reputation: Google's reputation could take a hit, making it as popular as a skunk at a lawn party. It could impact their ability to attract the best employees and succeed in business.

• Don't Be THAT Company: Google didn't want to be grouped with companies that directly worked with warfare tech. It’s like avoiding the troublesome group at school who always gets in trouble.

• Don’t Be Evil: This was Google's motto and the engineers felt it was being violated. If they lost this, they might lose user trust, like a baker losing his secret dough recipe.

The engineers demanded Google immediately cancel the project and never be involved in warfare tech. It's a bit like saying, "From now on, we only bake vegan pastries - no exceptions!"

So, there you have it. As a tech professional, you're not just coding, you're also deciding on the ethical usage of your creations. A little like a superhero, but with a keyboard instead of a cape.