The same ACM that didn't care about a well-known security hole at a contractor's site - affecting thousands of scientists - for several years [1]?

The same ACM that calls verbatim plagiarism "sloppy scholarship" [2]?

The same ACM that doesn't seem to have an official position on excessive state surveillance [3]?

I am no longer a member.

[1] https://raphaelwimmer.wordpress.com/2011/09/07/sheridan-secu...

[2] https://raphaelwimmer.wordpress.com/2016/12/20/acm-ethics-pl...

[3] http://www.acm.org/public-policy/public-policy-statements (in contrast, the German Chapter of the ACM / Gesellschaft for Informatik has condemned excessive surveillance multiple times in the past)

Do you disagree with the content of the standards posted, or with the professional ethos of the ACM? There's a substantive distinction to be made there.

I like the Code of Ethics. I have trouble with ACM's handling of ethical issues. With my comment I more or less wanted to point out the difference between both but should have elaborated on this.

ACM could be satan incarnate and still give useful advice on professional ethics for software engineers.

AFAICT no link given in the comments here so far comes anywhere close to the ACM page in terms of providing broad but concrete advice.

Indeed. I should have clarified this in my comment instead of just ranting.

The ACM Code of Ethics is important. It was one of the reasons I joined ACM. However, (IMHO) ACM [1] has not necessarily practiced what it preaches in the past.

Given that much of the discussion in this thread is about unions and professional organizations, I wanted to clarify that ACM might not be the best organization to join if you are concerned about ethics.

[1] I'm talking about its administration and committees, not its members. There are quite a few highly ethical and motivated people in the SIGs.