Suppose Alice works for a company that designs commercial solar panels. Her job is to test prototypes for defects

and risks. In the company's new design SP$3333,$ there is a defect: Short circuits and overheating of a key

component are likely when the ambient air temperature rises above $50$ degrees Celsius. However, despite testing

SP$3333,$ Alice never comes across any defect because none of her tests are carried out above $50$ degrees. Because

Alice approves SP$3333,$ it is developed for the market. When SP$3333$ has been on the market for one year, a fire is

reported due to a short circuit that happened in conditions of high ambient air temperature. Alice claims that she

is not responsible for the fire. What is the best thing to conclude about this situation?

Alice is legally but not morally responsible for the fire.

Alice is only responsible for the risk of fire, but not responsible for the actual occurrence of the fire since her

tests were carried out long before the actual fire broke out.

Alice has active but not passive responsibility for product defects.

Alice is not morally responsible for the fire because she did not know about the problem.

Alice can be morally responsible for the fire even if she did not predict that it was possible.

Suppose that for fun, Janssen purposely hacks information from the email account of a colleague without

permission. Which of the following conditions of passive responsibility is Janssen missing in such a case?

The causal contribution condition

The foreseeability condition

The wrongdoing condition

All of the conditions of passive moral responsibility are met

Which of the following best explains the fact that it is possible for an engineer to have conflicting responsibilities

as a result of being both an employee of a company and a professional engineer.

Total responsibility

Responsibility to be trustworthy

Role responsibility

Passive responsibility