DOCSLIB.ORG

The Internet and Ethical Values

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & BartlettCHAPTER Learning, 1 LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Light: © sakkmesterke/Shutterstock; Gavel: © Maksim Kabakou/Shutterstock Gavel: © sakkmesterke/Shutterstock; Light: The end [of ethics] is The Internet and action, not knowledge. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC 1 NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONEthical Values NOT FOR SALE—Aristotle OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC ManyNOT decadesFOR SALE have passedOR DISTRIBUTION since the fi rst communications wereNOT trans- FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION mitted over a fl edgling global network, which would later be called the Internet. At the time, few would have predicted the Internet’s explosive growth and persistent encroachment on our personal and professional © Jones & Bartlettlives. This Learning, radically decentralizedLLC network has been© Jones described & Bartlett in lofty Learning, LLC terms as empowering and democratizing. It has lived up to this ideal by NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION creating opportunity for many new voices with extraordinary reach. Although the claim that the Internet will revolutionize communica- tions may be hyperbole, there is no doubt that the Internet has the po- tential to magnify the power of the individual and fortify democratic © Jones & Bartlett Learning,processes. LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONMany governments, however,NOT are clearly FOR threatenedSALE OR by DISTRIBUTION some of this decentralized power and they have sought to impose some centralized controls on this anarchic network. The United States has attempted to regulate speech through the ill-fated Communications Decency Act and to restrict the use of encryption technology through its key recovery scheme.© Jones More & draconianBartlett regulationsLearning, have LLC been imposed by countries© Jones like & Bartlett Learning, LLC Iran,NOT China, FOR and SALE Saudi OR Arabia. DISTRIBUTION The Net and its stakeholders haveNOT stead- FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION fastly resisted the imposition of such controls, and this has led to many of the tensions and controversies we consider throughout this text. Although the control of technology through law and regulation © Jones & Bartletthas often Learning, been a futile LLC effort, “correcting” technology© Jones &with Bartlett other Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION 1 © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION 9781284082593_CH01_001-030.indd 1 13/11/15 4:50 PM © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION 2 Chapter 1 The Internet and Ethical Values © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC technology has been more effective. The regime of law has had a hard NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION time suppressing the dissemination of pornography on the Internet, but blocking software systems that filter out indecent material have been much more successful. This reflects the Net’s paradoxical nature— it empowers individuals and allows them to exercise their rights such © Jones & Bartlettas free speechLearning, more LLCvigorously, but it also makes© Jones possible & Bartletteffective Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALEtechnical OR controlsDISTRIBUTION that can undermine those rights.NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Although the primary axis of discussion in this text is the ethical issues that surface on the Internet, we must devote attention to these related matters of cyber governance and public policy. Thus, we ex- © Jones & Bartlett Learning,plore LLCin some detail the tensions© Jonesbetween & the Bartlett radical Learning,empowerment LLC that the Net allows and the impulse to tame this technology through NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION laws and other mechanisms. Because this is a text about ethics, about acting well in this new realm of cyberspace, we begin by reviewing some basic concepts that will enrich our moral assessment of these issues. Hence, in this intro- ductory© Jones chapter & Bartlett our purpose Learning, is to provide LLC a concise overview© of Jones the & Bartlett Learning, LLC traditionalNOT FOR ethical SALE frameworks OR DISTRIBUTION that can guide our analysis of theNOT moral FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION dilemmas and social problems that arise in cyberspace. More important, we also elaborate here on the two underlying assumptions of this work: (1) the directive and architectonic role of moral ideals and principles in determining responsible behavior in cy- © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC berspace and (2) the capacity of free and responsible human beings NOT FOR SALEto exercise OR DISTRIBUTION some control over the forces of technologyNOT FOR (technological SALE OR DISTRIBUTION realism). Let us begin with the initial premise concerning the proper role of cyberethics. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONCyberethics and theNOT “Law FOR of SALE the OR Horse” DISTRIBUTION An ethical norm such as the imperative to be truthful is just one exam- ple of a constraint on our behavior. In the real world, there are other constraints, including the laws of civil society or even the social pres- sures© Jones of the &communities Bartlett Learning, in which we LLC live and work. There are© many Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC forcesNOT atFOR work SALE limiting OR our DISTRIBUTION behavior, but where does ethics fit NOTin? FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION This same question can be posed about cyberspace, and to help us reflect on this question we turn to the framework of Larry Lessig. In his highly influential book, Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace, Lessig © Jones & Bartlettfirst describes Learning, the four LLC constraints that regulate© Jonesour behavior & Bartlett in real Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALEspace: OR law, DISTRIBUTION norms, the market, and code. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Laws, according to Lessig, are rules imposed by the government that are enforced through ex post sanctions. There is, for example, the © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION 9781284082593_CH01_001-030.indd 2 13/11/15 4:50 PM © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Cyberethics and the “Law of the Horse” 3 © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC complicated IRS tax code, a set of laws that dictates how much taxes NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION we owe the federal government. If we break these laws, we can be sub- jected to fines or other penalties levied by the government. Thanks to law’s coercive pedagogy, those who get caught violating tax laws are usually quick to reform. © Jones & BartlettSocial Learning, norms, on theLLC other hand, are expressions© Jones of the &community. Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALEMost ORcommunities DISTRIBUTION have a well-defined senseNOT of normalcy, FOR SALE which OR is DISTRIBUTION reflected in their norms or standards of behavior. Cigar smokers are not usually welcome at most community functions. There may be no laws against cigar smoking in a particular setting, but those who try to © Jones & Bartlett Learning,smoke LLC cigars will most likely be© stigmatized Jones & andBartlett ostracized Learning, by others. LLC When we deviate from these norms, we are behaving in a way that is NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION socially “abnormal.” The third regulative force is the market. The market regulates through the price it sets for goods and services or for labor. Unlike norms and laws, market forces are not an expression of a community and they are imposed© Jones immediately & Bartlett (not Learning, in ex post LLCfashion). Unless you hand over© Jones $2 & Bartlett Learning, LLC atNOT the local FOR Starbucks, SALE OR you DISTRIBUTION cannot walk away with a cup of theirNOT coffee. FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION The final modality of regulation is known as architecture. The world consists of many physical constraints on our behavior; some of these are natural (such as the Rocky Mountains), whereas others © Jones & Bartlettare human Learning, constructs LLC (such as buildings and bridges).© Jones A &room Bartlett with- Learning, LLC out windows imposes certain constraints because no one can see NOT FOR SALEoutside. OR OnceDISTRIBUTION again “ enforcement” is not ex NOTpost, FORbut at SALE the same OR DISTRIBUTION time, the constraint is imposed. Moreover, this architectural constraint is “self-enforcing”—it does not require the intermediation of an agent who makes an arrest or who chastises a member of the community. © Jones & Bartlett Learning,According LLC to Lessig, “the constraints © Jones of architecture & Bartlett are Learning, self-executing LLC 2 NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONin a way
Recommended publications
  • Reflections on Cyberethics Education for Millennial Software Engineers

    Reflections on Cyberethics Education for Millennial Software Engineers

    Reflections on Cyberethics Education for Millennial Software Engineers Claudia de O. Melo Thiago C. de Sousa Faculty of Technology Urbanism and Technology Center University of Bras´ılia State University of Piau´ı Bras´ılia, Brazil Teresina, Brazil Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Abstract—Software is a key component of solutions for challenges to educating millennial software engineers, which 21st Century problems. These problems are often “wicked”, requires continuous innovation in educational systems and complex, and unpredictable. To provide the best possible solution, curricula delivery [2], [7]. millennial software engineers must be prepared to make ethical decisions, thinking critically, and acting systematically. This Moreover, the design of software systems comes with reality demands continuous changes in educational systems and a special set of responsibilities to society that are much curricula delivery, as misjudgment might have serious social broader than those described in existing codes of ethics for impact. This study aims to investigate and reflect on Software computing professionals [8]. While the potential return on Engineering (SE) Programs, proposing a conceptual framework investment in technology is usually high, the increasing pace for analyzing cyberethics education and a set of suggestions on how to integrate it into the SE undergraduate curriculum. of technological innovation raises ethical questions about its development and use [9]. Information and Communications Keywords-cyberethics; millennial software
  • Motivations Behind Software Piracy: from the Viewpoint of Computer Ethics Theories

    Motivations Behind Software Piracy: from the Viewpoint of Computer Ethics Theories

    Motivations behind Software Piracy: From the viewpoint of Computer Ethics Theories University of Oulu Department of Information Processing Science Master’s Thesis Bethelhem Tadele Oulu 2013 Abstract Computer Ethics is a study of ethical issues that are related mainly with computing machines and computing profession. The features of internet that, it is global and interactive, it allows users to stay anonymous, and it enables reproducibility of information possible unlike before makes the online behavior morally different. Computer ethics studies the nature and social influence of computing machines and ethical issues in formulating and justification of policies. Software Piracy, which is the unauthorized use or copying of software illegally, has become a major problem for businesses and it is widespread in many parts of the world which led to drain of economy. As the access to use computer grows, the percentage for using pirated software also grows. The Business Software Alliance (BSA) and the Software Publishers Association (SPA) made estimation (2010) that there are two-ten illegal copies of software are available for every legal copy of software sold. Software piracy is one of the most remarkable among computer ethics’ breaches. Unlike other activities like hacking and security breaches, which are outright illegal, software piracy technically covers a gray area of ethical principles, as they relate to computers and information technology. This is because people might inadvertently commit the act without realizing that they are ethically/morally/legally wrong. When one buys software, it means that they actually are buying the software license but not the software. This is similar to artistic copyrights, where a composer/artist holds the license to his work and gains monetary compensation on a licensing basis.
  • Information Ethics in the Context of Information Literacy

    Information Ethics in the Context of Information Literacy

    Proinflow: časopis pro informační vědy 2/2016 Information ethics in the context of information Literacy Františka Tomoriová Comenius University on Bratislava, Department of Library and Information Science Abstract The concept of information ethics is quite extensive. It is necessary to deal with it also with regard to information literacy, as prove recent and traditional concepts and definitions of information literacy with incorporated ethical espects. Information ethics and information literacy are closely connected, as illustrates the RPT (R-Resource, P-Product, T-Target) model of information ethics created by Luciano Floridi1, Christine Bruce's model of Seven Faces of information literacy, which deals with ethical aspects in connection with wise use of information2 and Nancy Tuana's concept of moral literacy3. Critical thinking is perceived as necessary in the context of both information literacy and information ethics. As Richard Paul4 stresses, information ethics without critical thinking can lead to indoctrination. On the basis of these approaches were created visualizations of connection between information ethics and information literacy. Keywords: information ethics, information literacy, crithical thinking 1 FLORIDI, Luciano. 2013. The Ethics of Information. United States of America: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199641321. 2 BRUCE, Christine. The Seven Faces of Information Literacy. Australia: Auslib Press, 1997. ISBN 978- 1875145430. 3 TUANA, Nancy. Conceptualizing Moral Literacy. Journal of Educational Administration [online]. 2007, 45(4), 364-378 [cit. 2016-06-16]. Retrieved from: http://site.ebrary.com/lib/uniba/reader.action?docID=10196373 4 PAUL, Richard. Ethics Without Indoctrination. In: The Critical Thinking Community [online]. 2013 [cit. 2016- 06-16]. Retrieved from: http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/ethics-without-indoctrination/494 85 Františka Tomoriová Information ethics in the context..
  • The Society of Enhanced Legal Scholars, Seven of Nine, and Some Regulatory Challenges for Future Generations by Roger Brownsword

    The Society of Enhanced Legal Scholars, Seven of Nine, and Some Regulatory Challenges for Future Generations by Roger Brownsword

    The Society of Enhanced Legal Scholars, Seven of Nine, and some regulatory challenges for future generations by Roger Brownsword INTRODUCTION REGULATORY LEGITIMACY: THREE evelopments in information and communication SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT technologies have transformed the way that Where human enhancement is simply cheating by Dlawyers work. Nowadays, the electronic resources another name, we should obviously take a negative view. are so swift, comprehensive and convenient that However, if the rules permit enhancement, or if the researching the law only occasionally involves consulting situation is not competitive, is a negative view still the hard copy sources in the library. Imagine, though, that appropriate? If regulators permit (even encourage) further developments of this kind, coupled with physical and intellectual improvement, why prohibit developments in biotechnologies and nanotechnologies, as technologies for human enhancement? Does it make sense, well as in human brain/machine interfacing, reach a stage for example, to argue that regulators should permit the at which all legal source materials are on a tiny chip connected to the human brain. With such enabling application of technologies to correct impairment (such as technology, the lawyers of the future will be more than failing eyesight) but not to enhance human capacities (for advanced, they will be enhanced. Should we welcome example, to equip a person with X-ray or all-round vision)? enhancing developments of this kind? Should we try to How do we sort out the ethical wheat from the chaff? resist them or confine them? How should regulators What is the appropriate standard of regulatory legitimacy? respond? What kind of regulatory environment should be Broadly speaking, ethical argument adopts one of three set for a community of potentially enhanced citizens, basic forms: namely, goal-orientated (consequentialism), lawyers, and law-enforcers? rights-based and duty-based forms.
  • Classical Ethics in A/IS

    Classical Ethics in A/IS

    The IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems Classical Ethics in A/IS We applied classical ethics methodologies to considerations of algorithmic design in autonomous and intelligent systems (A/IS) where machine learning may or may not reflect ethical outcomes that mimic human decision-making. To meet this goal, we drew from classical ethics theories and the disciplines of machine ethics, information ethics, and technology ethics. As direct control over tools becomes further removed, creators of autonomous systems must ask themselves how cultural and ethical presumptions bias artificially intelligent creations. Such introspection is more necessary than ever because the precise and deliberate design of algorithms in self-sustained digital systems will result in responses based on such design. By drawing from over two thousand years’ worth of classical ethics traditions, we explore established ethics systems, including both philosophical traditions (utilitarianism, virtue ethics, and deontological ethics) and religious and culture-based ethical systems (Buddhism, Confucianism, African Ubuntu traditions, and Japanese Shinto) and their stance on human morality in the digital age.1 In doing so, we critique assumptions around concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice, and we attempt to carry these inquiries into artificial systems’ decision-making processes. Through reviewing the philosophical foundations that define autonomy and ontology, we address the potential for autonomous capacity of artificially intelligent systems, posing questions of morality in amoral systems and asking whether decisions made by amoral systems can have moral consequences. Ultimately, we address notions of responsibility and accountability for the decisions made by autonomous systems and other artificially intelligent technologies.
  • Guide to the Raymond M. Herbenick Papers

    Guide to the Raymond M. Herbenick Papers

    University of Dayton eCommons Guides to Archival and Special Collections University Libraries January 2014 Guide to the Raymond M. Herbenick papers Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.udayton.edu/finding_aid eCommons Citation "Guide to the Raymond M. Herbenick papers" (2014). Guides to Archival and Special Collections. 22. https://ecommons.udayton.edu/finding_aid/22 This Finding Aid is brought to you for free and open access by the University Libraries at eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Guides to Archival and Special Collections by an authorized administrator of eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Guide to the Raymond M. Herbenick papers, 1965-1998 UASC.025 Finding aid prepared by Rachel DeHart This finding aid was produced using the Archivists' Toolkit September 27, 2012 Describing Archives: A Content Standard University Archives and Special Collections University of Dayton 300 College Park Dayton, Ohio, 45469-1360 937-229-4256 [email protected] Guide to the Raymond M. Herbenick papers, 1965-1998 UASC.025 Table of Contents Summary Information ............................................................................................................................. 3 Biography of Raymond M. Herbenick..........................................................................................................4 Scope and Content.........................................................................................................................................4
  • An Introduction to Cybersecurity Ethics MODULE AUTHOR: Shannon Vallor, Ph.D

    An Introduction to Cybersecurity Ethics MODULE AUTHOR: Shannon Vallor, Ph.D

    An Introduction to Cybersecurity Ethics MODULE AUTHOR: Shannon Vallor, Ph.D. William J. Rewak, S.J. Professor of Philosophy, Santa Clara University TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 2-6 PART ONE: What are the important ethical issues in cybersecurity? 7-12 Case Study 1 13-15 PART TWO: Common ethical challenges for cybersecurity professionals 15-21 Case Study 2 21-24 Case Study 3 24-28 PART THREE: What are cybersecurity professionals’ obligations to the public? 29-34 Case Study 4 34-38 PART FOUR: What ethical frameworks can guide cybersecurity practice? 38-47 PART FIVE: What are ethical best practices in cybersecurity? 48-56 Case Study 5 57-60 Case Study 6 60-61 APPENDIX A: Relevant Professional Ethics Codes & Guidelines (Links) 62 APPENDIX B: Bibliography/Further Reading 63-65 1 An Introduction to Cybersecurity Ethics MODULE AUTHOR: Shannon Vallor, Ph.D. William J. Rewak, S.J. Professor of Philosophy, Santa Clara University 1. What do we mean when we talk about ‘ethics’? Ethics in the broadest sense refers to the concern that humans have always had for figuring out how best to live. The philosopher Socrates is quoted as saying in 399 B.C. that “the most important thing is not life, but the good life.”1 We would all like to avoid a bad life, one that is shameful and sad, fundamentally lacking in worthy achievements, unredeemed by love, kindness, beauty, friendship, courage, honor, joy, or grace. Yet what is the best way to obtain the opposite of this – a life that is not only acceptable, but even excellent and worthy of admiration? How do we identify a good life, one worth choosing from among all the different ways of living that lay open to us? This is the question that the study of ethics attempts to answer.
  • Spring 2017 Course Schedule

    Spring 2017 Course Schedule

    SPRING 2017 PHI 1306 Introduction to Logic .01 Sandwisch MWF 9:05-9:55 MORRSN 105 .02 Cartagena MWF 10:10-11:00 MORRSN 105 .03 Guido MWF 11:15-12:05 MORRSN 105 .04 Cartagena MWF 1:25-2:15 MORRSN 105 .05 Brandt MWF 2:30-3:20 MORRSN 106 .06 Thornton TR 9:30-10:45 MORRSN 110 .07 Younger TR 11:00-12:15 MORRSN 108 .08 Thornton2 TR 12:30-1:45 MORRSN 110 .09 L. Rettler TR 2:00-3:15 MORRSN 110 .H1 Buras MWF 11:15-12:05 MORRSN 110 HNR PHI 1307 Critical Thinking .01 Marcum TR 11:00-12:15 MORRSN 110 Logic and Medicine PHI 1308 Introductory Topics in Ethics .01 Tweedt TR 9:30-10:45 MORRSN 107 Contemporary Ethical Issues .02 Beary MWF 11:15-12:05 MORRSN 108 Seven Deadly Sins .03 Wilson TR 2:00-3:15 MORRSN 106 Love and Sex PHI 1309 Introduction to Medical Ethics .01 Colgrove MWF 9:05-9:55 MORRSN 106 PHI 1310 Computer Ethics .01 Younger TR 9:30-10:45 MORRSN 108 PHI 1321 Introductory Topics in Philosophy .01 Anderson TR 9:30-10:45 MORRSN 106 Doubt, Questioning, The Search for Truth .02 Dougherty TR 11:00-12:15 MORRSN 106 C. S. Lewis and Philosophy PHI 2301 Existentialism .01 Sneed MWF 12:20-1:10 MORRSN 108 PHI 3301 Moral Philosophy .01 Beaty MWF 10:10-11:00 MORRSN 108 PHI 3310 History of Philosophy - Classical .01 Schultz 11/1/2016 SPRING 2017 TR 3:30-4:45 MORRSN 106 PHI 3312 History of Philosophy: Modern European .01 Evans TR 9:30-10:45 MORRSN 105 PHI 3320 Phil.
  • Computer Ethics: Basic Concepts and Historical Overview

    Computer Ethics: Basic Concepts and Historical Overview

    Computer Ethics: Basic Concepts and Historical Overview http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2001/entries/ethics-computer/ This is a file in the archives of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z Computer Ethics: Basic Concepts and Historical Overview Computer ethics is a new branch of ethics that is growing and changing rapidly as computer technology also grows and develops. The term "computer ethics" is open to interpretations both broad and narrow. On the one hand, for example, computer ethics might be understood very narrowly as the efforts of professional philosophers to apply traditional ethical theories like utilitarianism, Kantianism, or virtue ethics to issues regarding the use of computer technology. On the other hand, it is possible to construe computer ethics in a very broad way to include, as well, standards of professional practice, codes of conduct, aspects of computer law, public policy, corporate ethics--even certain topics in the sociology and psychology of computing. In the industrialized nations of the world, the "information revolution" already has significantly altered many aspects of life -- in banking and commerce, work and employment, medical care, national defense, transportation and entertainment. Consequently, information technology has begun to affect (in both good and bad ways) community life, family life, human relationships, education, freedom, democracy, and so on (to name a few examples). Computer ethics in the broadest sense can be understood as that branch of applied ethics which studies and analyzes such social and ethical impacts of information technology.
  • Computer Ethics: Job of Computer Scientist

    Computer Ethics: Job of Computer Scientist

    International Journals of Advanced Research in Research Article June Computer Science and Software Engineering 2017 ISSN: 2277-128X (Volume-7, Issue-6) Computer Ethics: Job of Computer Scientist Juneed Iqbal Bilal Maqbool Beigh Department of Computer science Department of Computer Science Mewar University cluster university of Kashmir Srinagar, India Srinagar, India DOI: 10.23956/ijarcsse/V7I6/0135 Abstract: This paper reiterates the fact that computer ethics is a job of computer scientist and not philosophers. This paper is divided into three sections. First section provides with a brief explanation and discussion on the weaknesses and shortcomings of classical ethical theories like Divine command theories, Ethical Egoism, Kantianism, Utilitarianism, Social Contract Theory and Virtue Ethics, which makes them unfit for the application of computer ethics. Second section discusses the ambiguity in theories proposed for foundation of computer ethics. Third section deals with professional ethics and discusses that Computer ethics is a domain of computer scientist. This article gives a clear picture of shortcoming of traditional ethical theories and need of new theory to deal with computer ethics. This article points out flaws in theories trying to give foundation for computer ethics. We suggest professional ethics as practical and preventive measure for computer ethics that caters to its requirements. We also explores the role of computer scientist for the application of computer ethics as a profession. Keywords: Computer ethics; computer scientist; professional ethics; foundational ambiguity; code of ethics. I. INTRODUCTION Modern day societies are driven by computing technologies and are critically dependent on it. Every aspect of society like health, finance, defense, education, transportation and an unending list of other systems which drive our society are dealing with computing technology and artefacts.
  • Ethics Assessment in Different Fields Information Technologies

    Ethics Assessment in Different Fields Information Technologies

    Ethics Assessment in Different Fields Information Technologies Johnny Hartz Søraker University of Twente Philip Brey University of Twente June 2015 Annex 2.b.1 Ethical Assessment of Research and Innovation: A Comparative Analysis of Practices and Institutions in the EU and selected other countries Deliverable 1.1 This deliverable and the work described in it is part of the project Stakeholders Acting Together on the Ethical Impact Assessment of Research and Innovation - SATORI - which received funding from the European Commission’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement n° 612231 Information Technology report Contents 1 Basic description of the field ............................................................................................. 3 2 Values and Principles ........................................................................................................ 3 3 Ethical issues ...................................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Privacy ............................................................................................................................ 5 3.2 Security and crime .......................................................................................................... 6 3.3 Free expression and content control ............................................................................... 6 3.4 Equity and access ...........................................................................................................
  • Thinging Ethics for Software Engineers

    Thinging Ethics for Software Engineers

    (IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, Vol. 16, No. 9, September 2018 Thinging Ethics for Software Engineers Sabah S. Al-Fedaghi Computer Engineering Department Kuwait University City, Kuwait [email protected] Abstract—Ethical systems are usually described as principles for The field of computer ethics is changing rapidly as distinguishing right from wrong and forming beliefs about concerns over the impact of information and communication proper conduct. Ethical topics are complex, with excessively technology on society mount. New problems of ethics emerge verbose accounts of mental models and intensely ingrained one after another, and old problems show themselves in new philosophical assumptions. From practical experience, in forms. Ethics is often tied to legal procedures and policies that, teaching ethics for software engineering students, an explanation if breached, can put an organization in the midst of trouble [6]. of ethics alone often cannot provide insights of behavior and In this context, we adopt the classical engineering method thought for students. Additionally, it seems that there has been of explaining a phenomenon through modeling. For example, no exploration into the development of a conceptual presentation in developing system requirements, a model-based approach is of ethics that appeals to computer engineers. This is particularly used to depict a system graphically at various levels of clear in the area of software engineering, which focuses on software and associated tools such as algorithms, diagramming, granularity and complexity. The resultant unified, conceptual documentation, modeling and design as applied to various types model facilitates communication among different stakeholders of data and conceptual artifacts.