In weeks 5-8 we covered the topics of Freedom vs. Privacy and Security; Hacktivism, Internet Vigilantism, & Anonymous; Freedom of Information, speech, Whistle-blowing and Wikileaks; The Internet and Social Revolution and the Digital Divide. During these weeks it became pretty obvious to me the reason that a class on Digital Media Ethics is touching on these particular subjects. The reason is every one of the subjects tests our ethical standards that we have been creating over the years. By testing I mean I came into each subject matter with a predetermined mindset on how I felt about each. After going through the discussion process with the class I was able to understand other classmate’s ethical views. By being able to understand the thinking behind others ethical views on what it or is not ethical has allowed me to go into gray areas that I was previously black and white on.
For example the week six topic of Hacktivism, Internet Vigilantism, & Anonymous, I had a very black and white view that I could not see anything good ethically out of hacking. I thought that anyone caught hacking should be prosecuted by law even if data was not stolen or damaged. After much discussion throughout the week I was able to enter the gray area a little bit in some instances. The problem for me was the conflicting ethical views that I felt it was ok to give up some freedom for privacy and security as discussed in week five, but I also felt hacking should not be allowed. For me it was difficult not to allow ethically the use of hacking when the lives of many could be affected from the gathered information. My mindset did change on the subject of hacking; now I view hacking with eyes of intent. The intent of the act of hacking should be looked at to determine whether this is crossing the line ethically or not. Was the intention of the hacker for good or harm? This question set up the scene for week seven and eight’s discussion on Wikileaks and whistle-blowing. Although some Wikileaks information leaks and whistle-blowing efforts have done some good, it is still hard for me to go against the loyalty to my country or company that I work for. So the discussion in week 6 on hacking has allowed me to see some gray area in these discussions as long as the intent was for the good of the many instead of for profit or individual accolades.
For example the week six topic of Hacktivism, Internet Vigilantism, & Anonymous, I had a very black and white view that I could not see anything good ethically out of hacking. I thought that anyone caught hacking should be prosecuted by law even if data was not stolen or damaged. After much discussion throughout the week I was able to enter the gray area a little bit in some instances. The problem for me was the conflicting ethical views that I felt it was ok to give up some freedom for privacy and security as discussed in week five, but I also felt hacking should not be allowed. For me it was difficult not to allow ethically the use of hacking when the lives of many could be affected from the gathered information. My mindset did change on the subject of hacking; now I view hacking with eyes of intent. The intent of the act of hacking should be looked at to determine whether this is crossing the line ethically or not. Was the intention of the hacker for good or harm? This question set up the scene for week seven and eight’s discussion on Wikileaks and whistle-blowing. Although some Wikileaks information leaks and whistle-blowing efforts have done some good, it is still hard for me to go against the loyalty to my country or company that I work for. So the discussion in week 6 on hacking has allowed me to see some gray area in these discussions as long as the intent was for the good of the many instead of for profit or individual accolades.
No comments:
Post a Comment