Reflection Blog 2
Weeks 5-8 for me have seemed to be a little bit less enlightening than weeks 1-4 from a “learning” perspective. In weeks 1-4 we learned the framework of ethics and how it applies to ICT, played with Prezi, and got “down and dirty” with regards to real ethical issues. I expected more questions about moral dilemmas in weeks 5-8 but the conversation didn’t seem to go that way. I also expected more integration of the ethical framework that we learned in weeks 1-4. For example, instead of just discussing free speech and our opinions on the matter, I think we should be looking at free speech from a utilitarian approach, a relativist approach (or whatever other ethical approach), etc. I think it’s the only way to get the concepts down completely.
My take so far from the class is that moral decisions are totally a moving target and there is no standard to making ethical decisions. I’m the type of person that likes to use logic to my advantage, and I think logic fits right into ethics, but it just hasn’t seemed to pan out that way in the discussions. I think that part of the reason for that is human nature and the instinctual avoidance of confrontation. Maybe it’s just really difficult to put a stake in the sand and say “this is my opinion and I’m willing to defend it” and it’s a lot easier to dance around by asking rhetorical questions and not really draw a line.
As far as leading the discussion as a group – admittedly, our group was a little late to get the ball rolling but I think our questions were pretty good. Frankly, I was a little surprised when none of our questions were used for the actual discussion.
I was able to find a good personal connection with the content of week 6 as I’ve participated in some of the non-nefarious aspects of hacking and I think it’s good to discuss.
Last, not to complain, as I’m sure everyone has a lot on their plate and it would just be another thing, but I’m surprised how few lectures there have been. The lectures we’ve had have been really good and I would not mind seeing more of them.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Info Technology Ethics on the International Level
These past few weeks have presented a new variety of interesting topics in the realm of information technology ethics. Firstly, the readings that discussed the history and function of Anonymous were particularly interesting to me. The group is very unique in its organizational structure, but that individuality also made it hard to understand how it functions. Being able to break down the operational nuances of the group through the readings helped me to understand how the group works that much better.
Learning about this topic also caused me to think about what online communities may look like in the future. Will they move towards more anonymity, or will a desire for accountability necessitate maintaining consistent online identities? This debate is already occurring on the social network sphere, for instance, with Google+ deciding to mandate a real name policy. I have a feeling that I will be consistently be encountering this questions as I continue to utilize the Internet.
Some of the other readings that I found interesting were in the whistle-blowing section. While this idea has been around since the beginning of the private sector, it’s very apparent that information technology revolutionizes (or complicates) the whole concept. Since the technology makes information about a company much more easier to access, I think the chances of employees finding out about dubious information without anyone else knowing is much more likely. In addition, it has become easier for them to share that information with the media, i.e. blow the whistle, anonymously. This also doesn’t just involve the private sector, however, as Wikileaks has taught us.
Speaking of governmental involvement in information technology, another provocative topic area was the influence of social media in certain countries. Since these new forms of media are breaking down the barriers to information that might have been put up by governmental entities (e.g. Chinese internet censorship), I wonder how long those governments will be able to curtail information access. I think the constitutional right of freedom of speech and freedom of information causes us to take the power of free information for granted. For instance, the events of the Arab Spring were made that much more successful due to the ability to make information widely available. This makes me wonder: how long until governments will no longer be able to censor information because of their citizens’ push for freedom of information? What effects will that have on global political dynamics? My feeling is that the rapid communication afforded by social media will show people the power of free information, and that will instigate more political movements.
So, the past couple weeks have definitely had an elements concerning on international issues. Given the wide-impact nature of information technology, it isn’t surprising that the concepts have implications on an international scope. Gaining this perspective is not only interesting by also essential in analyzing and understanding how information technology affects ethics on a global scale.
Learning about this topic also caused me to think about what online communities may look like in the future. Will they move towards more anonymity, or will a desire for accountability necessitate maintaining consistent online identities? This debate is already occurring on the social network sphere, for instance, with Google+ deciding to mandate a real name policy. I have a feeling that I will be consistently be encountering this questions as I continue to utilize the Internet.
Some of the other readings that I found interesting were in the whistle-blowing section. While this idea has been around since the beginning of the private sector, it’s very apparent that information technology revolutionizes (or complicates) the whole concept. Since the technology makes information about a company much more easier to access, I think the chances of employees finding out about dubious information without anyone else knowing is much more likely. In addition, it has become easier for them to share that information with the media, i.e. blow the whistle, anonymously. This also doesn’t just involve the private sector, however, as Wikileaks has taught us.
Speaking of governmental involvement in information technology, another provocative topic area was the influence of social media in certain countries. Since these new forms of media are breaking down the barriers to information that might have been put up by governmental entities (e.g. Chinese internet censorship), I wonder how long those governments will be able to curtail information access. I think the constitutional right of freedom of speech and freedom of information causes us to take the power of free information for granted. For instance, the events of the Arab Spring were made that much more successful due to the ability to make information widely available. This makes me wonder: how long until governments will no longer be able to censor information because of their citizens’ push for freedom of information? What effects will that have on global political dynamics? My feeling is that the rapid communication afforded by social media will show people the power of free information, and that will instigate more political movements.
So, the past couple weeks have definitely had an elements concerning on international issues. Given the wide-impact nature of information technology, it isn’t surprising that the concepts have implications on an international scope. Gaining this perspective is not only interesting by also essential in analyzing and understanding how information technology affects ethics on a global scale.
Blog 2
It’s been very exciting and but also nerve wrecking for me to express my opinion in the discussion board. I know I am very opinionated person therefore I should not express my opinion too much in public. That was how I taught when I grew up in Japan and it is hard to lose the shell that I’ve been covered for many years. There were many great discussions we had in last couple of weeks. It is very exciting to see how my classmates are engaging heated discussion about the topic. Slowly but surely, I am start to enjoy expressing my opinion in the discussion board.
A topic that I enjoyed the most was freedom of speech on Internet. I am very impressed that many of you are very concerned and wonderful parent. It is true that many things on Internet are not for children’s eyes. I believe as user, we should be free to use Internet with little restriction possible for ourselves. But for children, I believe some contents on Internet should be restricted by parental discretion. On the other hand, there are many children who had no supervision by parent or guardian at all. I strongly believe that if children were taught ethical and healthy behaviors by parent in early age, they will likely to keep it throughout their lives. So it is very important for parent to make good ethical decision not only for themselves, but also for their children.
Other aspect of freedom of speech is first amendment of the U.S. Constitution. As a legal permanent resident of the U.S. (I am not U.S. citizen), I am too, granted the freedom of speech. But I don’t consider my freedom is free from restriction. My ability of freedom of speech should not use for harm others. I respect other people’s opinion and religion, but I expect others to respect my opinion and belief as well. For example, Michael Stalk used a teacher from New Jersey as a bad example of freedom of speech. I think a teacher who put anti-gay comment on Facebook should not be teaching children. Indeed she expressed her opinion under freedom of speech, but her comment is very hateful, and her students should be free from her opinion. Her opinion about gays and religion should be kept to herself, and she should have respected people of different sexual orientation and religion.
Last topic that I want to mention is the Arab Spring. I did not know the term until this discussion. I knew something is going on in the Middle East and I was not paying attention because usually such protest against the government ends up in disappointment. It is hard to measure how much Internet and social media affected the movement. Information on Internet and social media could have used for both positively and negatively in the Arab Spring. Either way, the movement spread around the Middle East and the Northern Africa. I think it is good thing that people are taking control of their countries from oppressive regimes. There are lots of works to be done in those countries and I wish them very best wishes for their future. It is impossible for me to live under oppressive government. I had visited such countries few times. That experience keep reminded me that how lucky I am to live the country that I have choices in my life.
A topic that I enjoyed the most was freedom of speech on Internet. I am very impressed that many of you are very concerned and wonderful parent. It is true that many things on Internet are not for children’s eyes. I believe as user, we should be free to use Internet with little restriction possible for ourselves. But for children, I believe some contents on Internet should be restricted by parental discretion. On the other hand, there are many children who had no supervision by parent or guardian at all. I strongly believe that if children were taught ethical and healthy behaviors by parent in early age, they will likely to keep it throughout their lives. So it is very important for parent to make good ethical decision not only for themselves, but also for their children.
Other aspect of freedom of speech is first amendment of the U.S. Constitution. As a legal permanent resident of the U.S. (I am not U.S. citizen), I am too, granted the freedom of speech. But I don’t consider my freedom is free from restriction. My ability of freedom of speech should not use for harm others. I respect other people’s opinion and religion, but I expect others to respect my opinion and belief as well. For example, Michael Stalk used a teacher from New Jersey as a bad example of freedom of speech. I think a teacher who put anti-gay comment on Facebook should not be teaching children. Indeed she expressed her opinion under freedom of speech, but her comment is very hateful, and her students should be free from her opinion. Her opinion about gays and religion should be kept to herself, and she should have respected people of different sexual orientation and religion.
Last topic that I want to mention is the Arab Spring. I did not know the term until this discussion. I knew something is going on in the Middle East and I was not paying attention because usually such protest against the government ends up in disappointment. It is hard to measure how much Internet and social media affected the movement. Information on Internet and social media could have used for both positively and negatively in the Arab Spring. Either way, the movement spread around the Middle East and the Northern Africa. I think it is good thing that people are taking control of their countries from oppressive regimes. There are lots of works to be done in those countries and I wish them very best wishes for their future. It is impossible for me to live under oppressive government. I had visited such countries few times. That experience keep reminded me that how lucky I am to live the country that I have choices in my life.
Blog Post 2
The week that was the most interesting was when we discussed hackivism, internet vigilantism, and the anonymous group. I feel within that topic there was a lot of good discussion and debates on how hacking and cracking were used in the ethically right or wrong context. Beginning with that week I didn’t even know that there were two meanings to the term hacking and that hacking was potentially harmless in nature. The denotation of hacking can be labeled as white hat and the other word for hacking would be labeled as cracking or black hat. I still feel that Tavani gave an excellent example of cracking vs. hacking in his breaking and entering scenario he wrote in his book. I have actually been able to discuss this section with friends telling them to read the excerpt from Tavani and then talking about the differences between the two. We talked about how hacking mainly has a negative connotation synonymous with the word yet it really isn’t that bad. Cracking, however, which is almost never used in any context of technological breaking and entering is pretty much useless to the layperson. I also spoke with my Grandparents on a Sunday before the Packer game and asked them what they specifically thought of when they heard the words “hacking” and “cracking.” They figured that hacking had to do with illegal computer activities whilst cracking had to deal with breaking information. They were surprised to learn that the word hacking doesn’t encompass complete negative aspects of criminal activity yet cracking is far worse. I can’t really say that this certain topic would change my technological behavior because I honestly don’t hack or even come close to cracking. I suppose in my future career in I.T. however this concept may become present in some situations. I can imagine that certain professions need to have security clearance for specific types of files and that could get into a legitimate case of hacking and cracking. If I were tempted to peek inside folder that I wasn’t supposed to I would probably think twice about doing so. I wouldn’t want to be fired for abusing my security clearance or have others in the company not trust me. This section helped to form a safe boundary of what would be and would not be acceptable in a work setting. Onto this week’s class the main point that was carried over was how social media is a hindrance or an advantage to developing nations. Political unrest is usually stirring as nations develop and the nations people decide on what they really want from their government. Many people have different opinions and the use of social media sites allow them to express their opinions in many ways. However with this many governmental authorities in charge may find the person and prosecute them as they see fit. Other ways that social media sites help is in the case of Egypt and Mubarak they were able to gather a protest against the leader of Egypt. Many positive and negative things can coexist with social media network sites in developing nations: it just depends on how everyone decides to interact.
Blog 2
In the past few weeks I have learned,engaged and found a couple of things interesting. While I read and watched documentaries required in the last few weeks. What had engaged me the most about the readings was the talk about the readings was the talk and concern about hacking. While we discussed hacking whether harmless but intense curiosity to a criminal act.
What made this the most engaging subject to me in the past few weeks was the fact it is hard to decide when the one switches over to the other. Hacking is wrong and usually used for terrible things such as budding up a modem or simply constant virus pop ups. The thing is if someone is hacking and invading your privacy or maybe stealing your files in the end it does not so much harm you in any way. The only way a hacker could use any of that against you is financial gain or embarrassment otherwise your life would be fine and you would not even know of it.
Now I believe hacking to be a criminal act when it is done for pure enjoyment to ruin companies files or changing data bases and screwing up master codes for serious business and bureaus across the Unites States. If someone deals in hacking in these types of conditions it is know doubt it is a criminal act and the individual should be using their knowledge for the better of the world instead of trying to ruin it. The material in the past weeks I was not very much engaged in would include some ideas and quotes from Tavani in the earlier weeks including media material.
What surprised me this week was the discussion about certain speech behind censored on the internet. This had surprised me because their most definitely should be censored topics on the internet. This had surprised me because their most definitely should be censored topics online but a child should not be online without a parent. Websites that younger viewers should not participate in should not be seen. Things in my opinion do not need to be censored because if there is a child on the computer the parent should always be there so why would the child ever see anything they should not be online.
I had many different things in the past weeks that I have talked about but the thing that stood out the most is how I learned about how many different types of things the internet is used for and how ridiculous it is to think we did not always have it. The internet proves to make our lives easier and better. The world would be fine without the internet but I feel as if people would go crazy. When people go crazy there is always disaster and tragedy. In my everyday life I will take what I learned in the past dew weeks and use them in positive ways. When it comes to hacking,personal opinion and censoring online I know much more on the subject and believe it to be very interesting.
I had talked to some friends of mine about hacking and one of my friends is actually really skilled in the trade. My buddy can go on a site call someone make it look like it is a different contact shows up and the person receiving the call has no idea. The person will believe you are who you said to be especially because this option of using a voice over is available. These things in the future that have been created online are scary and may be the problem with the world in decades to come.
A code of ethics?
So I was thinking about the idea of a universal code of ethics—it’s not too likely or practical that such a thing would be codified or agreed upon, but there are small scale versions, like professional codes of ethics. Interestingly, Wikileaks—that is Assange and his core group—seem to a very strong ethical code. Conversely, many media portrayals of Wikileaks are of some kind of nihilist/terrorist collective brainwashed by Assange. Anonymous, is certainly less cohesive than Wikileaks by its nature, but certainly individuals associated with Anonymous have strong personal ideas of ethics and there seem to be certain “laws” to Anonymous’ behavior.
Also, the Luciano Floridi quote has really stuck with me; ““My” in “my information” is not the same as “my” in “my car” but rather the same as in “my body” or “my feelings:” it expresses a sense of constitutive belonging, not of external ownership, a sense in which my body, my feelings and my information are part of me but are not my (legal) possessions.” This quote made me think of the Hippocratic oath and the medical profession—would something similar be useful or effective for the information professions? Does a code of ethics actually impact the behavior of its inductees?
So as an example of an information profession, the American Library Association (ALA) has abided by a code of ethics since 1939, and has routinely updates the contents of the code; the most recent version is from 2008. (http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/proethics/history/index.cfm)
The ALA’s code of ethics addresses such issues as providing equitable access to information (which I understand as providing information in a form that disabled, non-English speakers, and even illiterate people can access), privacy for users, access to unbiased, uncensored information, and to not “advance private interests at the expense” in way that would compromise the sentiments of the above values.
I believe that any sort of ethical code can be ignored and is very difficult to enforce, but at the same time they are a necessary guide for an information (or any) profession. There is some evidence that similar documents, like honor codes for colleges reduce unethical behavior by increasing a feeling of community (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-callahan/why-honor-codes-reduce-st_b_795898.html), and I would think they stir up one’s conscience, making that “Jiminy Cricket” voice just a bit louder.
To answer the question of how can we try to ensure information professionals act ethically, I would look at the medical profession. While certainly not a perfect example—(it is hard, and perhaps futile to strive for perfection in ethical issues)—there is a colloquial code, the Hippocratic oath which serves as the main mission statement for doctors, to “do no harm.” But there are also HIPAA laws to protect privacy, and EMTALA to guarantee treatment, along with the ability to sue for malpractice and plenty of regulations at the national, state, and hospital levels. Perhaps the institution of legal consequences would motivate ethical behavior in information professions. That sounds so dreary though, maybe there could also be positive incentives such as subsidies each year for creating a system that does the best job of ensuring privacy, or accessibility, etc.
Also, the Luciano Floridi quote has really stuck with me; ““My” in “my information” is not the same as “my” in “my car” but rather the same as in “my body” or “my feelings:” it expresses a sense of constitutive belonging, not of external ownership, a sense in which my body, my feelings and my information are part of me but are not my (legal) possessions.” This quote made me think of the Hippocratic oath and the medical profession—would something similar be useful or effective for the information professions? Does a code of ethics actually impact the behavior of its inductees?
So as an example of an information profession, the American Library Association (ALA) has abided by a code of ethics since 1939, and has routinely updates the contents of the code; the most recent version is from 2008. (http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/proethics/history/index.cfm)
The ALA’s code of ethics addresses such issues as providing equitable access to information (which I understand as providing information in a form that disabled, non-English speakers, and even illiterate people can access), privacy for users, access to unbiased, uncensored information, and to not “advance private interests at the expense” in way that would compromise the sentiments of the above values.
I believe that any sort of ethical code can be ignored and is very difficult to enforce, but at the same time they are a necessary guide for an information (or any) profession. There is some evidence that similar documents, like honor codes for colleges reduce unethical behavior by increasing a feeling of community (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-callahan/why-honor-codes-reduce-st_b_795898.html), and I would think they stir up one’s conscience, making that “Jiminy Cricket” voice just a bit louder.
To answer the question of how can we try to ensure information professionals act ethically, I would look at the medical profession. While certainly not a perfect example—(it is hard, and perhaps futile to strive for perfection in ethical issues)—there is a colloquial code, the Hippocratic oath which serves as the main mission statement for doctors, to “do no harm.” But there are also HIPAA laws to protect privacy, and EMTALA to guarantee treatment, along with the ability to sue for malpractice and plenty of regulations at the national, state, and hospital levels. Perhaps the institution of legal consequences would motivate ethical behavior in information professions. That sounds so dreary though, maybe there could also be positive incentives such as subsidies each year for creating a system that does the best job of ensuring privacy, or accessibility, etc.
Blog 2 - Matt Pavelchik
Over the past few weeks, the topic that has been most fascinating to me has been social media. I think this topic appeals to me because MySpace, Facebook, and Twitter are all social media outlets that have blown up during my late teen years, and into my 20’s. It is amazing to look back and see how far along these social media outlets have come, and to see how much of an effect they have on people’s everyday lives. I am definitely guilty of checking my Facebook on my IPhone several times throughout the day. I think the most fascinating part about these social media applications is the ability to keep up with the lives of people you may not necessarily have any contact with if it wasn’t for the sites. These social media outlets have also made it easy to send invitations out to large groups of people, or to send private messages to just a select group of people. The concept of being able to see where people have “checked in” sometimes make me worry about the security of our world. It seems to easy to think that someone can basically track you down based on a GPS location service activated through your social media outlet.
Another topic that interested me was hacking. I truly find it hard to believe that someone who is trying to hack a company is not out to try and harm the company in some way. Hackers follow their own code of ethics and believe that what they are doing is not illegal, however; the outcome almost always affects a company in a negative manner. In the hacker’s world, I believe Anonymous holds a lot of power, because people are intrigued on finding out who exactly would openly attack major corporations like that. Companies pay a high price for security nowadays, because of the increasing chances that their website may be hacked, or important employee information may get leaked outside of the company.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)