1. Many games that children used to play on boards with dice, cards and plastic pieces are now available as computer games . Is this an example of unnecessary use of the new technology just because it is there? Describe some advantages and disadvantages of replacing a board game by computer version.
Answer:
Technology has been an effective tool in providing entertainment especially now that more and more features are being discovered to enhance it. Varieties of games being employed to computer technology had captured the attention of many. There are even computer games that got their origin in a real human-to-human interaction.
The deployment to computer of games which are originally played with a real human opponent, as with games on dice, cards and plastic pieces had changed the trend on playing these traditional games. I believe that this deployment is an example of unnecessary use of the technology just because it is there. Since in computer you are playing with the computer itself, you are isolated from the crowd of real people or players thus it prevent social interaction. Also since computer games are made in a pattern of codes, after a long time of playing, the game will be so predictable that the level of excitement will diminish. Other than the two disadvantages mentioned, another disadvantage is that playing computer games is not economical nor practical. On the other hand, computer games also got some good points. You can play anywhere you want as long as there is a computer at your own convenient time. You don't have to look or even wait for an opponent or other players to start the game, thus you are saving time.
2. Suppose an employee uses computer time, services and storage on an employer's computer for the employee's own business. Can you consider such action as a theft? Why or why not?
Answer:
As an employee, there is a difference between you and your employer's access and use of resources. He/She can use /access resources more than you can and as an ethical employee you should live or work by the ethical rules. Using computer time, services and storage on employer's computer for your own personal gain is an act of theft for me. I believe that theft doesn't refer only to money stolen but to things that negatively affects the person from whom those things were stolen. It could be in any form and using computer time, service and storage of employer's computer is already a way of stealing. The time, service and storage you used for your own gain could have been used exclusively for your job and could have maximized the productivity and profit of your company or employer and will definitely benefit you as well. I f the employer pays you right, then it is not morally and ethically accepted for you not to work and use the resources right.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Friday, October 5, 2007
Assignment5
Intellectual Property Rights
Question 1
Your uncle owns a sandwhich shop. He asks you to write an inventory program for him. You are glad to help him and do not charge for the program. The program works pretty well, and you discover later that your uncle has given copies to several friends who also operate small food shops. Do you believe you should be paid for copies?
Answer:
Given that situation, I believe I should have been paid for the copies given to other shop owners. Excluding the original program I gave willingly to my uncle, I deserve a payment from those who copied copied my program for my effort, time and skill in making the system. Though it is possible that my uncle assumed that the program is for free, that assumption is only true to him and not to other shop owners. The payment that should have been given to me could be in the form of money but necessarily. It acceptably be in the form of respect and acknowledgment. My uncle and those who copied the program could have at least informed me first and asked permission from me on copying the program and should have not simply invited themselves and copy my program.
Question 2
Read articles by Esther Dyson and Lance Rose from Wired (http://www.wired.com/wired.archive/3.07/dyson/html and http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/3.02/rose.if.html). Write a short essay telling which author's view about the future of intellectual property in "digital age" are more convincing to you and why.
Answer:
Reading the article of both Esther Dyson and Lance Rose, the idea and concept of Esther Dyson about the future of intellectual property in digital age convinced me more than the view of Lance Rose did.
I agree with Esther Dyson's view that gradually the contents in the Net will become free of charge and that IT companies will make money not out of the content itself but out of the follow-up products and services to the free product initially released . Other than that, her ideas about the business strategies on the Net holds true to the present state of e-commerce. Even software developers today tend to follow the trend of giving out their softwares and yet they still make some profit out of it. Big profit actually.
Esther Dyson seems to imply also that information security in the Net cost high and even higher in the near future. Complete confidentiality, copyrights and intellectual property will take so much time, money and effort to implement and maintain and on which I agree.
Question 1
Your uncle owns a sandwhich shop. He asks you to write an inventory program for him. You are glad to help him and do not charge for the program. The program works pretty well, and you discover later that your uncle has given copies to several friends who also operate small food shops. Do you believe you should be paid for copies?
Answer:
Given that situation, I believe I should have been paid for the copies given to other shop owners. Excluding the original program I gave willingly to my uncle, I deserve a payment from those who copied copied my program for my effort, time and skill in making the system. Though it is possible that my uncle assumed that the program is for free, that assumption is only true to him and not to other shop owners. The payment that should have been given to me could be in the form of money but necessarily. It acceptably be in the form of respect and acknowledgment. My uncle and those who copied the program could have at least informed me first and asked permission from me on copying the program and should have not simply invited themselves and copy my program.
Question 2
Read articles by Esther Dyson and Lance Rose from Wired (http://www.wired.com/wired.archive/3.07/dyson/html and http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/3.02/rose.if.html). Write a short essay telling which author's view about the future of intellectual property in "digital age" are more convincing to you and why.
Answer:
Reading the article of both Esther Dyson and Lance Rose, the idea and concept of Esther Dyson about the future of intellectual property in digital age convinced me more than the view of Lance Rose did.
I agree with Esther Dyson's view that gradually the contents in the Net will become free of charge and that IT companies will make money not out of the content itself but out of the follow-up products and services to the free product initially released . Other than that, her ideas about the business strategies on the Net holds true to the present state of e-commerce. Even software developers today tend to follow the trend of giving out their softwares and yet they still make some profit out of it. Big profit actually.
Esther Dyson seems to imply also that information security in the Net cost high and even higher in the near future. Complete confidentiality, copyrights and intellectual property will take so much time, money and effort to implement and maintain and on which I agree.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Assignment4
1. What is the important difference between the public-key cryptography and secret-key cryptography?
The major difference between the public-key cryptography and secret-key cryptography that distinguishes one from the other is the number of keys each uses and how they use it.
The major difference between the public-key cryptography and secret-key cryptography that distinguishes one from the other is the number of keys each uses and how they use it.
In a traditional cryptography, also known as secret-key cryptography or symmetric cryptography, a single key is used by both sender and receiver to encrypt and decrypt data. The key is kept private between the two involved in the communication. Both parties should agree on what key to use before starting the communication.
On the other hand, in a modern cryptography or public-key cryptography or asymmetric cryptography, two keys are used; a public key and a private key. This cryptography is more likely to be used on a data communication wherein the sender and receiver have not yet met or there is no agreement between the two on what key is to be used. The public key is a non-secret key known by those who will be sending a message to a user. It is used by sender to encrypt the data. On the contrary, the private key is only known to a user or the one who will receive the data thus allowing him alone to decrypt and read the message which ensures data integrity.
2. What kinds of information Echelon collects?
Based on some sites concerned with Echelon activities, Echelon collects huge amount of random data and just sort out the interesting stuff or data of used to them using keywords. Since it has been said that Echelon uses these data for national security, then, maybe we could assume the Echelon collects information such as criminal records, suspected terrorists/criminal communications, politics-related data, newly discovered technology or weaponry etc.
3. Describe at least three different kinds of uses of encryption that have social value. Indicate why the are valuable.
The major difference between the public-key cryptography and secret-key cryptography that distinguishes one from the other is the number of keys each uses and how they use it.
The major difference between the public-key cryptography and secret-key cryptography that distinguishes one from the other is the number of keys each uses and how they use it.
In a traditional cryptography, also known as secret-key cryptography or symmetric cryptography, a single key is used by both sender and receiver to encrypt and decrypt data. The key is kept private between the two involved in the communication. Both parties should agree on what key to use before starting the communication.
On the other hand, in a modern cryptography or public-key cryptography or asymmetric cryptography, two keys are used; a public key and a private key. This cryptography is more likely to be used on a data communication wherein the sender and receiver have not yet met or there is no agreement between the two on what key is to be used. The public key is a non-secret key known by those who will be sending a message to a user. It is used by sender to encrypt the data. On the contrary, the private key is only known to a user or the one who will receive the data thus allowing him alone to decrypt and read the message which ensures data integrity.
2. What kinds of information Echelon collects?
Based on some sites concerned with Echelon activities, Echelon collects huge amount of random data and just sort out the interesting stuff or data of used to them using keywords. Since it has been said that Echelon uses these data for national security, then, maybe we could assume the Echelon collects information such as criminal records, suspected terrorists/criminal communications, politics-related data, newly discovered technology or weaponry etc.
3. Describe at least three different kinds of uses of encryption that have social value. Indicate why the are valuable.
- Encryption secures private/personal information of an individual.
- Encryption secures the authenticity and integrity of the data transmitted.
- Encryption or encrypting of data serves as a reminder for everyone involved in data transmission to be responsible and careful enough in keeping or giving out information.
The three uses of encryption mentioned above are of great value for it determines how important an encryption could be and how greatly could it affect one’s personal and social being especially to a someone in the field of information technology.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Assignment3
1.Discuss how adherents of ethical egoism and altruism would
analyze the following situations.
Case 1: Roger plans to buy a licensed software in the US using royalties from the sale of his book on computer ethics and donate the software to his Alma Mater.
The scenario speaks more of ethical altruism. Roger, using his own personal royalties from all his efforts, his time, his knowledge and his money to publish a book, make a sale and buy
something for his Alma Mater, shows his selflessness. He is a picture of a man who sacrifices his personal interests and gains in exchange for the benefit of others. He is also someone who fulfills his unwritten obligation to his Alma Mater by giving back something to it.Though these unwritten obligations are not forcibly and deeply imposed, still Roger knows that as someone who had been taught and helped by his Alma Mater he should be giving back something to it and by doing that, he probably knows that he is not only doing his Alma Mater a favor but also everyone who had been a part, who are a part and who will be a part of his Alma Mater.
Case 2: Baba debugged a secret code of the NBI that allowed her to access all computer systems of the agency.She plans to sabotage the whole system as a form of revenge for what she considers to be the NBI's violation of her human rights.
Clearly, the situation is vividly picturing an example of ethical egoism or more specifically a rational egoism.Debugging a system of such an important agency of the government requires honesty and a sense of obligation. Baba, having full access to the NBI's systems and also having a plan to sabotage it, can see only the advantages of what her plans can do to her and is not considering the people who could be affected by it. What she could have been thinking is that it is reasonable for her to do such thing since the NBI is the first one who had done something she considered wrong to her. But, what if she really is truly and legally wrong? Her judgment, her means and her reasons are all just based on her own beliefs and perception of things and the benefits of her plan are all centered on herself and not to others.
Case 3: Marjo wants to create a computer virus that would affect
only laptop operations.
This is one situation that can hardly be distinguished as more inclined on ethical egoism or ethical altruism because of so much circumstances that could be surrounding this. However, if it is read and analyzed deeper, I would say that this is more of ethical egoism. The sentence says that "Marjo wants...".Wants signifies our own desire, in this case Marjo's desire. He is the one who wants to do this, we don't know for what reason or for whom, but the point is, it is he himself who decided to do such thing. It reflects self-interest and that what egoism is all about.
2. Which among the finalist theories (John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism, Immanuel Kant' Categorical Imperative & Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics) appeals to you most?
As a theory that commands an action simply because it is good under any situation, I would say that Immanuel Kant's Categorical Imperative Theory is the one that appeals to me most. Categorical Imperative for me implies universal goodness. No matter what race you are, who you are and where you are, it doesn't matter as long as what you do is good and right in whatever angle you may look at it and for whatever reason you have for doing it. Take for example "love". Love is in itself good and it conforms to whatever reason. Though not everyone act in accordance to it, still it ought to be applied by everyone. It should be a universal law and it may already be, only unwritten.
3. Which among the theories seems to predominate in the world of computing as you know it?
The world of computing is offering so much good things to the physical world. People behind all the conveniences we are enjoying right now-programmers, developers, designers, analysts etc.- all got some driving force that enabled them to invent new gadgets and principles. I believe that whatever it is that motivates them, it all goes back to their own personal interests. It may be that they want fame or money, could be for others or for themselves, whatever reason these people have for doing certain things, in the long-run it is their self-interests that they satisfy. With that I conclude that the theory of Ethical Egoism is the theory that predominates the world of computing.
Case 1: Roger plans to buy a licensed software in the US using royalties from the sale of his book on computer ethics and donate the software to his Alma Mater.
The scenario speaks more of ethical altruism. Roger, using his own personal royalties from all his efforts, his time, his knowledge and his money to publish a book, make a sale and buy
something for his Alma Mater, shows his selflessness. He is a picture of a man who sacrifices his personal interests and gains in exchange for the benefit of others. He is also someone who fulfills his unwritten obligation to his Alma Mater by giving back something to it.Though these unwritten obligations are not forcibly and deeply imposed, still Roger knows that as someone who had been taught and helped by his Alma Mater he should be giving back something to it and by doing that, he probably knows that he is not only doing his Alma Mater a favor but also everyone who had been a part, who are a part and who will be a part of his Alma Mater.
Case 2: Baba debugged a secret code of the NBI that allowed her to access all computer systems of the agency.She plans to sabotage the whole system as a form of revenge for what she considers to be the NBI's violation of her human rights.
Clearly, the situation is vividly picturing an example of ethical egoism or more specifically a rational egoism.Debugging a system of such an important agency of the government requires honesty and a sense of obligation. Baba, having full access to the NBI's systems and also having a plan to sabotage it, can see only the advantages of what her plans can do to her and is not considering the people who could be affected by it. What she could have been thinking is that it is reasonable for her to do such thing since the NBI is the first one who had done something she considered wrong to her. But, what if she really is truly and legally wrong? Her judgment, her means and her reasons are all just based on her own beliefs and perception of things and the benefits of her plan are all centered on herself and not to others.
Case 3: Marjo wants to create a computer virus that would affect
only laptop operations.
This is one situation that can hardly be distinguished as more inclined on ethical egoism or ethical altruism because of so much circumstances that could be surrounding this. However, if it is read and analyzed deeper, I would say that this is more of ethical egoism. The sentence says that "Marjo wants...".Wants signifies our own desire, in this case Marjo's desire. He is the one who wants to do this, we don't know for what reason or for whom, but the point is, it is he himself who decided to do such thing. It reflects self-interest and that what egoism is all about.
2. Which among the finalist theories (John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism, Immanuel Kant' Categorical Imperative & Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics) appeals to you most?
As a theory that commands an action simply because it is good under any situation, I would say that Immanuel Kant's Categorical Imperative Theory is the one that appeals to me most. Categorical Imperative for me implies universal goodness. No matter what race you are, who you are and where you are, it doesn't matter as long as what you do is good and right in whatever angle you may look at it and for whatever reason you have for doing it. Take for example "love". Love is in itself good and it conforms to whatever reason. Though not everyone act in accordance to it, still it ought to be applied by everyone. It should be a universal law and it may already be, only unwritten.
3. Which among the theories seems to predominate in the world of computing as you know it?
The world of computing is offering so much good things to the physical world. People behind all the conveniences we are enjoying right now-programmers, developers, designers, analysts etc.- all got some driving force that enabled them to invent new gadgets and principles. I believe that whatever it is that motivates them, it all goes back to their own personal interests. It may be that they want fame or money, could be for others or for themselves, whatever reason these people have for doing certain things, in the long-run it is their self-interests that they satisfy. With that I conclude that the theory of Ethical Egoism is the theory that predominates the world of computing.
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Assignment2
** One writer defines privacy as "freedom from inappropriate judgment of others"
(A) Is this a good definition of privacy? Why or why not?
Privacy for me is not "freedom from inappropriate judgment of others" but rather "freedom from inappropriate intrusions of others". The first definition, which is that privacy ifs freedom from inappropriate judgment, appeals lesser substance for people or others can inappropriately judge us without crossing the line where our privacy starts. All judgments are inappropriate if not proven to be true. All of us are suspects and victims of these inappropriate judgments. Merely by looking, we inappropriately judge others. merely by looking at us, we are inappropriately judged by others. Most often, after prejudging someone we don't care anymore how true our judgments are that we dare not to spend time to prove the truthfulness of what we think. However, there are those who care enough to take evasive, immediate sometimes destructive, inappropriate and unreasonable actions to prove themselves that what judgment they have for someone is true. Then, inappropriate intrusions follow, violating others' right of privacy. Inappropriate judgments therefore for me, are causes of inappropriate intrusions that could destruct and disturb your privacy and not a direct cause of it. This realization therefore leads me to the conclusion that the definition of privacy as freedom from inappropriate judgment of others is not that good of a definition of privacy.
(B) Suppose we use this definition, should people have a positive right (claim right) for this kind of privacy? Why or why not?
Should people have the negative right (liberty) for this kind of privacy? Why or why not?
Supposedly using the definition of privacy as "freedom from inappropriate judgment of others", I can say that people should have the negative right (liberty) for this kind of privacy but should not have the positive right (claim right). This is because if people would have the positive right on this privacy, with that definition, everybody could claim that they should not be judged in anyway and they could also claim that they are inappropriately judged by others and that their privacy is disturbed. Basing on those claims of people, a more serious problem will arise where in anybody could point anybody accusing him or her of inappropriate judgment . On the other hand if negative right (liberty) would be given to the people, inappropriate judgment will be controlled and those inappropriate judgments without enough grounds and reason will have to be considered as fallacy. Another thing is that nobody got the authority to impose to someone that he/she should not be judged inappropriately. These would give the people the chance to exercise their right to choose what they think is good for them: to inappropriately judge others or not.
(A) Is this a good definition of privacy? Why or why not?
Privacy for me is not "freedom from inappropriate judgment of others" but rather "freedom from inappropriate intrusions of others". The first definition, which is that privacy ifs freedom from inappropriate judgment, appeals lesser substance for people or others can inappropriately judge us without crossing the line where our privacy starts. All judgments are inappropriate if not proven to be true. All of us are suspects and victims of these inappropriate judgments. Merely by looking, we inappropriately judge others. merely by looking at us, we are inappropriately judged by others. Most often, after prejudging someone we don't care anymore how true our judgments are that we dare not to spend time to prove the truthfulness of what we think. However, there are those who care enough to take evasive, immediate sometimes destructive, inappropriate and unreasonable actions to prove themselves that what judgment they have for someone is true. Then, inappropriate intrusions follow, violating others' right of privacy. Inappropriate judgments therefore for me, are causes of inappropriate intrusions that could destruct and disturb your privacy and not a direct cause of it. This realization therefore leads me to the conclusion that the definition of privacy as freedom from inappropriate judgment of others is not that good of a definition of privacy.
(B) Suppose we use this definition, should people have a positive right (claim right) for this kind of privacy? Why or why not?
Should people have the negative right (liberty) for this kind of privacy? Why or why not?
Supposedly using the definition of privacy as "freedom from inappropriate judgment of others", I can say that people should have the negative right (liberty) for this kind of privacy but should not have the positive right (claim right). This is because if people would have the positive right on this privacy, with that definition, everybody could claim that they should not be judged in anyway and they could also claim that they are inappropriately judged by others and that their privacy is disturbed. Basing on those claims of people, a more serious problem will arise where in anybody could point anybody accusing him or her of inappropriate judgment . On the other hand if negative right (liberty) would be given to the people, inappropriate judgment will be controlled and those inappropriate judgments without enough grounds and reason will have to be considered as fallacy. Another thing is that nobody got the authority to impose to someone that he/she should not be judged inappropriately. These would give the people the chance to exercise their right to choose what they think is good for them: to inappropriately judge others or not.
Monday, June 25, 2007
Assignment1
Friendster, MySpace, Hi5. These are only few of the Online Social Networking sites dominantly available today. Online Social Networks started in 1995 with Classmates.com as the first ever Internet social community. Basically, Online Social Networks are social structures made of nodes, (generally individuals or organizations) that are tied by one or more specific types of relations, such as values, visions, ideas, friends and kinship. These virtual communities allow their users to create profiles that provide personal information and photos. In these communities, a user sends out invitations to anyone he wishes to join his network. Once invitation is confirmed or accepted by the invited, he will be an official "friend" of the user. This process is repeated by other members and even by new members thus growing the number and links of the network. But what do these online social networks really do? What do these networks provide that it became such a big hit? What are the benefits and the risks of joining in these virtual-social communities.
Research in number of academic fields has shown that social networks operate on many levels , from families up to the level of nations, and play a critical role in determining the ways problems are solved, organizations are run and the degree to which individuals succeed in achieving their goals. Psychologically it can be said that these social networks give power to the users. It is for the reason that these networks provide user control rather than being computer-controlled. A user is the one who chooses the people he wants to be in his network. He has the power to change his profile and design his network base on his own preferences. Not only that, these virtual communities also create connectivity through being discovered through friends of friends and it present opportunities for self expression and friendship building. Also, in such environment, youth can build skills that will be a foundation for career in the 21st century.
However, everything got downfalls. Ethical and Social issues do exist about involvement on these sites. Unsafe disclosure of personal information are providing potentially dangerous or damaging personal information. Addiction can result to lack of healthy engagement in major areas of life. Pornography and cyberbullying can be easily done by those users who's hobbies are these. Making connections with other users to discuss information can result to misgiving of very vital and private information. On large social networking services, there has been growing concern on giving out too much information. Also person-to-person communication and socialization are blocked by these sites.
Online social networking all-in-all is one huge development in technology. It is a new way of connecting with others anywhere in the world, anytime. Though we may say it has so many uses, such as personal development applications, business applications and medical applications by sharing information with anyone in your network, still these sites also got its drawbacks. These could be the reason of your own downfall, a tool of your destruction. No one stops anyone in joining and being a part of these sites but as responsible individuals, we should be guarding our own selves. Feed these sites but not of too much information, engage on these virtual communities but don't let yourself be addicted. Follow safety precautions, enjoy but never be irresponsible.
Research in number of academic fields has shown that social networks operate on many levels , from families up to the level of nations, and play a critical role in determining the ways problems are solved, organizations are run and the degree to which individuals succeed in achieving their goals. Psychologically it can be said that these social networks give power to the users. It is for the reason that these networks provide user control rather than being computer-controlled. A user is the one who chooses the people he wants to be in his network. He has the power to change his profile and design his network base on his own preferences. Not only that, these virtual communities also create connectivity through being discovered through friends of friends and it present opportunities for self expression and friendship building. Also, in such environment, youth can build skills that will be a foundation for career in the 21st century.
However, everything got downfalls. Ethical and Social issues do exist about involvement on these sites. Unsafe disclosure of personal information are providing potentially dangerous or damaging personal information. Addiction can result to lack of healthy engagement in major areas of life. Pornography and cyberbullying can be easily done by those users who's hobbies are these. Making connections with other users to discuss information can result to misgiving of very vital and private information. On large social networking services, there has been growing concern on giving out too much information. Also person-to-person communication and socialization are blocked by these sites.
Online social networking all-in-all is one huge development in technology. It is a new way of connecting with others anywhere in the world, anytime. Though we may say it has so many uses, such as personal development applications, business applications and medical applications by sharing information with anyone in your network, still these sites also got its drawbacks. These could be the reason of your own downfall, a tool of your destruction. No one stops anyone in joining and being a part of these sites but as responsible individuals, we should be guarding our own selves. Feed these sites but not of too much information, engage on these virtual communities but don't let yourself be addicted. Follow safety precautions, enjoy but never be irresponsible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
