Class Texts and Materials…Applications and Thoughts
ICEK
This book would facilitate small group discussion for junior high and senior high students. The chapters are to the point. The questions are relevant and thought provoking. The text may serve as reference material for middle and secondary education teachers.
I’m not a lawyer (IANAL), but I am familiar with the selected issues and legalities written to in the text. People should be treated respectfully. The internet is dangerous; proceed with caution.
The Blue Nowhere
Though not a suspenseful “ticking-bomb,” the novel provides a basic introduction to the largess and complexity of the internet.
I glimpsed into a world that heretofore I did not know. The internet has no boundaries, not interpersonal, geographical or political. Countries do not contain it. Languages do not confound it. The only limitation to which the internet is subject is the medium that carries its “message.” I learned about servers, routers and circuitry and viruses, encryptions, and codes. I have come to recognize that the commercial and educational windows-supported use of the web though valuable is superficial, hardly addressing its potential terror and full capacity.
By the time I finished the novel, I knew the internet was wide-open frontier. It is the world’s “wild west.” I experienced a sense of jealousy of those who can challenge it and conquer even a little part of it.
Ethics for the Information Age and Privacy Articles
I appreciated the computing history presented in the first chapter. The chapters on privacy as well as the assigned articles have clearly altered some of my activities on the web. I have a better grasp regarding what permissible for use in an educational setting. I try to model responsible behaviors. I downloaded the “Easy Guide for Windows Users” and have shared it with friends. I recognize the government postures against personal privacy in the name of “anti-terrorism.” I now view personal privacy as critical to liberty. I am thankful for privacy advocacy groups. I also have an answer for those who say they “have nothing to hide.”
The introduction to ethical theories was most interesting. I differentiated between my uncompromising religious world view and a workable social ethic wherein everyone may survive and enjoy freedoms. When an individual on our discussion board blithely selected the “Divine Command Theory” as workable for our diverse society, it gave me pause. Although we may share similar energy, if our orthodoxy is not the same, the only other thing we may share if applying the Divine Command Theory is strife and sorrow. I pray this is not heresy: there will be no peace on earth without convergence and tolerance.
Social Contract Theory and the Internet...Thoughts
I chose the Social Contract Theory because it purported to offer equal liberties, respect, and opportunity to all members of its society. The governing body is charged with the protection against infringement of individual liberties and it is not above its own laws. Social contract implies a common goodness between people. It does mean, however, that some personal preferences are unmet. A community of tolerance is necessary to achieve peace in a complex society.
There are limitations, however, to the theory. The social contract will not work where there is no vision beyond the self. A contract implies at least two parties; it is not unidirectional, and there must be reciprocity between like-minded individuals.
In regard to the internet, its fierce capacity is overwhelmingly huge; it is its own being. The internet exacerbates self-orientation and subjective relativism.
We studied no ethical theory appropriate to harness it. The Social Contract Theory is inadequate by definition; it requires reciprocity. Its justice does not well address willful wrong of multitudes.
My choice of theory is irrelevant. For the first time since starting this course of work, I question the worth of what I am studying in terms of its lasting effect or value to other persons. I must have much more information to make any significant application of ethics to the peculiar connectedness afforded by the internet.
Thank-you for this course and the opportunity to study these issues.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Saturday, November 29, 2008
"Public Records on the Internet: The Privacy Dilemma"
Internet Privacy
Review and Reaction to the Article
“Public Records on the Internet: The Privacy Dilemma” (Givens)
In “Public Records on the Internet,” Givens exposes the dangers and perceived consequences of the posting of public records on the internet. The accessibility of public records promotes governmental accountability and transparency. Conversely, in a technological age, the exposure of private citizens’ information jeopardizes their safety.
There are a variety of public records that are accessible via the internet. These include tax records, motor vehicle records, voter files, state and federal licenses, and court files. Of most concern are court files. Court files contain sensitive information regarding the personal lives and identities of individuals involved in the file. Issues dealing with family law are particularly concerning. Posted court files lend themselves to identity theft, safety threats, and intimidation that did not exist when only paper records were kept. Paper records created a “de facto privacy” that required the inquirer to activity go to a courthouse and retrieve documents. When documents are posted on line, they may readily be accessed by the “click of a mouse” eliminating any privacy the individual may have had.
Givens suggests that there are several “negative consequences” of posting court records on the internet and then offers several suggestions to amend them. I will speak to three of these.
Identity Theft. The posting of personal information when it is not pertinent fact constitutes irresponsible posting by governmental agencies. The inclusion of unnecessary personal identifying information or the failure to block information to public view should be carefully reviewed. That high opportunity is afforded to identity thieves is indisputable.
The creation of a “two-tier” report posting seems to remedy some of the unnecessary exposure problem. The fact of a matter may be posted e.g. a child was abused. The identifying information regarding the accused social security numbers, address, etc. as well as the texted record of the grief imposed upon the child need not be entered on line. If this information is wanted, the person wanting it may then request of the courthouse records department to have it.
Risks of Personal Safety. In criminal court proceedings, victims, witnesses, and jury members are all at risk of for personal safety when identifying information is posted on the internet. Witnesses and jury members may be in fear of personal safety and decline to participate in juries except under duress. Justice potentially may not be served on several levels.
The “two-tier” method may be of some help here, but more aggressive measures should be taken to protect innocent persons such as concealment of identity except by personal request.
“Private” Judges. The existence and function of “private” judges as well as the desirability of judgment by the court alone attests to the concern for the privacy and functionality of a jury of “peers.” Though the option for these judgment avenues has long existed, posting sensitive and private information to the internet acerbates this so called dual system of justice. The ability to safeguard personal information should be the right of all persons in a free society. As our society becomes increasingly diverse and less apt to comprehend the personal liberties yet afforded it by law, I believe more persons will opt for private or court versus jury judgments in certain types of cases.
Work Cited
Givens, Beth. “Public Records on the Internet: The Privacy Dilemma.”
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. Mar. 2006. 28 Nov. 2008.
Review and Reaction to the Article
“Public Records on the Internet: The Privacy Dilemma” (Givens)
In “Public Records on the Internet,” Givens exposes the dangers and perceived consequences of the posting of public records on the internet. The accessibility of public records promotes governmental accountability and transparency. Conversely, in a technological age, the exposure of private citizens’ information jeopardizes their safety.
There are a variety of public records that are accessible via the internet. These include tax records, motor vehicle records, voter files, state and federal licenses, and court files. Of most concern are court files. Court files contain sensitive information regarding the personal lives and identities of individuals involved in the file. Issues dealing with family law are particularly concerning. Posted court files lend themselves to identity theft, safety threats, and intimidation that did not exist when only paper records were kept. Paper records created a “de facto privacy” that required the inquirer to activity go to a courthouse and retrieve documents. When documents are posted on line, they may readily be accessed by the “click of a mouse” eliminating any privacy the individual may have had.
Givens suggests that there are several “negative consequences” of posting court records on the internet and then offers several suggestions to amend them. I will speak to three of these.
Identity Theft. The posting of personal information when it is not pertinent fact constitutes irresponsible posting by governmental agencies. The inclusion of unnecessary personal identifying information or the failure to block information to public view should be carefully reviewed. That high opportunity is afforded to identity thieves is indisputable.
The creation of a “two-tier” report posting seems to remedy some of the unnecessary exposure problem. The fact of a matter may be posted e.g. a child was abused. The identifying information regarding the accused social security numbers, address, etc. as well as the texted record of the grief imposed upon the child need not be entered on line. If this information is wanted, the person wanting it may then request of the courthouse records department to have it.
Risks of Personal Safety. In criminal court proceedings, victims, witnesses, and jury members are all at risk of for personal safety when identifying information is posted on the internet. Witnesses and jury members may be in fear of personal safety and decline to participate in juries except under duress. Justice potentially may not be served on several levels.
The “two-tier” method may be of some help here, but more aggressive measures should be taken to protect innocent persons such as concealment of identity except by personal request.
“Private” Judges. The existence and function of “private” judges as well as the desirability of judgment by the court alone attests to the concern for the privacy and functionality of a jury of “peers.” Though the option for these judgment avenues has long existed, posting sensitive and private information to the internet acerbates this so called dual system of justice. The ability to safeguard personal information should be the right of all persons in a free society. As our society becomes increasingly diverse and less apt to comprehend the personal liberties yet afforded it by law, I believe more persons will opt for private or court versus jury judgments in certain types of cases.
Work Cited
Givens, Beth. “Public Records on the Internet: The Privacy Dilemma.”
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. Mar. 2006. 28 Nov. 2008.
"Employee Monitoring: Is There Privacy in the Workplace?"
Internet Privacy
Review and Reaction to the Article:
“Employee Monitoring: Is There Privacy in the Workplace?” (Privacy)
Employer monitoring of its workforce is “virtually unregulated”; it is at the will and discretion of the employer. Moreover, communication technologies invite easy monitoring of employee work product and activity while “on the clock” and even while off – site. Generally, employees should be aware that there are few rights to privacy in the work place.
Motivation for monitoring includes concern for litigation over electronic records, productivity, and inappropriate or illegal activity. Most employers have policies regarding their surveillance of employees, but policies may not be legally binding.
In regard to telephone use, employers may monitor any phone conversation, log the numbers dialed, and record the time spent at that number. Electronic mail, voice mail, and instant messaging are not private. Text messages from a workplace provided phone are a little more difficult to obtain insomuch that the storage of the text messages may be from an outside telephone company.
Computer use is employers’ “window” into the workspace. Computer screens may be viewed. File content may be monitored. Even keystrokes may be logged. Employees need not be “notified” that they are being monitored.
Several privacy sites were listed in this article to which a person may refer if they have concerns. The ACLU is active in the area of personal privacy.
Of the reasons proposed by the author to justify employer monitoring, the protection of personal client records was over sighted. Employer surveillance may be fairly heavy in workplaces where large numbers of private or sensitive records are held. This is not secret. Surveillance of record disposition and use is necessary to maintain the trust of clientele. However, there is a balance that should be carefully maintained. Heavily monitoring employees in arenas outside of clientele records seems to express employer distrust of sorts of the employee. It is symptomatic of a breach in healthy employer – employee relationships.
It has occurred to me that for the Social Contract Theory to “work,” the society to which it is applied must for the most part hold in common human values such as respect, good will, and trust. If moral guidelines such as respect and trust erode, then parties must act to protect themselves. Everyone looses. I wonder if ethics and philosophy has any meaning at all in societies where large numbers of its members do not or cannot identify with the greater social impact of their personal behaviours.
Work Cited
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. “Employee Monitoring: Is There Privacy in the Workplace?” Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. July 2008. 28 Nov. 2008..
Review and Reaction to the Article:
“Employee Monitoring: Is There Privacy in the Workplace?” (Privacy)
Employer monitoring of its workforce is “virtually unregulated”; it is at the will and discretion of the employer. Moreover, communication technologies invite easy monitoring of employee work product and activity while “on the clock” and even while off – site. Generally, employees should be aware that there are few rights to privacy in the work place.
Motivation for monitoring includes concern for litigation over electronic records, productivity, and inappropriate or illegal activity. Most employers have policies regarding their surveillance of employees, but policies may not be legally binding.
In regard to telephone use, employers may monitor any phone conversation, log the numbers dialed, and record the time spent at that number. Electronic mail, voice mail, and instant messaging are not private. Text messages from a workplace provided phone are a little more difficult to obtain insomuch that the storage of the text messages may be from an outside telephone company.
Computer use is employers’ “window” into the workspace. Computer screens may be viewed. File content may be monitored. Even keystrokes may be logged. Employees need not be “notified” that they are being monitored.
Several privacy sites were listed in this article to which a person may refer if they have concerns. The ACLU is active in the area of personal privacy.
Of the reasons proposed by the author to justify employer monitoring, the protection of personal client records was over sighted. Employer surveillance may be fairly heavy in workplaces where large numbers of private or sensitive records are held. This is not secret. Surveillance of record disposition and use is necessary to maintain the trust of clientele. However, there is a balance that should be carefully maintained. Heavily monitoring employees in arenas outside of clientele records seems to express employer distrust of sorts of the employee. It is symptomatic of a breach in healthy employer – employee relationships.
It has occurred to me that for the Social Contract Theory to “work,” the society to which it is applied must for the most part hold in common human values such as respect, good will, and trust. If moral guidelines such as respect and trust erode, then parties must act to protect themselves. Everyone looses. I wonder if ethics and philosophy has any meaning at all in societies where large numbers of its members do not or cannot identify with the greater social impact of their personal behaviours.
Work Cited
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. “Employee Monitoring: Is There Privacy in the Workplace?” Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. July 2008. 28 Nov. 2008.
Friday, November 28, 2008
"Search Engine Privacy Tips"
Internet Privacy
Review and Reaction to the Article:
“Search Engine Privacy Tips” (Dixon)
In “Search Engine Privacy Tips,” Dixon makes the observation that most people treat inquiry boxes on search engines like a blank slate that erases itself when the search is completed. The contrary is true. Search engines keep extensive logs of inquiries. Search engines make private information very public. Many connect names and other identifying information with searches. Some search engines have actually posted inquiries on the web. Others inquiries have been accessed by the federal government. To this, Dixon offers several personal privacy suggestions. She also recommends that readers at least start with simple protection measures versus become intimidated and do nothing at all.
While making a search inquiry, users should avoid searching their own name and /or personal identifying information such as social security numbers, passwords, and other ID; this information is logged and attached to the search engine and the user’s IP address. Users should try to avoid accepting search engine cookies. Users should be careful about what they search for remembering that the logs of these will be kept for a very long time.
Several suggestions were made regarding the search engine sites themselves. Use of an anonymizing tool may dissociate the search from the searcher. Avoid posting email, reading the news, and searching on the same search engine. Use a variety of search engines and as many different computers as possible. If one computer is consistently used, request a periodic change of IP address.
Browser histories should be deleted after each use. This is especially true when using public access computers.
From an ethical perspective, aggression against personal privacy is fierce and relentless. Personal privacy is kept only in as much as the holder is aware and is able to fend away intruders. Governmental trespass into personal privacy via the internet makes a mockery of personal privacy legislation. Full disclosure of the extent of personal privacy invasion and, governmental transparency as to its access would shock the citizenry.
Work Cited
Dixon, Pam. “Search Engine Privacy Tips.” World Privacy Forum. 14 July 2008.
28 Nov. 2008..
Review and Reaction to the Article:
“Search Engine Privacy Tips” (Dixon)
In “Search Engine Privacy Tips,” Dixon makes the observation that most people treat inquiry boxes on search engines like a blank slate that erases itself when the search is completed. The contrary is true. Search engines keep extensive logs of inquiries. Search engines make private information very public. Many connect names and other identifying information with searches. Some search engines have actually posted inquiries on the web. Others inquiries have been accessed by the federal government. To this, Dixon offers several personal privacy suggestions. She also recommends that readers at least start with simple protection measures versus become intimidated and do nothing at all.
While making a search inquiry, users should avoid searching their own name and /or personal identifying information such as social security numbers, passwords, and other ID; this information is logged and attached to the search engine and the user’s IP address. Users should try to avoid accepting search engine cookies. Users should be careful about what they search for remembering that the logs of these will be kept for a very long time.
Several suggestions were made regarding the search engine sites themselves. Use of an anonymizing tool may dissociate the search from the searcher. Avoid posting email, reading the news, and searching on the same search engine. Use a variety of search engines and as many different computers as possible. If one computer is consistently used, request a periodic change of IP address.
Browser histories should be deleted after each use. This is especially true when using public access computers.
From an ethical perspective, aggression against personal privacy is fierce and relentless. Personal privacy is kept only in as much as the holder is aware and is able to fend away intruders. Governmental trespass into personal privacy via the internet makes a mockery of personal privacy legislation. Full disclosure of the extent of personal privacy invasion and, governmental transparency as to its access would shock the citizenry.
Work Cited
Dixon, Pam. “Search Engine Privacy Tips.” World Privacy Forum. 14 July 2008.
28 Nov. 2008.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Last Text Chapters & The Book
Last Text Chapters as They May Apply to Educational Setting
Chapter 36: Cyber Police
Computer use is highly monitored and restrictive in my educational setting. URL histories, emails, and actual time spent on internet activity are monitored and limited. Sites close automatically after idling for specified time frames. Exchange or download of files is limited. Views, frames and information in general are available on a needs – base only. Violations of institutional policy occur no doubt, but they are confidential and I am not aware of them. It is probable that individuals do cross institutional boundaries, but this does not seem to be common. The environment is very professional.
Chapter 37: Getting Caught
Most institutions have ethical codes of conduct. The attitude that some on line behaviour is OK if not caught is not a part of the institutional environment at all.
Chapter 38: Play by My Rules
Right and wrong is not relative. The world is unable to survive if it is. That cyberspace “has no rules” has more to do with the threat of punishment than it does with behaving responsibly within the greater human community. In my institution, employees agree that they will “play by the employer’s rules” or the person is not employed.
Chapter 39: Making Ethical Decisions
Acceptable behaviour on line may be guided by laws of the land, rules of conduct, religion, and company policies. Carefully considering the outcomes of personal behaviour is important in any environment as well.
Chapter 40: Cyber – Parenting
Parents should be take the initiative and become involved in their children’s internet activity. There are number servers and filters that may help parents shield their children from dangers on the internet. The need for internet involvement of parents in children’s lives is not a part of my institutional concern.
The Book
The Book lends itself to group discussion. It is appropriate in a public setting for use with adolescents. It might be given as a reference to a parent. The book provides questions for discussion. It is easy to read. The book is, however, fairly repetitive. Its language is diminutive. Parents are portrayed as “bad guys” and “stupid guys” versus best friends, confidants, and individuals who have the child’s best interest in mind.
Chapter 36: Cyber Police
Computer use is highly monitored and restrictive in my educational setting. URL histories, emails, and actual time spent on internet activity are monitored and limited. Sites close automatically after idling for specified time frames. Exchange or download of files is limited. Views, frames and information in general are available on a needs – base only. Violations of institutional policy occur no doubt, but they are confidential and I am not aware of them. It is probable that individuals do cross institutional boundaries, but this does not seem to be common. The environment is very professional.
Chapter 37: Getting Caught
Most institutions have ethical codes of conduct. The attitude that some on line behaviour is OK if not caught is not a part of the institutional environment at all.
Chapter 38: Play by My Rules
Right and wrong is not relative. The world is unable to survive if it is. That cyberspace “has no rules” has more to do with the threat of punishment than it does with behaving responsibly within the greater human community. In my institution, employees agree that they will “play by the employer’s rules” or the person is not employed.
Chapter 39: Making Ethical Decisions
Acceptable behaviour on line may be guided by laws of the land, rules of conduct, religion, and company policies. Carefully considering the outcomes of personal behaviour is important in any environment as well.
Chapter 40: Cyber – Parenting
Parents should be take the initiative and become involved in their children’s internet activity. There are number servers and filters that may help parents shield their children from dangers on the internet. The need for internet involvement of parents in children’s lives is not a part of my institutional concern.
The Book
The Book lends itself to group discussion. It is appropriate in a public setting for use with adolescents. It might be given as a reference to a parent. The book provides questions for discussion. It is easy to read. The book is, however, fairly repetitive. Its language is diminutive. Parents are portrayed as “bad guys” and “stupid guys” versus best friends, confidants, and individuals who have the child’s best interest in mind.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
On Line Voting Benefits v Risks
Regarding the benefit – risk ratio of on line voting, the risks far out weigh the benefits.
Voting from Home
The primary benefit of on line voting touted by proponents is that individuals who otherwise could not get to the polls would have an opportunity to vote from within their own home or another convenient location. However, this benefit assumes…
*that these excluded persons have and can operate a computer,
*that they are able to pay for and access internet service,
*that they will have opportunity to cast their vote without coercion, and
*that the intended individual is indeed voting.
Persons negatively impacted would be the computer illiterate, the elderly, the poor, and the oppressed. Privacy for voting would be uninsurable at the point of entry. Individual identity would be more difficult to determine.
Ballot Box Tampering
The argument that electronic voting would eliminate “ambiguity associated with paper balloting” and the “risk of ballot box tampering” is outweighed by the technological problems of safeguarding the electronic process of casting an on line vote.
*that personal computers be virus and otherwise tamper free
*that the website be real versus spoof
*that the website be available, not overwhelmed or under an attack
*that personal privacy be respected,
*that the personal and IP addresses of individuals not be retained, and
*that a paper trail be made to ensure backup in case of computer failure or “clitch.”
Internet voting would be a potential target for illegal tampering on a huge scale, much larger than a ballot box scale.
Monetary Costs
Whether the costs of creating, installing, insuring, and making a verifiable paper record would be less expensive than casting an on line vote is dubious. I have no way of measuring the costs to either side. Voters would sustain the cost of access to computers and the internet. A system for receiving millions of votes would need to be created and kept. The thought that large amounts of technical equipment would be on standby for months at a time and be expected to start up without high costs is unreasonable. The equipment would also require safe storage and tight security.
If electronic voting becomes an option in a larger way than it already is, it should be offered only as one of several methods in which a vote may be cast. All persons should feel safe, free, private, and comfortable with voting for the individual of their choice ...and they must know for certainty that their vote has indeed been cast.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Ethics Personal Privacy
In the Country’s infancy, the right to personal privacy was implied from privacy rights that were originally extended to personal property, especially to the home. Individuals were given the right to grant and deny access to their property to all persons including governmental representatives. Only with demonstration of significant cause was a breach of such personal privacy justified.
In Thomson (1975), “the right to be let alone” is more appropriately applied to individual privacy from the public versus from governmental intrusion or law enforcement as the example was given in the text.
In Benn and Reiman (1976), the right to personal privacy as fundamental to American liberty is expanded by equating it with “a right which all human individuals possess.”
In our technological society, physical boundaries are ineffectual as barriers against invasion of privacy. High concentrations of private information held by governmental and private others begs use and abuse of the power. The lack of transparency exacerbates abuse. Governmental and private parties alike relentlessly challenge consumers for personal information e.g. “surcharges” for cash payers, higher pricing for “non-club” shoppers, higher fees for “non-registered” drivers on state funded toll roads. Personal information is also simply given away. Children and adults alike fail to identify or value personal privacy as liberty, as a critical element of freedom.
Privacy exists in our society only as far as an individual is able (in compliance with law) to assert and defend his right. Given the citizenry’s loss of rights subsequent to 9/11 and the aggressiveness of the public and private sectors, there can be no question that personal privacy is endangered.
In Thomson (1975), “the right to be let alone” is more appropriately applied to individual privacy from the public versus from governmental intrusion or law enforcement as the example was given in the text.
In Benn and Reiman (1976), the right to personal privacy as fundamental to American liberty is expanded by equating it with “a right which all human individuals possess.”
In our technological society, physical boundaries are ineffectual as barriers against invasion of privacy. High concentrations of private information held by governmental and private others begs use and abuse of the power. The lack of transparency exacerbates abuse. Governmental and private parties alike relentlessly challenge consumers for personal information e.g. “surcharges” for cash payers, higher pricing for “non-club” shoppers, higher fees for “non-registered” drivers on state funded toll roads. Personal information is also simply given away. Children and adults alike fail to identify or value personal privacy as liberty, as a critical element of freedom.
Privacy exists in our society only as far as an individual is able (in compliance with law) to assert and defend his right. Given the citizenry’s loss of rights subsequent to 9/11 and the aggressiveness of the public and private sectors, there can be no question that personal privacy is endangered.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)