theclasssessionssamblog-blog

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

Assessing short ethics presentations

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrvtOWEXDIQ

This presentation was about Aristotle and virtue theory. It states that Aristotle was pretty vague about how to act in situations, because a virtuous person should know how to act. Since we are social animals, we should act kindly toward other people. Aristotle's virtue theory also says we should take a middle ground in life. Nothing should be on the extreme end or the other, such as eating food. I thought that the presentation was very good, it seemed very high quality and his voice came through without issue. This was very professional and the presentation was good at keeping up with what was on screen. The flow of his speech was very good too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Umk7nQiaqkA&list=LLkvlzdpPeE-Ogt3iAv2P62g&index=3&t=0s

This was about giving robots rights if the AI gets good enough. He talked about the robots feeling pain, if they could even feel pain. He pretty much just talked about scenarios in which the AI gets advanced. I think it makes sense to make robots without pain and without ego. Maybe they could evolve to have that, but I’d hope not. I thought the presentation itself was awful. He did nothing but have a camera film him sitting in front of a desk. The audio was very good though, but the presentation itself was not very good. I got tired of seeing him sitting in front of the desk, and almost nothing about it captured my attention.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_t4obUc51A

I would say that his was my favorite video out of all of them. The audio was great and it was a simple yet informative presentation. He was great at capturing attention with lots of pictures relevant to what he was talking about. He could be heard very well. This covered the basics of ethics’ and people who came up with various types of ethics. It was very basic but a very well done video. It covered deontological ethics, virtue ethics, and consequences ethics. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE9EFZhSqR0

This video is about ethics and its relation to religion. I thought it was a good presentation, however the audio could have been better. He talked about everything on the screen and his flow of words was great.  Other than the audio the presentation was very good. It starts out by saying how religion can be used to justify ethical behaviors. It gives all people an ethical code that they should follow. Divine Morality states that “Morality is what the god’s like while immorality is what the god’s dislike”. This originates from ancient greece, but it translates well into the usually christian belief in morality. But then you need to know what God commands. However people have issues deciding what God believes. I think that’s were problems can really emerge, it depends on what people think. Overall it was a good video.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ew2OmY_Uer4

I would be sure to say that this is a pharmaceutical business's channel, but I think it makes good points. I think it’s important to have animal trials, after were pretty sure it won’t hurt them. Like giving them a vaccine that could cure cancer, that makes sense. I don’t agree with some ways studies have been done though, such as giving mice loads of tobacco smoke to cause tumors. We know tobacco isn’t medical and is harmful, so why harm the animals. I guess using drugs that are in the trial phase on extremely sick kids could be good. If the kid and parents think it could help the kid, I don’t see what's wrong with that. I’m all for giving people more options, and a lot of drugs are risk vs reward situation. The video itself was pretty good and the audio was perfect. It did seem like they spent a lot of time and probably hired people to do the video. The cartoons were good and got the point across. The graphics were great at making me pay attention.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

HW6 Case 3

The facts of the case.”

Jill took her robot to an old man named bill to test out her robot named Buddy. Buddy helped Bill out with the house chores and keep track of his medication. Later on strange things started happening with Buddy and she became suspicious that someone could have hacked into it. This ended up being the case. 

“Analysis.” 

I understand why Jill was nervous to tell Bill that he might be being spied on. I think she could have told him in good way what her concerns wore, while keeping Bill calm. Even if she didn’t want to do that she should have gotten some professional to look into what was happening. She didn’t want to upset people but what they didn’t know hurt them more because they couldn’t anticipate it. I think the ideal of trying it out on Bill was good, but she was too confident in her own abilities. 

“My conclusions.”

Jill really should have just tested it out with professionals, while trying it out on a man that needs it sounds really fun, it can end bad. I really think this was her best bet, and then use the robot in a controlled environment for people testing it out.

“Future environment.” 

People are much more careful about testing, and sign papers about what they will cover if something is hacked. People will also test their programs and robots for security issues way before any customer gets to try it out.

“Future Scenario”

Customers who are testing out products are told how to protect themselves. They should keep personal information away from the robot and cover the robot up with a blanket or towel when it’s not in use. The robot also would not have tracking data, and the location of the robot would be extremely secure.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

HW6 Case 2

Question’s

1. Was it ethical to give Bill the robot without testing it out.

2. How could she have prevented the security leak

3. What should she had done when she became suspicious.

4. Is it ethical to try and get back in business. 

Answers

1. I think it was ethical but she should have warned Bill more about what could happen. She should have been more upfront about the possibility of being hacked.

2. She could have hired professionals to try and get through her system.

3. She should have gotten help from a security professional.

4. I think so, but she needs to make sure this doesn’t happen again.

5th question 

I think that people should start out by keeping the robots in one room, and don’t use medical patients. If the robot was kept in a room away from personal information, none of this would have happened.

(i)   What if you apply deontological ethics (rule-based)  to this case?

 I think that she failed on the part of telling Bill the risks that could happen. In terms of rule’s I would hope that a standard practice for people making robots, to warn them of the risks that could happen.

(ii)  What if you apply utilitarian ethics (similar to consequentialist ethics) to this case?

Maybe it could have been ok. She could learn alot security from this and then benefit the majority of society by her work. I don’t agree with it though.

(iii) What if you apply virtue ethics (character-based) to this case?

Jill would be in the wrong, because she should have let by knowing about the risks he was taking. Especially after she started to get suspicious

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

HW6 case 1

                                           Buddy the Robot

A woman named Jill has been working a her new robot, Buddy. Buddy is a humanoid robot that has the appearance of a small, not threatening man. Buddy is designed to help with the usual house chores that people have. Her hope is that this will save time and energy by cutting down on the amount of work they have. The robot also talks and learns from his owners. He will accept commands and learn how to navigate his environment. He is also designed not to harm human beings, obey commands from its owners, and to preserve itself. 

Buddy is designed to be cute and elicit emotion. Jill has sold her first robot and the man to test it out is named Bill, and older man who is illiterate with computers. While he is still healthy, he is noticing it is harder for him to get around. In order to make sure the robot is functioning properly, she will be stopping by his house twice a week asking him questions and doing maintenance on the robot. She feels it is important to make sure the robot is working correctly, for now it brings Bill drink and cleans his apartment out. 

Jill sold her robot to Bill 2 weeks ago, and is going to checkup on them. When she arrives, she notices that Bill’s son is their with his family. The man says that he really appreciates the robot, but he is worried about his dad’s privacy. He knows that the robot learns by watching the behavior of humans, plus it is connected to Jill’s server through the internet. Jill assured him that the information is on a cloud server that is secure, and that this is improving the experience that he will have.

About a month has passed by and Bill has developed a heart issue, but the doctor tells him it’s not too serious as long as he remembers to take his medication. Jill asks bill if she can talk to the doctor about his health issues to see if the robot can assist him. The doctor had reservations about it buy opened up to it as she said his records were secured in the database. Intrigued with the potential to lessen the burden on bill and him he agrees. He tells Jill that Bill must take his medication once in the morning and once at night, not doing so could have huge ramifications. Jill then programs the robot to remind bill each morning and night to take his medication.

Buddy starts administering medications for bill, and all is well. A few months go by and Jill is feeling very confident about her little Buddy robot. She decides to launch 4 more in the coming weeks, using AI to learn the environment and delivery medications on time. The doctor's confidence with Jill’s robot is growing so he allowed some other patients to try the robot. Bill’s family also says that it helps serve as a companion to the lonely man, and they have noticed his spirits have been improved. Bill has started sharing more personal secrets with the Robot.

Bill decides that he would like the robot to start helping with his taxes and social security. Jill being extremely confident agress, but says she will need to take the robot off his hands for a weekend, and gets Bills family involved in getting him his medication. While taking apart her robot she notices that the software has changed in minor ways, not wanting to make a fuss about it she chalks it up the A.I. acting in unprecedented ways. She also noticed a medication set for Bill to take that night never showed up. She contemplated taking it from Bill for a few weeks to check on the issues, but decides she will compile Buddy’s data onto another robot the same module as him. Besides, she will be checking in with Bill and Buddy twice a week to make sure all is going well. 

Bill is excited to get his robot back, even cries a few tears to see his friend Buddy back. Jill tells him that although Buddy is supposed to remind him twice a day to take his medication, he should be mindful that the robot could have a malfunction and forget. Bill says he’ll remember. One night Jill decides to view Buddy via remote control in Bill’s apartment. She notices that the Robot is moving around in ways that are very pecular for a robot. Buddy is roaming around viewing pictures of Bill and his family. This worries her but she again chalks it up to a malfunction in his programming. 

The next time Jill visits Bill, Bill is complaining about people spying on him outside his balcony. The doctor said that his medication could make him loopy so she asks Bill’s son to spend the night and see if Bill’s anxiety is a result of the drug he is taking. Again that night, she decides to view through the robots camera, this time the robot seems to be focusing on Bill’s son, view his face extensively, and listening to Bill and him reminiscent about the past giving lots of names and personal information. By this point she is starting to get nervous. The next as she goes to visit Bill, Bill is ecstatic about going on a trip to Canada with his son to go fishing. After listening to Bill go on and on about fishing, she asks if she can view the Robot remotely in his house when he is gone. By this time, Bill truths Jill and agrees to it. 

While remote viewing Buddy’s camera, she watches in horror as two men in ski masks break into the house. They go to spots that Buddy had been observing that had valuables in it. As if they had a map they go to each room where there are valuables. She called the cops but by the time they get their it’s too late. Later she is asked to come to the station for questioning. She tells them what happened and they are perplexed, they warn her to get a lawyer because civil lawsuits will probably be coming.

When Bill finds out what happens he is extremely upset and in tears that Buddy was used to spy on him. He decides to forgive Jill but doesn’t want to see her again. His son however decides to file a lawsuit, something she would spend years fighting. After years of court dates, she agrees to pay the family 100,000 dollars in damages. Her business is on hold, and she thinks of ways to improve the program so this never happens again. This time though, she gets other professionals to test the robot for vulnerabilities, however, after what happened, it is hard for her to get more buyers of the robot.

Question’s

1. Was it ethical to give Bill the robot without testing it out.

2. How could she have prevented the security leak

3. What should she had done when she became suspicious.

4. Is it ethical to try and get back in business.

Fifth discussion question

1. She had Bill test her product, how should people test these products in real life.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

Blog for 11/11/2019

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3gp4LFgPX0

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/jppy8g/are-soldiers-getting-too-emotionally-attached-to-war-robots

Most of this focuses on empathy for robots and treating them as a living being. Could we have too much empathy for robots? What are the Ramifications for treating them as humans

They are using robots in the US military which were designed to minimize the risk to soldiers, such as a bomb diffusing robot. Many soldiers start to form emotional attachments to robots and project traits of a pet to it. This is called Anthropomorphism which is defined as associating human traits to non-human entities. We naturally do this as kids with toys and most of us do it as adults. With robots in the military and soldiers developing empathy for them, it is asked if it could defeat the purpose of robots. Soldiers have risked their lives to save their robot friends, and if your working with a robot for months and it performs a valuable service, I think that most people would start to care for them. Especially if the robot had saved someone’s life. The problem lies in treating them as living entities instead of machines designed for war. 

In Japan they had a funeral for ABIO dogs, which are pretty much just little robot pets. Unlike the military robots, these were made to be cute and cause empathy for them, much like if you have a pet. Soldier’s have also had funerals for their dead robots. I think that having a full rite of funeral shows how attached people will get.

What about using robots for patients with mental issues. Patients with dementia have had robot’s as emotional support “animals”, they have reacted very positively to it. Having a brain disease like dementia is very sad for both the patient and caregivers, and it probably feels bad to be taken care of all the time. A robot doesn’t need to eat and won’t die if not cared for, and it gives the patients a feeling of taking care of something as opposed to always being taken care of. It has also been used in patients with autism to help bridge the gap these people have in communication. Children could explain themselves better to their parents with the robots. I think it’s interesting that video games have been used in patients with PTSD, it works especially well with kids who have been through traumatic experiences, because it allows them to open up in an environment they feel comfortable. I wonder if robot’s could be used to help patients with PTSD to open up more about their experiences or just have something they fell understands them.

The downside to using robots like this in a non-military setting is would it take other people out the the equation more? Would people with dementia be cared for as well if they had robots doing it, I don’t think that robots are a substitution for human contact. Would people with autism have any motivation to improve their social skills, and PTSD patients become more withdrawn from people by relying on robots. I think it has potential to be a great thing, but we need to keep in mind that while robots can do lots of good, they aren’t a replacement for people.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

HW 6

I will be combing the topics I have done in the previous homework assignments and will Make a case for the future of technology in regards to privacy and pricing.  Here is an article about robots being hacked so they can spy on individuals. https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/22/16183514/hack-home-robot-surveillance-ioactive

https://ioactive.com/ 

This is definitely a cause for concern, as the robot probably has recorded conversations and has a camera so you can be identified. With a Robot like pepper it could probably even roam around. I think the video of the little chinese robot stabbing the tomato was pretty funny, but it should demonstrate a point for why security is important. I think that there needs to be some sort of standardization by people making these robots, but it’s not possible to make something with no vulnerabilities. A good idea would probably be to make sure the robot isn’t around anything that could give away your location or personal information, for example don’t have him outside your apartment or house number.

Pricing could be another important issue I think. I think that software updates should be free, but if someone has to pay for them they should be told how much each software update will be before it comes out. Ideally this would be a stable monthly fee at the most or a rare but affordable update. What makes me a little nervous is the possibility of businesses charging lots of money for updates that are essential for security. I think if they anticipate the cost of updates to be high then they should raise the price on the initial product. Not doing so can really hurt people. While not robots I think it’s important to mention cars here as well, because cars are becoming more robot. New cars such as the Ford Escalade can be hacked and electronic functions can be manipulated. This includes brakes, and is a very serious concern for everyone on the road. I think that as more and more things become connected by the internet the risks will go up as well. We also should think of that things should not be digitized. Maybe it’s better to have animals as pets instead of robots, they are usually a lot safer. I think we should be careful with how far we want to take connecting ourselves with everything else in the world.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

HW 5 Case 3

The Facts of the case

The Russian Government uses State propaganda to influence its viewers. It is said tried to influence the U.S. election, although the extent of it is not clear. Propaganda is spread throughout countries not only the United States. 

Analysis of the Case

Propaganda has had a small effect on the U.S. population. It is not as big of a deal as people make it out to be, and for all the propaganda that exists, it’s actually pretty moderate. I think that as people get older and see different points of view, propaganda is less likely to take effect. The propaganda is not very well done, and there are different sides to every story. Each news organization is going to have a little bit of bias at least, even when not trying to be. It depends on how stories line up and what the facts are that determine if it is propaganda or not.

My Conclusions

I think that good information can combat propaganda. Big news organizations should release information and all their sponsors, to make it to where it becomes normal. This would allow people to see if there would be any reason for political bias, but it should also be remembered that correlation does not equal causation. 

Future Environment

When people go to a news site, there will be a page with the sponsors. News sites would also show to their readers why they are reliable and without bias. Hopefully people will start to catch on and expect for every new site to show their sponsors. They could also show how their stories line up with other sites. They would also provide how they got the information, such as one of their reporters had news to cover, or they got it from a different web site. 

Future scenario 

People would learn how to check the sponsors and the sources of the news. Checking the source of news is very helpful, not just for propaganda but also to see if the news can be relied upon. A news site might say a new president got elected, but it’s some insider who was mistaken that did it. I’m saying that often times at the time reporting is inaccurate, simply because nothing has been confirmed.  

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

HW5 Case 2

1. I don't think it affects the united states that much besides a small portion of the population. Most of the 

people it affects seem to be younger people by looking at the comments. Perhaps their adults, but their pretty

immature then. A good propaganda website is Southfront, which reports many true things on parties other than their

own. It does not report diplomatic issues that the Russian Military is involved in, but exaggerates those they are

against. If you read the comments you will quickly notice that is people susceptible to the most ridiculous propaganda, such

as the United States funding the terrorist group ISIS, to israel funding al-qaeda, which has never been proven.

2. I don't think so, as long as we can see who the sponsors are, it's okay with me. People need to learn to think

for themselves, and if they are not challenged, how can they learn. 

3. I think the best way is to just let it run its course. The government shouldn't be interfering with 

speech as long as it's not slander or explicitly encouraging violence.

4. They should show who their sponsors are and explain why their news is credible. While all news has it's political

slance, such as CNN and FOX NEWS, it doesn't compare to the stance that news organizations that are government sponsored

such as Russia Times or South China Morning Post.

5. We don't know, most likely it will happen at some point, which is why it's important

for people to think for themselves. It's not something people should be too worried  about

though as long as they can navigate it. If propaganda works, i think that says more

about us than it does about the people producing the propaganda.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

Project 5 Case 1

https://www.rand.org/blog/2016/12/beyond-the-headlines-rands-christopher-paul-discusses.html

List of eight important facts

1. Russian government is known to spread propaganda and fake news

2. Uses state sponsored media, such as RT

3. Often filled with half or partial truths

4. Use alternative explanations and theories

5. While much is targeted at domestic audience, a lot is still for foreign audiences

6. Supports Russian agendia, such as in Ukraine.

7. Volume is associated with truth

8. Doctored photos

A list of four or more questions

1. How much does this affect the United States

2. Should sponsored news be designated as agent

3. How would the US deal with the problem and still respect free speech if it becomes an issue.

4. How should credible sources educate about fake news

A 5th question

How do we know the United States wouldn’t make propaganda about the propaganda. How do we spot all propaganda, from whatever source?

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

HW 5 case

I am starting to think that the most important thing is to treat your customers fairly and with respect while following the law. If you do this, you are doing your ethical duty while doing the best that you can. I honestly can’t say much else.

Most of these cases have been client oriented, as they are mostly focused on keeping the patient safe and secure. For the next blog ill will work more on a legal case against government regulations, but not against the patients themselves. Both of these must be followed, and it is unbelievably important to triple check that everything checks out.

Even if you think that you're helping people, the law could say that something is law. Everyone is accountable to the law, no matter how complicated,ridiculous, or ludicrousy they are, we have to follow them. This means checking of things you would never think of, such as how workers are and regulations for everything, even to the point of making a desk fireproof, as it is too high off the ground. The customers always come first, the government comes next. Next comes yourself, you have to look out for yourself and practice self care. This is one part of ethics that is often overlooked, they workload and stress of life can make you be difficult on yourself, just remember many others have been through similar situations and have seen it though.

So this next case will deal with following government laws which protect you, while also managing your own personal life. While you should help your clients as much as possible, it is equally important to protect yourself and your health. Government and self management both merge into keeping yourself happy and fulfilled. It is not only ethical to think about the outside, but you yourself are a person as well and you need to practice keeping yourself healthy and of right mind. Too many times ethics focuses on others, while it does not focus on the self and managing the health of it. My final project will be about the ethics of taking care of yourself, financially, physically, and spiritually.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

Blog for 10/23/2019

Blog for 10/23/2019 “The Last Lecture”

I read a summary and watched the video of this man. I was pretty impressed with what he had accomplished and he seemed to have good advice. It pretty much came down to working hard, being good to others, and counting your blessings. 

 He starts out by talking about what he wanted to be when he was a kid, which was a football player.  He never got to be an NFL player, but that’s ok because lots of us have to accept our limitations. He also wanted to be an imagineer and loved Star Trek’s Captain Kirk. Later on he decided to move into computer science.

When he was in his 20’s he was working on virtual reality, and was good at it. He picked something that he also enjoyed a lot, while being able to make time to hangout with people. Later he became a professor at a university and was well liked by the students for being both a good teacher and life coach. He also began teaching people how to achieve their goals.

Later he would develop cancer and doctors gave him 3-6 months to live. He delivered his last lecture, and he was Seemingly positive. He wanted to help other people and his kids when he died. Doing something for other people when your going to die soon if a very good thing to do.

Overall he lived a short but good life. We don’t know what's going to happen in the future, but and long we keep trying hopefully we’ll be fulfilled. That’s the basics of his message, which is a very good one. Soon after his last lecture, he passed away, but his impact on people carry;s on without him. 

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

HW 4 Proj 2

1. I don’t think you should cut customers off right away. They may be in stressful situations or may be the kind who complains to all their friends. Either way, it’s best to be fantastic to the customers, even if the are being rude. If they are not willing to cooperate at all, then I'd say it’s fair to hang up on them. These people probably have reputations for complaining about everything anyway.

2. I think that they are under an ethical obligation to not give any information away to authorities unless a warrant is issued. The reason I say this is because the government themselves could be wrong about the law, and violating it will get you into trouble as ignorance of the law is no excuse.

3. I think that the  truth is still important for people, even though it might be hard to accept. If people find out that their information is not secure and it ruins their peace of mind, it’s fine because it will help them. 

4. I think it’s a tricky situation. If the federal government is looking the other way, let's say like in the cannabis industry, I think it’s find, however if it’s being enforced, I think that it is wrong to go against the Federal Government. By the same standard, i think if a local government is enforcing a law specific to the area, it should be followed as well.

5. I think that they should  test the products or make sure the products are well tested before they come out. Then they should keep up with them. Minor faults in programs as no big deal, because it happens, security issues need to be reportable however.

(i)   What if you apply deontological ethics (rule-based)  to this case?

(ii)  What if you apply utilitarian ethics (similar to consequentialist ethics) to this case?

(iii) What if you apply virtue ethics (character-based) to this case?

1. If you apply rule based ethics to the case, things should run pretty smoothly. Following all laws and reporting security concerns work extremely well in business. I think the deontological ethics are by far the best for this case. 

2. If the apply Utilitarian ethics, you would still follow the rules of deontological ethics, as having a company impacts not just you but everyone. It is very important to do things right as many people could be relying on the business as a source of income.

3. If you apply virtue ethics, the same thing applies. Be honest with your customers and follow state,local, and federal law.

I am very impressed that all three of these ethics systems come to the same conclusion. At first i thought that these ethical ideals were very different, now I am thinking that they are just variations on a theme.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

HW4 proj 1

Link to the code of ethics

https://www.4macsolutions.com/code-of-ethics/

List of 8 important facts about this ethical code

1. Do No misrepresent one’s work or abilities 

2. Abide by all Laws Federal, local, or state.

3. Not to divulge into private information without consent of the client

4. Only use and install Licensed software

5. Always be respectful to customers, even if they are not as kind

6. Offer Equal opportunities to all people the qualify, regardless of differences

7. Speak out against abuses and protect the public

8. MACS is a specialized IT service for Mac users.

    List of 4 questons

1. When should it be okay to cut a disrespectful customer off, let’s say they are swearing constantly?

2. What if the individual has private information that authorities are asking for?

3.What if showing abuses of the industry will probably do more harm than good?

4. What if local and federal laws contradict each other

    5th discussion question

1. Should MACS have to keep up and the software they are contracted to support? What if a product that has been secure for years has a breach, what should the appropriate steps be? A warning to customer, taking it off the shelves, what else.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

Sam’s 7 rules for keeping pets

1. Make sure you have the money to buy food and medicine for the animal

2. Remember that animals are not people, so don’t expect them to act like a human should.

3. Displicing your animal should not include any yelling or hurting the animals. Giving it commands is okay. Shooting your cat with a squirt gun is fine too, but the animals must have a lesson to learn and it has to be done out of discipline, you can’t be having a bad day and take it out on them.

4. If your pets don’t like each other, give them seperate areas to eat and sleep.

5. Remember to get vaccines every year

6. If someone is allergic to your pet, keep the pet away from them.

7. If you can’t take care of your pet, try to get someone who can or if you need to take it to a shelter. 

The Main Rule: Love your pet because they love your as well.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

HW 4 proj

 I think that these project sections have made me realize how much security matters. With many important aspects of society working on the internet, such as government, healthcare, and banking, it has become clear that security is one of the most important aspects needed.

    After my homework 3 project, it is amazing at how easy something can be exploited. Think of how many times the FBI has been hacked. These things happen, but I think it might be a good idea to keep the extremely sensitive information offline or at least make sure it’s extremely secure. This is a problem for many people, with more than 10 credit cards being stolen a minute.

    I think that computer security should be encouraged, we have all of these health advertisements by the government, but they don’t teach people anything. People need to know why it is so important that they stay secure and safe. The truth of the matter is that the government can’t protect people from this kind of thing, they can’t investigate it all, much less solve them. I think it is becoming more and more important for individual people to educate themselves on these issues. 

    I think that kids who go to elementary school should not just be taught basic computer skills, as they are now, but they also need to learn how to stay secure. I don’t mean avoiding dumb risks, such as willfully giving out personal information online, but the risks that people don’t think about. Teach them about secure connections, how to make sure a site is trustworthy, and how to keep basic computer maintenance. The maintenance would include having passwords for accounts, having anti malware and virus programs, to how to do banking or shopping. Banking is extremely risky if people don’t know what they are doing, and so is shopping, as this gives out peoples addresses. These classes would continue into highschool, so that most highschoolers in arkansas would have had the opportunity to learn about being responsible on the internet.

    With computers becoming a huge part of everyday life for people in the United States, I think it’s important to teach people how to deal with the environment they will have to deal with. Sometimes I wonder if life would be more fun without the gadgets we use, but we have become dependent on them and they serve a very good purpose. Like everything though, it comes with risks. Teaching someone to drive a car and forcing them to get a license cuts down on the risks of car crashes, the same could be said about computers.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

10/11/2019

Ethical Codes

I think I'll start of with the Rabbit Ridge Mountain Bike Trail. This ethics is definitely deontological as it gives us a responsibility to take care of the trail. At least that’s what I think they're trying to get at. It also works with utilitarianist ethics as well, because it honestly is better for the people that want to enjoy the trail later that you clean up after yourself. In a virtue based ethics, is being considerate for other people that want to enjoy the trail as much as you do.  I think that character traits are important to being ethical, and it is just a minor thing to clean up after yourself, but it encourages you to be more considerate in the future. I think Aristotle might like it because it gets people to reinforce the good behaviors, Confucius probably thinks it’s a nice thing to do, and I can’t see Hume having any problem with it. 

Laws Vs. Unjust Laws

Laws can definitely be illegitimate. I think any law that is not made to protect people is unjust, as more exceptions to the law will be passed. Laws need to be watched very carefully, as we need law but laws are often instruments that are used to oppress people. For example, I think the idea of SWAT teams started out as a decent ideal, such as when people are robbing a bank or have lots of firepower, but it has morphed into SWAT teams being used to raid on a daily basis. The law started out as a good idea, but has since become dangerous for both police officers and non-police. It also feeds into the mentality that they are against us, when they should be here to serve us. I think most cops really are trying to do the right thing, but we take it too far sometimes and give them unrealistic goals.  I believe in Natural Law as well, but many laws start out as good ideals, but quickly become something very bad. I don’t blame anyone for it though, I think it’s natural to want to be safe and for cops to want to help people, but sometimes we let it get out of control. Having people put in these high stakes situations when there is no need has gotten lots of police and non-police to get seriously hurt or killed. I think this law is unjust because it needlessly hurts both sides and no one really benefits from having a police state. My ideals go against the idea that laws reflect society's values, because too often we take law too far and are motivated by personal reasons. 

Typical behaviors covered are:

Truthfulness

Integrity

Impartiality

Respect for clients/colleagues/others

Adherence to law of the land

Confidentiality

Responsibility

I thought that this part would be an interesting topic to elaborate a lot on. I don’t play video games that much, but I used to and still play a bit every once in a while. One of my favorite games is Starcraft 2, which is owned by a company called Blizzard Entertainment. Recently however they have begun censoring things due to Chinese government pressure. That really bugs me. https://secure.ethicspoint.com/domain/media/en/gui/33121/index.html. On a different one of their games, they had a professional player say something that was offensive to the Chinese government. This player won the tournament he was in and amazingly for playing a game he got half a million dollars. After he had won he had shouted slogans against the Chinese government, in response Blizzard was pressured and banned the man and didn’t give him a dime of his prize money. It really bums me out that a game I spent a lot of money on went to help out greedy people who would rather have more money than personal freedom. I’ve spent around $150 on the Starcraft games, and after this I don’t think ill play any of them. I don’t really care what a companies political beliefs are, but following the line of the chinese government is a big issue for me.

[theclasssessionssamblog-blog]

HW3 case 3

The Fact of the Case

A group of two men found a loophole in at&t’ sign in. They took advantage

Of the situation and gathered up email’s from customer. They then leaked this

To the press, saying that at&t should have to be held accountable. Everything

Looked fine until text messages came out that they were doing this to

Get a cyber security business.

Analysis. The consequentialist approach suggests in this case that decides the it wasn’t such a bad idea. Overall at&t found out their security problems and fixed them.. The deontological approach seems to imply that  the two men were wrong in this case which differs from the consequentialist approach in that it condemns the action while consequentialist promotes it, but is similar in that they both are trying to determine how to act good in this situation.. A Humean analysis indicates that  the hackers were wrong as people care deeply about their personal information, but also that it is good for people to know what is wrong which seems similar to the consequentialist approach in terms of result of their actions but different in that they come to the conclusions by a different process. It is not similar to the deontological approach. All of these approaches arrive at the conclusion that even if they were partly in the right, it was still not done the right war.      

Conclusions

The two men should not have kept the information and given a full disclosure. This really could have worked out well for them had they not done that. I have a hard time playing them completely though, because they did expose and issue with at*t’s system. I think it would have been much worse had they been talking about selling the information online. I think they pretty much just let the ideal of having a business got to them too much. 

Future Environment

In the future, many more things are done online. This makes security more important and gives more opportunities for hacking. Security is in high demand, and it is good, but somehow people find ways around the security systems.

Future Scenario

The same thing happens, but they do things differently, here’s how. When the discover the exploit and found out then can get emails, they decide to see a lawyer. They tell him about their business and the best way to get the credit they deserve without breaking the law. I think if they had done this they could have gotten paid and gotten a reputation without being unethical about it.