A Guide to Being an Ethical Person Morally
By: Dylan Armand Ngo
1
2
Table of Contents
Preface
xi
Acknowledgement
xii
About the Author
xiii
Introduction (All About Ethics)
7
Introduction (Information Ethics)
8
Chapter I
10
Chapter II
12
Chapter III
14
Chapter IV
22
Chapter V
24
Chapter VI
28
Chapter VII
30
References
33
3
Preface
It is said that in the last ten years information and computer ethics becomes an important part of ethics
and plays a huge part and role in the flow of years as we upgraded and become a more modern world.
Information ethics also became an important part of applied philosophy in terms of professionals,
students and computer majors. Now a days many ethical problems occurred including the issues about
the use and creation of technology thus guides about it needs to be learned by people in order for them
to manages using and creating technologies ethically. Also issues about hackers, cyber crimes and even
terrorist are rising and we need to act about it thats why this novels and handbooks about ethical issues
are really important and useful.
Each chapter on this novel is an inspiring story and is based to some true story and some to educate that
is really done to solve this issues about ethics. Also every chapter on this book is written originally even
though we set an example on some thats why we have articles there that we got from different great
authors to educate more the readers because of this amazing and full of leanrnings examples. This book
unlike others has a different style as it doesn't focus only on one topic but it has many style like stories,
novel and theory type that will let the user adjust on what type of it they can learn more and faster.
After reading this book, readers will be more systematically and ethically more intelligent and also they
can reflect on the story that are experienced by our beloved examples that finds success in their lives
and maybe our readers will be inspired by it and eventually they will become a better person morally.
4
Acknowledgement
The author would like to acknowledge the support he get from his professor and fellow author and
classmates. It helps him to understand more about the topic he was sharing. Dylan Ngo whom is the
author of this book also acknowledges the handbook of information and computer ethics for the sources
that is used on this book to add learnings to the readers. Also the author is grateful for the stories
shared by some people to him to be used and be putted in this book. We are also grateful that
nanowrimo's novel month which is november serves as an inspiration and motivation to finish this book
and for the national library for accepting our book and giving it the a privilege to be published and be
putted in their library. Most importantly we acknowledge our school, college of saint benilde and the
national library for giving us the chance to educate and share our learnings to people who wants to
learn more and people who have no idea about information and computer ethics because that is the
main reason and purpose of this book and hoping this will serves as a history that helped many.
5
About the Author
The author would like to acknowledge the support he get from his professor and fellow author and
classmates. It helps him to understand more about the topic he was sharing. Dylan Ngo whom is the
author of this book also acknowledge the handbook of information and computer ethics for the sources
that is used on this book to add learnings to the readers. Also the author is grateful for the stories
shared by some people to him to be used and be putted in this book. We are also grateful that
nanowrimo's novel month which is november serves as an inspiration and motivation to finish this book
and for the national library for accepting our book and giving it the a privilege to be published and be
putted in their library. Most importantly we acknowledge our school, college of saint benilde and the
national library for giving us the chance to educate and share our learnings to people who wants to
learn more and people who have no idea about information and computer ethics because that is the
main reason and purpose of this book and hoping this will serves as a history that helped many.
6
A Guide to Being an Ethical Person Morally
7
Introduction
I. All about ethics, what does ethics really means?
Ethics is something all of us should know and understand. This is being moral to others ethically. This
novel will mainly focus on IT which is about technology that almost all of us has idea on already this
novel will guide you in understanding more and be ethically good about cyber and IT ethics. This will also
contain topic about contemporary moral problems and some blogs review from the internet to give you
readers learnings from other branches of ethics. We filipinos is said to be morally good and hospitable
so I think these will all be easy to apply in our lives. After reading this you will know how to deal with
things especially in IT ethically and you don't have to ask yourself "how do I do these things morally?".
The main purpose and reason of ethics is for us to respect others. We already know what is right or
wrong we just need to chose which one to do. This novel will also have stories regarding cyber ethics
and my reflection from it to help you readers to understand it further. Normally we do things according
to our want and not by knowledge which is wrong because we need to think of things first before acting
it and our wants is not mandatory to it but it is normal doing our wants because we are human beings
but if we just learn things about ethics, our perspective and knowledge about things can change and
could be better and if everyone just be this kind of person well peace and happier life can happen to the
philippines and also the world but after all of this it still depend on us if we will make the change on
ourselves.
We live in a world where whats fun is sometimes the wrong things and people don't care about anything
just to be happy. We lack now people that are truly good and people who will fight for it because in our
time now people just tend to get along with others to avoid diferrences with them for example a
teenager who's generation are most likely to smoke that teenager even though he dont want to smoke,
he will do it because thats what everyone else does. He refuses to be diferrent and he will refuse to be
good to earn some friends and not become out of place. This is the time when a normal citizen is hurt or
offended by politicians no one bats an eye but when a politician or a government official is hurt or
offended by a normal citizen an issue occur and sometimes law is produced in order for that issue to not
happen again and best example of the is the cyber crime law bill. We still dont understand the real
problem and the best solution to that will always come to each everyone of us. We cant always blame
goverment official because we need to face it, they would never change because they aim for money
thats why they run for places on the government even the most quiet of all of them that seems diferrent
and good but we dont know he or she could be the worst. What would you choose for example a
government official ask for information of other people from you? Almost all will give it some because of
fear and some because they think they should obey and follow the goverment, but some will do the
right thing and will not give that information because that person trust them with that information and
not just because the government want it you should give it to them. That few people who will not
surrender and give that information to the government are the people who I can say are morally ethical
and thus I respect those people.
8
They say now we live in an information society because we are more intellectual and more advanced.
Information is really important these days, so important that we almost need it on everything in order to
know and understand it. Also they said that this is now a knowledge-based world that without
knowledge it will be hard to be successful and it is hard to go along with others because people now are
more intelligent than people 50 years ago.
II. Information Ethics
In this information society whats really important is our responsibility should be done right. Being moral
ethically is said to be adaptable because if a person is really open to things and is open minded anything
can be learn and understand or like they said adapted. We programmers tend to understand cyber
ethics more than other people who are not technical so I think we should be models and preachers and
be responsible also for others to learn more about this. That four moral principle is very important as it
is about null laws. The information and computer ethics is something we should also focus on as it is
something that we should do and learn from. It is a milestone in our history that is remembered by
everyone and passes to the next generations for learnings. Knowing about this milestone and history is a
key to a good life and a more moral life.
The exponential growth of information technology ethics is really adding up because of continuous
growth also on technologies and many new invented ones. As time passes our existing technologies
upgrades thus our technological ethics also grow and are updated in some point. A ethic on something
will actually never be deleted or removed in our history but it will surely be updated and also multiply in
the sense of improvement and it goes with the flow on how the people upgrade or evolve also because
as a person evolves as his mind, perspective and capacity improves also. In the other hand the moral
methodology of ethics is about applied and practical ethics the means the ethics that we use and apply
practically in our daily life. It is something we should apply and be practical about. We will always be
with others socializing so we need to be ethical so show respect to other people.
9
Part I
Stories and Novels about Ethics
10
Chapter I
The Boy who pursue to be successful
There was a child named christian he loves to play computer. Five years ago he dreamed of being good
in using computer in the way of programming, web designing and also inventing new products that will
change the world and make his name be remembered like his idol steve jobs the creator of apple. As
time pass he will soon be graduating and will be going to college. He take entrance exams on famous
universities around the world to explain it further christian is a son of a governor on Switzerland so
basically he is a son of a rich man. Going back to the story one of the school Christian passes was
Harvard university and he chooses to went there and take a bachelor degree on information system, at
first he struggle on the works and loads of requirements from the school but because christian is a smart
and genius kid he manages it to get high grades using his hard work and intelligence. Also he is very
active on his school that he almost joined all the activities and events on it and by that he learned more
and more. Later on on his 3rd year google company apple and microsoft corporation bats an eye on him
and wanted him to be a part of their organization and their team. So christian become a scholar and
gets allowance from both google apple and microsoft as they compete on whos gonna get him when he
graduate. Then the time comes christian graduated with a degree on information systems and he
choose to work on apple as what is said earlier he idolized steve jobs and admire his works. Christian,
with his knowledge, skills, ability, motivation and dedication becomes a very productive, useful and
important employee on the company so later on promotions floods him as other competitor companies
tries to pirate him from apple. Now christian works on samsung as a head on inventing smart
technologies and as rated has the highest pay on his position compared to other companies. Christian
now for short is a very successful man and it's all because of his hard work and sacrifice. Now the
problem about christian was he don't care about anything all he cared about was succeeding he didn't
notice he was being unethical to others specially on his work and later on people complain and complain
about his works and samsung was too afraid for people to hate their company because of christian thats
why later on christian was terminated. Christian was too depressed that he almost committed suicide;
he became unreliable and lost many of his fortune and wealth. Then Christian later on come to think of
it that he can’t live in the past forever and waste all his effort and time achieving was he achieved so he
went to school again to study and have a degree about ethics. Now Christian is an owner of an ethical
phone company is now one of the richest ethical people in the world and he sets as an example and
inspiration to all of us. The Moral on this Story is that we should also be ethical morally because being
good at what we do is not enough because later on people will hate and not like you eventually so one
should be ethical also in order to find his success in life.
11
Here’s An Issue about Google and Nsa that I reviewed
1. What is Mike Hearn thanking Edward snowden for?
He is thanking Snowden for revealing a secret that the government is hiding from Google which is the
taping of the government to Google lines to access their private informations and database for spying
purposes without the permission of Google.
2. Describe what Mike Hearn and his team did- before and after the GCHQ/NSA exploit
Before the gchq/nsa exploit Hearn and snowden was guarding and trying to secure google for the last 10
years. After this happening hearn's fist solution was creating this blog in order to aware and inform
users for the incident. Thus NSA should pay for the illegal act. People including me are just disappointed
with NSA.
Also here’s an Issue Review About Google and Author’s Guild
This issue has an advantage for the both sides while google has its resources and books from other
authors, the authors has a free advertising of their book that leads them to higher income. Downside
and disadvantage for the author is when almost all the details of his or her book is in the web then it will
lead to lower income because people will just use the internet rather than buying the book itself and for
google it's disadvantage is when a book contains wrong details also google will always be sued we cant
avoid that. Overall for me google really provides significant public benefits to the readers or researchers
and also to the authors. But still in the end of this case the Author's guild is still not satisfied and are
disappointed by the courts decision. I think the Author's guild should just sacrifice a little bit for the
greater good and that is the benefits and satisfaction of readers and researchers that are more likely
70% of our population.
12
Chapter II
A Filipino Story about Ethics-True Story
There was a man who lives in bacolod. He is 23 years old and now working here in manila as a guard on
a dormitory. He didn't graduate even elementary, he only studied up to grade 3 and never really has
parents to teach and support him in his life because his parents are separated and already have a family
of their own. His name is mark he is a good guy but sometimes what he think is right is wrong maybe
because nobody was there to teach him moral goods and nobody was there to teach him what the
difference between right and wrong. Nobody can blame him though and besides of his lack of
knowledge he still manages to get along with people and be a good guy on his own way. One day his
friends suggested for him to continue his study even just up to high school but he responded there is no
need and he said studying is not a mandatory and not really important on a person's life. There comes
his knowledge about life, he doesn't understand the important thing because he really doesn’t know
which ones are right and which ones are wrong. Later on Mark was always starting a fight he don't even
wanted because he didn't know if someone is already offended or mad to him, in short he was
insensitive also. So days go by and he always catching up fights and when his boss finds out he was
terminated as a guard on that dormitory. After that mark finds it hard to look for a new job as he just
become a guard on that dorm because his uncle works on it, mark pursue his studies by or as a working
student. He sell goods on buses and after a few years he finishes elementary and after realizing that he
was not good enough morally he decided to go to missionary school in order to learn good things by
God. Now mark is hoping someday he could become a priest and I know he could really be someday.
The moral of this story is one should not let his past be a reason to live good and hard work is all we
need in order to find the success in each one of us. God has plans for us and maybe your life is not like
what the others are living but you just need to take it as a challenge then eventually we will find our
purpose on this world that God has given to us.
On the other hand here are some of the cyber crime bill petitions that I have found Interesting and
reviewed:
G.R. No. 203299
This is about our freedom of speech and our right of privacy when it comes to communications and this
is something that is important to each every one of us. This bill contain that it should not allow
government people or official to get certain or specific record for their own use. This government people
that I stated are specifically the National Bureau of Investigation and Philippine National Police. Only
13
case that this bill is not to be followed is if that person is a wanted man and if he isn't then they should
be illegal.
G.R. No. 203335
This bill is about cyber crime law and act. This proposes to change or revise what is stated on the current
cyber crime law. Well my comment on cyber crime law is negative in the sense that I don't agree with
it's existence because we cant sue or blame others for expressing their opinion it like cutting out their
freedom of speech. Also we should respect thoughts from each other and this law should not be
approved just because some government official is offended by an opinion of a normal Filipino citizen.
Maybe this bill can be perform to specific websites but both on social ones where people interact and
states opinion with each other. Then this bill will be effective.
G.R. No. 203515
It is stated in this petition that what the government is trying to implement and do is unethical and will
violate the freedom of speech and the freedom of expression of the filipinos. Now a days we more
interact and we are more productive in the web or internet because of the technological shift in our
time so if government claim the rights of the people who uses this, where they can express their
thoughts and thus this government will not be a democratic one and never be "by the people" as our
president benigno aquino said. We Filipinos have a democratic government thus we citizens are the one
who has the more power to decide and to choose what to do because it is the right way.
14
Chapter III
Contemporary Moral Problems Review
Part1
Review Questions
1.) Explain the legend of Gyges. What questions about morality are raised by the story?
The Legend of Gyges is about a shepherd who is said to found a magic ring in a fissure opened by the
earthquake. That ring can make its wearer invisible that can make him do anything without being
noticed. Without limits some people do bad things with their self-interest this story defines the
difference between ethical egoism and psychological egoism. The question here is whether a man do an
act ethically or psychologically?
2.) Distinguish between psychological and ethical egoism.
Psychological egoism is something that is done by the many it’s like imitating what is done or what is the
self-interest of the people around you. An ethical egoism is all about yourself and what you want
because you do these things with your self-interest regardless what others normally do.
3.) Rachels discusses two arguments for psychological egoism. What are these arguments, and how does
he reply to them?
He said that psychological egoism is false and confused. It is false mainly because people do the act
unselfishly even though the act is a selfish one literally and they don’t do this with their self-interest and
it is confused because doesn’t really explain the difference between selfishness and self-interest.
4.) What three commonplace confusions does Rachels detect in the thesis of psychological egoism?
First is that it fails to distinguish selfishness and self-interest that it confused people. Second is that it let
you understand that every action is done by either self-interest or motives of others. Third is that it
ignores the fact of one’s own welfare which is concern for the welfare of others.
5.) State the argument for saying that ethical egoism is inconsistent. Why doesn’t Rachels accept this
argument?
Ethical egoism is inconsistent simply because almost everybody care about others and only a few do not.
Rachels doesn’t accept this argument because he believes that it is not consistent and it cannot be
decisively refuted.
15
6.) According to Rachels, why shouldn’t we hurt others, and why should we help others? How can the
egoist reply?
According to Rachels we should do these good things because we humans are born to care about others
and not just about ourselves this is already fundamental thus there are egoists that are rare.
Discussion Questions
1.) Has Rachels answered the question raised by Glaucon, namely “Why be moral?” If so, what exactly is
his answer?
Rachels didn’t answer this question directly but he said that people should be concerned of being
morally right. But for me be moral if you interest to be good.
2.) Are genuine egoists are rare, as Rachels claims? Is it a fact that most people care about others, even
people they don’t know?
Yes, genuine egoists are rare because almost everyone care about not just themselves but also on
others. Also people care about people they don’t know basically because it is fundamental already and
we have this thing called conscience on us that makes us care about others even if we don’t know them.
3.) Suppose we define ethical altruism as the view that one should always act for the benefit of others
and never in one’s own self-interest. Is such a view immoral or not?
It is not immoral because ethical altruism is like the heroism or the goodness for others inside of us. It’s
a moral that many of us don’t have but I can say a person who has this moral is a hero.
16
Part2
Review questions
1.) According to Arthur, how are morality and religion different?
Religion is something that is essential and if there is no religion people would not be expected to do
right things and it is necessary in order to provide guidance to people while in the other hand morality is
social.
2.) Why isn’t religion necessary for moral motivation?
Religion is necessary but not for moral motivation because these two are different and without each
other the other one could function. Moral motivation dictates to you what you do while religion just lets
you know what is right and wrong.
3.) Why isn’t religion necessary as a source of moral knowledge?
Religion isn’t necessary a source of our moral knowledge because religion teach us what is right or
wrong but it is not responsible for the actions that we are doing. Our moral knowledge is when for
example we want to kill someone you asked yourself “what if I got caught?” and on the religion side of
the story you tell yourself “This is not right, this is a bad thing, it’s a sin”.
4.) What is the divine command theory? Why does Arthur reject this theory?
The divine command theory means that God has a relation to moral law as the legislature has to
statutes it enacts. Arthur reject this theory by defending that God has no relation with the moral law for
example the law about limiting people’s speed on driving that is not a law from god but a law from the
legislatures that are decided to be done by them not by God. And he thinks without the divine command
theory we can still create laws to follow morally.
5.) According to Arthur, how are morality and religion connected?
Morality and religion do sometimes influence each other. There is a historical influence religion gave to
morality and also on politics and law. Many leaders of moral groups are also leaders of religious groups.
Thus morality also influences religion for example the issue of abortion in with the Catholic Church also
take a debate on it. At the end of the day the two have helped and influence each other but they will
always interact when it comes to the personal level.
6.) Dewey says that morality is social. What does this mean, according to Arthur?
According to Arthur this means that one’s morality is social because of conscience that lets us foreknow
and foreknowledge an act. You see morality of a person somehow connects its self to others. We reject
our own perspective in the favour of others and thinking how will person responses on an act that
you’re going to do thus this defines why morality is social.
17
Discussion Questions
1.) Has Arthur refuted the divine command theory? If not, how can it be defended?
Arthur disagree and somehow was against the divine command theory by his explanation that we can’t
depend of something is right because God said it was and he is arguing the fact that some that is not
commanded by God are also right but in the divine command theory it is stating that if something is not
commanded by God then it is morally wrong. In the sense that we have many kinds of religion, this
theory will simply not fit for everyone with different perspective.
2.) If morality is social, as Dewey says, then how can we have any obligations to non human animals?
(Arthur mentions this problem and some possible solutions to it in footnote 6.)
We still have an obligation to animals for example torturing them not because other people see it wrong
but because the animal itself will surely disapprove. Morality is social in nature and on the dictates of
someone’s conscience he can decide if he will torture the animal morally.
3.) What does Dewey mean by moral education? Does a college ethics class count as moral education?
Moral education now days are taught by knowledge and experience of the professor or teacher. A
college ethic class is considered and counted as a moral education. This is simply taught by how to act
morally normally and what is almost done by people.
18
Part3
Review Questions
1.) How does Nietzsche characterize a good and healthy society?
Nietzsche said that to have a good and healthy society we should allow superior individual to exercise
their will of power. Also superior individuals like us should follow a so called “master-morality” as
distinguished from a “slave-morality”.
2.) What is Nietzsche’s view of injury, violence and exploitation?
He said it is nihilistic and that it is a denial of life. These things come normally and already a part of life,
we naturally encounter these things either we are the one doing it or we are the one being done unto.
3.) Distinguish between master-morality and slave-morality.
Slave morality is the softness inside of us like kindness, sympathy and also humility while master
morality is composed of morality values that are pride, strength and nobility. Slave morality is about the
goodness and evilness of our intentions while on the other hand master morality is about how good or
bad a consequence is on our act. Nietzsche defined master morality as the morality of the strong willed
and also he said that it is sentiment while slave morality unlike master morality is literally re-sentiment.
To make it short slave morality is the inverse of master morality.
4.) Explain the will of power.
The “will of power” is a dominant principle of organic function. He said without the will of power society
will not and cannot develop. The will wills itself he said thus the will to power is important and essential
in the enhancing of life. In short the will of power is the will to life.
Discussion Questions
1.) Some people view Nietzsche’s writings as harmful and even dangerous. For example, some have
charged Nietzsche with inspiring Nazism. Are these charges justified or not? Why or why not?
It is normal for people to think this way about Nietzsche because even I thought of that first. This
charges is not justified as we all have our own beliefs and knowledge because not all religions are the
same and if we just think of it as a whole without differences we can see the points of Nietzsche is true
that life revolves on a master who dictates things but that master depends on us in what we believe.
2.) What does it mean to be “a creator of values”?
A creator of values as Nietzsche said is someone who is noble that regards himself as a determiner of
values that what is injurious to him is injurious to itself. He honours such morality he recognises in
himself. That noble one also honours itself as the powerful one, him who has power over himself.
19
Part4
Review Questions
1.) What is “moral isolationism”?
This simply means that our world is divided into separate societies, each with different thoughts and
religions. It’s like something forbids us to any other culture.
2.) Explain the Japanese custom of tsujigiri. What questions does Midgley ask about this custom?
Tsujigiri which means to try out one’s new sword on a chance of wayfarer, also literally means
crossroad-cut. The Japanese culture about samurai is about testing the sword in order to prove its value
by cutting some one’s body in one blow, this culture may be criticize by many but they don’t understand
it because they don’t belong in that Japanese culture. For someone it is like a cruelty but for Japanese
people it is a sign of honour. Does the isolating barrier work both ways? Are people in other cultures
equally unable to criticize us? These are the questions asked by Midley about the custom.
3.) What is wrong with moral isolationism, according to Midgley?
She said that there is a contradiction and we shouldn’t judge other culture and we should respect them.
Also if we criticize other’s culture then we should not be mad when they criticize ours. She suggested
that if we just accept the possibility of praising elements of other culture then there would be no
isolation.
4.) What does Midgley think is the basis for criticizing other cultures?
Midgley said that for you to criticize other cultures you first must know the culture and that you should
criticize them with respect. Criticizing other cultures should make you also open that your culture can be
criticized too.
Discussion Questions
1.) Midgley says that Nietzsche is an immoralist. Is that an accurate and fair assessment of Nietzsche?
Why or why not?
I think Midgley is wrong in that part and she should apply to herself what she said about criticizing other
culture that she can’t just criticize Nietzsche because they have a different point, view, perspective and
culture in life that not because it seems wrong to her it is wrong already. What happened there isn’t fair
for me because like what she said we should respect others.
2.) Do you agree with Midgley’s claim that the idea of separate and unmixed cultures is unreal? Explain
your answer.
20
I agree that a separate and unmixed culture is unreal because first of all we all live in a one world with
different culture it just means that even though we have different beliefs in some point our cultures will
cross its path because we live with each other in this world. Also because of these differences there
comes an interaction about this cultures like debates and also some people changes their culture.
21
"Saving 10,000" (Suicide)
A lot of people have a lot of problem. Problem is better shared than kept but in some cases a person
who has problems doesn’t have anyone to talk to and nobody is there to listen. Suicide is really a big
problem because it has killed millions every year. I think one of the main reasons why japan has a large
percentage of suicide every year is because of their history and culture which are about samurais etc.
Some Japanese think that suicide is beautiful also they have this book about suicide that most or almost
everybody knows but doesn’t care about it but for some it is an influence that leads them to commit
suicide because it is stating advantages and explaining suicide positively. Media is also one of the causes
of suicide in japan because there are many shows which shows them a part where someone commit
suicide which they don’t care if someone is influenced by it they just do business and Japanese is said to
have this mentality to imitate person whether it is a good or a bad thing. I think life insurance companies
should have a new policy that suicide is not included in the insurance this is to lessen people who
commit suicide in order to give money to their families. Suicide is done only by people who have mental
illness and depression because a normal person would not think of that. When it comes to the youth
suicide happens because of pressures where they get directly from their parents mostly about grades
and bullying that leads to being sad and depressed.
22
Chapter IV
Some of my review on some blogs (Online)
ONLINE QUIZ: If you were ind Ladar Levison's shoes, what would you have done?
If I were in Ladar levision's shoes I would do exactly what he did because it is the right thing and more
people will benefit in that act. He protected the information or data of many people which is why he
refuses to agree to the government. In the other hand the government should just agree with what
Ladar is proposing which is to give the government what they want but the people of Ladar will find it
for them and they cant have any access to it. The government should not let others pay for a problem of
one. But If this will become the last option to solve the problem I suggest that Ladar and the
government should have an agreement and a contract which states the if Ladar hand them over this
encryption keys thus they will be held responsible for whatever problems that will occur to it and be
responsible to any complains about it, for the sake of solving that problem of the government.
Online Quiz:
1. Should bloggers in principle charge for writing?
A blogger can be also charge for writing if he/she did something wrong like plagiarism and copyright
even though they say that a blog is the opinion of the blogger it still applies.
2. Are there copyright issues for posting a private conversation?
There wouldn't be any issue if all people involving the conversation agreed to it.
3. Should SciAm have taken down Dr. Lee's post?
Yes, because Dr.Lee's post has nothing to do with SciAm.
4. What makes this a racism issue? A sexism issue?
23
Racism occur in this issue because Dr. Lee is a black woman and this black thing is really almost defines
racism because of almost all racism events comes from this black thing issue. Sexism can also be an issue
because she was called a "whore"
5. What do you think Dr. Lee means when she asks writes, "I am trying to make myself redundant"?
I think Dr.Lee just wants it to become a lesson to others.
24
Chapter V
All About IT
September 11 2013
Based on the blog of Steve Losh, We document in order to teach and guide people who have no or
limited idea about the project because if you want someone to learn things they don't know you teach
them. For example I want my little brother to learn how to play basketball then I should teach him and
guide him. Documentation usually takes the creators place in teaching and guiding the learner like I
want to teach my brother but I can’t be there playing with him then the "document" that I made will
take place that I can teach and guide him with the use of paper where he will get knowledge about
basketball.
According to Steve Losh a good documentation can be divided into four parts which are first contact,
The black triangle, The hairball and The reference.
First Contact- Here is where we introduce our project and this is where we should get the interest of our
reader and to do this successfully we should imagine ourselves as if we are the reader.
Black Triangle- these serves as a guide and a proof that the project will work and run. Also this is where
you prove the importance and the usefulness of your project.
Hairball- This is where the reader learned how to use the project. This is where they understand and get
the information need in using the project. Also they should become an expert here.
Reference- Here the user or the reader is already an expert that knows the project well and how it
functions but this reference will serves as its guide in future problems as they use this in their daily
works.
We need a high-quality documentation to meet the standards of the user that should be satisfied and
educated from the documentation and to achieve that well we should do the four parts of documenting
right and precise yet easy to understand for the users.
In this topic I think the four parts of documenting is the most important thing that I should learned
because first it is the main purpose of this blog. But for me the most useful thing I learned here is when
making documentation we should be taking the shoe of the user to know what a user will want and to
apply it. Documenting is very important in our course especially when we create a system that is needed
25
to be documented in order for the user to be an expert on it thus we should document in a high-quality
for our high-quality system.
An example ethic on working people about their company
Which is created and authorized by Mark Putman
Reading your company's technology Acceptable Use Policy might be as interesting as reading the
dictionary or your favorite IRS publication. But before you sign it and file it away, take some time to
familiarize yourself with it and dig a little deeper. What is contained in this document may have more
practical, real-life application for your every day job than anything else in the stack of compliance stuff
that you sign to get your job. Without rehashing your Acceptable Use Policy here, there are some
serious ethical considerations.
First, understand that the company-owned computer is not yours. Just because your puppy's picture is
on the desktop and you have the high score on solitaire, doesn't make it any more yours, even if you're
the only person who ever uses it. The reality is, your two thousand dollar laptop is merely borrowed
equipment. Someone else paid for it and that owner has the right do what he or she wants with "your"
computer. Your ethical responsibility is to treat it like anything else you borrow: with respect and care.
Additionally, the rightful owner can ask for it back anytime and dictate what you can and can't do. You
have no Constitutional right to privacy here. Your company email, web surfing, and most everything you
do on that machine is open for review by your employer. If you invent something that will solve the
world's energy problems while on the company computer on company time, guess who owns that
invention? That's right, your employer. A good perspective is to look at your computer as just another
piece of office equipment that you use to make your job easier.
Using the company computer for personal use will always present ethical boundary issues. There are
probably only a handful of people walking the planet who haven't checked their personal email,
shopped online, or composed a personal letter on their work computer. So how can you resolve this?
First, find out what the boundaries are. Maybe your company allows occasional use or maybe it doesn't.
Or, maybe it doesn't officially allow personal use but usually overlooks it. Whatever the case may be,
find out the truth and don't make any assumptions.
Second, if occasional use is allowed, it may be tempting to go overboard and reinterpret "occasional" to
mean something different. Consider your occasional use of the computer to be the same as the phone,
copy machine, or any other piece of office equipment. You may use the phone occasionally to make
personal appointments during lunch or breaks, but not to chat with distant relatives at length or call 900
26
numbers. Your company may allow a few personal photocopies now and then but certainly does not
want this to take the place of Kinko's. It's the same for computers. You must show restraint, good
judgment, and boundaries.
Of course the most costly and devastating ethical problem with computers is security. Keeping your
computer secure, both physically and in the cyber world is the most critical security consideration you
have. You hear about government laptops getting lost, computer viruses or worms bringing corporations
to their knees, or hackers stealing ideas and identities. You can't be sloppy in how you protect your
machine. You need to guard it against hackers and viruses, not store sensitive data on your machine,
secure your computer, and obey any and all guidelines and recommendations from your company. If
your IT department sounds paranoid, they have very good reason to be.
But in a more subtle way, use of computers provides fundamental moral challenges to our notion of
honesty and ethics. The critical question here is, "What's really on that iPod?" Most people wouldn't go
into a store and steal a CD or a piece of software, but downloading it for "free" from the Internet can be
rationalized. Software piracy and other music and video piracy cannot be allowed any latitude on your
computer. An ethical person should not only make this a rule at work but at home as well.
The problem with software piracy and copyright is that doing something illegal has never been so easy
and widely rationalized. No matter what the culture says, the moral principle of stealing remains - if you
didn't pay for it, it is stealing. You should be able to sit down at your computer and identify every
application, music file, or video as being 100% legitimate. There is no good excuse for a person who
purports to be "ethical" but has stolen files on his or her computer.
The bottom line is this: Cyber ethics is no different from any other kind of ethics. To be ethical, you must
make the moral choice to obey the laws, respect people and property, and play by the rules. In every
area of life, you should do the right thing no matter who's the boss or who's watching. An Acceptable
Use Policy should be a clear reminder that in the cyber world, your ethics should not be virtual but be
real.
This is a review about the popular internet USB, the dropbox
Dropbox:
Dropbox is more popular than its competitors because even though they have similar functionalities,
Dropbox based its strategy to the customer or user unlike its competitors that mostly too busy wanting
their program to be perfect they forget the user needs and wants.
27
1. What does it mean when you think in terms of UX design?
Thinking in UX design simply means thinking in the customer side first and then thinking about the
program. User experience design follows certain rules that if followed, will surely be wanted by
customers. In short to have this UX design possible you need to simply satisfy the customer so that
he/she will love the program.
2. Why is UX design or design-thinking important nowadays?
In today’s time technologies upgrades and people learn more faster about it and more companies rises
because technologies becomes a need in some point but these companies differ in one thing and it is in
satisfying their customer. Thinking like the customer and designing your product according to it will give
you advantages against other companies.
3.) How does UX design yield advantage?
Some people look at quality and some people are ready to purchase an expensive product if that
product will satisfy their want and to have a customer satisfied he/she should have an amazing
experience from your product. If you get your customer satisfaction it is clearly an advantage from
competitors.
If I will choose 1 object in my life that is not technical but really important it would be a wallet:
A.) Wallet
B.) Wallet because this is where I put some of my important things like pictures, cards, School ID,
License, receipts and of course money. In my life I never lost a wallet and just keep them when I want to
use a new one, without a wallet in my pocket I feel uncomfortable in the sense that I feel that I don’t
have money, ID etc even though I have it in my pocket. Also without it I can’t save money because it also
function as my piggy bank that I have a certain place there where I put my savings. This is my favourite
object simply because you just have to put there things or objects and it will be compiled and becomes
like a one object already also this will help you not to lost certain things and not left them at home.
28
Chapter VI
Political Ethics
I want to share to you a nice and accurate article written by Carrie Jaffe Pickett
What are the ethical issues in political campaigns? What roles do money and influence play in
outcomes? How can high ethical standards be maintained and upheld before, during, and after
campaigns? These were just a few of the issues raised during the Government Ethics Roundtable held
November 15, 2013, at The Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University. The panelists
were: Rich Robinson, expert in strategic planning, public policy development, and government relations,
and founder of Robinson Communications; and Dan Schnur, director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of
Politics at the University of Southern California. Judy Nadler, Senior Fellow in Government Ethics and
former mayor of the city of Santa Clara, moderated the panel.
The "rule of three" served as a theme for both presenters, each of whom outlined three central talking
points, similar in concept but with different perspectives. "There are three things the public gets mad
about," began Robinson, who served as northern California Director for Bill Clinton for President, and
worked on Barack Obama for President, as well as the campaigns for Gary Hart, Alan Cranston, John
Kerry, and Joe Biden. First, Dishonest Campaigns reflect the inherent ethical quandaries of politics:
There are no regulations on the honesty of a campaign, or what is deemed appropriate or inappropriate.
Robinson argued that a "negative campaign" is not necessarily a bad thing, if the accusations about the
candidate are true, but he said that lying during campaigns has become commonplace, often with little
distinction between fact and opinion, leading to misjudgments and misinformation among voters. And
what about transparency? For example, if a candidate is running for a financial office, is it fair to demand
the disclosure of his or her personal bankruptcy?
A second ethical dilemma in political campaigns is inconsistency, Robinson noted, emphasizing the
importance of "cleaning house" for both Democrats and Republicans within their own parties and the
unfortunate double standards that exist. He pointed out parallel scenarios in the cases of the sex
scandals for Republican senator Bob Packwood, and later, Bill Clinton. "Many Democrats were quick to
call for Packwood's resignation," Robinson said. "But when it happened with Bill Clinton, they were
quiet." Political parties have to be willing to call out wrongdoing on the part of their own members,
Robinson argued.
A third ethical quandary is the Role of Money in campaigns. Contrary to popular thought, money does
not determine outcomes in elections, especially at the national level. We do not now have, for example,
President Mitt Romney or Governor Meg Whitman. Money can play a role, however, in "down-ballot"
races, and continually changing rules on contributions, expenditures, and reporting, can make almost
any politician appear unethical at some point during his or her campaign.
Dan Schnur's trio of challenges to ethical conduct in political campaigns included: the influence of
money in politics; lying and deception; and disenchantment among voters. Using as analogy the wellknown myth of Icarus, whose flight too close to the sun led to his ultimate downfall, Schnur suggested
that, essentially, power corrupts. And, the potential to behave unethically grows with stature and
influence. "We've seen too much of this," he commented, referring to "candidates behaving in ways
they never thought they would" when they started out as idealistic newcomers in public life.
On lying, Schnur asked and answered: "What motivates someone to lie about someone else? You lie
about the enemy. The temptation to lie in politics comes from our hyper-partisanship." Shnur, who is
29
also adjunct instructor at the University of California at Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies,
drew from his "Future of California" class to illustrate the 40-yard line solution for public policy. The
loudest voices are in the bleachers, he said, but the solutions need to be found in midfield. In an
interesting commentary on how social media and other technologies are impacting the issue, Schnur
held up his iPhone as both empowering and isolating. Technology, he said, is both social and anti social.
Our ability to create the "Me network' through technology creates an echo chamber, he said, "and those
who disagree with us suddenly become the enemy."
Regarding disenchantment among voters, Schnur pointed out that there is only a 9 percent favorability
rating for Congress. The challenge is not only how to communicate to an electorate that doesn't trust
politicians or finds them relevant, but also how to restore confidence when the bad actors of the
political world get headlines, while countless hardworking and ethical public officials are overlooked.
A concluding discussion among members of the roundtable about potential solutions to these ethical
dilemmas focused on a "power to the people" approach, such as a citizen watchdog or "credibility
center" on the local level to determine minimum ethical standards.
Carrie Jaffe-Pickett is the assistant director of communications for the Markkula Center for Applied
Ethics.
November 2013
In this article I realize that you will really have a hard time seeing a politician that is ethical because even
some of them has knowledge about being ethical, they still choose not to be for the sake of money and
fame. They set standards and money becomes more important than being ethical, that’s why people
hated them and now a day’s even if there is a politician that is ethical he can’t prove it anymore because
the people are really bias already on what they see on politician well basically because of experience so
if I’m that politician I’ll ask my self why should I be ethical when nobody believes in me. Then it will
come to me what if I just be like the other politician and be corrupt because what can I lose? People
hate me already for doing nothing and being good so I’ll just be what they think I ‘am and be corrupt. I
earn money despite of them hating me rather not earning anything and they still hate me.
30
Chapter VII
Ethical Phone
I got an article about this ethical phone from the creators of it:
Sebastian Salek wrote this article to advertise and promote the First Ethical Phone in the world:
The world’s first fair-trade smartphone will be unveiled to the public in London this week, marking a
leap forward in ethical technology. The Dutch firm behind the phone said it had worked closely with
pressure groups to ensure the smartphone, called Fairphone, was the most ethically sourced product
available.
Smartphone makers such as Apple and Samsung have in the past been criticised for failing to reveal that
their products were made from resources mined in conflict zones and manufactured in Far East factories
where labour practices have been called into question.
The new handset, with a screen size of 4.3 inches (10.9cm), half-way between the iPhone 5 and
Samsung Galaxy SIII, will retail at £272, but is not available until December. Almost 15,000 have already
been pre-ordered. Potential customers will be able to handle the new product at the London Design
Festival on Wednesday
A number of minerals used in smartphones often come from conflict zones, such as the Democratic
Republic of Congo (DRC). The three Ts – tantalum, tin and tungsten – in particular, are extracted from
mines in the region and armed groups controlling them are alleged to benefit, with profits fuelling the
fighting.
Fairphone’s tin and tantalum are extracted from conflict-free mines – those where profits aren’t used
for the purchase of arms.
Product manager Miquel Ballester said he decided to start building a fair-trade phone rather than simply
campaigning against existing phones because “it would be too easy to stand by and criticise others”. The
business started out as a campaign for fair wages and working conditions across the supply chain of
smartphone makers, but evolved into a social enterprise. “It’s only as a manufacturer that you’re playing
by the same rules as the big brands. Then you can have real impact,” he said.
Mr Ballester is using tin from mines in South Kivu, in eastern DRC, despite on-going fighting among
militias for control of the mineral trade, but insists that the company is working hard to ensure its
workers are fairly treated and the profits don’t get into the hands of the militias.
“The whole point of the Fairphone social enterprise and the campaign that came before it is to intervene
on the ground where the problems have originated,” he explained.
31
In contrast to Apple’s sealed devices, the Fairphone handset can be opened by consumers and is easy to
repair, extending its lifespan. It runs a custom version of Google’s Android operating system, built by the
London-based developers Kwame Corporation. One innovative feature is a dual SIM card slot, which
allows for business and personal phones to be merged into one, reducing the number of devices in
circulation. This is a common feature of phones in Africa and Asia.
Mr Ballester admitted that Fairphone is not fully ethical, but claimed this was not the point. “With the
classical social auditing of manufacturers that’s been done for the past 20 years, you can tick a few
boxes and earn a certification, but once you turn around and leave the factory there’s nothing to stop
things from changing. For us, it’s about creating a business environment that favours ethical treatment
from the outset.”
In this article the phone was described and it’s advantages is stated against apple and some other
competitor’s product. This phone is made and process ethically that it is also called a Fair phone because
it is created with fairness and moral. The phone has now many investors and also pre-orders, it is a click
to be short because if you are a concerned person, this phone will really struck and catches your mind.
Also this phone that will be produced first in London is really cheaper compared to Samsung’s S4 and
apple’s Iphone 5s thus it aims a mission to an ethical use and creation of phone and not to profit.
32
References
Alfino, M. and Pierce, L. (1997). Information Ethics for Librarians. McFarland & Co.,
Jefferson, NC.
Buchanan, E.A. (1999). An overview of information ethics issues in a world-wide context.
Ethics and Information Technology, 1(3), 193–201.
Bynum, T. (2001). Computer ethics: basic concepts and historical overview. In: Edward, N.Z.
(Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethicscomputer.
Bynum, T.W.E. and Rogerson, S.E. (Eds.). (1996). Global Information Ethics. Opragen
Publications. (A special issue of the journal Science and Engineering Ethics, April 1996.)
Capurro, R. (2006). Toward an ontological foundation of information ethics. Ethics and
Information Technology, 8(4), 175–186.
Cavalier, R.J. (2005). The Impact of the Internet on Our Moral Lives. State University of
New York Press, Albany, NY.
Einstein, A. (1954). Ideas and Opinions. Crown Publishers, New York.
Ess, C. (2006). Ethical pluralism and global information ethics. Ethics and Information
Technology, 8(4), 215–226.
Floridi, L. (1995). Internet: which future for organized knowledge, Frankenstein or Pygmalion?
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43, 261–274.
Floridi, L. (1999a). Information ethics: on the philosophical foundations of computer ethics.
Ethics and Information Technology, 1(1), 37–56. Reprinted, with some modifications, in
The Ethicomp Journal, 1(1), 2004. http://www.ccsr.cse.dmu.ac.uk/journal/articles/floridi_
l_philosophical.pdf. Abridged French translation in L.Agora, 5.4 (July–August 1998),
pp. 19–20. Polish translation in Ethos, the journal of the John Paul II Institute at the Catholic
University of Lublin (August–September 2005).
Floridi, L. (1999b). Philosophy and Computing: An Introduction. Routledge, London,
33
New York.
Floridi, L. (2002). Information ethics: an environmental approach to the digital divide.
Philosophy in the Contemporary World, 9(1), 39–45.
Floridi, L. (2003). On the intrinsic value of information objects and the infosphere. Ethics and
Information Technology, 4(4), 287–304.
Floridi, L. (Ed.). (2004). The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information.
Blackwell, Oxford, New York, 40–61.
Floridi, L. (2005a). Information, semantic conceptions of. In: Edward, N.Z. (Ed.), Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/information-semantic/.
Floridi, L. (2005b). An interpretation of informational privacy and of its moral value.
Proceedings of CEPE 2005—6th Computer Ethics: Philosophical Enquiries Conference,
Ethics of New Information Technologies, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Floridi, L. (2005c). The ontological interpretation of informational privacy. Ethics and
Information Technology, 7(4), 185–200.
Floridi, L. (2005d). The philosophy of presence: from epistemic failure to successful observability.
Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 14(6), 656–667.
Floridi, L. (2006a). Four challenges for a theory of informational privacy. Ethics and
Information Technology, 8(3), 109–119.
Floridi, L. (forthcoming). Information ethics: its nature and scope. In: van den Hoven, J. and
Weckert, J. (Eds.), Moral Philosophy and Information Technology. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Floridi, L. (2006b). Information technologies and the tragedy of the good will. Ethics and
Information Technology, 8(4), 253–262.
Floridi, L. and Sanders, J.W. (1999). Entropy as evil in information ethics. Etica & Politica,
Special Issue on Computer Ethics, 1(2).
34
Floridi, L. and Sanders, J.W. (2001). Artificial evil and the foundation of computer ethics.
Ethics and Information Technology, 3(1), 55–66.
Floridi, L. and Sanders, J. (2002a). Mapping the foundationalist debate in computer ethics.
Ethics and Information Technology, 4(1), 1–9.
Floridi, L. and Sanders, J.W. (2002b). Computer ethics: mapping the foundationalist debate.
Ethics and Information Technology, 4(1), 1–9. Revised version published in the 2nd edition.
In: Spinello, R. and Tavani, H. (Eds.), Readings in Cyberethics. Jones and Bartlett, Boston,
pp. 81–95.
Floridi, L. and Sanders, J.W. (2004a). The method of abstraction. In: Negrotti, M. (Ed.),
Yearbook of the Artificial-Nature, Culture, and Technology, Models in Contemporary
Sciences. Peter Lang, Bern, pp. 177–220.
Floridi, L. and Sanders, J.W. (2004b). On the morality of artificial agents. Minds and
Machines, 14(3), 349–379.
Floridi, L. and Sanders, J.W. (2005). Internet ethics: the constructionist values of Homo
Poieticus. In: Cavalier, R. (Ed.), The Impact of the Internet on Our Moral Lives. SUNY,
New York.
Froehlich, T.J. (1997). Survey and Analysis of Legal and Ethical Issues for Library and
Information Services, G.K. Saur, M€unich. UNESCO Report (Contract no. 401.723.4), for
the International Federation of Library Associations. IFLA Professional Series.
Froehlich, T.J. (2004). A brief history of information ethics. Textos universitaris de biblioteconomia
i documentacio, http://www.ub.es/bid/13froel2.htm
Greco, G.M. and Floridi, L. (2004). The tragedy of the digital commons. Ethics and Information
Technology, 6(2), 73–82.
Hauptman, R. (1988). Ethical Challenges in Librarianship. Oryx Press, Phoenix. Hepburn,
R. (1984). Wonder and Other Essays. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.
35
Himma, K.E. (2004). There.s something about Mary: the moral value of things qua information
objects. Ethics and Information Technology, 6(3), 145–159.
Huizinga, J. (1970). Homo ludens: a study of the play element in culture. Paladin, first published
1938 London.
Johnson, D.G. (2006). Computer systems: moral entities but not moral agents. Ethics and
Information Technology, 8(4), 195–204.
Koenig, M.E.D., Kostrewski, B.J., and Oppenheim, C. (1981). Ethics in information science.
Journal of Information Science, 3, 45–47.
Leopold, A. (1949). The Sand County Almanac. Oxford University Press, New York.
Maner,W. (1996). Unique ethical problems in information technology. Science and Engineering
Ethics, 2(2), 137–154.
Mather, K. (2005). Object oriented goodness: a response to Mathiesen.s .what is information
ethics?. Computers and Society, 34(4), http://www.computersandsociety.org/sigcas_ofthefuture2/
sigcas/subpage/sub_page.cfm?article¼919&page_number_nb¼911
Mathiesen, K. (2004). What is information ethics? Computers and Society, 32(8), http://www.
computersandsociety.org/sigcas_ofthefuture2/sigcas/subpage/sub_page.cfm?article
¼909&page_number_nb¼901
Mintz, A.P. (Ed.). (1990). Information Ethics: Concerns for Librarianship and the Information
Industry: Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual Symposium of the Graduate Alumni
and Faculty of the Rutgers School of Communication, Information and Library Studies,
April 14, 1989. Jefferson, NC, McFarland, London.
Moore, A.D. (Ed.). (2005). Information Ethics: Privacy, Property, and Power. University of
Washington Press, London, Seattle, Washington.
Naess, A. (1973). The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement. Inquiry, 16, 95–
100.
36
Nash, R.F. (1989). The Rights of Nature. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison,
Wisconsin.
Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice, revised edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Severson, R.J. (1997). The Principles of Information Ethics. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY.
Sicart, M. (2005). On the foundations of evil in computer game cheating. Proceedings of the
Digital Games Research Association.s 2nd International Conference–Changing Views:
Worlds in Play, June 16–20, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Siponen, M. (2004). A pragmatic evaluation of the theory of information ethics. Ethics and
Information Technology, 6(4), 279–290.
Smith, M.M. (1996). Information Ethics: An Hermeneutical Analysis of an Emerging Area in
Applied Ethics, Ph.D. Thesis. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill,
NC.
Smith, M.M. (1997). Information ethics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology,
32, 339–366.
Spinello, R.A. (1997). Case Studies in Information and Computer Ethics. Prentice Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NJ.
Spinello, R.A. (2003). Case Studies in Information Technology Ethics and Policy, 2nd edition.
Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Stichler, R.N. and Hauptman, R. (Eds.). (1998). Ethics, Information, and Technology: Readings.
Jefferson, NC, McFarland, London.
Tavani, H.T. (2002). The uniqueness debate in computer ethics: what exactly is at issue, and
why does it matter? Ethics and Information Technology, 4(1), 37–54.
Turilli, M. (2007). Ethical protocols design. Ethics and Information Technology, 9(1), 49–62.
Van Den Hoven, J. (1995). Equal access and social justice: information as a primary good.
ETHICOMP95: An International Conference on the Ethical Issues of Using Information
37
Technology. De Montfort University, Leicester, UK.
Weckert, J. and Adeney, D. (1997). Computer and Information Ethics. Greenwood Press,
Westport, Connecticut.
White, L.J. (1967). The historical roots of our ecological crisis. Science, 155, 1203–1207.
Wiener, N. (1954). The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society. Revised
Edition. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
Woodbury, M.C. (2003). Computer and Information Ethics. Stipes, Champaign, Ill.
York, P.F. (2005). Respect for the world: universal ethics and the morality of terraforming.
Ph.D. Thesis. The University of Queensland.
Adam, A. (2000). Gender and computer ethics. Computers and Society, 30(4), 17–24.
Adam, A., and Ofori-Amanfo, J. (2000). Does gender matter in computer ethics? Ethics and
Information Technology, 2(1), 37–47.
Anderson, R. Johnson, D., Gotterbarn, D. and Perrolle, J. (1993). Using theACMcode of ethics
in decision making. Communications of the ACM, 36, 99–107.
Begg, M.M. (2005). Muslim Parents Guide: Making Responsible Use of Information and
Communication Technologies at Home. Centre for Computing and Social Responsibility, De
Montfort University, Leicester, UK.
Brey, P. (2000). Disclosive computer ethics. Computers and Society, 30(4), 10–16.
Brey, P. (2006). Evaluating the social and cultural implications of the Internet. Computers and
Society, 36(3), 41–44.
Brey, P., Introna, L., and Grodzinski, F. (2005). Ethics of new information technologies.
Proceedings of the 6th Computer Ethics—Philosophical Enquiries Conference. University
of Twente, The Netherlands.
Bynum,T.W. (1982).Adiscipline in its infancy. The Dallas Morning News, Dallas, TX, at http://
www.southernct.edu/organizations/rccs/resources/research/introduction/bynum_dallas.
38
html.
Bynum, T.W. (Ed.) (1985). Computers and Ethics. Blackwell, Oxford, UK. [Published as the
October, 1985 issue of the journal Metaphilosophy].
Bynum, T.W. (1999). The development of computer ethics as a philosophical field of study. The
Australian Journal of Professional and Applied Ethics, 1(1), 1–29.
Bynum, T.W. (2000). The foundation of computer ethics. Computers and Society, 30(2), 6–13.
Bynum, T.W. (2001). Computer ethics: basic concepts and historical overview. Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-computer/.
Bynum, T.W. (2004). Ethical challenges to citizens of the “automatic age”: NorbertWiener on
the information society. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society. 2(2),
65–74.
Bynum, T.W. (2005). NorbertWiener.s vision: the impact of the “automatic age” on our moral
lives. In: Cavalier, R.J. (Ed.), The Impact of the Internet on Our Moral Lives. SUNY Press,
Albany, NY, pp. 11–25.
Bynum, T.W. (2006). Flourishing ethics. Ethics and Information Technology, 8(4), 157–173.
Bynum,T.W. (2007). NorbertWiener and the rise of information ethics. In: van den Hoven,W.J.
andWeckert, J. (Eds.), Moral Philosophy and Information Technology. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK.
Bynum, T.W. and Schubert, P. (1997). How to do computer ethics—a case study: the electronic
mall Bodensee. In: van den Hoven, W.J. (Ed.), Computer Ethics–Philosophical Enquiry.
Erasmus University Press, Rotterdam, pp. 85–95 (Proceedings of CEPE97).
Bynum, T.W. and Rogerson, S. (Eds.), Computer Ethics and Professional Responsibility.
Blackwell, Oxford, UK.
Capurro, R. (2007a). Information ethics for and from Africa. International Review of
Information Ethics, 7, 2–10.
39
Capurro, R. (2007b). Intercultural information ethics. In: Capurro, R., Fr€uhbauer, J. and
Hausmanninger, T. (Eds.), Localizing the Internet: Ethical Issues in Intercultural Perspective,
ICIE Series, Vol. 4, Fink, Munich.
Capurro, R. (2006). Toward an ontological foundation for information ethics. Ethics and
Information Technology, 8(4), 157–186.
Capurro, R. (2004). The German debate on the information society. The Journal of Information,
Communication and Ethics in Society, 2, Supplement, 17–18.
Cavalier, R.J. (Ed.) (2005). The Impact of the Internet on Our Moral Lives. SUNY Press,
Albany, NY.
Edgar, S.L. (1997). Morality and Machines: Perspectives on Computer Ethics. Jones and
Bartlett, Sudbury, MA.
Elgesem, D. (1995). Data privacy and legal argumentation. Communication and Cognition 28
(1), 91–114.
Elgesem, D. (1996). Privacy, respect for persons, and risk. In: Ess, C., (Ed.), Philosophical
Perspectives on Computer-Mediated Communication, SUNY Press, Albany, NY.
Elgesem, D. (2002). What is special about the ethical problems in internet research? Ethics and
Information Technology, 4(3), 195–203.
Elgesem, D. (2007). Information technology ethics. In: van den Hoven, W.J. and Weckert, J.
(Eds.), Moral Philosophy and Information Technology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
UK.
Ess, C. (1996). The political computer: democracy, CMC, and Habermas. In: Ess, C. (Ed.),
Philosophical Perspectives on Computer-Mediated Communication. SUNY Press, Albany,
NY, pp. 197–230.
Ess, C. (2001a). What.s culture got to do with it? Cultural collisions in the electronic global
village. In: Ess, C. (Ed.), Culture, Technology, Communication: Towards an Intercultural
40
Global Village. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, pp. 1–50.
Ess, C.(Ed.) (2001b). Culture, Technology, Communication: Towards an Intercultural Global
Village. SUNY Press, Albany, NY.
Ess, C. (2005a). Computer-Mediated Communication and Human-Computer Interaction. In:
Floridi, L. (Ed.), The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information.
Blackwell, Oxford, UK, pp. 76–91.
Ess, C. (2005b). Moral imperatives for life in an intercultural global village. In: Cavalier, R.J.
(Ed.), The Impact of the Internet onOur Moral Lives.SUNYPress, Albany,NY, pp. 161–193.
Fairweather, B. (1998). NoPAPA:Whyincomplete codes of ethics are worse than none at all. In:
Collste, G. (Ed.), Ethics and Information Technology. New Academic Publishers, Delhi,
India.
Flanagan, M., Howe, D., and H. Nissenbaum, H. (2007). Values in design: theory and practice.
In: van den Hoven, W.J. and Weckert, J. (Eds.), Information Technology and Moral
Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK.
Floridi, L. (1999). Information ethics: on the theoretical foundations of computer ethics. Ethics
and Information Technology, 1(1), 37–56.
Floridi, L. (Ed.) (2004). The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information.
Blackwell, Oxford, UK.
Floridi, L. (2005a). Information ethics: its nature and scope.Computers and Society, 36(3), 21–36
Floridi, L. (2005b). Internet ethics: the constructionist values of homopoieticus. In:Cavalier, R.J.
(Ed.), The Impact of the Internet on OurMoral Lives.SUNYPress, Albany,NY, pp. 195–214.
Floridi, L. (2006). Information technologies and the tragedy of the good will. Ethics and
Information Technology, 8(4), 253–262.
Floridi, L. and Sanders, J.W. (2004). The foundationalist debate in computer ethics. In:
Spinello, R.A. and Tavani, H.T. (eds.), Readings in CyberEthics, 2nd edition. Jones,
41
Bartlett, pp. 81–95.
Friedman, B. (Ed.) (1997). Human Values and the Design of Computer Technology, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Friedman, B. and Nissenbaum, H. (1996). Bias in Computer Systems. ACM Transactions on
Information Systems, 14(3), 330–347.
Gert, B. (1998). Morality: Its Nature and Justification. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Gert, B. (1999). Common morality and computing. Ethics and Information Technology, 1(1),
57–64.
Gorniak-Kocikowska, K. (1996). The computer revolution and the problem of global ethics. In:
Bynum, T.W. and Rogerson, S. (Eds.), Global Information Ethics, a special issue of Science
and Engineering Ethics, 2(2), 177–190.
Gorniak-Kocikowska, K. (2005). From computer ethics to the ethics of global ICT society. In:
Bynum, T.W., Collste, G., and Rogerson, S. (Eds.), Proceedings of ETHICOMP2005,
published on a CD, Link€opings University, Sweden.
Gorniak-Kocikowska, K. (2007). ICT, globalization and the pursuit of happiness: the problem
of change. In: Proceedings of ETHICOMP2007. Meiji University Press, Tokyo.
Gotterbarn, D. (1991). Computer ethics: responsibility regained. National Forum: The Phi Beta
Kappa Journal, 71, 26–31.
Gotterbarn, D. (2001). Informatics and professional responsibility. Science and Engineering
Ethics, 7(2), 221–230.
Gotterbarn, D. (2002). Reducing software failures: addressing the ethical risks of the software
development life cycle. Australian Journal of Information Systems, 9(2), 155–165.
Gotterbarn, D., Miller, K., and Rogerson, S. (1997). Software engineering code of ethics.
Information Society, 40(11), 110–118.
Gotterbarn, D. and Miller, K. (2004). Computer ethics in the undergraduate curriculum: case
42
studies and the joint software engineer.s code. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges,
20(2), 156–167.
Gotterbarn, D. and Rogerson, S. (2005). Responsible risk analysis for software development:
creating the software development impact statement. Communications of the Association
for Information Systems, 15, Article 40.
Grodzinsky, F. (1997). Computer access for students with disabilities. SIGSCE Bulletin. ACM
Press, March 1997.
Grodzinsky, F. (1999). The practitioner from within: revisiting the virtues. Computers and
Society, 29(2), 9–15.
Grodzinsky, F., Miller, K., and Wolfe, M. (2003). Ethical issues in open source software.
Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, (4) 193–205.
Grodzinsky, F. and Tavani, H.T. (2002). Ethical reflections on cyberstalking. Computers and
Society, 32(1), 22–32.
Grodzinsky, F. and Tavani, H. (2004). Verizon vs. the RIAA: implications for privacy
and democracy. In: Herkert, J. (Ed.), Proceedings of ISTAS 2004: The International
Symposium on Technology and Society. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos,
CA.
Himma, K.E. (2003). The relationship between the uniqueness of computer ethics and its
independence as a discipline in applied ethics. Ethics and Information Technology, 5(4),
225–237.
Himma, K.E. (2004a). The moral significance of the interest in information: reflections on a
fundamental right to information. Journal of Information, Communication, and Ethics in
Society, 2(4), 191–202.
Himma, K.E. (2004b). There.s something about Mary: the moral value of things qua
information objects. Ethics and Information Technology, 6(3), 145–159.
43
Himma, K.E. (2006). Hacking as politically motivated civil disobedience: Is hacktivism
morally justified? In: Himma, K.E. (Eds.), Readings in Internet Security: Hacking,
Counterhacking, and Society. Jones and Bartlett, Sudbury, MA.
Himma, K.E. (2007). Artificial agency, consciousness, and the criteria for moral agency: What
properties must an artificial agent have to be a moral agent? Proceedings of ETHICOMP2007.
Meiji University Press Tokyo Japan
Huff, C.W., Fleming, J.F., and Cooper, J. (1991). The social basis of gender differences
in human-computer interaction. In: Martin, C.D. (Ed.), In Search of Gender-Free Paradigm
for Computer Science Education. ISTE Research Monographs, Eugene, OR, pp. 19–32.
Huff, C.W. and Finholt, T. (Eds.) (1994). Social Issues in Computing: Putting Computers in
Their Place. McGraw-Hill.
Huff, C.W. and Martin, D. (1995). Computing consequences: a framework for teaching ethical
computing. Communications of the ACM, 38(12), 75–84.
Huff, C.W. (2002). Gender, Software Design, and Occupational Equity. SIGCSE Bullet:
Inroads, 34, 112–115.
Huff, C.W. (2004). Unintentional power in the design of computing systems. In: Bynum, T.W.
and Rogerson, S. (Eds.), Computer Ethics and Professional Responsibility. Blackwell,
Oxford, UK (Originally presented as a paper at ETHICOMP95).
Huff, C., Johnson, D., and Miller, K. (2007). Virtual harms and real responsibility. In: Brennan,
L. and Johnson, V. (Eds.), Social, Ethical, and Policy Implications of Information Technology.
Idea Group Information Science Publishing, Hershey, PA.
Introna, L.D. (1997). Privacy and the computer: why we need privacy in the information society.
Metaphilosophy, 28(3), 259–275.
Introna, L.D. (2002). On the (im)possibility of ethics in a mediated world. Information and
Organization, 12(2), 71–84.
44
Introna, L.D. (2005a). Disclosive ethics and information technology: disclosing facial recognition
systems. Ethics and Information Technology, 7(2), 75–86.
Introna, L.D. (2005b). Phenomenological approaches to ethics and information technology. The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-it-phenomenology/.
Introna, L.D. and Nissenbaum, H. (2000). Shaping the web: Why the politics of search engines
matters. The Information Society, 16(3), 1–17.
Introna, L.D. and Pouloudi, N. (2001). Privacy in the information age: stakeholders, interests
and values. In: Sheth, J.N. (Eds.), Internet Marketing. Harcourt College Publishers, Fort
Worth, TX, pp. 373–388.
Johnson, D.G. (2001[1985,1994]). Computer Ethics, 1st edition 1985, Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ. 2nd edition 1994, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 3rd edition 2001,
Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Johnson, D.G. (1997a). Ethics online. Communications of the ACM, 40(1), 60–65.
Johnson, D.G. (1997b). Is the global information infrastructure a democratic technology?
Computers and Society, 27(4), 20–26.
Johnson, D.G. (1999) Sorting out the uniqueness of computer-ethical issues. In: Floridi, L.
(Ed.), Etica & Politica (special issue on computer ethics), Vol. 2. Available at http://www.
univ.trieste.it/_dipfilo/etica_e_politica/1999_2/homepage.html.
Johnson, D.G. (2004). Computer ethics. In: Floridi, L. (Ed.), The Blackwell Guide to the
Philosophy of Computing and Information, Blackwell, Oxford, UK, pp. 65–75.
Johnson, D.G. and Nissenbaum, H.(Eds.) (1995). Computing, Ethics & Social Values, Prentice
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Maner, W. (1980[1978]). Starter Kit on Teaching Computer Ethics. Self-published in 1978,
published in 1980 by Helvetia Press in cooperation with the National Information and
Resource Center on Teaching Philosophy, Hyde Park, NY.
45
Maner, W. (1996). Unique ethical problems in information technology, a keynote address at
ETHICOMP95. In: Bynum, T.W. and Rogerson, S. (Eds.), Global Information Ethics, A
Special Issue of Science and Engineering Ethics, 2(2), 137–154.
Maner, W. (1999). Is computer ethics unique? In: Floridi, L. (Ed.), Etica & Politica (special
issue on computer ethics), Vol. 2. Available at http://www.univ.trieste.it/_dipfilo/etica_e_politica/1999_2/homepage.html.
Martin, C.D. and Martin, D.H. (1990). Professional codes of conduct and computer ethics
education. Social Science Computer Review, 8(1), 96–108.
Martin, C.D., Huff, C., Gotterbarn, D., and Miller, K., (1996a).Aframework for implementing
and teaching the social and ethical impact of computing. Education and Information
Technologies, 1(2), 101–122.
Martin, C.D., Huff, C., Gotterbarn, D., and Miller, K. (1996b). Implementing a tenth strand in
the computer science curriculum (second report of the Impact CS steering committee).
Communications of the ACM, 39(12), 75–84.
Mather, K. (2005). The theoretical foundation of computer ethics: stewardship of the information
environment. Contemporary Issues in Governance. Monash University, Melbourne,
Australia. (Proceedings of GovNet Annual Conference, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 28–30
November, 2005.)
Miller, K. (2005b). Web standards: Why so many stray from the narrow path. Science and
Engineering Ethics, 11(3), 477–479.
Miller, K. and Larson, D. (2005a). Agile methods and computer ethics: raising the level of
discourse about technological choices IEEE Technology and Society, 24(4), 36–43.
Miller, K. and Larson, D. (2005b). Angels and artifacts: moral agents in the age of computers
and networks. Journal of Information, Communication & Ethics in Society, 3(3), 151–157.
Moor, J.H. (1979). Are there decisions computers should never make? Nature and System, 1
46
217–229.
Moor, J.H. (1985). What is computer ethics? In: Bynum (Ed. ), Computers and Ethics (a special
issue of Metaphilosophy), 16(4), 263–275.
Moor, J.H. (1998[1996]). Reason, relativity and responsibility in computer ethics, a keynote
address at ETHICOMP96 in Madrid, Spain. Later published in Computers and Society, 28
(1), 14–21.
Moor, J.H. (1997). Toward a theory of privacy for the information age. Computers and Society,
27(3), 27–32.
Moor, J.H. (1999). Just consequentialism and computing. Ethics and Information Technology, 1
(1), 65–69.
Moor, J.H. (2001). The future of computer ethics: You ain.t seen nothin. yet. Ethics and
Information Technology, 3(2), 89–91.
Moor, J.H. (2005). Should we let computers get under our skin? In: Cavalier, R.J. (Ed.), The
Impact of the Internet on our Moral Lives. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, pp. 121–138.
Moor, J.H. (2006). The nature, importance, and difficulty of machine ethics. IEEE Intelligent
Systems, 21(4), 18–21.
Nissenbaum, H. (1995). Should I copy my neighbor.s software? In: Johnson, D.G. and Nissenbaum,
H. (Eds.), Computers, Ethics and Social Values, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Nissenbaum, H. (1998[1997]). Can we protect privacy in public? Proceedings of
Computer Ethics–Philosophical Enquiry 97 (CEPE97), Erasmus University Press,
Rotterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 191–204. Reprinted in Law and Philosophy, 1998,
17, 559–596.
Nissenbaum, H. (1998).Values in the design of computer systems. Computers in Society, 38–39.
Nissenbaum, H. (2005a). Hackers and the contested ontology of cyberspace. In: Cavalier, R.J.
(Ed.), The Impact of the Internet on our Moral Lives.SUNYPress, Albany,NY, pp. 139–160.
47
Nissenbaum, H. (2005b). Where computer security meets national security. Ethics and
Information Technology, 7(2), 61–73.
Parker, D. (1968). Rules of ethics in information processing. Communications of the ACM, 11,
198–201.
Parker, D. (1979). Ethical Conflicts in Computer Science and Technology, AFIPS Press,
Arlington, VA.
Parker, D., Swope, S., and Baker, B.N. (1990). Ethical Conflicts in Information & Computer
Science, Technology and Business. QED Information Sciences, Wellesley, MA.
Pecorino, P. and Maner, W. (1985). A proposal for a course on computer ethics. In: Bynum
(Ed.), Computers and Ethics, A Special Issue of Metaphilosophy, 16 (4), 327–337.
Rogerson, S. (1996). The ethics of computing: the first and second generations. The UK
Business Ethics Network News.
Rogerson, S. (1998). Computer and information ethics. In: Chadwick R. (Ed.), Encylopedia of
Applied Ethics. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 563–570.
Rogerson, S. (2004). The ethics of software development project management. In: Bynum T.W.
and Rogerson S. (Eds.), Computer Ethics and Professional Responsibility, Blackwell,
Oxford, UK, pp. 119–128.
Rogerson, S. and Bynum, T.W. (1995). Cyberspace: the ethical frontier. The Times Higher
Education Supplement, No 1179, June 9, 1995, p iv.
Rogerson, S., Fairweather, B., and Prior, M. (2002). The ethical attitudes of information
systems professionals: outcomes of an initial survey. Telematics and Informatics, 19, 21–36.
Rogerson, S. and Fairweather, B. (2003). Entitlement cards. IMIS Journal, 13(2).
Rogerson, S. and Gotterbarn, D. (1998). The ethics of software project management. In: Collste
G. (Ed.), Ethics and Information Technology. New Academic Publishers, Delhi, India, pp.
137–154.
48
Spinello, R.A. (1997). Case Studies in Information and Computer Ethics. Prentice-Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NJ.
Spinello, R.A. (2000). CyberEthics: Morality and Law in Cyberspace. Jones and Bartlett,
Sudbury, MA.
Spinello, R.A. and Tavani, H.T. (2001a). The Internet, ethical values, and conceptual frameworks:
an introduction to cyberethics. Computers and Society, 31(2), 5–7.
Spinello, R.A. and Tavani, H.T.(Eds.) (2004[2001b]). Readings in CyberEthics, 2nd edition
2004. Jones and Bartlett, Sudbury, MA.
Spinello, R.A. and Tavani, H.T. (Eds.) (2005). Intellectual Property Rights in a Networked
World: Theory and Practice. Idea Group/Information Science Publishing, Hershey, PA.
Stahl, B.C. (2004a). Information, ethics and computers: the problem of autonomous moral
agents. Minds and Machines, 14, 67–83.
Stahl, B.C. (2004b). ResponsibleManagement of Information Systems. Idea Group, Hershey, PA.
Stahl, B.C. (2005). The ethical problem of framing e-government in terms of e-commerce.
Electronic Journal of E-Government, 3(2), 77–86.
Stahl, B.C. (2006). Responsible computers? A case for ascribing quasi-responsibility to
computers independent of personhood or agency. Ethics and Information Technology, 8
(4), 205–213.
Tavani, H.T. (Ed.) (1996). Computing, Ethics, and Social Responsibility: A Bibliography. CPSR
Press, Palo Alto, CA.
Tavani, H.T. (1999). Privacy and the Internet. Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Ethics and
Technology Conference. Boston College Press, Chestnut Hill, MA, pp. 114–125.
Tavani, H.T. (2002). The uniqueness debate in computer ethics: What exactly is at issue and why
does it matter? Ethics and Information Technology, 4(1), 37–54.
Tavani, H.T. (2004). Ethics and Technology: Ethical Issues in an Age of Information and
49
Communication Technology, 2nd edition 2007. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Tavani, H.T. (2005). The impact of the Internet on our moral condition: Do we need a new
framework of ethics? In: Cavalier, R.J. (Ed.), The Impact of the Internet on our Moral Lives.
SUNY Press, Albany, NY, pp. 215–237.
Tavani, H.T. (2006). Ethics, Computing, and Genomics. Jones and Bartlett, Sudbury, MA.
Turner, E. (2006). Teaching gender-inclusive computer ethics. In: Trauth, I. (Ed.), Encyclopedia
of Gender and Information Technology: Exploring the Contributions, Challenges, Issues
and Experiences of Women in Information Technology. Idea Group, pp. 1142–1147.
Van den Hoven, M.J. (1997a). Computer ethics and moral methodology. Metaphilosophy, 28
(3), 234–248.
Van den Hoven, M.J. (1997b). Privacy and the varieties of informational wrongdoing.
Computers and Society, 27(3), 33–37.
Van den Hoven, M.J. (1998). Ethics, social epistemics, electronic communication and scientific
research. European Review, 7(3), 341–349.
Van den Hoven, M.J. (1999). Knowledge and democracy in cyberspace. Etica e Politica 1(2) at
http://www.univ.trieste.it/dipfilo/etica_e_politica/1999_2/index.html.
Volkman, R. (2003). Privacy as life, liberty, property. Ethics and Information Technology, 5(4),
199–210.
Vokman, R. (2005). Dynamic traditions: Why globalization does not mean homogenization.
Proceedings of ETHICOMP2005. Published on CD. Link€opings University, Sweden.
Volkman, R. (2007). The good computer professional does not cheat at cards. Proceedings of
ETHICOMP2007. Meiji University Press, Tokyo.
Weckert, J. (2002). Lilliputian computer ethics. Metaphilosophy, 33(3), 366–375.
Weckert, J. (2005). Trust in cyberspace. In: Cavalier, R.J. (Ed.), The Impact of the Internet on
our Moral Lives. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, pp. 95–117.
50
Weckert, J. and Adeney, D. (1997). Computer and Information Ethics. Greenwood Press,
Westport, CT.
Weizenbaum, J. (1976). Computer Power and Human Reason: From Judgment to Calculation.
Freeman, San Francisco.
Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics: or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine.
Technology Press, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Wiener, N. (1954[1950]). The Human Use of Human Beings. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1950,
2nd edition Revised. Doubleday Anchor, New York, 1954.
Wiener, N. (1964). God & Golem, Inc.: A Comment on Certain Points Where Cybernetics
Impinges on Religion. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Anscombe, E. (1958). Modern Moral philosophy. Philosophy, 33.
Berleur, J. and Brunnstein, K. (1996). Ethics of Computing. Chapman & Hall, London.
Brey, P. (2000). Method in computer ethics: towards a multi-level interdisciplinary approach.
Ethics and Information Technology, 125–129.
Bynum, T.W. (2007). Flourishing ethics. Ethics and Information Technology, 8, 157–173.
Collins, R. and Miller, K. (1995). Paramedic ethics for computer professionals. In: Johnson and
Nissenbaum (Eds. ), Computers, Ethics and Social Values. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
NJ.
Dancy, J. (2004). Ethics Without Principles. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Daniels, N. (1979). Wide reflective equilibrium and theory acceptance in ethics. Journal of
Philosophy, 76(5), 256–82. Reprinted in Daniels, N. (Ed.), Justice and Justification:
Reflective Equilibrium in Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
pp. 21–46.
Floridi, L. (1999). Information ethics: on the philosophical foundations of computer ethics.
Ethics and Information Technology, 1, 37–56.
51
Gert, B. (1999). Common morality and computing. Ethics and Information Technology, 1(1),
57–64.
Friedman, B. (Ed.) (1998). Human Values and the Design of Computer Technology. Series:
(CSLI-LN), Lecture Notes. Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford.
Griffin, J. (1993). Howwe do ethics now. In: Griffiths, A.P. (Ed. ), Ethics. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Q3 Grodzinsky, F.S. (1999). The practitioner from within: revisiting the virtues. Computers and
Society, 29.
Q4 Himma, K.E. (2004). There.s something about Mary: the moral value of things qua information
objects. Ethics and Information Technology, 6(3).
Huff, C. and Rogerson, S. Craft and reform in moral exemplars in computing. Available at
http://bibliotecavirtual.clacso.org.ar/ar/libros/raec/ethicomp5/docs/htm_papers/30Huff,%
20Chuck.htm.
Kamm, F. (2007). Intricate Ethics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Lessig, L. Available at http://www.lessig.org/.
Maner,W. Heuristic method for computer ethics. Available at http://csweb.cs.bgsu.edu/maner/
heuristics/maner.pdf.
Moor, J.H. (1985). What is computer ethics? Metaphilosophy, 16, 266–75.
Nissenbaum, H. and Introna, L. (1999). Shaping the web; why the politics of search engines
matters. Information Society, 16, 169–85.
Nozick, R. (1993). The Nature of Rationality. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
O.Neill, O. (2004). Modern moral philosophy and the problem of relevant descriptions. In:
Hear, A.O. (Ed. ), Modern Moral Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Posner, R.A. (1999). Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. Belknal Press, Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, MA.
52
Quine, W.V.O. and Ullian, J. (1970). The Web of Belief. Random House, New York.
Shneiderman, B. (2002). Leonardo.s Laptop, Human Needs and the New Computing Technologies.
MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Tavani, H.T. (2002). The uniqueness debate in computer ethics: what exactly is at issue, and why
does it matter? Ethics and Information Technology, 4(1), 37–54.
Van den Hoven, J. and Lokhorst, G.J. (2002). Deontic logic and computer supported ethics. In:
Moor, J.H. and Bynum, T.W. (Eds.), Cyberphilosophy. Blackwell, Oxford.
Wiegel, V., van den Hoven, J. and Lokhorst, G. (2005). Privacy, deontic epistemic action logic
and software agents. Ethics and Information Technology, 7(4), 251–264.
Winner, L. (1980). Do artefacts have politics? Daedalus, 109, 121–36.
Aberg, J. and Shahmehri, N. (2001). An empirical study of humanWeb assistants: Implications
for user support inWeb information systems. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2000). Association for Computing Machinery Press,
New York, NY, pp. 404–411.
Ackerman, M.S. and Cranor, L. (1999). Privacy critics: UI components to safeguard users.
privacy. In: Extended Abstracts of CHI 1999. ACM Press, pp. 258–259.
Adler, P.S. and Winograd, T. (Eds.) (1992). Usability: Turning Technologies into Tools. Oxford
University Press, Oxford.
Agre, P.E. and Rotenberg, M. (Eds.) (1998). Technology and Privacy: The New Landscape.
MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Baier, A. (1986). Trust and antitrust. Ethics, 231(60), 231–260.
Beck, A. and Katcher, A. (1996). Between Pets and People. Purdue University Press, West
Lafayette, IN.
Becker, L.C. (1977). Property Rights: Philosophical Foundations. Routledge & Kegan Paul,
London, England.
53
Bellotti, V. (1998). Design for privacy in multimedia computing and communications environments.
In: Agre, P.E. and Rotenberg, M. (Eds.), Technology and Privacy: The New
Landscape. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 63–98.
The Belmont Report. Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of
Research (1978). The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of
Biomedical and Behavioral Research.
Bennet,W.J. and Delatree, E.J. (1978). Moral education in the schools. The Public Interest,
50, 81–98.
Bers, M.U., Gonzalez-Heydrich, J., and DeMaso, D.R. (2001). Identity construction environments:
supporting a virtual therapeutic community of pediatric patients undergoing dialysis.
In: Proceedings of the Conference of Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2001).
Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, pp. 380–387.
Bjerknes, G. and Bratteteig, T. (1995). User participation and democracy: a discussion of
Scandinavian research on system development. Scandinavian Journal of Information
Systems, 7(1), 73–97.
Bødker, S. (1990). Through the Interface: A Human Activity Approach to User Interface
Design. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Borning, A., Friedman, B., Davis, J., and Lin, P. (2005). Informing public deliberation:Value
Sensitive Design of indicators for a large-scale urban simulation. In: Proceedings of the 9th
European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Paris, September 2005,
pp. 449–468.
Borning, A.,Waddell, P., and F€orster, R. (2008). UrbanSim: using simulation to inform public
deliberation and decision-making, In: Chen, Hsinchun et al. (Eds.), Digital Government:
Advanced Research and Case Studies. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, pp. 439–466.
Boyle, M., Edwards, C., and Greenberg, S. (2000). The effects of filtered video on awareness
54
and privacy. In: Proceedings of Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work
(CSCW 2000). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY pp. 1–10.
Bynum, T.W. (Ed.) (1985). Metaphilosophy, 16(4) 263–377.
Camp, L.J. (2000). Trust and Risk in Internet Commerce. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Campbell, R.L. and Christopher, J.C. (1996). Moral development theory: a critique of its
Kantian presuppositions. Developmental Review, 16, 1–47.
Carroll, J.M. and Rosson, M.B. (2000). Dimension of participation in information system
design. In: Zhang, P. and Galletta, D. (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction and Management
Information System. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY.
Cooper, M. and Rejmer, P. (2001). Case study: localization of an accessibility evaluation. In:
Extended Abstracts of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2001).
Association for Computing Machinery Press, New York, NY, pp. 141–142.
Davis, J. (2006). Value Sensitive Design of interactions with UrbanSim indicators, Ph.D.
dissertation. Department of Computer Science & Engineering, University of Washington.
Dieberger, A., Hook, K., Svensson, M., and Lonnqvist, P. (2001). Social navigation
research agenda. In: Extended Abstracts of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (CHI 2001). Association of Computing Machinery Press, New York, NY,
pp. 107–108.
Dworkin, R. (1978). Taking Rights Seriously. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Egger, F.N. (2000). “Trust me, I.man online vendor”: towards a model of trust for e-commerce
system design. In: Extended Abstracts of the Conference of Human Factors in Computing
Systems (CHI 2000). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, pp. 101–102.
Ehn, P. (1989). Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Hillsdale, NJ.
Faden, R. and Beauchamp, T. (1986). A History and Theory of Informed Consent. Oxford
55
University Press, New York, NY.
Fogg, B.J. and Tseng, H. (1999). The elements of computer credibility. In: Proceedings of CHI
1999. ACM Press, pp. 80–87.
Foot, P. (1978). Virtues and Vices. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los
Angeles, CA.
Frankena, W. (1972). Value and valuation. In: Edwards, P., (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Vols. 7–8 Macmillan, New York, NY, pp. 409–410.
Franklin, J., Waddell, P., and Britting, J. (2002). Sensitivity analysis approach for an integrated
land development & travel demand modeling system. Presented at the Association of
Collegiate Schools of Planning 44th Annual Conference, November 21–24, 2002, Baltimore,
MD. Preprint available from www.urbansim.org.
Freeman-Benson, B.N. and Borning, A. (2003). YP and urban simulation: applying an agile
programming methodology in a politically tempestuous domain. In: Proceedings of the
2003 Agile Programming Conference. Salt Lake City. Preprint available from www.
urbansim.org.
Friedman, B. (Ed.) (1997a). HumanValues and the Design of Computer Technology. Cambridge
University Press, New York, NY.
Friedman, B. (1997b). Social judgments and technological innovation: adolescents. understanding
of property, privacy, and electronic information. Computers in Human Behavior,
13(3), 327–351.
Friedman, B., Howe, D.C., and Felten, E. (2002). Informed consent in the Mozilla browser:
implementing Value-Sensitive Design. In: Proceedings of HICSS-35. IEEE Computer
Society, Abstract, p. 247; CD-ROM of full papers, OSPE101.
Friedman, B. and Kahn, P.H. Jr. (1992). Human agency and responsible computing: implications
for computer system design. Journal of Systems Software, 17, 7–14.
56
Friedman, B. and Kahn, P.H. Jr. (2003). Human values, ethics, and design. In: Jacko, J. and
Sears, A., (Eds.), The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook. Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Friedman, B., Kahn, P.H. Jr., and Howe, D.C. (2000a). Trust online. Communications of the
ACM, 43(12), 34–40.
Friedman, B., Kahn, P.H. Jr., and Hagman, J. (2003). Hardware companions?: What online
AIBO discussion forums reveal about the human-robotic relationship. In: Conference
Proceedings of CHI 2003. ACM Press, New York, NY, pp. 273–280.
Friedman, B., Kahn, P.H. Jr., Hagman, J., Severson, R.L., and Gill, B. (2006). The watcher
and the watched: social judgments about privacy in a public place. Human–Computer
Interaction, 21(2), 235–272.
Friedman, B. and Millett, L. (1995). It.s the computer.s fault—reasoning about computers as
moral agents. In: Conference Companion of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (CHI 95). Association for Computing Machinery Press, NewYork,NY, pp. 226–
227.
Friedman, B., Millett,L., and Felten, E. (2000b). InformedConsentOnline:AConceptualModel
andDesignPrinciples.University ofWashingtonComputerScience&EngineeringTechnical
Report 00–12–2.
Friedman, B. and Nissenbaum, H. (1996). Bias in computer systems. ACM Transactions on
Information Systems, 14(3), 330–347.
Friedman, B. and Nissenbaum, H. (1997). Software agents and user autonomy. Proceedings
of the First International Conference on Autonomous Agents. Association for Computing
Machinery Press, New York, NY, pp. 466–469.
Fuchs, L. (1999). AREA: a cross-application notification service for groupware. In:
Proceedings of ECSCW 1999. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht Germany, pp.
57
61–80.
Galegher, J., Kraut, R.E., and Egido, C. (Eds.) (1990). Intellectual Teamwork: Social and
Technological Foundations of CooperativeWork. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale,
NJ.
Gallopin, G.C. (1997). Indicators and their use: information for decision-making. In: Moldan,
B., Billharz, S., and Matravers, R. (Eds.), Sustainability Indicators: A Report on the
Project on Indicators of Sustainable Development. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester,
England.
Gewirth, A. (1978). Reason and Morality. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Greenbaum, J. and Kyng, M. (1991). Design at Work: Cooperative Design of Computer
Systems. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Grudin, J. (1988). Why CSCW applications fail: problems in the design and evaluation of
organizational interfaces. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Supported
Cooperative Work (CSCW .88). Association for Computing Machinery Press, New York,
NY, pp. 85–93.
Habermas, J. (1979). Communication and the Evolution of Society. McCarthy, T. (trans).
Beacon Press, Boston.
Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action,Vol. 1.McCarthy, T. (trans). Beacon
Press, Boston.
Hagman, J., Hendrickson, A., and Whitty, A. (2003). What.s in a barcode: informed consent
and machine scannable driver licenses. In: CHI 2003 Extended Abstracts of the Conference
on Human Factors in Computing System. ACM Press, New York, NY pp. 912–913.
Hart, M. (1999). Guide to Sustainable Community Indicators., 2nd edition. Hart Environmental
Data, North Andover, MA.
Herskovits, M.J. (1952). Economic Anthropology: A Study of Comparative Economics. Alfred
58
A. Knopf, New York, NY.
Hill, T.E. Jr. (1991). Autonomy and Self-Respect. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Isaacs, E.A., Tang, J.C., and Morris, T. (1996). Piazza: a desktop environment supporting
impromptu and planned interactions. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Computer
Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW, 96). Association for Computing Machinery Press,
New York, NY, pp. 315–324.
Jacko, J.A., Dixon, M.A., Rosa, R.H., Jr., Scott, I.U., and Pappas, C.J. (1999). Visual profiles:
a critical component of universal access. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems (CHI.99). Association for Computing Machinery Press, New
York, NY, pp. 330–337.
Jancke, G.,Venolia, G.D., Grudin, J., Cadiz, J.J., and Gupta, A. (2001). Linking public spaces:
technical and social issues. In: Proceedings of CHI 2001,. pp. 530–537.
Johnson, E.H. (2000). Getting beyond the simple assumptions of organization impact
(social informatics). Bulletin of the American Society for Information, Science, 26(3),
18–19.
Johnson, D.G. and Miller, K. (1997). Ethical issues for computer scientists and engineers. In:
Tucker, A.B. Jr. (Ed.-in-Chief), The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook. CRC
Press, pp. 16–26.
Kahn, P.H. Jr. (1999). The Human Relationship with Nature: Development and Culture. MIT
Press Cambridge, MA.
Kahn, P.H. Jr. and Kellert, S.R. (Eds.) (2002). Children and Nature: Psychological, Sociocultural,
and Evolutionary Investigations. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Kahn, P.H. Jr. and Turiel, E. (1988). Children.s conceptions of trust in the context of social
expectations. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 34, 403–419.
Kant, I. (1964). Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals. (Paton, H.J. trans.). Harper Torchbooks,
59
New York, NY (original work published in 1785).
Kling, R., Rosenbaum, H. and Hert, C. (1998). Social informatics in information science: an
introduction. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(12),
1047–1052.
Kling, R. and Star, S.L. (1998). Human centered systems in the perspective of organizational
and social informatics. Computers and Society, 28(1), 22–29.
Kyng, M. and Mathiassen, L. (Eds.) (1997). Computers and Design in Context. The MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Leveson, N.G. (1991). Software safety in embedded computer systems. Communications of the
ACM, 34(2), 34–46.
Lipinski, T.A. and Britz, J.J. (2000). Rethinking the ownership of information in the 21st
century: ethical implications. Ethics and Information Technology, 2(1), 49–71.
MacIntyre, A. (1984). After Virtue. University of Nortre Dame Press, Nortre Dame.
Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., and Schoorman, F.D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational
trust. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.
Millett, L., Friedman, B., and Felten, E. (2001). Cookies and web browser design:
toward realizing informed consent online. In: Proceedings of CHI 2001. ACM Press,
pp. 46–52.
Moldan, B., Billharz, S., and Matravers, R. (Eds.) (1997). Sustainability Indicators: A Report
on the Project on Indicators of Sustainable Development. Wiley & Sons, Chichester,
England.
Moore, G.E. (1978). Principia Ethica. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (original work
published in 1903).
Nass, C. and Gong, L. (2000). Speech interfaces from an evolutionary perspective. Communications
of the ACM, 43(9), 36–43.
60
Neumann, P.G. (1995). Computer Related Risks. Association for Computing Machinery Press,
New York, NY.
Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. AP Professional, Boston, MA.
Nissenbaum, H. (1998). Protecting privacy in an information age: the problem with privacy in
public. Law and Philosophy, 17, 559–596.
Nissenbaum, H. (1999). Can trust be secured online?Atheoretical perspective. Etica e Politca,
2 (electronic journal).
Nissenbaum, H. (2001). Securing trust online: wisdom or oxymoron. Boston University Law
Review, 81(3), 635–664.
Norman, D.A. (1988). The Psychology of Everyday Things. Basic Books, New York.
Northwest Environment Watch (2002). This Place on Earth 2002: Measuring What Matters.
Northwest Environment Watch, 1402 Third Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.
Noth, M., Borning, A., and Waddell, P. (2003). An extensible, modular architecture for
simulating urban development, transportation, and environmental impacts. Computers,
Environment and Urban Systems, 27(2), 181–203.
Olson, J.S. and Olson, G.M. (2000). i2iTrust in e-commerce. Communications of the ACM, 43
(12), 41–44.
Olson, J.S. and Teasley, S. (1996). Groupware in the wild: lessons learned from a year of virtual
collaboration. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Supported CooperativeWork
(CSCW 96). Association for Computing Machinery Press, New York, NY, pp. 419–427.
Orlikowsi,W.J. and Iacono, C.S. (2001). Research commentary: desperately seeking the “IT” in
ITresearch: a call to theorizing the ITartifact. Information SystemsResearch, 12(2), 121–134.
Palen, L. and Dourish, P. (2003). Privacy and trust: unpacking “privacy” for a networked world.
In: Proceedings of CHI 2003, pp. 129–136.
Palen, L. and Grudin, J. (2003). Discretionary adoption of group support software: lessons from
61
calendar applications. In: Munkvold, B.E. (Ed.), Implementing Collaboration Technologies
in Industry. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg.
Palmer, K. (Ed.) (1998). Indicators of Sustainable Community. Sustainable Seattle, Seattle,
WA.
Phillips, D.J. (1998). Cryptography, secrets, and structuring of trust. In: Agre, P.E. and
Rotenberg, M. (Eds.), Technology and Privacy: The New Landscape. The MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, pp. 243–276.
Pruitt, J. and Grudin, J. (2003). Personas: practice and theory. In: Proceedings of DUX 2003,
ACM Press.
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Reeves, B. and Nass, C. (1996). The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television,
and New Media Like Real People and Places. Cambridge University Press and CSLI
Publications, New York, NY and Stanford, CA.
Riegelsberger, J. and Sasse, M.A. (2002). Face it: photos don.t make a web site trustworthy. In:
Extended Abstracts of CHI 2002. ACM Press, pp. 742–743.
Rocco, E. (1998). Trust breaks down in electronic contexts but can be repaired by some initial
face-to-face contact. In: Proceedings of CHI 1998. ACM Press, pp. 496–502.
Rosenberg, S. (1997). Multiplicity of selves, In: Ashmore, R.D. and Jussim, L. (Eds.), Self and
Identity: Fundamental Issues. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 23–45.
Sawyer, S. and Rosenbaum, H. (2000). Social informatics in the information sciences: current
activities and emerging direction. Informing Science, 3(2), 89–95.
Scheffler, S. (1982). The Rejection of Consequentialism. Oxford University Press, Oxford,
England.
Schiano, D.J. and White, S. (1998). The first noble truth of cyberspace: people are people (even
when they MOO). In: Proceedings of the Conference of Human Factors in Computing
62
Systems (CHI 98). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, pp. 352–359.
Schneider, F.B. (Ed.) (1999). Trust in Cyberspace. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Schoeman, F.D. (Ed.) (1984). Philosophical Dimensions of Privacy: An Anthology. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, England.
Shneiderman, B. (1999). Universal usability: pushing human–computer interaction research to
empower every citizen. ISR Technical Report. 99–72. University of Maryland, Institute for
Systems Research, College Park, MD.
Shneiderman, B. (2000). Universal usability. Communication of the ACM, 43(5), 84–91.
Simpson, J.A. and Weiner, E.S.C. (Eds.) (1989). “value, n.” Oxford English Dictionary.
Clarendon Press, Oxford; OED Online, Oxford University Press, 30 May 2003. Available
at http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/00274678.
Smart, J.J.C. and Williams, B. (1973). Utilitarianism For and Against. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Stephanidis, C. (Ed.) (2001). User Interfaces for All: Concepts, Methods, and Tools. Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Suchman, L. (1994). Do categories have politics? The language/action perspective reconsidered.
CSCW Journal, 2(3), 177–190.
Svensson, M., Hook, K., Laaksolahti, J. and Waern, A. (2001). Social navigation of food
recipes. In: Proceedings of the Conference of Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI,
2001). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, pp. 341–348.
Tang, J.C. (1997). Eliminating a hardware switch: weighing economics and values in a design
decision. In: Friedman, B. (Ed.), Human Values and the Design of Computer Technology.
Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, pp. 259–269.
Thomas, J.C. (1997). Steps toward universal access within a communications company. In:
Friedman, B. (Ed.), Human Values and the Design of Computer Technology. Cambridge
63
University Press, New York, NY, pp. 271–287.
Turiel, E. (1983). The Development of Social Knowledge. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, England.
Turiel, E. (1998). Moral development. In: Eisenberg, N. (Ed.), Social, Emotional, and
Personality Development. In: Damon,W. (Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology, 5th edition,
Vol. 3. Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, pp. 863–932.
Turiel, E. (2002). The Culture of Morality: Social Development, Context, and Conflict.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
Turkle, S. (1996). Life on the Screen: Identify in the Age of the Internet. Simon and Schuster,
New York, NY.
Ulrich, R.S. (1984). View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science,
224, 420–421.
Ulrich, R.S. (1993). Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. In:Kellert, S.R. and Wilson,
E.O.(Eds.), The Biophilia Hypothesis. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp. 73–137.
United Nations (2002). Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1992. Available at http://www.un.org/esa/
sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/agenda21toc.htm.
Waddell, P. (2002). UrbanSim: modeling urban development for land use, transportation, and
environmental planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 68(3), 297–314.
Waddell, P., Borning, A., Noth, M., Freier, N., Becke, M., and Ulfarsson, G. (2003).
Microsimulation of urban development and location choices: design and implementation
of UrbanSim. Networks and Spatial Economics, 3(1), 43–67.
Weiser, M. and Brown, J.S. (1997). The coming age of calm technology. In: Denning, P. and
Metcalfe, B. (Eds.), Beyond Calculation: The Next 50 Years of Computing. Springer-Verlag,
New York, NY, pp. 75–85.
64
Weizenbaum, J. (1972). On the impact of the computer on society: How does one insult a
machine? Science, 178, 609–614.
Wiener, N. (1985). The machine as threat and promise. In: Masani, P. (Ed.), Norbert Wiener:
CollectedWorks and Commentaries, Vol. IV. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 673–678.
reprinted from St. Louis Post Dispatch, December 13, 1953.
Winograd, T. (1994). Categories, disciplines, and social coordination. CSCW Journal, 2(3),
191–197.
World Commission on Environment and Development (Gro Harlem Brundtland, Chair) (1987).
Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Wynne, E.A. and Ryan, K. (1993). Reclaiming Our Schools: A Handbook on Teaching
Character, Academics, and Discipline. Macmillan & Co., New York.
Zheng, J., Bos, N., Olson, J., and Olson, G.M. (2001). Trust without touch: jump-start trust
with social chat. In: Extended Abstracts of CHI 2001. ACM Press, pp. 293–294.
Becker, L.C. (1993). Deserving to own intellectual property. Chicago-Kent Law Review,
68.
Boyle, J. (1996). Shamans, Software, and Spleens. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Bugbee, B. (1967). Genesis of American Patent and Copyright Law. Public Affairs Press,
Washington, DC.
Child, J.W. (1997). The moral foundations of intangible property. In: Moore, A. (Ed.),
Intellectual Property: Moral, Legal, and International Dilemmas. Rowman and Littlefield,
Lanham, MD.
Croskery, P. (1993). Institutional utilitarianism and intellectual property. Chicago-Kent Law
Review, 68, 631–657.
Gordon,W.J. (1993). Property right in self expression: equality and individualism in the natural
law of intellectual property. Yale Law Journal, 102, 1533–1609.
65
Gordon,W.J. (1994). Assertive modesty: an economics of intangibles. Columbia Law Review,
94, 2579–2593.
Hettinger, E.C. (1997). Justifying intellectual property. Philosophy and Public Affairs,
reprinted in: Moore, A. (Ed.), Intellectual Property: Moral, Legal, and International
Dilemmas. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD 18, 31–52.
Himma, K. (2006). Justifying intellectual property protection: why the interests of contentCreators usually wins over everyone else.s. In: Rooksby, E. (Ed.), Information Technology
and Social Justice, Idea Group.
Hughes, J. (1997). The philosophy of intellectual property. Georgetown Law Journal. Reprinted
in: Moore, A. (Ed.), Intellectual Property: Moral, Legal, and International Dilemmas.
Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD 77, p. 287.
Kuflik, A. (1989). The moral foundations of intellectual property Rights. In: Weil, V. and
Snapper, J. (Eds.), Owning Scientific and Technical Information. Rutgers University Press,
New Brunswick and London.
Machlup, F. (1962). Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States. Princeton
Moore, A.D. (1997). In: Moore, A. (Ed.), Intellectual Property: Moral, Legal, and International
Dilemmas. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD.
Moore, A.D. (2004[2001]). Intellectual Property and Information Control: Philosophic
Foundations and Contemporary Issues. Transaction Publishing, New Brunswick, NJ,
2004, 2001, hardback.
Moore, A.D. (2005). Intangible property: privacy, power, and information control. American
Philosophical Quarterly, 35, 365–378. Reprinted in: Moore, A. (Ed.), Information Ethics:
Privacy, Property, and Power. University of Washington Press.
Nelkin, D. (1984). Science as Intellectual Property. Macmillan, New York.
Palmer, T.G. (1997). Intellectual property: a non-posnerian law and economics approach.
66
Hamline Law Review, 261–304. Reprinted in: Moore, A. (Ed.), Intellectual Property:
Moral, Legal, and International Dilemmas. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham MD.
Palmer, T.G. (2005). Are patents and copyrights morally justified? The philosophy of property
rights and ideal objects. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 13, 817–866. Reprinted
in: Moore, A. (Ed.), Information Ethics: Privacy, Property, and Power. University of
Washington Press.
Spooner, L. (1971). The Law of Intellectual Property. M & S Press (originally published in
1855).
Tavani, H. (2005). Intellectual property rights: from theory to practical implementation (with
Richard Spinello). In: Spinello, R.A. and Tavani, H.T. (Eds.), Intellectual Property Rights in
a Networked World: Theory and Practice. Idea Group/Information Science Publishing,
Hershey, PA, pp. 1–65.
Waldron, J. (1993). From authors to copiers: individual rights and social values in intellectual
property. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 68, 841–887.
Weil, V. and Snapper, J. (Eds.). (1989). Owning Scientific and Technical Information. Rutgers
University Press, New Brunswick and London.
67
68