1. Invitation to Computer Science 5th Edition
Chapter 17
Making Decisions about Computers, Information, and Society

2. Objectives In this chapter, you will learn about:
Case studies involving:
MP3
PGP
Hackers
Technology and ethics
Genetic information and medical research
What we covered and what we did not
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

3. Introduction In this chapter:
We introduce skills that will help you to think and reason carefully when making personal decisions about computing
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition 3

4. Case Studies
Case 1: The Story of MP3-Compression Codes, Musicians, and Money
1989: Fraunhofer Institute patented MP3 in Germany
1997: Tomislav Uzelac created the first commercially viable MP3 playback program
1998: WinAmp was offered for free on the Internet
Peer-to-peer file sharing: set up by Napster
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition 4

5. Figure 17.1 Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Created by Napster
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

6. Asking Ethical Questions
Ethics
The study of how to decide if something is morally right or wrong
Consequentialism
Focuses on the consequences of an act to determine if the act is good or bad
Utilitarians
Answer the question Good for whom? with a hearty, Good for everyone!
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

7. Utilitarian Argument #1: MP3 Copying is OK
Market research
Shows that MP3 downloading has increased the sale of music CDs
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

8. Utilitarian Argument #2: MP3 Copying is Not OK
The decline of music CD sales
Long-term effect of widespread copying of copyrighted materials
Dialectic
Used by ethicists to try to get better and better ethical decisions
Ultimate goal is for both sides to “win” by moving closer to the truth from two different perspectives
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

9. Case 2: PGP: The U.S. Government vs. Phil Zimmermann
1991
Phillip Zimmermann developed an encryption algorithm called “Pretty Good Privacy,” PGP
In any analogy between two “things,” there are both similarities and differences
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

10. Case 2: PGP: The U.S. Government vs. Phil Zimmermann (continued)
Analogy #1: is Like a Private Conversation
Analogy #2: is Like Phone Conversations
Some similarities and differences in Analogy #1
The presumed audience may be larger than intended
Private conversation is high-bandwidth
Conversation happens in real time
Having capability costs money
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

11. Case 2: PGP: The U.S. Government vs. Phil Zimmermann (continued)
Some similarities and differences in Analogy #2
Phone calls typically include more information than s
Both phone calls and s are done at a physical distance
Phone calls are meant to be in real time, but s are asynchronous
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

12. Case 2: PGP: The U.S. Government vs. Phil Zimmermann (continued)
Analyzing the ethical significance of the similarities and differences
Three methods of communication all differ in the amount of information exchanged
PGP allows users to return to the default of privacy
What are the consequences of enforcing a ban on PGP, and what are the consequences of allowing people to use PGP?
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

13. Case 3: Hackers: Public Enemies or Gadflies?
Someone who breaks into computer systems and launches Internet worms and viruses or perpetrates other computer-related vandalism
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

14. Analogy: Breaking into a Computer is Like Breaking into Someone’s House
Similarities between burglars and hackers
In both cases, the intruders are there without our permission and without us being aware of their presence
Differences between burglars and hackers
Burglar is likely to take something from your house, and that removal will deprive you of something
Hacker takes your intellectual property and privacy
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

15. Utilitarian Argument: Costs and Benefits of Hacking
Challenges when using a utilitarian argument in a dialectic about hacking
It is sometimes hard to predict consequences with any accuracy
There seems to be a distinction between “good hackers” and “bad hackers”
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

16. Deontological Argument: Hacking with a Golden Heart
Utilitarian and other consequentialist arguments
Focus on the consequences of an act to determine if the act is ethical
Deontologist
Focuses more on the intent of an act and how that act either is or is not a defensible, responsible act
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

17. Deontological Argument: Hacking with a Golden Heart (continued)
The “hacker ethic” claims
Information sharing is a powerful positive good
It is the ethical duty of hackers to facilitate access to information and computing resources
System cracking for fun and exploration is ethically OK as long as the cracker commits no theft, vandalism, or breach of confidentiality
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

18. Thinking Straight about Technology and Ethics
Paramedic ethics for technology
Who are the stakeholders in this situation?
What does each stakeholder have to gain or lose?
What duties and responsibilities in this situation are important to the stakeholders?
Can you think of an analogous situation that doesn’t involve computing?
Either make a decision or revisit the steps
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

19. Case 4: Genetic Information and Medical Research
Step 1: Identify stakeholders
Step 2: What is at stake?
Step 3: Identify duties and responsibilities
Step 4: Think of analogies
Step 5: Make a decision or loop through the method again
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

20. What We Covered and What We Did Not
Technical decisions
Involve human values, whether we recognize it or not
When you have to decide if something involving technology is right or wrong
Remember to think carefully about consequences and duties
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition

21. Summary Ethics Dialectic Deontologist The “hacker ethic” claims
The study of how to decide if something is morally right or wrong
Dialectic
Used by ethicists to try to get better and better ethical decisions
Deontologist
Focuses more on the intent of an act and how that act either is or is not a defensible, responsible act
The “hacker ethic” claims
Information sharing is a powerful positive good
Invitation to Computer Science, 5th Edition