Expertiza_Wiki - User contributions [en]

CSC 379:Week 5, Group 3

2007-08-02T23:16:08Z

Jwbreedi:

=Internet Voting=

'''Below is the content from the [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/reliability/voting/internet/study.php existing study guide on internet voting]. Your assignment will be to update the study guide. Expand each section with more detailed and recent content and add at least one new section that provides a thorough overview of areas of ethical concern regarding internet voting. You may rename, move, and reformat content within the study guide as prudent. Include links to articles about instances of internet voting.'''

'''Note: Your new study guide does not need to follow the structure of the [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/reliability/voting/internet/ existing topic page].'''

==Relevant Class Website Links==
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/reliability/voting/internet/new.html Articles on Internet Voting]

==Study Guide==
===What is Internet Voting?===

"Internet voting means the casting of a secure and secret electronic ballot that is transmitted to election officials using the Internet.”

===Types of Internet Voting===

* Poll Site: Voting: Internet technology is added to the traditional voting locations.
* Kiosk Voting: Internet would be place at non traditional sites such as mall for convenience of people.
* Remote voting: Citizens would be able to vote from anywhere such as home or office.

===Advantages and disadvantages of Internet voting===

Some of the advantages that are associated with internet voting are that more people will be able to participate since voting will become more accessible. Since Internet voting can be done from one's living room, it also eliminates much of the perceived hassle that limits voter turn-out at conventional polling places.

It will also be more cost effective than conventional methods; if everyone uses their own
computers then less equipment will be needed to get voting done. Vote tally will also be nearly instantaneous.

Some of the disadvantages of Internet voting include security issues. [http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/01/21_vote.shtml Some] are concerned that hackers may intercept, spoof, trace or alter votes cast from users' computers. In addition to potentially causing false election results, this could also violate a voter's right to keep his votes anonymous. Another concern is that of digital vandalism. It's likely that a Distributed Denial of Service attack may occur on the day of the elections, which would cause the voting system to go down and render it useless.

The other major disadvantage cited by opponents of Internet voting is that of the [http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/interviews/internetvoting/issues.html 'digital divide'], which argues that people with lower incomes or less technical knowledge will have less
chance of voting. Proponents of Internet voting offer the counter-argument that conventional polling centers will still be available for those without Internet access.

===Government concerns and the future of Internet voting===

Due to the growing interest in Internet voting, there have been many studies
conducted on how secure internet voting would be if it were implemented. Although the Pentagon spent $22 million researching the viability of implementing an online voting system to afford Americans who live abroad an easy way to vote, the project was [http://technews.acm.org/articles/2004-6/0331w.html#item1 later scrapped] because of security concerns. Despite this, proponents of online voting are still present in Washington and precedent for successful online systems in [http://technews.acm.org/articles/2003-5/1112w.html#item11 Canadian] and [http://news.com.com/Estonia+pulls+off+nationwide+Net+voting/2100-1028_3-5898115.html Estonian] government already exist, so the future of whether online voting will become a reality in the States remains uncertain.

CSC 379:Week 4, Group 5

2007-07-26T23:27:02Z

Jwbreedi:

=Mapping / Google Street View=
Many are concerned about the invasiveness of satellite/aerospace imaging. Governments have complained of risks related to the availability of images of sensitive military or strategic sites, sometimes requesting obfuscation or blackouts of the compromising images. With the expansion of mapping technologies to the street level (see links below), more people have become concerned about how invasive to their privacy public photography can be. Amongst many lawful and beneficial uses, mapping technologies have also made it easier for planning crimes.

==Google Mapping Technology==

===Ethical implications of mapping technologies===

===Should mapping technologies comply with the laws of every country that has access their services even if they are not located there?===

===Are requests for censorship of public photography ethical? When? ===

===As mapping imagery increases in coverage and resolution over time, should there be limits set or censorship mandated to protect the public from lawful but invasive and sometimes unwanted photography?===

===Emerging Google Map Features===
*[http://www.google.com/help/faq_clicktocall.html Click-to-call Feature]

==Google Street View==

===Overview===

Google recently launched a new tool called "Street View", which allowed users to view street-level images of selected major cities in the US. Although such images are legal, many claim that posting them on the internet without consent or any apparent censorship violates their privacy.

===Concerns about Lack of Censorship===

One of the largest concerns among critics of Street View is that Google made no effort to censor peoples' faces or license plate numbers, so individuals and their vehicles are easily identifiable to whoever views the images. Also, these photographs were taken without first making people aware that they were about the be photographed. Many say this is unethical because it takes away a person's choice to be viewable by millions and also has the potential to catch some people in embarrassing or unfavorable situations. For example, photographs have been found of individuals whose faces are easily visible getting arrested, sunbathing nude and urinating on the side of a road.

Critics argue against this point, stating that all of these things could be seen by people simply driving down the street in their normal lives. Public photography is neither new nor illegal in the US. Also, Google has stated that there's a system in place that allows users to flag inappropriate or sensitive imagery for review to be removed. Critics point out that someone should not be engaging in embarrassing activity in public unless they're prepared to have the public see them doing it. Also, Google has said that they understand peoples' privacy concerns in some areas, such as photographing peoples' children, and say that they are putting loose restrictions on what may be flagged for review to help accommodate for those concerns. Google stated that it avoided photographing anonymous organizations such as women's refuge and drug rehabilitation centers.

===Concerns about Stalking===

Some argue that this technology can be used to stalk individuals, however this argument most often stems from the erroneous assumption that the photos are updated in real-time, which they're not. They're simply snapshots of a moment in time weeks or months prior and can't be used to ascertain a person's location at any particular moment.

==Resources==
===Relevant External Links:===
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/01/technology/01private.html Google Zooms In Too Close for Some (New York Times)]
* [http://www.boingboing.net/2007/06/05/google_street_view_a.html Public Opinion on Google Street View (Boing Boing)]
* [http://www.mcwetboy.net/maproom/2007/06/google_street_v.php Privacy Concerns Raised about Google Street View (Maproom)]
* [http://mashable.com/2007/05/31/top-15-google-street-view-sightings/ A Collection of Notable Sightings found with Google Street View (Mashable)]

CSC 379:Week 4, Group 5

2007-07-26T23:25:04Z

Jwbreedi:

=Mapping / Google Street View=
Many are concerned about the invasiveness of satellite/aerospace imaging. Governments have complained of risks related to the availability of images of sensitive military or strategic sites, sometimes requesting obfuscation or blackouts of the compromising images. With the expansion of mapping technologies to the street level (see links below), more people have become concerned about how invasive to their privacy public photography can be. Amongst many lawful and beneficial uses, mapping technologies have also made it easier for planning crimes.

==Google Mapping Technology==

===Ethical implications of mapping technologies===

===Should mapping technologies comply with the laws of every country that has access their services even if they are not located there?===

===Are requests for censorship of public photography ethical? When? ===

===As mapping imagery increases in coverage and resolution over time, should there be limits set or censorship mandated to protect the public from lawful but invasive and sometimes unwanted photography?===

===Emerging Google Map Features===
*[http://www.google.com/help/faq_clicktocall.html Click-to-call Feature]

==Google Street View==

Google recently launched a new tool called "Street View", which allowed users to view street-level images of selected major cities in the US. Although such images are legal, many claim that posting them on the internet without consent or any apparent censorship violates their privacy.

One of the largest concerns among critics of Street View is that Google made no effort to censor peoples' faces or license plate numbers, so individuals and their vehicles are easily identifiable to whoever views the images. Also, these photographs were taken without first making people aware that they were about the be photographed. Many say this is unethical because it takes away a person's choice to be viewable by millions and also has the potential to catch some people in embarrassing or unfavorable situations. For example, photographs have been found of individuals whose faces are easily visible getting arrested, sunbathing nude and urinating on the side of a road.

Critics argue against this point, stating that all of these things could be seen by people simply driving down the street in their normal lives. Public photography is neither new nor illegal in the US. Also, Google has stated that there's a system in place that allows users to flag inappropriate or sensitive imagery for review to be removed. Critics point out that someone should not be engaging in embarrassing activity in public unless they're prepared to have the public see them doing it. Also, Google has said that they understand peoples' privacy concerns in some areas, such as photographing peoples' children, and say that they are putting loose restrictions on what may be flagged for review to help accommodate for those concerns. Google stated that it avoided photographing anonymous organizations such as women's refuge and drug rehabilitation centers.

Some argue that this technology can be used to stalk individuals, however this argument most often stems from the erroneous assumption that the photos are updated in real-time, which they're not. They're simply snapshots of a moment in time weeks or months prior and can't be used to ascertain a person's location at any particular moment.

==Resources==
===Relevant External Links:===
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/01/technology/01private.html Google Zooms In Too Close for Some (New York Times)]
* [http://www.boingboing.net/2007/06/05/google_street_view_a.html Public Opinion on Google Street View (Boing Boing)]
* [http://www.mcwetboy.net/maproom/2007/06/google_street_v.php Privacy Concerns Raised about Google Street View (Maproom)]
* [http://mashable.com/2007/05/31/top-15-google-street-view-sightings/ A Collection of Notable Sightings found with Google Street View (Mashable)]

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 2

2007-07-13T19:01:47Z

Jwbreedi:

=GNU General Public License=

==Overview==
"Originally released in 1989, The GNU General Public License, often called the GNU GPL for short, is a software license used by most GNU programs, and by more than half of all free software packages." from the [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html#GPL GNU web site] The GPL was created by [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman Richard Stallman] who created the GNU project and a leader in the free software movement. Unlike more permissive licenses which place little restriction on the end use of covered products, the GPL contains specific restrictions and stipulations on GPL-licensed works. Among other things, the current GNU GPL (version 3) mandates...
#That GPL software may be sold for commercial or other profit purposes at any cost...
#That regardless of software cost, a copy of the software package's original source code must be made available for free when any binary versions of GPL software are being distributed...
#That if territorial law prohibits any of the stipulations in the GPL from being upheld, GPL software may not be distributed at all in that locality...
#That a copy of the GPL license be distributed in full with any distributed GPL works...
#That the source code of GPL-covered works may be freely compiled, copied, modified, or improved by anyone...
#That an executable program covered under the GPL may be reproduced freely by anyone...
#That any software which results from modification of GPL work, or of which GPL-covered source code is a portion, must be licensed under the GPL...
#That GPL-licensed software may not be cross-licensed by any means which would restrict the liberties and requirements set in place by the GPL (ie, by a corporate contract, or a more restrictive license)...
#That GPL-licensed software must not be run on a platform which prohibits the running of modified GPL software...
#That no warranty whatsoever be issued for GPL software...
#That works covered under any version of the GPL are automatically covered under the newest version of the GPL as new versions of the license are released.
==Discussion Questions==

===What is the impact of GPL use?===
**A developer that wishes to release thier code free and open source can do so and not worry about future changes of their code ending up in none free propriety software by releasing their code under the GLP. Others can modify and change software to meet their needs, but any thing that is derived from GPL code must again be released under the GPL.
**If a developer wishes to use some code from a GPL project in one of thier own, they can not unless the new project will be liscened under the GPL. Some have criticized the GPL in acting like a virus as it gets attached to antying that uses GPL code. A [http://kaybee.org:81/~kirk/GPL.html View] as to why GPL should not be used
**GPL and other open source code licenses allows for many more developers to look and and find bugs and make improvements to software Then in proprietary software.
*** The many different distributions of linux is the most popular GPL example
*** Fire fox and Open Officer are releasesd under the [http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.html LGPL] or Lesser General Public License
===What are the ethical considerations for licenses like GPL that require their adoption if work licensed under it is incorporated into a parent work, with additional stipulations that include the acceptance of the most current version of the GPL license?===

===An Examination of a Recent Related Event: The Microsoft/Novell partnership===

Recently [http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/nov06/11-02MSNovellPR.mspx Microsoft partnered with their rival Novell], the makers of Suse Linux, in an effort to optimize virtualization for each other's operating systems, among other promised features. Since Suse Linux is covered under the GNU General Public License, this raised some unique concerns. GPL licenses specify that source code is available for free and can be freely modified and redistributed (given you adhere to the other stipulations of the GPL), however, Microsoft is paying a royalty to Novell to use and modify their products. Even though legally this agreement is valid, many developers who have contributed their work to Suse over the years with the understanding that it would be covered under the GPL feel betrayed by this and consider it a breach of the agreement.

Another ethical dilemma arises when one considers that the GPL agreement included patent protection for Novell customers only if Microsoft's intellectual property was discovered in Linux. However, Novell has not yet officially acknowledged that Linux infringes on Microsoft's patents.

Some argue that an agreement to make operating systems better optimized for one another as the demand for servers to run multiple operating systems increases can only be beneficial to customers, companies and the development community as a whole.

You can read more about the announcement, reactions and criticism at these external links:
*[http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html GNU Agreement which covers all of Suse Linux]
*[http://news.com.com/Microsoft+makes+Linux+pact+with+Novell/2100-1016_3-6132119.html The Announcement]
*[http://techp.org/petition/show/1 Reaction from some GNU Software Developers]

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 2

2007-07-12T23:20:37Z

Jwbreedi:

=GNU General Public License=

==Overview==

==Discussion Questions==

* '''What is the impact of GPL use?'''

* '''What are the ethical considerations for licenses like GPL that require their adoption if work licensed under it is incorporated into a parent work, with additional stipulations that include the acceptance of the most current version of the GPL license?'''

==An Examination of a Recent Related Event: The Microsoft/Novell partnership==

Recently [http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/nov06/11-02MSNovellPR.mspx Microsoft partnered with their rival Novell], the makers of Suse Linux, in an effort to optimize virtualization for each other's operating systems, among other promised features. Since Suse Linux is covered under the GNU General Public License, this raised some unique concerns. GNU licenses cover only free programs but with this new agreement Microsoft will be paying a royalty to distribute Suse Linux Enterprise. Even though legally this agreement is valid, many developers who have contributed their work to Suse over the years with the understanding that it would be covered under the GNU feel betrayed by this and consider it a breach of the agreement.

Another ethical dilemma arises when one considers that the GPL agreement included patent protection for Novell customers only if Microsoft's intellectual property was discovered in Linux. However, Novell has not yet officially acknowledged that Linux infringes on Microsoft's patents.

Some argue that an agreement to make operating systems better optimized for one another as the demand for servers to run multiple operating systems increases can only be beneficial to customers, companies and the development community as a whole.

You can read more about the announcement, reactions and criticism at these external links:
*[http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html GNU Agreement which covers all of Suse Linux]
*[http://news.com.com/Microsoft+makes+Linux+pact+with+Novell/2100-1016_3-6132119.html The Announcement]
*[http://techp.org/petition/show/1 Reaction from some GNU Software Developers]

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 2

2007-07-12T23:20:23Z

Jwbreedi:

=GNU General Public License=

==Overview==

==Discussion Questions==

* '''What is the impact of GPL use?'''

* '''What are the ethical considerations for licenses like GPL that require their adoption if work licensed under it is incorporated into a parent work, with additional stipulations that include the acceptance of the most current version of the GPL license?'''

==An Examination of a Recent Related Event: The Microsoft/Novell partnership==

Recently [http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/nov06/11-02MSNovellPR.mspx Microsoft partnered with their rival Novell], the makers of Suse Linux, in an effort to optimize virtualization for each other's operating systems, among other promised features. Since Suse Linux is covered under the GNU General Public License, this raised some unique concerns. GNU licenses cover only free programs but with this new agreement Microsoft will be paying a royalty to distribute Suse Linux Enterprise. Even though legally this agreement is valid, many developers who have contributed their work to Suse over the years with the understanding that it would be covered under the GNU feel betrayed by this and consider it a breach of the agreement.

Another ethical dilemma arises when one considers that the GPL agreement included patent protection for Novell customers only if Microsoft's intellectual property was discovered in Linux. However, Novell has not yet officially acknowledged that Linux infringes on Microsoft's patents.

Some argue that an agreement to make operating systems better optimized for one another as the demand for servers to run multiple operating systems increases can only be beneficial to customers, companies and the development community as a whole.

You can read more about the announcement, reactions and criticism at these links:
*[http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html GNU Agreement which covers all of Suse Linux]
*[http://news.com.com/Microsoft+makes+Linux+pact+with+Novell/2100-1016_3-6132119.html The Announcement]
*[http://techp.org/petition/show/1 Reaction from some GNU Software Developers]

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 2

2007-07-12T23:19:43Z

Jwbreedi:

=GNU General Public License=

==Overview==

==Discussion Questions==

* '''What is the impact of GPL use?'''

* '''What are the ethical considerations for licenses like GPL that require their adoption if work licensed under it is incorporated into a parent work, with additional stipulations that include the acceptance of the most current version of the GPL license?'''

==An Examination of a Recent Related Event: The Microsoft/Novell partnership==

Recently [http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/nov06/11-02MSNovellPR.mspx Microsoft partnered with their rival Novell], the makers of Suse Linux, in an effort to optimize virtualization for each other's operating systems, among other promised features. Since Suse Linux is covered under the GNU General Public License, this raised some unique concerns. GNU licenses cover only free programs but with this new agreement Microsoft will be paying a royalty to distribute Suse Linux Enterprise. Even though legally this agreement is valid, many developers who have contributed their work to Suse over the years with the understanding that it would be covered under the GNU feel betrayed by this and consider it a breach of the agreement.

Another ethical dilemma arises when one considers that the GPL agreement included patent protection for Novell customers only if Microsoft's intellectual property was discovered in Linux. However, Novell has not yet officially acknowledged that Linux infringes on Microsoft's patents.

Some argue that an agreement to make operating systems better optimized for one another as the demand for servers to run multiple operating systems increases can only be beneficial to customers, companies and the development community as a whole.

You can read more about the announcement, reactions and criticism at these links:
[http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html GNU Agreement which covers all of Suse Linux]
[http://news.com.com/Microsoft+makes+Linux+pact+with+Novell/2100-1016_3-6132119.html The Announcement]
[http://techp.org/petition/show/1 Reaction from some GNU Software Developers]

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 2

2007-07-12T23:19:20Z

Jwbreedi:

=GNU General Public License=

==Overview==

==Discussion Questions==

* '''What is the impact of GPL use?'''

* '''What are the ethical considerations for licenses like GPL that require their adoption if work licensed under it is incorporated into a parent work, with additional stipulations that include the acceptance of the most current version of the GPL license?'''

* '''What ethical considerations are highlighted by the patent sharing/protection agreement between Microsoft and Novell?'''
==An Examination of a Recent Related Event: The Microsoft/Novell partnership==

Recently [http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/nov06/11-02MSNovellPR.mspx Microsoft partnered with their rival Novell], the makers of Suse Linux, in an effort to optimize virtualization for each other's operating systems, among other promised features. Since Suse Linux is covered under the GNU General Public License, this raised some unique concerns. GNU licenses cover only free programs but with this new agreement Microsoft will be paying a royalty to distribute Suse Linux Enterprise. Even though legally this agreement is valid, many developers who have contributed their work to Suse over the years with the understanding that it would be covered under the GNU feel betrayed by this and consider it a breach of the agreement.

Another ethical dilemma arises when one considers that the GPL agreement included patent protection for Novell customers only if Microsoft's intellectual property was discovered in Linux. However, Novell has not yet officially acknowledged that Linux infringes on Microsoft's patents.

Some argue that an agreement to make operating systems better optimized for one another as the demand for servers to run multiple operating systems increases can only be beneficial to customers, companies and the development community as a whole.

You can read more about the announcement, reactions and criticism at these links:
[http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html GNU Agreement which covers all of Suse Linux]
[http://news.com.com/Microsoft+makes+Linux+pact+with+Novell/2100-1016_3-6132119.html The Announcement]
[http://techp.org/petition/show/1 Reaction from some GNU Software Developers]

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 2

2007-07-12T23:08:09Z

Jwbreedi:

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 2

2007-07-12T23:04:10Z

Jwbreedi:

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 2

2007-07-12T23:03:07Z

Jwbreedi:

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 2

2007-07-12T22:58:58Z

Jwbreedi: