Expertiza_Wiki - User contributions [en]

CSC 379:Week 4, Group 6

2007-07-30T20:50:09Z

RTurner: /* Relevant External Links: */

=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.

As mapping technoligies increase and images become clearer more and more protesters begin claim these photos as an invasion of privacy. Many people are calling for censorship of these photos and think there should regulations set on the clarity of images. Even though these technologies pose great privacy and security issues for literally everyone in the world i we must decide if censorship of public photographpy is ethical. Many people feel that they should have the right to say who can photograph propert they own.

=Google Street View=
==Overview==
[http://http://maps.google.com/help/maps/streetview/ Google Street View] is a tool integrated into [http://maps.google.com Google Maps] that allows users to view routes from a street-level perspective. This tool is only available for select locations, usually large cities such as Miami and San Francisco. When using Street View, you are given a 360 degree view of the street from the perspective of a car on the street. The view is generated from actual photographs taken of the streets. There is a zoom feature incorporated into the view and people and private property are not censored by Google. Street View was developed as a tool to aid users in finding landmarks, shops, restaurants, and other points of interest in cities that would otherwise be foreign to a tourist or other traveler. Another touted feature is that you can take a 'virtual walk' around a Street View enabled city.

==Concerns==
===Individual's Rights===
There are several concerns that people have with Google Street View. Many people function under the assumption that their everyday actions are not being watched. Some of the Street View photographs, which are all readily accessible show people walking the streets or entering establishments. Most of these pictures seem harmless, but there are a few that show men walking into adult-themed bookstores, or women laying out sunbathing. Had these people known that they would be displayed to the world, they may have changed their plans for that particular day, and surely some of them would have never consented to these images being shown. While there are some obvious benefits to Street View, if even one person is offended by the content of the images then there is reason for concern of the ethicality of the tool. Some may argue that the pictures are taken from a public place, and would be visible to anyone who happened to be traveling through the area. While this is compelling, one must also consider the fact that the people photographed may not have had a problem with being seen by the general public in small numbers, but would object to being seen by the millions of people that use Google.

There are many questions that can be raised about Street View regarding individual's privacy rights. However, none break any actual laws since all pictures are taken in public places. Does that make it ok though? Is it ethical? If you are accidentally caught changing infront of the shower by Google Street View photographers should they remove the photo? Since it was obviously not their intent to take a picture of you naked it may be hard to hold them accountable. However, it would be in good ethical 'taste' to remove the pictures if so requested, eventhough it would not be required by law.
===Larger Scale Implications===
It's not just mapping on a street level that have ethical implications. Mapping technologies on a larger scale bring up other ethical issues. While being able to view satalite imagery may make it easier for you to find a place of business, it could also aid robbers in researching their next robbery victim. It could even help terrorists plan their next attack on a major landmark without even requiring them to visit their target. Satalite imagery could have a huge impact on national security. Should access to such information be restricted? and to who's laws should they conform to? This all depends on who has ownership of the information. If a Russian satalite is sailing over the United States and takes pictures of the White House they should be allowed to do whatever they want with those images, unless of course, they obtained them by breaking some law. This obviously has great implications if such information falls into the wrong hands, but, ethically, you can't deny or restrict someone use to something that is rightfully and legally theirs. The access to such information can not ethically be restricted, but perhaps the ways the information is obtained could.

==Regulation/Solutions==
Currently, Google has no real restriction on what will get put on the maps. They will remove an image if there is a request and sufficient justification, but they report that there have been 'very few' removal requests. This does not mean that people would not be offended by their image being on a globally-viewed map, it may just be that due to the nature of the maps, that people may be ignorant to the fact that their image is even there. While Google may be on solid legal ground, there are a few options that have been posed by online communities that may offer a more responsible approach.
===Possible Solution===
*Censoring out images of people: Google could simply 'blur' out the faces of people caught by their cameras. This would address some of the individual's rights concerns, but it still leaves some of the other issues unresolved.

=Resources=
===Relevant External Links:===
*[http://maps.google.com/ Google Maps]
* [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://jonsmith.greykitty.net/2007/07/09/google-street-view/ Google Street View at Arriving Somewhere]
* [http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0805/082405td2.htm Google satellite imaging software raises terrorism concerns]
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/20/technology/20image.html?ei=5090&en=fc8a8529ca004e0c&ex=1292734800&adxnnl=1&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1185755335-XtGDEBT8QrPTINYVSlN1wg Governments Tremble at Google's Bird's-Eye View]

CSC 379:Week 4, Group 6

2007-07-30T20:47:23Z

RTurner: /* Mapping / Google Street View */

=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.

As mapping technoligies increase and images become clearer more and more protesters begin claim these photos as an invasion of privacy. Many people are calling for censorship of these photos and think there should regulations set on the clarity of images. Even though these technologies pose great privacy and security issues for literally everyone in the world i we must decide if censorship of public photographpy is ethical. Many people feel that they should have the right to say who can photograph propert they own.

=Google Street View=
==Overview==
[http://http://maps.google.com/help/maps/streetview/ Google Street View] is a tool integrated into [http://maps.google.com Google Maps] that allows users to view routes from a street-level perspective. This tool is only available for select locations, usually large cities such as Miami and San Francisco. When using Street View, you are given a 360 degree view of the street from the perspective of a car on the street. The view is generated from actual photographs taken of the streets. There is a zoom feature incorporated into the view and people and private property are not censored by Google. Street View was developed as a tool to aid users in finding landmarks, shops, restaurants, and other points of interest in cities that would otherwise be foreign to a tourist or other traveler. Another touted feature is that you can take a 'virtual walk' around a Street View enabled city.

==Concerns==
===Individual's Rights===
There are several concerns that people have with Google Street View. Many people function under the assumption that their everyday actions are not being watched. Some of the Street View photographs, which are all readily accessible show people walking the streets or entering establishments. Most of these pictures seem harmless, but there are a few that show men walking into adult-themed bookstores, or women laying out sunbathing. Had these people known that they would be displayed to the world, they may have changed their plans for that particular day, and surely some of them would have never consented to these images being shown. While there are some obvious benefits to Street View, if even one person is offended by the content of the images then there is reason for concern of the ethicality of the tool. Some may argue that the pictures are taken from a public place, and would be visible to anyone who happened to be traveling through the area. While this is compelling, one must also consider the fact that the people photographed may not have had a problem with being seen by the general public in small numbers, but would object to being seen by the millions of people that use Google.

There are many questions that can be raised about Street View regarding individual's privacy rights. However, none break any actual laws since all pictures are taken in public places. Does that make it ok though? Is it ethical? If you are accidentally caught changing infront of the shower by Google Street View photographers should they remove the photo? Since it was obviously not their intent to take a picture of you naked it may be hard to hold them accountable. However, it would be in good ethical 'taste' to remove the pictures if so requested, eventhough it would not be required by law.
===Larger Scale Implications===
It's not just mapping on a street level that have ethical implications. Mapping technologies on a larger scale bring up other ethical issues. While being able to view satalite imagery may make it easier for you to find a place of business, it could also aid robbers in researching their next robbery victim. It could even help terrorists plan their next attack on a major landmark without even requiring them to visit their target. Satalite imagery could have a huge impact on national security. Should access to such information be restricted? and to who's laws should they conform to? This all depends on who has ownership of the information. If a Russian satalite is sailing over the United States and takes pictures of the White House they should be allowed to do whatever they want with those images, unless of course, they obtained them by breaking some law. This obviously has great implications if such information falls into the wrong hands, but, ethically, you can't deny or restrict someone use to something that is rightfully and legally theirs. The access to such information can not ethically be restricted, but perhaps the ways the information is obtained could.

==Regulation/Solutions==
Currently, Google has no real restriction on what will get put on the maps. They will remove an image if there is a request and sufficient justification, but they report that there have been 'very few' removal requests. This does not mean that people would not be offended by their image being on a globally-viewed map, it may just be that due to the nature of the maps, that people may be ignorant to the fact that their image is even there. While Google may be on solid legal ground, there are a few options that have been posed by online communities that may offer a more responsible approach.
===Possible Solution===
*Censoring out images of people: Google could simply 'blur' out the faces of people caught by their cameras. This would address some of the individual's rights concerns, but it still leaves some of the other issues unresolved.

=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://jonsmith.greykitty.net/2007/07/09/google-street-view/ Google Street View at Arriving Somewhere]
* [http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0805/082405td2.htm Google satellite imaging software raises terrorism concerns]
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/20/technology/20image.html?ei=5090&en=fc8a8529ca004e0c&ex=1292734800&adxnnl=1&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1185755335-XtGDEBT8QrPTINYVSlN1wg Governments Tremble at Google's Bird's-Eye View]

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 6

2007-07-14T15:28:43Z

RTurner: /* Overview */

=Software Patents=

==Overview==
*A patent protects an idea or concept relating to software.
*A patent must be:
**Novel: It must be new, not capitolize on an existing idea that is already in use.
**Nonobvious: You can't patent anything thought of a "common knowledge" or obvious. It should not be an obvious idea to the reasonable person.
**Useful
**Fully Disclosed: Meaning that a person should be able to create your idea simply by looking at the design in the patent.
*Most patents last for 20 years.
*Until 1981 in general computer programs were not patentable.
*Most software patents these days only protect the small algorithms and techniques that are the building blocks to larger programs and not entire programs.

'''Cottage Industries & Patents:'''
* What are the ethical implications of having businesses devoted solely to acquiring, holding, and enforcing patents through lawsuits? What are the costs and benefits posed by allowing these “cottage industries” to exist?
'''Links:'''

'''Patents & Competition:'''
* Often groups will not enforce patents through lawsuits due to the risk of their patents being found invalid. They have found that it is often more wise to acquire and hold patents as a deterrent to competition. These actions pose a risk to software developers that do not have patents of their own to balance the threats. Examine the ethical considerations of this practice and of the responses to counter patent litigation threats.
'''Links:'''

'''Patent Infringemaent:'''
*Patents on software are there to protect the labor, time, and money invested ny the creator during the developement of the software. However, many people believe that patents become just an obstacle to developing new software. Many people have begun patenting basic ideas that were already commonly in use in the industry. Often patents are intentionaly broad to make them more valuable. These basic patents are beginning to make it very difficult for the developement and distribution of new software. People have patented all simple code and ideas that are essential to developing higher level software. This means a software developer must negotiate with each patent holder he violates to try and obtain a license to use it. This is obviuosly making it much harder for a software developer to produce a legal product.
**'''With all these problem created by software patents what ethics are involved in the development of software that likely infringes on existing patents?'''
***One of the main criteria for a patent is it be novel and nonobvious, the problem with this is for many the US Patent Office employed no computer science professionals; so they had no idea what ideas and practices were considers basic and obvious and had been in use for years in the software developement field. This means that many of these patents should never been issued in the first place.
***Software patents do not cover entire programs. Patents only cover the specific algorithms and techniques to carry out a task in a program. All these small bits being patented makes it nearly impossible to use them to develope a large useful program.
***With the internet and sites like Google Patent Search it is becoming much easier to find and research patents in order to avoind infringement. This has made unintentional infringement a less likely event with patent information more widely available.
***Patents are however difficult, timely, and very expensive to obtain. This means that no matter how trivial or redundant a patent might be someone has put a great deal of effort into obtaining it and thus have a legitimate claim to ownership of the idea. This should also discourage people from just filing as many patents as possible as a way to make a profit.
*According to the US Constitution the purpose of patent is to "promote the progress of science and the useful arts." So the question is do software patents promote progress? It is most likely that they don't. Most software patents only hinder the progress of the field by forcing developers to deal with lawsuits, red tape, and licensing issues. Many people feel that patent laws need to be changed and more specific rules for software patents need to be developed.
'''Links:'''
*[http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/Patents/patents.html Software Patents]
*[http://www.uspto.gov/ United States Patent and Trademark Office]
*[http://www.google.com/patents Google Patent Search]

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 6

2007-07-14T15:28:13Z

RTurner: /* Overview */

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 6

2007-07-14T15:24:12Z

RTurner: /* Overview */

=Software Patents=

==Overview==
*A patent protects an idea or concept relating to software.
*A patent must be:
**Novel: It must be new, not capitolize on an existing idea that is already in use.
**Nonobvious: You can't patent anything thought of a "common knowledge" or obvious. It should not be an obvious idea to the reasonable person.
**Useful
**Fully Disclosed: Meaning that a person should be able to create your idea simply by looking at the design in the patent.
*Most patents last for 20 years.
*Until 1981 in general computer programs were not patentable.
*

'''Cottage Industries & Patents:'''
* What are the ethical implications of having businesses devoted solely to acquiring, holding, and enforcing patents through lawsuits? What are the costs and benefits posed by allowing these “cottage industries” to exist?
'''Links:'''

'''Patents & Competition:'''
* Often groups will not enforce patents through lawsuits due to the risk of their patents being found invalid. They have found that it is often more wise to acquire and hold patents as a deterrent to competition. These actions pose a risk to software developers that do not have patents of their own to balance the threats. Examine the ethical considerations of this practice and of the responses to counter patent litigation threats.
'''Links:'''

'''Patent Infringemaent:'''
*Patents on software are there to protect the labor, time, and money invested ny the creator during the developement of the software. However, many people believe that patents become just an obstacle to developing new software. Many people have begun patenting basic ideas that were already commonly in use in the industry. Often patents are intentionaly broad to make them more valuable. These basic patents are beginning to make it very difficult for the developement and distribution of new software. People have patented all simple code and ideas that are essential to developing higher level software. This means a software developer must negotiate with each patent holder he violates to try and obtain a license to use it. This is obviuosly making it much harder for a software developer to produce a legal product.
**'''With all these problem created by software patents what ethics are involved in the development of software that likely infringes on existing patents?'''
***One of the main criteria for a patent is it be novel and nonobvious, the problem with this is for many the US Patent Office employed no computer science professionals; so they had no idea what ideas and practices were considers basic and obvious and had been in use for years in the software developement field. This means that many of these patents should never been issued in the first place.
***Software patents do not cover entire programs. Patents only cover the specific algorithms and techniques to carry out a task in a program. All these small bits being patented makes it nearly impossible to use them to develope a large useful program.
***With the internet and sites like Google Patent Search it is becoming much easier to find and research patents in order to avoind infringement. This has made unintentional infringement a less likely event with patent information more widely available.
***Patents are however difficult, timely, and very expensive to obtain. This means that no matter how trivial or redundant a patent might be someone has put a great deal of effort into obtaining it and thus have a legitimate claim to ownership of the idea. This should also discourage people from just filing as many patents as possible as a way to make a profit.
*According to the US Constitution the purpose of patent is to "promote the progress of science and the useful arts." So the question is do software patents promote progress? It is most likely that they don't. Most software patents only hinder the progress of the field by forcing developers to deal with lawsuits, red tape, and licensing issues. Many people feel that patent laws need to be changed and more specific rules for software patents need to be developed.
'''Links:'''
*[http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/Patents/patents.html Software Patents]
*[http://www.uspto.gov/ United States Patent and Trademark Office]
*[http://www.google.com/patents Google Patent Search]

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 6

2007-07-14T15:21:15Z

RTurner: /* Overview */

=Software Patents=

==Overview==
*A patent protects an idea or concept relating to software.
*A patent must be:
**Novel: It must be new, not capitolize on an existing idea that is already in use.
**Nonobvious: You can't patent anything thought of a "common knowledge" or obvious. It should not be an obvious idea to the reasonable person.
**Useful
**Fully Disclosed: Meaning that a person should be able to create your idea simply by looking at the design in the patent.
*Most patent are last for 20 years.

'''Cottage Industries & Patents:'''
* What are the ethical implications of having businesses devoted solely to acquiring, holding, and enforcing patents through lawsuits? What are the costs and benefits posed by allowing these “cottage industries” to exist?
'''Links:'''

'''Patents & Competition:'''
* Often groups will not enforce patents through lawsuits due to the risk of their patents being found invalid. They have found that it is often more wise to acquire and hold patents as a deterrent to competition. These actions pose a risk to software developers that do not have patents of their own to balance the threats. Examine the ethical considerations of this practice and of the responses to counter patent litigation threats.
'''Links:'''

'''Patent Infringemaent:'''
*Patents on software are there to protect the labor, time, and money invested ny the creator during the developement of the software. However, many people believe that patents become just an obstacle to developing new software. Many people have begun patenting basic ideas that were already commonly in use in the industry. Often patents are intentionaly broad to make them more valuable. These basic patents are beginning to make it very difficult for the developement and distribution of new software. People have patented all simple code and ideas that are essential to developing higher level software. This means a software developer must negotiate with each patent holder he violates to try and obtain a license to use it. This is obviuosly making it much harder for a software developer to produce a legal product.
**'''With all these problem created by software patents what ethics are involved in the development of software that likely infringes on existing patents?'''
***One of the main criteria for a patent is it be novel and nonobvious, the problem with this is for many the US Patent Office employed no computer science professionals; so they had no idea what ideas and practices were considers basic and obvious and had been in use for years in the software developement field. This means that many of these patents should never been issued in the first place.
***Software patents do not cover entire programs. Patents only cover the specific algorithms and techniques to carry out a task in a program. All these small bits being patented makes it nearly impossible to use them to develope a large useful program.
***With the internet and sites like Google Patent Search it is becoming much easier to find and research patents in order to avoind infringement. This has made unintentional infringement a less likely event with patent information more widely available.
***Patents are however difficult, timely, and very expensive to obtain. This means that no matter how trivial or redundant a patent might be someone has put a great deal of effort into obtaining it and thus have a legitimate claim to ownership of the idea. This should also discourage people from just filing as many patents as possible as a way to make a profit.
*According to the US Constitution the purpose of patent is to "promote the progress of science and the useful arts." So the question is do software patents promote progress? It is most likely that they don't. Most software patents only hinder the progress of the field by forcing developers to deal with lawsuits, red tape, and licensing issues. Many people feel that patent laws need to be changed and more specific rules for software patents need to be developed.
'''Links:'''
*[http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/Patents/patents.html Software Patents]
*[http://www.uspto.gov/ United States Patent and Trademark Office]
*[http://www.google.com/patents Google Patent Search]

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 6

2007-07-14T15:02:16Z

RTurner: /* Overview */

=Software Patents=

==Overview==

'''Cottage Industries & Patents:'''
* What are the ethical implications of having businesses devoted solely to acquiring, holding, and enforcing patents through lawsuits? What are the costs and benefits posed by allowing these “cottage industries” to exist?
'''Links:'''

'''Patents & Competition:'''
* Often groups will not enforce patents through lawsuits due to the risk of their patents being found invalid. They have found that it is often more wise to acquire and hold patents as a deterrent to competition. These actions pose a risk to software developers that do not have patents of their own to balance the threats. Examine the ethical considerations of this practice and of the responses to counter patent litigation threats.
'''Links:'''

'''Patent Infringemaent:'''
*Patents on software are there to protect the labor, time, and money invested ny the creator during the developement of the software. However, many people believe that patents become just an obstacle to developing new software. Many people have begun patenting basic ideas that were already commonly in use in the industry. Often patents are intentionaly broad to make them more valuable. These basic patents are beginning to make it very difficult for the developement and distribution of new software. People have patented all simple code and ideas that are essential to developing higher level software. This means a software developer must negotiate with each patent holder he violates to try and obtain a license to use it. This is obviuosly making it much harder for a software developer to produce a legal product.
**'''With all these problem created by software patents what ethics are involved in the development of software that likely infringes on existing patents?'''
***One of the main criteria for a patent is it be novel and nonobvious, the problem with this is for many the US Patent Office employed no computer science professionals; so they had no idea what ideas and practices were considers basic and obvious and had been in use for years in the software developement field. This means that many of these patents should never been issued in the first place.
***Software patents do not cover entire programs. Patents only cover the specific algorithms and techniques to carry out a task in a program. All these small bits being patented makes it nearly impossible to use them to develope a large useful program.
***With the internet and sites like Google Patent Search it is becoming much easier to find and research patents in order to avoind infringement. This has made unintentional infringement a less likely event with patent information more widely available.
***Patents are however difficult, timely, and very expensive to obtain. This means that no matter how trivial or redundant a patent might be someone has put a great deal of effort into obtaining it and thus have a legitimate claim to ownership of the idea. This should also discourage people from just filing as many patents as possible as a way to make a profit.
*According to the US Constitution the purpose of patent is to "promote the progress of science and the useful arts." So the question is do software patents promote progress? It is most likely that they don't. Most software patents only hinder the progress of the field by forcing developers to deal with lawsuits, red tape, and licensing issues. Many people feel that patent laws need to be changed and more specific rules for software patents need to be developed.
'''Links:'''
*[http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/Patents/patents.html Software Patents]
*[http://www.uspto.gov/ United States Patent and Trademark Office]
*[http://www.google.com/patents Google Patent Search]

CSC 379:Week 2, Group 6

2007-07-14T15:01:55Z