When you lie, you act unethically. If your lies hurt people you will be prosecuted. When you are on a border line, you might get away… But many will tell you that staying on that thin line and not crossing it is very hard. Vasiliy Galashev (or “Reiki Master Ardi Galash” as he calls himself) found that the hard way. He forgot that swindling (when proven) is a crime as one form of theft. Furthermore, it wasn’t enough for him to deceive (unethical) and get money for that (swindling is often hard to prove, so this is the border line), he decided to sexually assault (illegal) his credulous patients. He will pay dearly for his crimes and his filthy behavior.

Today I have a really short discussion. Is it ethical (as usual- legality of the action is not in question here) to post names/photos/portraits of people who “allegedly” did something bad? Without even thinking of what harm it can do I say that it is unethical unless the person gives permission to do so… But if one looks at the harm then there should be no question at all- it is completely unethical. Ruining life of a person who might later be found not guilty on any charges is unethical and immoral. If he or she is found guilty, then it is of course another story… Here is an example of what I’m talking about: CNN: American charged in alleged plot to assassinate President Bush

Some say that politics and ethics have nothing to do with each other and any political action cannot and must not be assessed from ethical point of view. Is it really true?

In the past couple of years Latvia (an xUSSR country) passed a number of laws concerning Russian language. Russian language was turned into a foreign language (i.e. not second official language); the area of its official application was narrowed. Use of Russian language in schools, especially in middle, high, and professional, was also restricted (“at least 60 percent of all classes taught in Latvia”s public schools for Russian minority must now be taught in Latvian”). I don’t want to talk about why it happened, what impact it will have, and how to “fix” it, as I don’t want to be too biased. There are many websites out there that represent at least three different points of view (depending on whether you are a conservative Latvian, Latvian Russian, or other ). For our purposes it will suffice to say that these laws will directly concern “around a third of Latvia”s population of 2.35 million”.

Latvia certainly has the right to pass such laws, but I argue that such legislation is unjust (and thus unethical in this case). Politics is not about being ethical, but this time it would”ve benefited Latvia to try to be more ethical. By passing these laws Latvia broke even more bonds with Russia (which is politically and economically a bad decision for Latvia) and made European Union wary… Thus, Latvia, by making an unethical decision, made a bad political decision.

If you want to read more about how some languages are favored over others, I suggest you read an article called “Urban Legend: German almost became the official language of the US” and especially this one (as it actually has a connection to the topic I discussed above): “Requiring English / Accepting Other Languages in the U.S.”

When we were discussing the Harvard “pron-dean” we covered a lot of issues, but one thing we”ve covered just too briefly. It is an issue of “confidential information” (as apposed to “personal life”). We talked about the professor, the technician, and even the reporter, but didn’t talk much about how the reporter got such information in the first place. First the reporter was somehow tipped off (by someone from the inside?) and then he got sufficient information to write the article (from someone from the inside!).

Similar actions are called “insider trading” in the exchange and investment field and are considered to be “illegal conduct”. Analogously, UK adopted Official Secrets Act that every “member of the security and intelligence services” (i.e. police officer) has to sign. To protect themselves some choose to make their employees and partners sign a nondisclosure agreement. All three methods (certainly there are many more) are used to bring this “unethical behavior” to the level of “illegal behavior”. Apparently Harvard school doesn’t have any of such processes in place or were unable to find the person behind the “insider trading”.

Certainly, as with any other unethical actions, this one has various levels. One can tip off the police or the other way around, and tip off a criminal. No matter whether you signed some kind of an agreement or not, you are bound by the “nondisclosure ethics” and when you reveal personal information you are behaving unethically.

One question that I could never answer completely is whether one has the right to undermine the law to enforce it. I don’t want to talk about “human rights” this time, just ethics and possibly morals. Let’s consider a few examples. First I will illustrate a simple, yet specific case and then go on from there…

Consider a “warez website”. It is illegal to distribute “pirated software” and there various ways to enforce the law in this case, but you yourself decided to step in. You do a (D)DoS attack on the website. Putting aside the issue of rights (whether you have the right to intervene or not), did you do an ethical thing, as not only “warez” is illegal, but also such attacks? I think this is unethical for plenty of reasons, one of which (by no means main and only) could be that the website could”ve been hosted a long with a number of other websites that will also be down during the attack.

Now consider a website used by terrorists to communicate with each other (assume this website(s) actually exist(s)). This time it is the government who steps in and the only way to found out what terrorists are planning and possibly to prevent another deadly terrorist attack is for FBIa href=”http://www.nsa.gov/" target=”_blank”>NSADHS to hack this website. This time it is much harder to say whether it is ethical or not. My background makes me say that in no way does “purpose justifies means” and so such action will be unethical. Should the FBI do it? It doesn’t really matter, as the FBI will still do it to protect me among all, keeping in mind that it will be unethical and will undermine the law itself (Orwell: “Everybody is equal, but some are more equal than others”).

We must not undermine the law to enforce it, but can we do it to protect human rights? If we value human life higher then everything else, then we will answer “Yes!”

P.S. As you can see I’m still not satisfied with the “answer” I got. I say “yes”, but I’m not content. Why? Probably because my answer goes against my ethics and my beliefs. I believe that purpose does not justify means, but I sometimes say otherwise. Am I a hypocrite? Tell me, as I’m afraid I am.

P.P.S. Read Elena Bonner”s (Sakharov“s widow) statement on Russian elections. This is not totally on the subject because it doesn’t talk about law and ethics, but rather ethics and politics, but it is still talking about purpose and means… Plus Bonner is really smart, so it won’t do any harm if you read this short article ;)

Starting this week I will begin posting here at least twice a week and will also start taking part in discussions @ CSC4735: Discussion Area.

As a first post…

What is a difference between morals and ethics? I think that morals are universal values that some might choose to follow, while ethics are common behavior rules agreed upon by a group of people. Thus, one can follow different ethics in different groups and still be an ethical person. As an example, it is unethical for a man to come into a synagogue (Jewish church) with head uncovered, which the reverse is true for an Orthodox church. At the same time, if I am to be a moral person, I am not to steal… Whatever country, building, or society I may be.

What is your take on this? Leave comments if you have an interesting idea that you want to share…

The European Union might pass a law that would legalize software patents. Can this law change software industry or it won’t have any effect on the industry at all? Is it ethical to be against it? For it? No Software Patents! website is arguing that “our prosperity, and some of our freedoms, will be in jeopardy” if the law is passed and that is would be “a huge mistake”.

This is a first “test” message…

cout(“Hello worldn”); :D

…Don’t mind the date on this “message”. I’ve set up the date this way so that it is the only message on the page and so that webliography doesn’t distract you from the messages. This page will be constantly updated as the semester progresses, so keep coming back…

In reverse-time order:

Ethical Consumer looks at the social and environmental records of various companies and lists them. It tells us that it would be wrong to consume what “unethical” businesses produce: “Ethical purchasing put simply is buying things that are made ethically by companies that act ethically.” They mostly target brand names, but smaller companies also end up in their extensive “black list”.

Utilitarianism: Past, Present, and Future contains a huge hierarchical list of various resources available on the Net and pertaining to Utilitarianism. This website is bound to have more then you will ever need to know about it ;)…

The Digital Rights Management Home Page is a great website that covers every singe aspect of this technology. Extensive pros and cons sections, history, and even dictionary of terms. A superb choice for anyone researching this topic.

TVHarmony is a weblog “devoted to home entertainment technology including PVR products like Tivo, Video Servers and Distribution.” It has latest news and a lot of articles on various ethical aspects of the entertainment industry (i.e. a really short article on DRM perfectly describes my point of view on the issue).

RORER is a Russian context based web advertisement company. What makes the company special is a unique (as far as I know) ethical filter that blocks advertisement on webpages with “negative information”. Thus, there will be no ads for cheap cars in a news article about a car wreck and no ads for cheap tickets next to an article about plane hostages.

Center for Business Ethics and Corporate Governance helps make business practices more transparent and ethical in Russia and the region. The website has some information on current situation with business ethics in Russia and explanations as to what they should be and why. English version seems to have a little less info, but most of it is still there. Good resource for people interested in finding out what business ethics are in the first place.

Center for Palliative Care Studies website “offers expert support to hospitals, nursing homes, health systems, hospices, and other organizations that serve individuals nearing the end of life”. They wrote numerous books about care of terminally-ill people and have many excerpts from these books on this website.

Twenty Improvements in End-of-Life Care is a list of things that “clinicians” (people looking after patients) can easily do to improve life of their terminally-ill patients and their relatives. This list shows how hard it is to manage such things and might just change your opinion on euthanasia one way or another.

“There is great danger in legalising assisted suicide”, says Mary Joseph in this article on euthanasia. Mary has a very interesting look on the subject even though, here in US, the Florida case is better known right now.

Requiring English / Accepting Other Languages in the U.S. is an article by Jennifer and Peter Wipf. They provide a short history of the subject and cases for and against it. This is, among other things, an important ethical question that many disregard by simply comparing US to countries that do have an official language.

Elena Bonner”s statement is a statement released by Elena Bonner (Sakharov“s widow) on previous presidential elections in Russia. She talks here about morals, ethics, and politics. Whether you agree with her or not, you still should read this article as she is extremely intelligent and many share her views on ethics.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a new government department that provides “the unifying core for the vast national network of organizations and institutions involved in efforts to secure our nation [from terrorist attacks].” The website has information on various citizen programs, government agencies, and even business that are protecting US from the terrorist threat. It also has additional information on the “Don’t Be Afraid, Be Ready” campaign.

NSA is a beautiful website that belongs to National Security Agency (NSA) and the Central Security Service (CSS). NSA (and CSS) is all about knowledge and whatever knowledge they are willing to give up to the public is available right here… Not much, but better then nothing.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (the FBI) is a US agency responsible for various important investigations, including computer crimes. The website has information about war on terrorism, various current and old cases, and list of Most Wanted with photographs (btw, is it ethical to get money for helping the society catch dangerous people?)

The SITE Institute (stands for Search for International Terrorist Entities) is a website that belongs to a non-profit organization. It provides terrorist related information to government, media, and public. It has latest news related to terrorists, background information on various terrorist groups, and even a list of terrorist websites.

CSC4735: Discussion Area: Various ethical topics are discussed here by my classmates from the CSC-4735 class. It might be interesting to see what kind of ethics future and current Computer Science professionals have, it’s only a pity that only registered members can view these topics.

No Software Patents! This website is arguing that “our prosperity, and some of our freedoms, will be in jeopardy” if EU legalizes software patents and that is would be “a huge mistake”. It’s an ongoing issue and this website reflects only one side of it…