Computer Ethics: What is it?
------
The Core Values of Computer Ethics and The Development of
Computer Ethics Through History
Written by
Andrew Cove
“The hour is very late, and the choice of good and evil
knocks at the door.”
(Wiener 1989 Pg 186)
Introduction:
Computer Ethics is a broad term which, with the accelerated growth and awareness of
cyber crime, cyber terrorism, computer security issues and the advance of digital
forensics, has evolved rapidly over the past decade. Where ethics can be defined as
“our conduct relating to motives, morals and character”1, defining computer ethics is
not simply a case of ‘joining the dots’ by placing the word computer in front of the
word ethics. Instead, Computer ethics is a vast minefield of important social and
theological choices that, moving forwards through and beyond the 21st Century, will
help guide our progress and the way in which we achieve it. Computers Ethics is now
being recognised as an important branch of practical philosophy2 where, across the
multiple layers of computing it will provide the guiding principles and ideologies by
which academics, professionals, experts and everyone else who has access to or uses a
computer may abide by. Stahl (2008) raises the point that “On the most basic level,
humans have ethical intuitions which leads them to believe that something is good or
bad.3” This naturally raises the question, are our ethical decisions around computers
directed because we are programmed to act a certain way or do computers and the
ethical concerns that they raise lead us to behave differently on a computer than we
would in a similar, non digital situation. Computer ethics is clearly an important subject
and therefore it is important, not only to be able to define what computer ethics is, but
also to trace its history, to understand its history and through this understanding, be
able to speculate with some degree of insight, into the future of computer ethics and
where it might take us.
History:
---
1 http://public.findlaw.com/library/pa-professional-responsibility-law.html
2 http://www.kdatagrid.com/ethics-computing-issues/
3 Researching Ethics and Morality in Information Systems : Some Guiding Questions: Stahl, B: 2008: Pg3
Page 2
Having searched the internet for a definitive answer to the question of global computer
access and come up with between 4% and 49%4 it is clear there is no accurate means of
answering this question but an educated estimate, considering the growth in mobile
phone ownership5 and the advent of smart phones which are in all essence, small
computers with a phone attached6, make it fair to assume that eventually, a higher
percentage of the world’s population, when expanding the definition of computer to
encompass smart phones and similar devices, will have access to a computer than
those who don’t. With the inevitability of such technological progress, there will be a
need for a clear understanding of what our digital and cyber responsibilities are across
all levels of society. In order to identify these responsibilities, we must first look at the
historical origins of computer ethics.
In its earliest form, the first recognisable pioneer to produce definable ideas on the
subject of computer ethics was Norbert Weiner, whose books ‘Cybernetics: Or Control
and Communication in the Animal and the Machine’ (1948)7 and ‘The Human Use of
Human Beings.’(1950)8 both helped define the early landscape of critical thinking on
computers and computer ethics. Coinciding with the invention of the EDSAC, regarded
as one of the first computers ever invented, at Cambridge University in 19509, Weiner’s
book ‘The Human Use of Human Beings’ published in the same year contains, in
appendix xxvi, a letter from Weiner addressed to an unnamed person in the military. In
the letter, Weiner is responding to a request for a copy of a paper which he had
written for the National Defence Research Committee10 the request coming in relation
to a project relating to controlled missiles. The logical, calculating and intelligent way
that Weiner rebuffs this request using sound ethical reasoning about the potential
dangerous use of technology to produce ill effects and harm rather than good, is a
compelling introduction to the writings and ideas of a man who was and still is at the
forefront of thinking on ethics in computing and technology. Weiner’s closing
paragraph in the letter...
“I am taking the liberty of calling this letter to the attention
of other people in scientific work. I believe it is only proper
that they should know of it in order to make their own
independent decisions, if similar situations should confront
them.”
(Wiener 1989 Pg xxviii)
---
4 http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_the_world's_population_own_a_computer and
http://askville.amazon.com/percentage-world's-population-owns-computers/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=5807671
http://www.chacha.com/question/what-percent-of-the-world's-population-owns-computers were the only two
sources I could find
5 http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=868 reports that mobile phone ownership has risen from 65% in
2001 to 81% in 2009.
6 http://ezinearticles.com/?What-Makes-A-Phone-A-Smartphone&id=5312717
7 Cybernetics: Or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. Paris : Weiner, N : (Hermann & Cie) &
Camb. Mass. (MIT Press) 1948
8 ‘The Human Use of Human Beings.’ Wiener. N : The Riverside Press (Houghton Mifflin Co.) : : Orig Pub 1950. Taken
from Reprinted 1989 Edition
9 http://www.computernostalgia.net/articles/EDSAC.htm
10 The Human Use of Human Beings.’ Wiener. N : The Riverside Press (Houghton Mifflin Co.) : Orig Pub 1950. Taken
from Reprinted 1989 Edition: App. xxvi-xxviii
Page 3
...can be seen as a call to arms to all his peers and colleagues in the scientific and
academic communities to make conscious, ethical decisions on how they distribute and
share their knowledge. What Weiner was doing was to place the responsibility squarely
with the people in possession of the knowledge, that as the gatekeepers to the
information and the resources to change the world, it needed to be done with the
proper intention.
Weiner’s influence is far reaching and modern scholar Bynum’s admiration for Weiner’s
theories are such that he wrote and published a paper solely on the impact of Weiner’s
writings in which he discusses the modern truths behind Weiner’s theories almost 30
years before computers were even beginning to enter the family home as personal
home computers.11 The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, in its article “Computer
and Information Ethics”, notes that the three relevant Weiner’s texts (within the field
of computer ethics) some 60 years later, still offer relative, effective guidelines and
present a “powerful foundation for today’s field of computer and information ethics” 12.
I will talk later about the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) in ethical terms and also
about how even in 195013 Weiner was able to predict not only the modern concept of
AI but also raise important ethical questions about the creation of AI and synthetic life
forms. What strikes me from Weiner’s writings is that he is not so much preaching
specific moral codes or ideas to people but more reminding people of the responsibility
to ask moral questions of what we do. There is never an instance where we should not
do something, but instead, a constant ethical responsibility to ask what would happen
if we did do it. His famous quote...
“We shall never receive the right answers to our questions
unless we ask the right questions.”
(Wiener 1989 Pg 186)
the doers through legitimate and ethical reasoning on their ideas. J. Robert
Oppenheimer, the scientific director of the Manhattan Project which led to the
invention and first use of the Nuclear Bomb in warfare, would years later in his role as
Chairman of the General Advisory Committee to the Atomic Energy Commission,
oppose further development of the hydrogen bomb14 only to have his justifiable ethical
concerns dismissed under a cloud of anti communist propaganda15. This commendable
standpoint that Oppenheimer took, echoes Weiner’s call to arms for the intellectually
enlightened to not only possess but also to demonstrate responsibility and ethical
judgement.
Through the following decade, without any opposing or strong contributing voices to
the subject, Weiner remained at the forefront of critical thinking on computer ethics
---
11 Bynum, T. (2005), “Norbert Wiener's Vision: the Impact of the ‘Automatic Age’ on our Moral Lives,” in R. Cavalier
(ed.), The Impact of the Internet on our Moral Lives, Albany, NY: SUNY Press,
12 http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-computer/#SomHisMil
13 The Human Use of Human Beings.’ Wiener. N : The Riverside Press (Houghton Mifflin Co.) : Orig Pub 1950. Taken
from Reprinted 1989 Edition: App. xxvi-xxviii
14 http://www.atomicarchive.com/Bios/Oppenheimer.shtml
15 Oppenheimer had his security clearance taken away in 1953 after being accused of having communist sympathies.
Page 4
until well into the 1960’s16. Several key advances not only in computer ethics, but also
in the growth and expansion of computer technology occurred in the 1960’s led, in part
by a German born scientist called Joseph Weizenbaum. Weizenbaum, born in Berlin in
1923, had fled Nazi Germany in the 1930’s and moved to the United States17 where, in
the 1950’s, he began working in computing. By 1963 Weizenbaum had joined MIT as a
visiting associate professor of computer science18 and over the next 3 years (generally
recognised as between 1964 and 196619) developed the groundbreaking ELIZA
computer program, recognised now as an important milestone in the development of
AI. Weizenbaum, based on his experiences with the ELIZA program, would later
become a prominent critic of AI and its implications. He found that many people took
the ELIZA program seriously and were talking to it as though it were a real
person, ”opening their hearts to it20” which ethically, Weizenbaum had problems with.
That human emotion was able to be driven by inhuman programmable advice disguised
as genuine human responses, raised important issues about the identity and ethics
surrounding computing and AI. Weizenbaum compared the ELIZA programs response
vectors to that of a real world fortune teller, whereby a patient would enter into a
dialogue with the program, with some pre determined hypothesis already held. This
hypothesis is then merely confirmed by the program through the illusion of
understanding and carefully generated responsive questioning based on this
understanding.21 In his seminal book “Computer Power and Human Reason: From
Judgment to Calculation”, first published in 1976, Weizenbaum raised two hugely
important questions regarding the advancement of AI, the second question raising
huge ethical implications on the subject of AI.
“Are there ideas that no machines will ever understand
because they relate to objectives that are inappropriate for
machines?”
(Weizenbaum, 1976 Pg 197)
machines would be used. In Computer Power and Human Reasons, Weizenbaum
distinguishes between reasoned and potentially unnecessary use of AI in machinery
and computing, separating the use of an Airplanes autopilot from that of a
computerised means of interviewing clinical out patients22. Weizenbaum’s arguement
that designing a program for a planes autopilot is ethically feasible because it is an
appropriate job for a machine to do, whereas giving a distinctly human function to a
machine, while possible, is not necessarily ethically correct or appropriate, that there is
no substitute for the human condition. Weizenbaum sums it up perfectly.
---
16 http://www.computerhottips.com/computer-history/History-Of-Computer-Ethics.html and
http://www.comphist.org/computing_history/new_page_5.htm are two of many resources that show little to no
computer ethics progress between 1950 and 1966
17 http://aipanic.com/rest-in-peace-joseph-weizenbaum/
18 http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/obit-weizenbaum-0310.html
19 http://www.science.uva.nl/museum/eliza.php
20 MIT TechTalk Vol 52 No 19 March 12 2008. Pg 2
21 Computer Power and Human Reason - From Judgment to Calculation: Weizenbaum. J: Freeman and Co. : 1976 : Pg
189
22 Computer Power and Human Reason - From Judgment to Calculation: Weizenbaum. J: Freeman and Co. : 1976 : Pg
207
Page 5
“Some things, humans know by virtue of having a human body.
No organism that does not have a human body can know these
things in the same way that a human knows them.”
(Weizenbaum, 1976 Pg 209)
As I have discussed earlier in the essay, even as far back as the 1950’s there has been
an ethical debate raging about this topic. Modern thinking on the ethics surrounding AI
is perhaps, in some ways, being shaped and guided by popular culture. Doomsayers in
Hollywood paint a picture of a world in ruin thanks to rampaging computers set free
with artificial intelligence. Blade Runner, I Robot, Surrogates, 2001: A Space Odyssey
and Alien all offer prime examples of dystopian futures where intelligent, synthetic
human beings are created and eventually malfunction, placing the lives and welfare of
the fictional humans in danger. In The Matrix films and The Terminator films, this is
even taken a step further, where machines seize control of central infrastructure and
rebel against their human creators on a large scale. That these films are successful,
generating huge global revenues and exposure, would perhaps suggest that a large
proportion of people see these movies and possibly have a subconscious bias against
the idea of artificial intelligence. As I have already discussed, Weizenbaum was
staunchly opposed ethically to the idea of allowing artificial intelligence a human like
freedom to perform tasks that should not be performed by artificial intelligence. James
Moor’s 1985 paper defining itself purely by its title “Are there decisions a computer
should never make?23” which echoes what Weizenbaum was saying in 1976.
Weizenbaum did not want a future where computers were making decisions that only
a human should. His quote...
“...there is an aspect to the human mind, the unconscious,
that cannot be explained by the information-processing
primitives... The concept of an intelligence, alien to certain
domains of thought and action, is crucial for understanding
what are perhaps the most important limits on artificial
intelligence.”
(Weizenbaum, 1976 Pg 197)
...again echoing the ethical question, how much humanity and reasoning can you give
to something that ultimately isn’t human? We are not at that point yet, but it is gettingcloser and closer and eventually, the decision of how much ‘life’ and ‘freedom’ we are
prepared to give to computers is going to be upon us. When that time comes, the
decisions made will need to be based on the strictest codes of morals and ethics.
Computer Crime:
What seems significant but rarely acknowledged is that 1966 was historically the year
of the first recorded computer crime, in which computer code was altered on the
system of a bank in order to stop an account from being classified as overdrawn24. Few
---
23 http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2676
24 There are a few websites that record this event, the two I used were
http://www.comphist.org/computing_history/new_page_5.htm and
Page 6
articles offer even a passing reference to this crime let alone stopping to consider its
contextual significance within the debate about computer ethics. Prior to 1966,
computer crime, though inevitable, had not yet been realised, after 1966, conceivably
as a reaction to the realisation of computer crime, the goal posts had been moved, so
to speak and computer crime had taken a physical form that needed serious attention
and recognition, not only from theorists and researchers but also from the worlds
lawmakers. The lack of both quality output and serious debate on computer ethics and
crime between 1948 and 1966 and then the accelerated growth in the area post 1966
is undeniable. It was in the 1960’s, Donn Parker rose to prominence in the field of
computer ethics, first becoming secretary of the ACM (Association for Computer
Machinery)25 and then shortly after in 1968, publishing the "Rules of Ethics in
Information Processing" in Communications of the ACM in 196826 in which he
acknowledges the development of academic study in computer science and also
identifies a few key areas of ethical areas relating to computers, these are: “...invasion
of privacy by use of the computer; implications of copyrighting computer programs;
and fraudulent programming trade schools.”27 Parker also acknowledges and describes
the first successful prosecution of a crime involving a computer as mentioned earlier,
going into significant detail on the methods and purposes of the crime. It is clear now
that Parker recognised that the realisation of computer crime was an important
milestone in computing and subsequently, the ethical concerns it raised are clearly
acknowledged in the creation of the aforementioned “Rules and Ethics in Information
Processing” document. Parker’s work can be seen as hugely influential to the subject of
computer ethics, producing a large body of work including books, papers, articles,
speeches and workshops which shaped and influenced the next generation of
computer ethics theory and debate28. From Parkers influence, it was clear to see that
computer crime and with it an ethical debate on computers, were becoming more and
more widely acknowledged though it wasn’t until 1970 that the term Computer Ethics
was first used and realised as a critical theory by Walter Maner29. Maner, who was
teaching Medical Ethics at University, had noticed that the use of computers in medical
ethics cases, lead to new, more complex levels emerging. Maner soon realised that a
unique field of ethics was required for computers alone30.
Terrell Ward Bynum states that throughout the 1970’s, the works of Parker, Maner and
Weizenbaum all helped to shape and guide the field of computer ethics31, until 1979
when Bynum himself became an important contributor to the study, initially by
developing a curriculum for a university course on computer ethics32. Computer Ethics
reached it “watershed year33” in 1985 with two significant milestones that not only
http://www.computerhottips.com/computer-history/History-Of-Computer-Ethics.html. It is also referenced in Rules
of Ethics in Information Processing: Parker, D.B. : Communications of the ACM Vol 11.No.3.March 1968
---
25 http://www.emr.org/products/UCE_overview/Bio_Parker.html
26 http://www.infosectoday.com/Articles/Intro_Computer_Ethics.htm
27 Rules of Ethics in Information Processing: Parker, D.B. : Communications of the ACM Vol 11.No.3.March 1968
28 http://teachers.parkhill.k12.mo.us/mcconnellk/Computer%20Ethics%20Article%202.pdf: Pg 3: “Author Unknown”
29 http://www.comphist.org/computing_history/new_page_5.htm
30 Computer Ethics: Its Birth and Its Future : Bynum. T.W. : Ethics and Information Technology : Vol 3. Issue 2. 2001 :
Pg 110
31 Computer Ethics: Its Birth and Its Future : Bynum. T.W. : Ethics and Information Technology : Vol 3. Issue 2. 2001 :
Pg 110
32 http://www.comphist.org/computing_history/new_page_5.htm
33 http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-computer/ : Bynum. T.J. : Section 1.3
Page 7
defined computer ethics based on its then history, but also helped redefine it for the
modern age of computing. In James Moor’s seminal 1985 paper “What Is Computer
Ethics?34” there is not even a reference to past scholars such as Weiner, Weizenbaum
and Parker, instead forming and presenting a modern definition on what computer
ethics is and how computers were set to effect modern living in ethical terms. Moor
identified a policy vacuum in the use of the new technology, something that previously
had not been recognised. At this time, there was awareness of computer ethics as a
legitimate field of study but there was no means of policing it or measuring it. Moor
identified the need for structured guidelines on what was ethical inside the broad term
of computing. Moor also identified that the issues surrounding computer ethics could
be both personal issues and larger social issues. What made Moor’s ideas stand out
was that for the first time, intelligent, ethical questions were being raised at a
philosophical level but directly relatable to the computer language that, though
commonplace now, was in 1985, at the cutting edge of science.
“What is a computer program? Is it really intellectual
property which can be owned or is it more like an idea, an
algorithm, which is not owned by anybody? If a computer
program is intellectual property, is it an expression of an
idea that is owned (traditionally protectable by copyright) or
is it a process that is owned (traditionally protectable by
patent)? Is a machine-readable program a copy of a humanreadable
program?”
(Moor, 1985 Pg 266-267)
momentum with the release in January 1984 of the first Apple Macintosh35, in 1985 of
the Atari ST36 and in 1986 of the Amstrad built ZX Spectrum +237 all being sold to
consumers at affordable prices. As the landscape was changing, so were the questions
that needed asking and Moor was one of the first to identify this.
The other notable name of the time was Deborah Johnson who, in the preface of the
3rd edition of Computer Ethics,38 clearly shows the accelerated evolution and
progression of computer technology between writing the 1st and 3rd editions of her
seminal “Computer Ethics” book. In 1985, the 1st edition was written on an Osborne
Computer39 using an obsolete word processing program, whereas 16 years later the 3rd
edition was written on a laptop using MS Word with a function that can correct your
spelling as you type40. This goes to show, albeit on a small scale, how much computer
technology was advancing and this acceleration, acknowledged by Johnson, meant that
new aspects of computer ethics were being created and established principles of
computer ethics would need to be updated to suit the new technologies. Johnson
identified the widespread growth and accessibility of the internet as the major area for
newly definable ethics consideration whilst also maintaining and updating the existing
---
34 Metaphilosophy: Moor, J : October 1985 : Pg 266-275
35 http://applemuseum.bott.org/sections/history.html
36 http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=20
37 http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=221
38 Computer Ethics - Third Edition : Johnson, D.G. : 2001 (originally published 1985) : Prentice Hill : Pg vii
39 http://oldcomputers.net/osborne.html
40 Computer Ethics - Third Edition : Johnson, D.G. : 2001 (originally published 1985) : Prentice Hill : Pg vii
Page 8
ethical issues such as philosophical ethics, professional ethics, privacy, property,
accountability and social implications41, which Johnson then uses as the framework for
the book. The most interesting part of Johnson’s 2001 updated edition is the addition
of a section focussing on internet ethics where by the end, as has been the case before
with Weiner and Weizenbaum, Johnson urges caution, accepting that with the internet
and new technologies there are great sociological rewards to be reaped but that like
anything, the new technologies must be approached with a distinct level of caution42.
The Future of Computer Ethics and the Ten Commandments:
In the last 20 years, acknowledgement of modern computer technology and the
dangers it could potentially pose are slowly being recognised and dealt with. In UK law,
the Computer Misuse Act of 199043 and the Data Protection Act of 199844 both are
clearly ethical reactions to the changing technological face of our lives. No longer are
we able to hide behind 19th and 20th century laws to uphold 21st century crimes. Born
from the first use of a computer to commit crime in 1966 to the now incomprehensible
figure, laws like these are needed not only to protect law enforcers and give them the
power to prosecute these crimes, but also to guide us ethically on what we can or
cannot do with computers. In 1992, the Computer Ethics Institute published the well
known and still highly regarded ‘Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics’45 which offer
a broad, well meaning list of ten ethical rules to consider when using a computer.
Almost twenty years on, are they still relevant and do people abide by them? Obviously
the second question is a rhetorical one as there is no way of proving conclusively either
way, but one of the commandments, which is passively present in several other
commandments, does strike me as being very easy to prove non general non
compliance. It is also, ironically, the closest wording, to any of the biblical ten
commandments, “Thou shalt not use a computer to steal”. Let’s look at the ten…
“1. Thou shalt not use a computer to harm other people.
2. Thou shalt not interfere with other people's computer work.
3. Thou shalt not snoop around in other people's computer files.
4. Thou shalt not use a computer to steal.
5. Thou shalt not use a computer to bear false witness.
6. Thou shalt not copy or use proprietary software for which
you have not paid.
7. Thou shalt not use other people's computer resources
without authorization or proper compensation.
8. Thou shalt not appropriate other people's intellectual output.
9. Thou shalt think about the social consequences of the
program you are writing or the system you are designing.
10. Thou shalt always use a computer in ways that ensure
consideration and respect for your fellow humans.”
http://computerethicsinstitute.org/images/TheTenCommandmentsOfComputerEthics.pdf
---
41 Computer Ethics - Third Edition : Johnson, D.G. : 2001 (originally published 1985) : Prentice Hill : Pg vii
42 Computer Ethics - Third Edition : Johnson, D.G. : 2001 (originally published 1985) : Prentice Hill : Pg 22943 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/contents
44 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/contents
45 http://www.buzzle.com/articles/ten-commandments-of-computer-ethics.html and
http://computerethicsinstitute.org/images/TheTenCommandmentsOfComputerEthics.pdf
Page 9
It is fair to suggest that commandments 4, 6, 7 and 8 are all, in essence, drawing from
the same idea which is don’t steal! This however, changes things considerably, because,
if it is agreed that these 4 commandments are preaching the same underlying message,
then ‘not stealing’ is now accounted for by 2/5 of the list, which is significant
percentage. It is also the commandment that, in the modern digital world of file sharing,
bit torrents and illegal downloads, is the one that is most abused. The RIAA (Recording
Industry Association of America) placed losses in 2010 at $12.5 billion per year and a
loss of over 70,000 jobs, all because of music piracy through illegal downloads and
illegal copying46 and the ten most illegally downloaded movies for 2010 reached a
cumulative total of over 92 million downloads47. Although these figures only represent
a small percentage of the global population, the figures are still quite staggering as an
argument that computer ethics based on the core values in the Ten Commandments of
Computer Ethics, are not being followed. Also regarding the Commandments, is the
interest of number nine, which appears to be the only one of the ten to be directed
towards research and design, whereas the other nine commandments exist at a more
personal and broadly social level. Lastly, would adoption of the real ten
commandments and a direct application of them in to computing terms be more
relevant? Aside from the aforementioned Thou shalt not steal, there is one biblical
commandment that is more than relevant to modern computing and ethics48 with You
Shalt Not Kill being of interest. With the technical inventiveness being displayed by the
leading games developers, are console games like Call of Duty: Black Ops, Medal of
Honour and the Grand Theft Auto series desensitising a generation of kids and young
adults to killing and warfare? In the next ten years when virtual reality gaming becomes
as commonplace49 as having a TV and a DVD player is now, will these games present
further ethical challenges? Falling under the same regulations as the Video Recordings
Act of 198450, video games are now being classified based on three different levels of
criteria.
• Human sexual activity or acts of force or restraint associated with such
activity;
• Mutilation or torture of, or other acts of gross violence towards,
humans or animals;
• Human genital organs or human urinary or excretory functions;
Taken from “Harmful Content on the Internet and in Video Games” Tenth
Report of Session Volume 1 : UK House of Commons : 2008 : Pg 60
or scenes of a sexual nature are present and when they are, the controversy that
surrounds these games seems to far outweigh any commercial or artistic reasons to
include them51, one specific example is in the game ‘Fahrenheit : Indigo Prophecy’
where a sexual scene, highly relevant to the narrative plot, was cut from the US release
---
46 http://www.riaa.com/faq.php
47 http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/dec/22/avatar-illegal-downloads-torrent-chart
48 http://www.the-ten-commandments.org/the-ten-commandments.html
49 http://www.scienceclarified.com/scitech/Virtual-Reality/Which-World-Is-Real-The-Future-of-Virtual-Reality.html
50 “Harmful Content on the Internet and in Video Games” Tenth Report of Session Volume 1 : UK House of
Commons : 2008 : Pg 60
51 http://www.ugo.com/games/best-video-game-sex-scenes
Page 10
of the game.52 Violence in video games is becoming increasingly more visceral and
more real and the fact that video games are receiving age restricted classifications
shows that there are clearly similar concerns regarding the possible influence that
these games have on underage children to the concerns raised by violence and horror
in movies. It is fair to say that there are different attitudes at a consumer level from
parents willing to buy 15 and 18 certificate video games for underage children, where
in a similar situation but with DVD’s, age classification is duly considered and applied.
By law, only video games carrying a BBFC classification, have age restrictions that are
enforceable by law53. A test carried out by Hampshire County Council showed that very
few complaints were received of underage sales but the majority of those that were
received were related to video games sales with advisory age restrictions rather than
legal age restrictions54.
It is not inconceivable that three dimensional holographic projected gaming
environments are the next step, with Sony already developing this technology for the
Sony Playstation 455. Microsoft’s X-Box 360 Kinect already allows full body motion
detected gaming56, in a similar but technologically superior fashion to how the
Nintendo Wii first developed, so it is a logical step to assume that a combination of
these two will place the gamer, literally, into the gaming environment. There is an
ethical concern that the legal grey area in gaming certifications and low parental ethics
in terms of purchasing games for underage children, may places potentially underage
gamers into shoot em’ up fantasy environments with games like Call of Duty, Medal of
Honour and the cartoon style violence of the Grand Theft Auto series, where gamers,
potentially underage, will be faced with a virtually lifelike prospect of violence, killing
and murder. Dang’s (2004) argument that “Regulations do not just appear they need to
be created57” is true if we are to protect against this potential ethical minefield. It could
be, albeit quite morbid to think about, that the gaming community is waiting for its
own cataclysmic event in order to cause a change to the general ethical views on video
gaming in the same way that the horrific incidents in Dunblane58, Columbine59 and the
James Bulger60 tragedy in Liverpool, all placed large portions of the publicly perceived
blame for these incidents on underage access to age restricted materials, be it Natural
Born Killers, Childs Play 3 or Marilyn Manson’s latest CD. The result of this was a change,
albeit possibly misguided, in perception of these mediums and how they are regulated.
Aside from a notable paper by Dang (2004) there is very little written on the subject of
video game ethics. Of the two more prominent modern writers on computer ethics,
Bynum seems to concentrate more on contextual historical analysis in computer ethics
and Johnson, although referring to the internet and its related ethics in the most recent
edition of the Computer Ethics book, has not yet discussed video games and ethics.
Based on his historical perspective that humans have a responsibility to constantly re-
---
52 http://www.ugo.com/games/best-video-game-sex-scenes-fahrenheit
53 http://www3.hants.gov.uk/underagesales/underagesales-video.htm
54 http://www3.hants.gov.uk/underagesales/underagesales-video.htm
55 http://www.ps4sony.net/sony-talks-holographic-games-ps4-bound/
56 http://www.xbox.com/en-US/kinect
57 Dang, J. Lee, J. Nguyen, C (2004) : Playing With Ethics - Video Game Controversy : The Ethical Imperative in the
Context of Evolving Technologies : Ethica Publishing : Pg 10
58 http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/13/newsid_2543000/2543277.stm
59 http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/20/newsid_2489000/2489639.stm
60 http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/feb/06/bulger.ukcrime
Page 11
an accelerated pace, I believe that Norbert Weiner would have shared similar ethical
concerns regarding this sort of technology and that ethical consideration has to be
made and laws created or changed in order to change people’s attitudes and to
account for the accelerated evolution of the video game and its market.
The Future:
Based on what I have read and discovered, the question ‘What is Computer Ethics?’, is
a rhetorical one with no definable answer. The constant redefining of the digital
landscape means that we are constantly re-evaluating our relationship with computers
and digital mediums and that the only answers we can raise to our ethical concerns are
merely further questions. My final point on computer ethics will, I believe, become one
of the major philosophical questions over the next 20 years and with it, will raise its
own separate set of ethical issues directly and indirectly relatable to computer ethics.
In the 21st century, when computers are, in the broadest terms, an indispensable part
of modern living, should we be asking ethically about the global right to ownership of
computers and now, moving forward beyond the technological age and into the digital
age, does everyone on the planet have an ethical right to own a computer? And if the
answer to that question is yes, then what, ethically, is our responsibility to those new
owners to ensure that they then know the correct ethics of computer use? Only time
will tell.
“The world is changing so fast, and we're all running to
catch up.61”
Jurassic Park (1993) : Crichton, D. Koepp, D
61 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107290/quotes
5,387 Words
References / Bibliography:
Books and Papers:
Bynum, T (2001) Computer Ethics – Its Birth and Its Future : Kluwer Academic Publishers : 109-112
Bynum, T. (2005) “Norbert Wiener's Vision: the Impact of the ‘Automatic Age’ on our Moral Lives,” in R. Cavalier
(ed.), The Impact of the Internet on our Moral Lives, Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 11-25.
Dang, J. Lee, J. Nguyen, C (2004) : Playing With Ethics - Video Game Controversy : The Ethical Imperative in the
Context of Evolving Technologies : Ethica Publishing
Johnson, D.G (2001) Computer Ethics - Third Edition : Prentice : Originally Published 1985
Moor, J (1985) : What is Computer Ethics : Metaphilosophy 16(4)
Moor. J. (1985) Are there decisions computers should never make? : Bibliometrics :
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2676
Parker, D.B. (1968) Rules of Ethics in Information Processing: Communications of the ACM Vol 11.No.3.March
Stahl, B (2008) Researching Ethics and Morality in Information Systems Some Guiding Questions: Twenty ICIS 2008
Proceedings
Page 12
Wiener, N. (1948) : Cybernetics: or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine : Boston, MA:
Technology Press
Wiener, N. (1989) : The Human Use of Human Beings: The Riverside Press (Houghton Mifflin Co.) : 1989 Edition
(originally Published 1950)
Wiener, N. (1964) : God & Golem, Inc. – A Comment on Certain Points Where Cybernetics Impinges on Religion :
MIT Press.
MIT TechTalk Vol 52 No 19 March 12 2008
UK House of Commons (2008) : “Harmful Content on the Internet and in Video Games” Tenth Report of Session
Volume 1
Web References:
Legal Dictionary: Ethics & Professional Responsibility : http://public.findlaw.com/library/pa-professionalresponsibility-
law.html
K-Data Grid - Ethics Computing Issues : http://www.kdatagrid.com/ethics-computing-issues/
Wiki Answers-What percentage of the world's population own a computer? :
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_the_world's_population_own_a_computer#ixzz1BzTm6CImhttp:/
/wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_the_world's_population_own_a_computer
Askville Amazon: What percentage of the world's population owns computers? :
http://askville.amazon.com/percentage-world's-population-ownscomputers/
AnswerViewer.do?requestId=5807671
ChaCha - What percent of the world's population owns computers? : http://www.chacha.com/question/whatpercent-
of-the-world's-population-owns-computers
Office for National Statistics - Consumer Durables Ownership increases:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=868
Ezine Articles - What Makes A Phone A Smartphone (Dunn, J) : http://ezinearticles.com/?What-Makes-A-Phone-ASmartphone&
id=5312717
Computer History Tracijng the history of the computer EDSAC :
http://www.computernostalgia.net/articles/EDSAC.htm
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Computer and Information Ethics : http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethicscomputer/#
SomHisMil
Atomic Archive - J. Robert Oppenheimer (1904 - 1967) : http://www.atomicarchive.com/Bios/Oppenheimer.shtml
Learning Computer History - A Brief History of Computer Ethics :
http://www.comphist.org/computing_history/new_page_5.htm
AI Panic - Rest in Peach Joesph Weizenbaum : http://aipanic.com/rest-in-peace-joseph-weizenbaum/
MIT News - Joseph Weizenbaum, professor emeritus of computer science, 85 :
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/obit-weizenbaum-0310.html
ELIZA : http://www.science.uva.nl/museum/eliza.php
Computer Hot Lips - History of Computer Ethics : http://www.computerhottips.com/computer-history/History-Of-
Computer-Ethics.html
Donn Parker Biography : http://www.emr.org/products/UCE_overview/Bio_Parker.html
Page 13
Information Systems Security - Introduction to Computer Ethics :
http://www.infosectoday.com/Articles/Intro_Computer_Ethics.htm
Computer Ethics: Basic Concepts and Historical Overview :
http://teachers.parkhill.k12.mo.us/mcconnellk/Computer%20Ethics%20Article%202.pdf
Apple History Timeline : http://applemuseum.bott.org/sections/history.html
Old Computers.com - Atari 520 ST : http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=20
Old Computers.com - ZX Spectrum +2 : http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=221
Old compuers.et - Osborne 1 : http://oldcomputers.net/osborne.html
Cpmputer Misuse Act 1990 : http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/contents
Data Protection Act 1998 : http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/contents
Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics - http://www.buzzle.com/articles/ten-commandments-of-computerethics.
html
computerethicsinstitute.org - The Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics :
http://computerethicsinstitute.org/images/TheTenCommandmentsOfComputerEthics.pdf
Recording Industry Association of America FAW Page : http://www.riaa.com/faq.php
Child, B : The Guardian - "Avatar tops 2010 chart for illegal downloads" :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/dec/22/avatar-illegal-downloads-torrent-chart
Science Clarified - Which World Is Real? The Future of Virtual Reality :
http://www.scienceclarified.com/scitech/Virtual-Reality/Which-World-Is-Real-The-Future-of-Virtual-Reality.html
UGO - Top Video Game Sex Scenes - Mass Effect : http://www.ugo.com/games/best-video-game-sex-scenes
UGO - Top Video Game Sex Scenes - Fahrenheit: Indigo Prophecy : http://www.ugo.com/games/best-video-gamesex-
scenes-fahrenheit
Hantsweb - Protecting young people from age restricted DVD's, videos and video games :
http://www3.hants.gov.uk/underagesales/underagesales-video.htm
PS4Sonynet - "Sony Talks Holographic Games, PS4 Bound?" : http://www.xbox.com/en-US/kinect
BBC - On this Day 13 March 1996: Massacre in Dunblane school gym :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/13/newsid_2543000/2543277.stm
BBC - On this Day - 20 April 1999: Students 'kill dozens' at Denver school:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/20/newsid_2489000/2489639.stm
Morrison, B : The Guardian - "Life After James" : http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/feb/06/bulger.ukcrime
The Internet Movie Database – Jurassic Park : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107290/quotes
No comments:
Post a Comment