A Little Cuckoo

Breaking into someone else’s private property is wrong; it makes no difference if that property is in physical or digital form. There is a wide spectrum of those who disagree, from those in government who say that gathering non-sensitive information in certain circumstances is ethical, to hacktivists who believe that all information should be available to everyone. If there is one side of this spectrum that I relate to more, it’s the government. I have nothing to hide and if they can save lives I would usually volunteer for a certain amount of my online activities being tracked. However, I have two questions, how are they justifying this activity and where do they draw the line? If the justification involves the fact that cyber terrorists are using digital means to invade our privacy and attack our country, by that same argument we could also justify torture or other methods of terrorism to fight an enemy that uses those same tactics. How is non-sensitive data defined for the average citizen? Does the type of information gathered by the “Stellar Wind” program fit the description of non-sensitive? Who decided that? Going behind our backs for this kind of information gathering was not the right way to start this kind of a program.

                A group, while very different from those in the government, that also believes that digital information that can be monitored should be monitored are those who call themselves hactivists. These people believe that not only should they try to gather information, but that it should be made available to the general public no matter how sensitive it is. One justification for their actions is the fact that they are quite often only gathering information, not trying to harm or disable the computer systems that they are hacking into, much the same as the hacker from Stoll’s The Cuckoo’s Egg. This is no different than breaking into these organizations’ physical buildings in search of classified information, which is not what I want people doing in my home or office. Secret information is usually secret for a reason, and many times that reason is to keep people safe. Even if you disagree with a war, leaking secret military information could be the equivalent to personally killing soldiers who were relying on that information to not reach enemy hands. While different groups have different reasons for invading others private digital information, none of these reasons make it ethical.

Internet All Around

The Internet is actively being spread all over the world. Google and Facebook among other companies have joined an organization with the sole purpose of making it more affordable to underdeveloped countries. I believe that with the Internet continuing to spread, access to it has become a human right, not just a privilege. While not every country grants its citizens completely free speech, this is one important right that the internet facilitates, most often through social media. One ideal that America was founded on was the duty of the citizens of a country to take action if something with their government is not acceptable. The use of the Internet has already proven in the Middle East that groups of people can unite through shared ideas and take decisive action as a group. While these more basic rights are facilitated through the Internet, these will not be the only benefits when underdeveloped countries gain access. Increased potential for education and commerce, and the facilitation of these basic human rights will be the start of a new way of life for much of the world.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/07/google-facebook-affordable-internet-access-developing-world/?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000589 

Ethical Ancestry

Ancestry.com is arguably the best online family history database, and the best always comes with a price. I believe this price is higher than it needs to be and that Ancestry.com is taking advantage of its customers. In a market where many other services are completely free such as FamilySearch you would think similar services wouldn't be able to charge much, but somehow this is not the case. Using Ancestry.com costs hundreds of dollars per year for full access. I believe the main reason for this high price comes from the nature of family history research itself. When performing this kind of research, it is quite common to reach a point where it seems like there is no more information to be found. When people reach this brick wall, they are willing to pay more to get unstuck than they would be otherwise. Ancestry.com takes advantage of this brick wall and the fact that their customers don't have to pay anything for similar services to charge a higher price than necessary.