Legislation to Govern Computer Use

I’m really amazed on how fast our generation changed. If we compare children from years ago and those from the present time, you’ll really see the difference of literacy in using technologies. I’ve encountered a 6-year old kid using a computer. Whoa! Really amazing, isn’t it?

If kids even have literacy using computers, then definitely, there should be an ordering principle to govern computer use. Implementing legislation that will govern computer use will set boundaries and limitations to what we could possibly do with the use of computers. It will help to control the unwanted circumstances to happen. Lacking an ordering principle will cause the rise of computer crimes. Implementing a punishment for violating will serve as a warning not to exceed from the boundary point. 

What Predominates in the World of Computing

I've read that the best end of life is happiness. Who doesn’t want happiness? We do our best to study hard, we strive and make a lot of efforts to get what we want, but for what? It’s for happiness. That’s why I think Mill’s utilitarianism is what predominates the world of computing.

When you do something, isn’t it that you first think of what it will bring you consequently? Computer programmers consider this when doing softwares. Softwares are implemented for the benefits it will bring. But still, there are people developing softwares for the destruction of others. They do such things for their greed purposes. 

Preliminary Theories : Things considered as morally good/bad under all/certain circumstances

Computer use is like a worm installed in a system. As every second, minute, and hour passes by, it doubles the contamination. Knowing the fact that technologies are invading our world is not anymore new in our ears. Our lives are already bombarded with technologies. Coping with a life full of technologies existing, how do we know if such action involving technologies, especially computers, are considered morally good or bad under all or certain circumstances?

A.      Morally good/bad under certain circumstances

One thing that pops in my mind is hacking. There are different types of hacking but I will only site 2; white and black hacking. White hacking is done for good purposes. In USA, they do white hacking to trace information and other things for the benefit of their country. On the other hand, black hacking is practiced by people who only want to benefit their selves and to destroy other people. Creation of worms and computer viruses is also what I consider to be good/bad under certain circumstances. I’ve heard there is a worm developed by a certain country that will destroy a system that matches with the platform of a specific detonator.

Though these actions bring destruction, it’s not surprising that they also have their ethical side.

B.      Morally good under all circumstances

 Developing softwares for our benefit is morally good, isn’t it? Softwares that will make life easier and better. It’s what people seek, things that will bring benefits.

C.      Morally bad under all circumstances

Students often take the road of plagiarism. We are all aware of copy-paste process without acknowledging the authors. This, I think, is morally bad. Well, it is human nature to choose a path that will require you a little amount of effort. But have we thought of what the people who originally made those things we copied and declared as our own might feel? If you were in their shoes, then I’m pretty sure you won’t feel good. 

Law Governing Computer Use

Our generation now is what they call the "MODERN" generation. As to compare years ago, our technologies are far much better and hi-tech. Cellphones evolved and now have computer-like features, transportation also has its progress and, of course, computers became more powerful. As people produces generations of their kind, and so with computers. However, as computers evolved, people have also developed their abilities to obstruct or intrude computer systems for their own advantage. 

Because of this, government implemented laws governing computer use. One is Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. A law passed by the United States Congress in 1986, intended to reduce cracking of computer systems and to address federal computer-related offenses.The Act (codified as 18 U.S.C. § 1030) governs cases with a compelling federal interest, where computers of the federal government or certain financial institutions are involved, where the crime itself is interstate in nature, or where computers are used in interstate and foreign commerce.

It was amended in 1988, 1994, 1996, in 2001 by the USA PATRIOT Act, 2002, and in 2008 by the Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act. Subsection of the act punishes anyone who not just commits or attempts to commit an offense under the Act, but also those who conspire to do so.  

The following are criminal offenses under the Act:

1.     Knowingly accessing a computer without authorization in order to obtain national security data

2.     Intentionally accessing a computer without authorization to obtain:

o    Information contained in a financial record of a financial institution, or contained in a file of a consumer reporting agency on a consumer.

o    Information from any department or agency of the United States

o    Information from any protected computer if the conduct involves an interstate or foreign communication

3.     Intentionally accessing without authorization a government computer and affecting the use of the government's operation of the computer.

4.     Knowingly accessing a protected computer with the intent to defraud and there by obtaining anything of value.

5.     Knowingly causing the transmission of a program, information, code, or command that causes damage or intentionally accessing a computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage that results in:

o    Loss to one or more persons during any one-year period aggregating at least $5,000 in value.

o    The modification or impairment, or potential modification or impairment, of the medical examination, diagnosis, treatment, or care of one or more individuals.

o    Physical injury to any person.

o    A threat to public health or safety.

o    Damage affecting a government computer system

6.     Knowingly and with the intent to defraud, trafficking in a password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization.

This law underpinned a non-jural law which is moral law because human actions like those mentioned above are unacceptable for all.

PERSONAL CODE OF ETHICS

People usually use the word 'ethics' without much of the knowledge of what this word really means. I tried to ask different persons what idea they have in mind about ethics. Other's reaction was, "Huh? Jak amu.." They don't have any background about it, or perhaps, it's their first time to encounter such word. Nevertheless, most of them, excluding those who didn't give any significant answer, said one thing "it's about what is right and what is wrong?" You might ask,why does it end with a question mark? It's simply because it's not a statement. They uttered their answer with a rising intonation and a question mark to end it. They're not sure of what ethics is.

What really is ethics? Ethics is the study and philosophy of human conduct with emphasis of the determination of right and wrong. We can determine what's right and wrong, can't we? Ethics also focuses on the care for the soul. Anything that contaminates the soul is unethical. I have this list which distinguishes what is ethical or unethical in my own perception. 

These are the following:

1. Thou shalt not put a person to shame or out of grace.

~ I personally think that embarrassing other people is such an unethical action. If you were in their shoes, would you feel enlightened? Definitely not, right?Before you put others to shame, think before throwing a stone.

2. Thou shalt not implement a law that causes other people's death.

~ I'm really disgusted with the "Silya Elektrika" thing. It's an immoral implementation of the government It's not ethical to put the decision in their hands whether a person lives or not based on the things they've done. People deserve to have second chances, right? I do believe in that because every person no matter how bad he could be, do have a good side inside of him.

Ethics may be still a blur for other people, however, I know all of us have a personal code of ethics.