Ethical behavior in a digital world.

[ACoyle]

A certain thread that just got a lot of play in the diesel world and some postings on other sites have made me think about what is considered ethical behavior now and in times gone by and how it has changed. Here are some examples and questions.



Does anyone have the right to write anything they want and store it on their computer. In times gone by, we could write a letter and put in our desk or somewhere else private and reasonably expect that no one would read it. Is it more common that folks will explore a computer that they have access to without permission? If you think is more common, do you think that it is OK?



Can someone send a document that they have authored to another party and have a reasonable expectation that baring it getting hijacked in transit on the Internet that it will arrive at that person’s computer and barring that person giving it out that it would continue to be more or less private to the two persons involved? How would feel if this happened to you?



If you happen to know access codes to someone’s e-mail or other files on their computer, is it OK to read these items?



If you go ahead and do this, and you find something spectacular or inflammatory, is it OK to then widely distribute this information?



The WEB has provided us all with a certain anonymity that we do not have anywhere else. Some of us choose to say and do things that we would not do in person, because, “No one will ever see us or really know who said it”. It enables a sort of artificial courage.



Anyway, with that said, I am pretty sure that many of you will know the event that got me thinking. This discussion is not about that single event. I am just offering a place to discuss how the WEB has changed how we interact and I am looking for your opinions on this subject.



This can become a heated discussion (locked or pulled) or an abstract discussion between a group of people whose intelligence I have come to respect in my 10 years on this site and my 8 years as a moderator. I look forward to hearing from you.

While you are forming your comments, please think of both sides of the issues. Look at as if it happened to you (we all have things that we consider personal), then look at it as if you were contemplating doing it to someone else.

 

[fest3er]

A certain thread that just got a lot of play in the diesel world and some postings on other sites have made me think about what is considered ethical behavior now and in times gone by and how it has changed. Here are some examples and questions.

Does anyone have the right to write anything they want and store it on their computer. In times gone by, we could write a letter and put in our desk or somewhere else private and reasonably expect that no one would read it. Is it more common that folks will explore a computer that they have access to without permission? If you think is more common, do you think that it is OK?

I would expect reasoning adults not to snoop or pry.

Can someone send a document that they have authored to another party and have a reasonable expectation that baring it getting hijacked in transit on the Internet that it will arrive at that person's computer and barring that person giving it out that it would continue to be more or less private to the two persons involved? How would feel if this happened to you?

People should err on the side of caution and keep private that which has not explicitly been identified as OK for release to the public. It happened to me; I realized I should have been even more explicit as to what could be public and what was definitely private.

If you happen to know access codes to someone's e-mail or other files on their computer, is it OK to read these items?

In almost all circumstances, no. Only if you have access and have been asked (or it is your job) to debug problems, may you 'pry'. But manners dictate that you immediately forget what you may have seen except as needed to correct the problem.

If you go ahead and do this, and you find something spectacular or inflammatory, is it OK to then widely distribute this information?

It is not.

The WEB has provided us all with a certain anonymity that we do not have anywhere else. Some of us choose to say and do things that we would not do in person, because, “No one will ever see us or really know who said it”. It enables a sort of artificial courage.

Anonymity is not an excuse to discard civility and manners.

Anyway, with that said, I am pretty sure that many of you will know the event that got me thinking. This discussion is not about that single event. I am just offering a place to discuss how the WEB has changed how we interact and I am looking for your opinions on this subject... .

I don't think the web has changed anything. I think *we* have failed to learn manners and civil discourse. I think our education system has failed far too many of us. I don't care if one is a pipe fitter, a toilet cleaner or a CEO. All people are expected to behave and speak civilly. You'll note that word has the same root as 'civilization'. Remove that which makes us civilized, and we become no different from any other animal on the planet.

 

[Larry Willard]

I agree totally with what Neal said.

Larry

 

[jkalchik]

And more agreement.

Manners and ethics are falling by the wayside.

 

[WDaniels]

I also agree with Neil. We all know what is right and wrong regardless of the times. When a person sneaks, lies and steals they know it is wrong. And if they get into my stuff like what was posted and think it was ok, they would have no problem understanding those concepts after all the lumps on their head and body healed. :-laf

WD

 

[TDRadmin]

Well Said

Well said Neal. Well said.



Why have we quit expecting ourselves and others to act with civility and to respect others?



And did we quit teaching our children that the decisions they make when no one is looking are the ones that truly define their character?



Is there any way to change these trends?



I get discouraged when I see some of the things that have become acceptable both on the internet and in our local restaurants.



Robin

TDR Admin

 

[Flexiheep]

If you happen to know access codes to someone’s e-mail or other files on their computer, is it OK to read these items?



If you happened to find someones house key is it ok to enter and look around? If someone gives you a house key so you can go in and paint for them, and you happen to keep a copy is it ok to go it later? NO

If you go ahead and do this, and you find something spectacular or inflammatory, is it OK to then widely distribute this information?



Was it your information to start with? If you go into the house above and find spectacular pile of cash is it ok to distribute as you see fit?



The WEB has provided us all with a certain anonymity that we do not have anywhere else. Some of us choose to say and do things that we would not do in person, because, “No one will ever see us or really know who said it”. It enables a sort of artificial courage.



Anonymity allows people to do amazing things. Humans seem to have an amazing ability to do good and bad when put in large groups, or if you have your personality taken away by a uniform, or are cut off from others in your car etc. The problem is most of the time you hear about the bad things people do, mob rules, concentration camps, crazy drivers etc. It is easy to forget about the groups building houses for habitat, cleaning up public lands, the folks at a soup kitchen feeding people, etc.





The way I see it the web is only a tool, it should not change standards of personal conduct, the rules have not changed, only the enforcement of them has gotten harder. you no longer have to answer the person you have done wrong, you don't even have to run away from them, you just sit at your computer and say anything that makes you feel good, and you get your jollies feeling like a big bully in control even if you are a 105 lb wimp.



My problem is that I can tell you what I feel is wrong, but I don't have a clue on what the heck to do about it except to try and raise my kids like they should be (both under 3 right now), and not accept that kinda junk from those around me.



Oh yes, I for one don't have a clue about the event that got you thinking, don't really care to know either. There are enough other examples everyplace you look to know what your talking about though

 

[gitchesum]

The topic on anonymity gets me to thinking about one person in particular. I've seen him kicked of multiple forums due to his behavior. But, there is always one phrase repeated over and over by people that know him personally.

"Yeah, he's a real jerk on the internet, but he's a great guy in person"

Of course my response is always that if a guy can act like a jerk online, then he can be acting like a nice guy in person. You have to decide which one is acting.

Sitting in front of the monitor and keyboard, you get this feeling of disconnect from the people you are interacting with. People will say some of the worst things I've ever heard to each other as long as the other person is hundreds or thousands of miles away. However, if they were sitting across the table from each other, the manners suddenly appear and things don't escalate to the levels they do online. Maybe it fear of getting knocked around a little if you were to say the same thing you say online to that other person's face, or perhaps the conscience kicks in and you genuinely feel that you shouldn't say those things because it could hurt the other person's feelings.

As far as the etiquette questions Mr Coyle brings up, I think we all know what the answer to each question should be. It's called doing the right thing. If you are looking at something you should be, and use that information to harm another person or company, you aren't doing the right thing. If you have to ask yoursef, "should I be doing this", you probably shouldn't be.

 

[JDiepstra]

Sometimes I think a person is obligated to reveal information that they may have uncovered in a less than "legit" manner. Lets say your wife left her email open and you noticed on the screen was an email where her best friend confessed to her she was cheating on her husband (who happens to be your good buddy). Don't you now have the obligation to tell him? Not exactly the same as the event which originated this, but close.

 

[gitchesum]

You may feel that you should tell your friend, which I don't really object to. However, telling him by renting a billboard with the message, "Hey Jim, your wife is cheating on you", may not be the most appropriate way to handle it.

Of course I'm kidding a little there. In your example, the information gathered would probably be kept between a small number of people rather than potentially millions of people.

Perhaps that's where the digital ethics argument comes in. How information may be gathered isn't as important as what is done with said information once it has been accessed by someone other than intended.

 

[JDiepstra]

Good points. In my example, only a small number of people were involved. In the original example, there could have been thousands of people, as well as multiple businesses involved and being hurt. A different form of communication may have been needed?



No doubt the original intent appears to have been malicious. Distribution of information is important, but so is knowing all of the facts before is becomes slander/liable.

 

[WDaniels]

and you noticed on the screen was an email where her best friend confessed to her she was cheating on her husband (who happens to be your good buddy). Don't you now have the obligation to tell him?

No! This, to me would be no different than evesdropping, which is also unethical. In commiting this act of evesdropping, it would do nothing to obligate us in any way. He may be our good friend, but we are going to have to weigh our latter action against the former and determine for ourselves if informing our friend about an unjustice to him(which would be none of our business to begin with) will out weigh the unethical action we commited.

Now, I know by taking this tack, it opens up lots of "What if's", but like we were all taught, "two Wongs don't make Wright". Oops, "Im sorry Lord, please forgive me and feed all the starving pigmies in the jungle. "

How information may be gathered isn't as important as what is done with said information once it has been accessed by someone other than intended.

I also disagree with this statement as you've read from above. If a person is to be a honest and upright citizen in the community, living and co-existing with us, gleaning information by eavesdropping and reading other peoples correspondence,(read as "ours") he would soon get a reputation as being dishonest.

WD

 

[AMink]

Civility, in general, is wasting away. The amount of foul language that would have gotten my mouth washed out (or more) just 20-30 years ago is now common. People don't respect themselves, let alone each other. I do find, however, that the pot stirrers are usually the same people on many subjects. I fear that our country is in a downward spiral that may not recover. :{

 

[Vaughn MacKenzie]

The topic on anonymity gets me to thinking about one person in particular. I've seen him kicked of multiple forums due to his behavior. But, there is always one phrase repeated over and over by people that know him personally.



"Yeah, he's a real jerk on the internet, but he's a great guy in person"



Of course my response is always that if a guy can act like a jerk online, then he can be acting like a nice guy in person. You have to decide which one is acting.

I'm not saying this in reference to any particular person but I think most of us would figure the acting is usually done face to face, and the real person comes out on the internet.



A friend once commented "Integrity is acting the same whether or not someone is looking. " It seems so much of society behaves according to what one can get away with. . . it's OK as long as there's no consequences or you don't get caught.

 

[Adventure Bob]

The problem we face here is self correcting and we shouldnt worry. Its annoying for now but it will fix itself. Its a problem born of a society that has provided each succesive generation more and more instant gratification. Those of us who are old enough to remember TVs without remotes find this generation of on line people to be degenerating into something we find intolerable.



The ability to type my thoughts and hit 'submit' does not necesarily mean I should. There are simply people out there, who we would have never heard from because the effort involved: writing a letter to an editor, publishing a newsletter and so on. The instant access to audiences that the internet has provided, has removed the Darwin filter and now anybody can say anything about any subject at will. Again, does having the ability give you the right?



The flip side of stupid people on the internet is that we have the ability to hold our discusions, relatively inexpensively, communicate information, and get feedback in nearly realtime. The same mechanism that provides and open forum to such half wits and non thinkers also provides me access to a group of people I would never be able to reach through some other medium.



This will drive disparity into society that further seperates the haves and have nots (I know Im getting a little deep here but this internet thingy might just be around a while). To prevent stupid people from spewing thoughtless drivel we make access to information membership driven and we remove those who go against the norms of accepatble behavior within the group. Now all of these mindless reactionaries will end up excluding themselves fromm where real informaiton is being exchanged and therefore will have less tools to benefit from either socially or economically.



Bottom line is: don't worry about it, knowledge is power and thes folks will remove themselves from the ability get at the knowledge.

 

[kowaliga]

Every bit and byte is read by 'some device' to allow its transmission. You may be sure, in this day of petaflop processing, that any and all communications, other than hand delivered correspondence will be tested for content; what you digitally 'say' or 'write' is not private. Unless data is specifically protected by law, such as copyright or secured access, view-away!

If one 'digitally' observes criminal activity, lest one become complicit, one is legally compelled to report it.

With all that B. S. being said. . there is so much inaccurate and imprecise internet information, some deliberately so, that its use for anything other than entertainment is caveat emptor.

 

[BigEasy]

Look at as if it happened to you (we all have things that we consider personal), then look at it as if you were contemplating doing it to someone else.

If people did more of this, we would have far less problems in life, both online and off!

 

[fest3er]

If people did more of this, we would have far less problems in life, both online and off!

It generally behooves us to remember that the Golden Rule is not, "Do unto others before they do unto you. "



Rather, the Golden Rule is, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. "

 

[ToolManTimTaylor]

Civility, in general, is wasting away. The amount of foul language that would have gotten my mouth washed out (or more) just 20-30 years ago is now common. People don't respect themselves, let alone each other. I do find, however, that the pot stirrers are usually the same people on many subjects. I fear that our country is in a downward spiral that may not recover. :{

Wow this man has always spoke volumes. This is Epic and I am total agreement. I was thinking the EXACT same thing the other day. My Birthday is here (Whoa 36) and when i think back to the way I was brought up to respect my elders, be as kind to someone as they would hopefully treat you with the same.



At work we have alot of "Young Bucks" and the ones that have made it through their 90 day crucible, I deal with on a day to day basis with some leniency as I know times have changed and can shift with a certain degree.



I REFUSE tho to sink to the level of any of whom show little respect and think they are god. I feel this way because it seems that we as a society have failed to do this and what is now mainstream "Aceptence" just isn't what it was.



Man I wish I grew up in the LATE 50's. From what I see and have heard respect, chivalry, and general day to day demeanor was at its best. Not to say that it was all shiny pennys and fluffy puppies but it was the simple things that I sure am smitten with in an era that is long gone.



Simply saying hi to the neighbor "Hello Mr. Rodgers" instead of " 'Sup Bill" or even using proper english "Where are you?" as opposed to "Yo, where ya at?". It seems it stems not only from home upbringing but our beloved school systems.



This all ties into the Digital Annamimity age where the "they don't know who I am so why give a **** " attitude has to go. It is a shame and it also has a little bit of a direct impact from our beloved and failed legal system. We have lawed ourselves into such a corner that now there is no need for the act of kindness, and or honesty. "Can't hit me ... . I'll sue" Yeah well 50 years ago If I hit you for backtalk I bet you would think twice before doing it again. AND THAT KEPT PEOPLE STRAIGHT (Not all of them)



So with this comes a close to my missguided, missconstrewn and halphazzardly composed gripe. Moreso a rant that went way off course ... . but the gist is somewhat apparent I hope.

 

[nickleinonen]

encrypt everything you don't want anyone but you to see and keep your passwords complicated.