Group items tagged

1.11_people_machines 2.3_environment 2.3_ewaste 3.1_hardware

1.11_people_machines 1.9_policies 2.3_ewaste 3.1_hardware

I could never thought that such things could lead to such problems! This social and ethical issue (people and machines) is surely affecting the world around us, not only use but the environment as well. Not everyone is aware of this, that these electronics can lead to a lot of harm! Yet, even if more people would be aware of this, I don't think anything special would be made to reduce so many pollution and harm to the society as people are becoming so dependent of technology that eventhough they would like to reduce such pollution, they wouldn't abdicate their electronics in order to reduce pollution (in my opinion) Furthermore, technology has been increasing rapidly and will continue to increase even more. This means that more pollution due to more electronics will be made. The question is, for how long will Earth continue 'alive'? Because by this passe, how technology and pollution is increasing drastically, not many more centuries.

Some of the points are: 3. information falsitication The intention to cause errors in juridical relations by introducing, modifying, deleting or suppressing data or by producing non-genuine documents can lead to a fine of 120 to 600 days, or 5 years of jail. 4. Damage relative to programs or data Whoever does not have legal permission or the administrator's consent to delete, alter and impossibilitate utilisation of programs or data, will be punished with up to 3 years in jail or a fine. 5. electronic sabotage Whoever does not have legal permission or the administrator's consent to obstruct, interrupt of gravely disrupt the functioning of an information system through introduction of, alteration of, damaging of, or suppression of programs and data will be punished with up to 5 years in jail or a 600-day fine. 6. Ilegitimate access Whoever does not have legal permission or the administrator's consent and tries to access an IT system will be punished with up to 1 year in jail or a 120-day fine. Punishments also true for users who produce, sell or distribute a set of executable instructions destined to cause the aforementioned unauthorised actions. 7.Ilegitimate interception Whoever does not have legal permission or the administrator's consent and tries to intercept the transmission of data  will be punished with 3 years of jail.

If the proposed blackout were to occur, a greater awareness and understanding could be achieved. This would likely garner more support against SOPA, as websites like Facebook, Google and Twitter are used by millions of people worldwide, most of these people being casual internet users who have no idea what SOPA really is, meaning some would attempt to educate themselves on the subject and try to do something about it. The potential increase in support could lead to more people demanding big companies to 'drop' their support by threatning to boycott said comapnies products/services. As mentioned in an article bookmarked by Tranny Franny (http://www.slashgear.com/sony-and-nintendo-drop-sopa-support-amid-anonymous-threats-03205579), Sony and Nintendo appear to have dropped their suppor after being threatned by Anonymous. Although what Anonymous threatned to do was wrong, it certainly go the point across to both companies meaning a boycott from customers worldwide could change other companies minds on whether or not to support SOPA

Although that seems like a good way to reach a wider audience in order for them to understand the severity of how SOPA would affect the internet, it could be seen as quite unethical. These casual internet users could only use websites such as Facebook to get an quick update, so these could be people who would be indifferent after knowing the affect of SOPA. Why should these people be prevented to access a website they use simply because the website feels the need to make a statement. And in terms of big companies dropping their support, is it really correct for them to drop their support? why did they support it in the first place? If they believe that this act should be made official is it correct for them to "drop" their support simply because too many people are going against it? So they would be "changing sides" out of fear, rather than due to their opinion, which in a way goes agaisnt the point of voting or supporting somethis such as SOPA

International Civil Aviation Organization This relates to RFID e-passports.

Good find. Nice to back this discussion up with some hard facts about policy.

To what extent does media and governments distort information that is presented to the general audience, taking into consideration the concealing of an extremely sensitive piece of information such as this?\n\nWhat degree of obscurantism does the US army's "don't ask, don't tell" policy imply? How much misunderstanding can it provoke?\n\nHow reliable is the information provided to us by Wikileaks?