Search (13 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Informationsethik"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Reed, G.M.; Sanders, J.W.: ¬The principle of distribution (2008) 0.02
    0.015938118 = product of:
      0.047814354 = sum of:
        0.03276989 = weight(_text_:computer in 1868) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03276989 = score(doc=1868,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.20188503 = fieldWeight in 1868, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1868)
        0.0150444675 = product of:
          0.030088935 = sum of:
            0.030088935 = weight(_text_:22 in 1868) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030088935 = score(doc=1868,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044416238 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1868, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1868)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    This article introduces a normative principle for the behavior of contemporary computing and communication systems and considers some of its consequences. The principle, named the principle of distribution, says that in a distributed multi-agent system, control resides as much as possible with the individuals constituting the system rather than in centralized agents; and when that is unfeasible or becomes inappropriate due to environmental changes, control evolves upwards from the individuals to an appropriate intermediate level rather than being imposed from above. The setting for the work is the dynamically changing global space resulting from ubiquitous communication. Accordingly, the article begins by determining the characteristics of the distributed multi-agent space it spans. It then fleshes out the principle of distribution, with examples from daily life as well as from Computer Science. The case is made for the principle of distribution to work at various levels of abstraction of system behavior: to inform the high-level discussion that ought to precede the more low-level concerns of technology, protocols, and standardization, but also to facilitate those lower levels. Of the more substantial applications given here of the principle of distribution, a technical example concerns the design of secure ad hoc networks of mobile devices, achievable without any form of centralized authentication or identification but in a solely distributed manner. Here, the context is how the principle can be used to provide new and provably secure protocols for genuinely ubiquitous communication. A second, more managerial example concerns the distributed production and management of open-source software, and a third investigates some pertinent questions involving the dynamic restructuring of control in distributed systems, important in times of disaster or malevolence.
    Date
    1. 6.2008 12:22:41
  2. Kuhlen, R.: Informationsethik - Die Entwicklung von Normen für den Umgang mit Wissen und Information in elektronischen Räumen (2005) 0.01
    0.010994123 = product of:
      0.065964736 = sum of:
        0.065964736 = product of:
          0.13192947 = sum of:
            0.13192947 = weight(_text_:programs in 3687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.13192947 = score(doc=3687,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.25748047 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.79699 = idf(docFreq=364, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044416238 = queryNorm
                0.5123863 = fieldWeight in 3687, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.79699 = idf(docFreq=364, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3687)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Source
    Bibliothekswissenschaft - quo vadis? Eine Disziplin zwischen Traditionen und Visionen: Programme - Modelle - Forschungsaufgaben / Library Science - quo vadis? A Discipline between Challenges and Opportunities: Programs - Models - Research Assignments. Mit einem Geleitwort von / With a Preface by Guy St. Clair Consulting Specialist for Knowledge Management and Learning, New York, NY und einem Vorwort von / and a Foreword by Georg Ruppelt Sprecher von / Speaker of BID - Bibliothek & Information Deutschland Bundesvereinigung Deutscher Bibliotheksund Informationsverbände e.V. Hrsg. von P. Hauke
  3. Information ethics : privacy, property, and power (2005) 0.01
    0.0090076635 = product of:
      0.02702299 = sum of:
        0.016384944 = weight(_text_:computer in 2392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016384944 = score(doc=2392,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.100942515 = fieldWeight in 2392, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2392)
        0.010638045 = product of:
          0.02127609 = sum of:
            0.02127609 = weight(_text_:22 in 2392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02127609 = score(doc=2392,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044416238 = queryNorm
                0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 2392, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2392)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Classification
    323.44/5 22 (GBV;LoC)
    DDC
    323.44/5 22 (GBV;LoC)
    Footnote
    Part III, "Privacy and Information Control," has four articles and three discussion cases beginning with an 1890 article from the Harvard Law Review, "The Right to Privacy," written by Samuel A Warren and Louis D. Brandeis. Moore then includes an article debating whether people own their genes, an article on caller I.D., and an article on computer surveillance. While all four articles pose some very interesting questions, Margaret Everett's article "The Social Life of Genes: Privacy, Property, and the New Genetics" is incredible. She does a great job of demonstrating how advances in genetics have led to increased concerns over ownership and privacy of genetic codes. For instance, if someone's genetic code predisposes them to a deadly disease, should insurance companies have access to that information? Part IV, "Freedom of Speech and Information Control," has three articles and two discussion cases that examine speech and photography issues. Moore begins this section with Kent Greenawalt's "Rationales for Freedom of Speech," which looks at a number of arguments favoring free speech. Then the notion of free speech is carried over into the digital world in "Digital Speech and Democratic Culture: A Theory of Freedom of Expression for the Information Society" by Jack M. Balkin. At 59 pages, this is the work's longest article and demonstrates how complex the digital environment has made freedom of speech issues. Finally, Part V, "Governmental and Societal Control of Information," contains three articles and three discussion cases which provide an excellent view into the conflict between security and privacy. For instance, the first article, "Carnivore, the FBI's E-mail Surveillance System: Devouring Criminals, Not Privacy" by Griffin S. Durham, examines the FBI's e-mail surveillance program called Carnivore. Durham does an excellent job of demonstrating that Carnivore is a necessary and legitimate system used in limited circumstances and with a court order. Librarians will find the final article in the book, National Security at What Price? A Look into Civil Liberty Concerns in the Information Age under the USA Patriot Act by Jacob R. Lilly, of particular interest. In this article, Lilly uses historical examples of events that sacrificed civil liberties for national security such as the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II and the McCarthyism of the Cold War era to examine the PATRIOT Act.
  4. Brody, R.: ¬The problem of information naïveté (2008) 0.01
    0.006968761 = product of:
      0.041812565 = sum of:
        0.041812565 = weight(_text_:web in 1865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041812565 = score(doc=1865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.2884563 = fieldWeight in 1865, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1865)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    With the rapidly changing Web-enabled world, the already existing dichotomy between knowing of and knowing about, or information naïveté, widens daily. This article explores the ethical dilemmas that can result from the lack of information literacy. The article also discusses conditions and consequences of information naïveté, media bias, possessive memory, and limited contexts and abilities. To help avoid information failure, the author recommends producers, contributors, disseminators, and aggregators of information be less information naïve.
  5. Frohmann, B.: Subjectivity and information ethics (2008) 0.01
    0.0061791493 = product of:
      0.037074894 = sum of:
        0.037074894 = weight(_text_:computer in 1360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037074894 = score(doc=1360,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.22840683 = fieldWeight in 1360, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1360)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    In A Brief History of Information Ethics, Thomas Froehlich (2004) quickly surveyed under several broad categories some of the many issues that constitute information ethics: under the category of librarianship - censorship, privacy, access, balance in collections, copyright, fair use, and codes of ethics; under information science, which Froehlich sees as closely related to librarianship - confidentiality, bias, and quality of information; under computer ethics - intellectual property, privacy, fair representation, nonmaleficence, computer crime, software reliability, artificial intelligence, and e-commerce; under cyberethics (issues related to the Internet, or cyberspace) - expert systems, artificial intelligence (again), and robotics; under media ethics - news, impartiality, journalistic ethics, deceit, lies, sexuality, censorship (again), and violence in the press; and under intercultural information ethics - digital divide, and the ethical role of the Internet for social, political, cultural, and economic development. Many of the debates in information ethics, on these and other issues, have to do with specific kinds of relationships between subjects. The most important subject and a familiar figure in information ethics is the ethical subject engaged in moral deliberation, whether appearing as the bearer of moral rights and obligations to other subjects, or as an agent whose actions are judged, whether by others or by oneself, according to the standards of various moral codes and ethical principles. Many debates in information ethics revolve around conflicts between those acting according to principles of unfettered access to information and those finding some information offensive or harmful. Subjectivity is at the heart of information ethics. But how is subjectivity understood? Can it be understood in ways that broaden ethical reflection to include problems that remain invisible when subjectivity is taken for granted and when how it is created remains unquestioned? This article proposes some answers by investigating the meaning and role of subjectivity in information ethics.[In an article on cyberethics (2000), I asserted that there was no information ethics in any special sense beyond the application of general ethical principles to information services. Here, I take a more expansive view.]
  6. Nagenborg, M.: Privatheit - Menschenrecht oder eine Frage des Anstandes? (2008) 0.01
    0.0060976665 = product of:
      0.036585998 = sum of:
        0.036585998 = weight(_text_:web in 1698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036585998 = score(doc=1698,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 1698, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1698)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Im ersten Teil des Beitrages wird eine kurze Zusammenfassung der Diskussion um den Schutz der Privatheit in Recht und Ethik gegeben. Der Schwerpunkt liegt dabei auf der Informationsethik. Im zweiten Teil werden einige für die Wissensorganisation relevante Beispiele für den Umgang mit personenbezogenen Daten diskutiert: u. a. Web Information Retrieval, Data Mining sowie FOAF als Beispiel für die Standardisierung von personenbezogenen Informationen.
  7. Kuhlen, R.: Informationsethik (2004) 0.01
    0.005406756 = product of:
      0.032440536 = sum of:
        0.032440536 = weight(_text_:computer in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032440536 = score(doc=2905,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.19985598 = fieldWeight in 2905, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2905)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Informationsethik ist Ethik von und für Menschen, deren Verhalten und Werte sich allerdings immer mehr in der Infosphere, in den Informationsumgebungen, entwickeln. Diese wiederum werden immer mehr von dem geprägt, was Telemediatisierung aller, auch und gerade der intellektuellen Lebenswelten genannt werden kann, also die Durchdringung dieser Lebenswelten mit Informations-, Kommunikations-, und Multi-/Hypermedia-Technologien. Daher kann in einem ersten Zugriff Informationsethik bestimmt werden als ein offenes Ensemble von Aussagen über normatives Verhalten gegenüber Wissen und Information, das sich in fortschreitend telemediatisierten Lebenswelten und in der Auseinandersetzung mit den in bisherigen Lebenswelten gültigen Werten und normativen Verhalten entwickelt. Die Abhängigkeit von dem Telemediatisierungsprozess könnte dazu verleiten, Informationsethik mit Computerethik oder Netzethik gleichzusetzen. Nicht alles, was am Thema Computer ethisch relevant sein könnte, sollte die Informationsethik für sich reklamieren - so wie die Informationswissenschaft ja auch einen spezifischeren Begriff von Information hat als die Informatik (vgl. Kap. A 1). Informationsethik ist Ethik in elektronischen Räumen. Das klingt spektakulär, ist aber doch keine Cyberethik, keine Ethik von epers(ons) (electronic personas), durch die in der virtuellen Realität z.B. Rechte und Pflichten von intelligenten Informationsassistenten (Cyborgs, Bots, Agenten) geregelt werden könnten. Solche Rechte von epers, wie z.B. "epers' rights include those of privacy, autonomy and anonymity" wurden und werden durchaus formuliert, so in einer ACM-Konferenz zum Thema Ethics in the Computer Age von 1995. Referenziert werden konnte diese Cyber-/Eper-Ethik auf die drei Asimovschen Gesetze für Roboter, die sich aber letztlich, anders als die Cyborgs and anders als die den Menschen ablösenden Maschinen von Hans Moravec, noch nicht von ihren Schöp fern, den Menschen, emanzipieren durften, sondern, im Sinne der ersten beiden Asimovschen Roboter-Gesetze, sich an den Interessen der Menschen auszurichten hatten. Erst dann, wenn diesen Interessen Genüge geleistet ist, dürften die Roboter auch an sich denken und Rechte und Freiheiten für sich reklamieren. Für Martha M. Smith in ihrem Information-Ethics-Artikel aus dem 32. Band der Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) ist Informationsethik "concerned with the ethical conflicts and issues that arise in the use of information, information technologies, and information systems", und zwar will sie dabei vor allem professionelle Aspekte angesprochen sehen, nicht Fragen persönlicher Ethik. Letztere können wir hier im Jahr 2004 nicht mehr so deutlich ausgrenzen, zumal die Bereiche professioneller Fachinformation und informationeller Alltagswelten auf den Publikumsmärkten durch die Telemediatisierung, durch die Ubiquität des Internet ineinander übergehen. Der Universalisierung der Informationsethik haben auch die drei UNESCO-INFOethics-Konferenzen (1997, 1990 und 2000) Rechnung getragen, bei denen das Ethos der Informationsspezialisten nur am Rande eine Rolle spielte. Vielmehr spiegelten die INFOethics-Themen die ethischen (und - im Sinne einer auf Aristoteles bezogenen Trias - zugleich die politischen und ökonomischen) Herausforderungen der (globalen) Informationsgesellschaft wider - die UNESCO bevorzugt eher den Plural und Wissensgesellschaften
  8. Informations- und Kommunikationsutopien (2008) 0.00
    0.0049276585 = product of:
      0.029565949 = sum of:
        0.029565949 = weight(_text_:web in 213) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029565949 = score(doc=213,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.2039694 = fieldWeight in 213, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=213)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Content
    Inhalt: Rafael Capurro: Einleitung Klaus Wiegerling: Ubiquitous Computing als konkrete Utopie Michael Nagenborg: Wenn Roboter alles wissen und Kühlschränke nicht lügen Tassilo Pellegrini: Semantic Web als konkrete Utopie - Eine praktische Annäherung Falko Blask: TV kontra Web: Mythos Medien - Medienmythen Hans Kräh: Filme als Zeitreisen: Medienszenarien in Zukunftsszenarien Uwe Jochum: Zur Zeit wird hier der Raum - Die digitale Inversion des Karfreitagszaubers Thomas Nisslmüller: Der cybergnostische Imperativ: Sich lesen in Zeiten virtueller Versuchsspiele Manfred Lang: Good Night, and Good Luck! Zur Geschichte informationspolitischer Utopien
  9. Seadle, M.: Copyright in a networked world : ethics and infringement (2004) 0.00
    0.0040118583 = product of:
      0.024071148 = sum of:
        0.024071148 = product of:
          0.048142295 = sum of:
            0.048142295 = weight(_text_:22 in 2833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048142295 = score(doc=2833,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044416238 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2833, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2833)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.106-110
  10. Hammwöhner, R.: Anmerkungen zur Grundlegung der Informationsethik (2006) 0.00
    0.0040118583 = product of:
      0.024071148 = sum of:
        0.024071148 = product of:
          0.048142295 = sum of:
            0.048142295 = weight(_text_:22 in 6063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048142295 = score(doc=6063,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044416238 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6063, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6063)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    13.10.2006 10:22:03
  11. Lengauer, E.: Analytische Rechtsethik im Kontext säkularer Begründungsdiskurse zur Würde biologischer Entitäten (2008) 0.00
    0.003510376 = product of:
      0.021062255 = sum of:
        0.021062255 = product of:
          0.04212451 = sum of:
            0.04212451 = weight(_text_:22 in 1697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04212451 = score(doc=1697,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044416238 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1697, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1697)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    17. 3.2008 15:17:22
  12. "Code of Ethics" verabschiedet (2007) 0.00
    0.001755188 = product of:
      0.010531127 = sum of:
        0.010531127 = product of:
          0.021062255 = sum of:
            0.021062255 = weight(_text_:22 in 459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021062255 = score(doc=459,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044416238 = queryNorm
                0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 459, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=459)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Im Rahmen des 3. Leipziger Kongresses für Information und Bibliothek 19.-22. März 2007 hat Bibliothek & Information Deutschland (BID) die im folgenden wiedergegebenen "Ethischen Grundsätze der Bibliotheks- und Informationsberufe" verabschiedet und der Presse und Fachöffentlichkeit vorgestellt. Damit folgt Deutschland den rund 40 Ländern weltweit, die bereits einen "Code of Ethics" veröffentlicht haben. Diese ethischen Richtlinien sind auf der IFLA/FAIFE-Website gesammelt unter www.ifla.org/faife/ethics/codes.htm.
  13. "Code of Ethics" verabschiedet (2007) 0.00
    0.0015044467 = product of:
      0.00902668 = sum of:
        0.00902668 = product of:
          0.01805336 = sum of:
            0.01805336 = weight(_text_:22 in 462) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01805336 = score(doc=462,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044416238 = queryNorm
                0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 462, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=462)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Im Rahmen des 3. Leipziger Kongresses für Information und Bibliothek 19.-22. März 2007 hat Bibliothek & Information Deutschland (BID) die im folgenden wiedergegebenen "Ethischen Grundsätze der Bibliotheks- und Informationsberufe" verabschiedet und der Presse und Fachöffentlichkeit vorgestellt. Damit folgt Deutschland den rund 40 Ländern weltweit, die bereits einen "Code of Ethics" veröffentlicht haben. Diese ethischen Richtlinien sind auf der IFLA/FAIFE-Website gesammelt unter www.ifla.org/faife/ethics/codes.htm.