"Last Lecture" Discussion Questions

1. The video was intended as life advice to whom? 
The video was intended as life advice for anyone with a dream, but more specifically it is intended for anyone that’s ever been passionate about anything.

2. List the advice items that you/your group can recall below. (Many, but not all, are related to ethics.) For each, note whether you agree or not.

1. In order to make people more interested in something, it can be helpful to wrap it in something else. This is known as abstraction.  --  I agree. I remember being taught in classes that in order to get someone to be more receptive of criticism you need to make a sandwich (wrap it), compliment  --  critique  --  compliment.
2. Never lose the child like wonder.  --  I agree. I think the more we grow, the more our priorities change. It becomes easier to be lazy and lose interest in having curiosity, but curiosity is what creates the world.

HWcase5 Q1

Q1. For this unit, find a case concerning a law, or use the law itself as your case, for a law related to security, privacy, etc. Suggestions: HIPAA, FERPA, Computer Security Act, Sarbanes-Oxley, Gramm-Leach-Bliley, COPPA, Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), US Patriot Act, Section 508 of the Americans with Disabilities Act, or some other law. If you just type the name into a search engine you should be able to find plenty of information. This should include

• a link or other citation to the case you are using. If it is from personal experience, point that out.
• A list of 8 or more important facts about the case, in your own words. You can refer to these as reminders when you tell your group members about the case.
• A list of questions (3 or more) you could ask your group members in order to get an interesting and enlightening discussion going (for in-class students), or that you could consider yourself or ask someone else about (for online students); see the “Questions to ask during discussion” tab on the course web page for some suggestions in developing your discussion questions.
• A 4th discussion question about how computer security relates to or could relate to the case. The computer security question could be about hacking, viruses or worms, theft of information, piracy, abuse of privileges, destruction of assets, information privacy, disruption of operations, unauthorized access, corporate abuse of information or computing, government abuse of information, physical harm, or any other issue in the general area of computer security.

Answer:

The source of my case is https://www.aclu.org/other/surveillance-under-usapatriot-act.

Eight important facts are:

1. Due to the attacks on 9/11, Congress panicked and passed the US Patriot Act.
2. This expanded the government's authority to spy on its own citizens, while simultaneously reducing checks and balances on those powers like judicial oversight, public accountability, and the ability to challenge government searches in court overnight.
3. Many Senators and Congressmen claimed they were not given enough time to read it, let alone analyze it, before having to vote on it.
4. The Bush Administration implied that anyone who voted against it would be blamed for future attacks.
5. The Patriot Act increases the governments surveillance powers in four areas: records searches, secret searches, intelligence searches, and "trap and trace" searches.
6. Section 215 of the Patriot Act allows the FBI to force anyone at all - including doctors, libraries, bookstores, universities, and internet service providers - to turn over records on their clients or customers.
7. The government no longer has to show evidence that the subjects of search orders are an "agent of a foreign power," a requirement that previously protected Americans against abuse of this authority. 
8. A person or organization forced to turn over records is prohibited from disclosing the search to anyone.  As a result of this gag order, the subjects of surveillance never even find out that their personal records have been examined by the government.  That undercuts an important check and balance on this power: the ability of individuals to challenge illegitimate searches. 

Questions to ask about the case are:

1. We all make jokes about "my FBI agent" when we look things up online or make a call, but do you think its ethical for the government to have this kind of power?
2. If you think the government is in the clear on this one, do you think its ethical for that power to go unchecked to the point a judge can't refuse an application for search?
3. In what ways would it be ethical/unethical for the gag order to be in place so that third parties aren't allowed to notify the client/customer that their records have been searched or seized?
4. Do you find it ethically right/wrong that the government is allowed to hack an individuals computer or records, but hacking as an individual comes at a price of $10k and up to 10 years in prison?

Three additional standard questions:

What does virtue ethics say about this case?

What does utilitarianism say about this case?

What does deontology say about this case?