Please send questions to st10@humboldt.edu .

CIS 450 - Week 14, Lecture 1 - November 29, 2011

================================
Ethics and Knowledge Management
================================

(most of these notes were typed in after the actual lecture...)

*   This is a BIG topic -- there are whole books on it!

    *   1 example: "Ethical Issues and Social Dilemmas in Knowledge
        Management: Organizational Innovation", Goncalo Jorge Morais
        da Costa (ISLA Leiria, Portugal)

http://www.igi-global.com/book/ethical-issues-social-dilemmas-knowledge/37348

*   BUT -- it is too important to not discuss at least a little!

--------------------------------------------
ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
--------------------------------------------

*   Handed out an abridged version of the "ACM Code of Ethics and
    Professional Conduct";

************
free-write:
come up with 2-3 examples of how one (or more) of the
points on the "ACM Code of Ethics..." might be said
to apply to KMS's;
************

---------------------------------------
"Information Ethics"
---------------------------------------

*   I'm not sure this site is authoritative, but it seems like a
    good starting point for some additional discussion of
    this area:

    http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~rxv/infomgt/ethics.htm

    "Information Ethics", by "Veryard Projects";
    (so, should keep in mind that this does seem to be a
    UK commercial site)

*   This site notes:
    "There are a number of ethical issues that can arise in information 
    management.", and breaks these up into four categories (which I
    don't feel are exhaustive, BUT are interesting):

    *   "professional ethics"
        *   they define as:
	    "the responsibility of the analyst towards the organization";

            ^^ I disagree with that limitation pretty vehemently;
	       I prefer ACM's attitude, that professional ethics
	       should be BROADER in scope than this (to society as well);

    *   "data protection and privacy"
        *   they define as:
            "the responsibility of the organization towards the data 
            subject" 

    *   "business ethics"
        *   they define as:
            "the responsibility of the organization towards society"

    *   "discrimination and justice"
        *   they define as:
            "the responsibility of society towards the data subject"

*   ethics of modeling
    *   Recall CIS 315's discussion of database models --
        a database model is a model of a model --
        a representation of the USERS' view of what is 
            important/significant about the significant entities 
            in their scenario;

    *   do we model in KMSs?
        *   sure -- if nothing else, one or more database models
            are implicitly (and hopefully explicitly) involved
	    with any operational databases within a KMS;

        *   we also decide what is important and significant in
	    deciding what tools to include in a KMS, what data to
	    elicit, what data to keep, etc.;

	    ...and aren't many (most?) UML diagram types creating
	    what we hope are useful models of various aspects of
	    a system?

    *   So -- should consider ethical issues as we build the models
        related to a KMS;

    *   This site's take on this:
        *   "A model is *not* merely a description of the real world.
	    It expresses some *intentions* about the real world."

        *   that doesn't fit badly with our CIS 315 database model
	    idea, I think; the intentions there are to model what's
	    important in the context of that sceneario, for the users'
	    day-to-day operational activities (for an operational
	    database)

    *   Going from this idea to the ethical implications:
        *   "When modelling people, therefore, the model expresses
            *intentions* relating to these people, including the
            intention to judge people according to particular
            criteria."

        *   "The inclusion of *particular* criteria in an information
            model, enabling *particular* decision or selection
            processes, therefore has *ethical* and *legal* implications."

        *   "If people are judged according to inaccurate or
            inappropriate data, and if subjective assessments are
            mistaken for reliable facts, the *information model* carries
            some of the responsibility for this."

        *   "The analyst cannot hide behind the convenient fiction of
            moral neutrality."

    *   Might redlining be considered an example of this?
        *   Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

            "Redlining is the practice of denying, or increasing the
            cost of services such as banking, insurance, access to
            jobs, access to health care, or even supermarkets
            to residents in certain, often racially determined,
            areas."

            ...."Reverse redlining occurs when a lender or insurer
            particularly targets minority consumers, not to deny them
            loans or insurance, but rather to charge them more than
            would be charged to a similarly situated majority
            consumer."

        *   So, for example, if the decision support system that is
            part of your KMS makes or suggests decisions on such 
            grounds -- that might be a problem;

            (and you can probably think of other scenarios/examples;)

*   privacy and data protection
    *   data ownership - "Who 'owns' the data?"
        
        *   The "Information Ethics" website asks some interesting
	    questions in this regard, also;

        *   "Does a company own the data it has collected about a person?"

        *   "Does the person himself/herself have any ownership rights
            over his/her ‘own’ data?"

        *   You can probably think of ways to take this further, too --
            for example, does a person in an organization have any
            "right" or ownership to his or her tacit knowledge?

    *   What about the "information wants to be free" school of
        thought?

	*   But this is really just part of Stewart Brand's original
	    quote;

        *   Source: 
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_wants_to_be_free

        *   Stewart Brand - "who, in the late 1960s, founded the Whole
            Earth Catalog and argued that technology could be
            liberating rather than oppressing."

        *   "The earliest recorded occurrence of the expression was at
            the first Hackers' Conference in 1984. Brand told Steve
            Wozniak:

    	    On the one hand information wants to be expensive, because
    	    it's so valuable.

	    The right information in the right place just changes your
	    life."

            *   [ASIDE -- and, really, hasn't that been one of the main
                goals of these KMSs we have been discussing this semester?

		...to somehow get people the right information in the
		right place, and at the right time as well?]

  	    "On the other hand, information wants to be free, because
  	    the cost of getting it out is getting lower and lower all
  	    the time.

	    So you have these two fighting against each other."

        *   Want a shorter version?  

            "Brand's conference remarks are transcribed in the Whole
            Earth Review (May 1985, p. 49) and a later form appears in
            his The Media Lab: Inventing the Future at MIT:

            Information Wants To Be Free. Information also wants to be
            expensive. ...That tension will not go away."

*   following the link from "Who owns your mother's maiden name?"
    on the "Information Ethics" website -- 
    http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~rxv/infomgt/mother.htm

    ...there are a few more bits of interesting food for thought;
    *   (each of these also includes links to even MORE discussion/
        information on that topic, if you are interested)

    *   identity -
        "Surely your mother's maiden name belongs (ultimately) to your
        mother.  But perhaps it's not her name any more.  (It
        identifies a person who no longer exists - your mother when
        she was a girl.)"

        ...there is the need to "identify the thing to which ...
        information refers";

    *   trust -
        "Lots of companies use "mother's maiden name" as a kind of
        password - which is pretty stupid really, as it's dead easy to
        find out.  (Even if you try to be clever, and give the bank
        your grandmother's or greatgrandmother's maiden name instead,
        it's not very secure.)"

    *   data ownership -
        "Every bank that stores my mother's maiden name thinks it
        "owns" (and must "protect") this data item - and so it gets
        replicated all around the internet."

    *   status -
        "What if your mother still uses her maiden name?  What if you
        have the same surname that your mother had when she was a
        girl?  Does this tell us something about you?"

        *   this topic's "more" link brings up a salient point, I
	    think;

        *   for SIMPLICITY, we make simplifying assumptions in our
            modeling, in our systems, in our algorithms --

        *   BUT --
            (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~rxv/infomgt/mother.htm#status)

            *   "However, for many purposes, what matters to the
                'average' business is the 'average' customer.

	    *   This representation is also a form of
                identity (template) -

            *   any customer or employee who doesn't fit the template
                may be subject to (possibly unfair) discrimination.
                
                [it may not even be intended or deliberate;]

            *   If a finance company gives you a poor credit rating
                because of some coincidence of surname - how will you
                find out, and to whom can you complain?"

    *   privacy - 
        "Is your mother's maiden name (a) private information or (b)
        public knowledge?"
   
        *   (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~rxv/security/privacy.htm)

        *   "Privacy means that some data subject has some rights over
            some data.

        *   What can the data subject do with the data? (e.g. publish,
            hide, preserve, alter, destroy)

        *   What can other agents NOT do with the data? (e.g. publish,
            hide, preserve, alter, destroy)

        *   What recompense is the data subject entitled to, in the
            event of any accidental or deliberate breach of these
            rights."

*   "Data protection implies a set of mechanisms to ...
    *   ...support the rights of the data subject,
    *   ...limit the actions of other agents, and
    *   ...resolve any disputes."

*   Privacy and granularity - from
(http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~rxv/infomgt/ethics.htm#privacygranularity)

    *   "Three possible ways of capturing personal information, in
        database records for each PERSON:
            
        1.  A single occurrence of PERSON for each human being.

        2.  A single occurrence of PERSON for each human being in each
            (socio-economic) role.

        3.  Personal information aggregated into demographic or
            behavioural statistics."

    *   "One of the aims of the UK Data Protection Act (and of similar
        legislation in other countries) is to prevent the combination
        of data from several sources, for purposes other than that for
        which the data were originally collected.
            
        *   This means that (2) is preferred to (1). 

        *   For some purposes, we are only allowed access to statistical
            aggregations of data, but not the raw data
            themselves. This means that (3) is preferred to (1) and
            (2)."

    *   "Then the fun is to predict the behaviour of an individual from
        the demographic data, for example:

        *   what is the probability that this person will respond
            positively to this mailshot

        *   what is the probability that this person will prove a good
            credit risk

        *   Thus it is possible to dis-aggregate and restore data, to
            return to the individual person from the anonymous totals
            and averages.

            *   Of course, this process introduces errors and
                inaccuracies.

            *   Does this benefit the person whose privacy is at stake?
                Hardly!

            *   Imagine: you are denied a loan because you live in a
                dubious district, or you belong to some demographic
                category that the statisticians depreciate. " 
                [ ^-- that's redlining, isn't it?]

            *   [ASIDE: isn't there a DANGER that this very sort of
                thing could arise from drilling-down in data-mined
                patterns from a data warehouses, gathered from various
                sources?]