mikegerwitz
/
ethics-void
1
0
Fork 0
Code Releases Activity
ethics-void/slides.org

2603 lines
76 KiB
Org Mode
Raw Permalink Normal View History

Slide source code and resources The talk didn't go quite as well as I had liked---I ran out of time to prepare---but I hope that it will convey some useful information to others. The source code contains my intended transcript.
2018-04-14 00:29:08 -04:00
#+startup: beamer
#+TITLE: The Ethics Void
#+AUTHOR: Mike Gerwitz
#+EMAIL: mtg@gnu.org
#+DATE: LibrePlanet 2018
#+OPTIONS: H:3 num:nil toc:nil p:nil todo:nil stat:nil
#+LaTeX_CLASS: beamer
#+LaTeX_CLASS_OPTIONS: [presentation]
#+BEAMER_THEME: Luebeck
#+BEAMER_COLOR_THEME: seagull
#+BEAMER_HEADER: \beamertemplatenavigationsymbolsempty
#+BEAMER_HEADER: \setbeamerfont{title}{size = \Huge}
#+BEAMER_HEADER: \setbeamertemplate{bibliography item}{\insertbiblabel}
#+BEAMER_HEADER: \setbeamertemplate{headline}{}
#+BIBLIOGRAPHY: ethics-void plain
#+TODO: RAW(r) DEVOID(v) LACKING(l) DRAFT(d) REVIEWED(R) AUGMENT(A) | READY(,) REHEARSED(.)
#+COLUMNS: %40ITEM %10DURATION{:} %8TODO %BEAMER_ENV(ENVIRONMENT)
#+LATEX_HEADER: \usepackage[backend=biber]{biblatex}
#+LATEX_HEADER: \usepackage{color}
#+LATEX_HEADER: \bibliography{ethics-void}
#+BEGIN_LATEX
% citations will be grayed and pushed to the right margin
\let\origcite\cite
% incite = "inline" cite
\def\cite{\hfill\incite}
\newcommand*{\incite}[1]{{%
\tiny
\raisebox{1ex}{%
\color{lightgray}%
\origcite{#1}%
}%
}}
\renewcommand*{\bibfont}{\scriptsize}
#+END_LATEX
#+BEAMER: \def\subskip{\vskip0.5in}
#+BEAMER: \def\medsubskip{\vskip0.25in}
#+BEAMER: \def\smallsubskip{\vskip0.15in}
* RAW Slides
:PROPERTIES:
:ID: slides
:END:
** Summary :noexport:
#+BEGIN: columnview :hlines 2 :maxlevel 3 :indent t :id slides
| ITEM | DURATION | TODO | ENVIRONMENT |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| * Slides | 0:39 | RAW | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| ** Summary :noexport: | | | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| ** Introduction :noexport: | 00:00:30 | REHEARSED | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| ** We Are Everywhere (Introduction / Opening) | 0:04 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Let's Switch Perspectives :B_fullframe: | 00:01:05 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Pervasive Technology :B_fullframe: | 00:00:30 | REHEARSED | |
| *** We Control What You See and What\nbsp{}You\nbsp{}Do :B_frame: | 00:00:25 | REHEARSED | |
| *** We Know Where You Are, Have Been, Will Be :B_frame: | 00:00:25 | REHEARSED | |
| *** We Live Inside Your Home :B_frame: | 00:00:30 | REHEARSED | |
| *** We Observe and Influence Your Children :B_frame: | 00:00:20 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Any Of Us Can Do These Things :B_fullframe: | 00:00:45 | REHEARSED | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| ** Moral Considerations | 0:03 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Something Feels Wrong :B_fullframe: | 00:00:20 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Snowden Revelations :B_fullframe: | 00:01:00 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Moral Relativism :B_fullframe: | 00:00:40 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Consequentialism :B_fullframe: | 00:00:45 | REHEARSED | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| ** Human Rights | 0:02 | REHEARSED | |
| *** United States Declaration of Independence (4\nbsp{}July\nbsp{}1776) :B_frame: | 00:00:55 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Universal Declaration of Human\nbsp{}Rights\nbsp(1948) :B_frame: | 00:01:00 | REHEARSED | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| ** Privacy | 0:14 | REHEARSED | |
| *** 2018 ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct :B_frame: | 00:01:20 | REHEARSED | |
| *** 2018 ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct :B_frame: | 00:00:55 | REHEARSED | |
| *** HIPAA :B_frame: | 00:01:00 | REHEARSED | |
| *** When Is Data Collection Okay? :B_fullframe: | 00:02:00 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Privacy) :B_frame: | 00:00:15 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Privacy Is A Human Rights Issue :B_fullframe: | 00:00:05 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Introducing Personally Identifiable Information :B_fullframe: | 00:00:15 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Personally Identifiable Information (PII) :B_frame:rmc: | 00:00:55 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Information Security Well Researched :B_fullframe: | 00:00:35 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) :B_frame: | 00:00:45 | REHEARSED | |
| *** OECD Guidelines :B_frame: | 00:01:30 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Framework Code of Ethics: Transparency :B_frame: | 00:01:00 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Framework Code of Ethics: Consent :B_frame: | 00:00:40 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Solid Principles, So Why Not Follow? :B_fullframe: | 00:00:15 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Surveillance Capitalism :B_fullframe: | 00:00:50 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Opinion :B_frame: | 00:00:45 | REHEARSED | |
| *** You Can, But Should You? :B_frame: | 00:00:50 | REHEARSED | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| ** Those Who Control | 0:07 | REHEARSED | |
| *** You Can, But Should You? Example: GPS :B_fullframe:rmc: | 00:00:45 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Software Cannot Be Trusted :B_fullframe: | 00:00:25 | REHEARSED | |
| *** No Transparency Without Source Code :B_fullframe: | 00:00:20 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Programs That Keep Secrets Aren't Transparent or Safe :B_frame: | 00:01:00 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Keeping Secrets Means Keeping Control :B_fullframe: | 00:00:25 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Universal Declaration of Human Rights :B_frame: | 00:00:20 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Liberty :B_frame: | 00:00:15 | REHEARSED | |
| *** No Servitude :B_fullframe: | 00:00:10 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Philosophy of Control :B_frame: | 00:01:00 | REHEARSED | |
| *** User Freedom Is Software Freedom :B_fullframe: | 00:00:25 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Moral Imperative :B_fullframe: | 00:00:30 | REHEARSED | |
| *** What About Moral Relativism? :B_fullframe: | 00:01:20 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Framework Code of Ethics: Serve the User :B_frame: | 00:00:10 | REHEARSED | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| ** A Moral Speedbump | 0:07 | READY | |
| *** A Moral Foundation: The Four Freedoms :B_frame: | 00:00:50 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Why Is ``Open Source'' Popular? :B_frame: | 00:00:50 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Open Source Misses the Point :B_fullframe: | 00:00:20 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Perpetuating An Ethics Void :B_fullframe: | 00:01:05 | READY | |
| *** Conformity Bias / ``Groupthink'' :B_frame: | 00:00:25 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Follow the Leader :B_fullframe: | 00:00:45 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Misjudging Oneself :B_fullframe: | 00:00:30 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Moral Clarity :B_fullframe: | 00:01:20 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Judged By Inaction :B_fullframe: | 00:00:25 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Framework Code of Ethics: Be Mindful :B_frame: | 00:00:35 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Framework Code of Ethics: Empower Others, Recursively :B_frame: | 00:00:20 | REHEARSED | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| ** Conclusion | 0:02 | READY | |
| *** Framework Code of Ethics :B_frame: | 00:00:30 | REHEARSED | |
| *** Pragmatic Ethics :B_fullframe: | 00:00:30 | REHEARSED | |
| *** We, You :B_fullframe: | 00:00:45 | READY | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| ** Thank You :B_fullframe: | 00:00:01 | | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+-----------+-------------|
| ** References :B_appendix: | | | |
#+END:
** REHEARSED Introduction :noexport:
:PROPERTIES:
:DURATION: 00:00:30
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Hello, everyone!
Thanks for coming!
My name's Mike Gerwitz.
I am a free software hacker and activist with a focus on user privacy and
security.
I'm also a GNU Maintainer and software evaluator, and hold other
various other administrative duties within GNU.
Last year,
here at LibrePlanet,
I talked a lot about various threats to privacy, security, and freedom.
I provided a /lot/ of references for those who might be interested in them.
How many of you attended or have otherwise seen
The Surreptitious Assault on Privacy, Security, and Freedom?
<brief reaction>
#+END_COMMENT
** REHEARSED We Are Everywhere (Introduction / Opening)
*** REHEARSED Let's Switch Perspectives :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:01:05
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
I'm really excited to be back this year and to switch perspectives.
Last year was all about "them"---
"us" versus "them".
But framing those issues as such doesn't permit the type of perspective that
I'm interested in pursuing this talk.
I'm going to reframe these issues.
I'm instead going to refer to a collective "we".
The "we" I am referring to is anyone and everyone that has influence over
others with technology.
That includes people that many of us here probably wouldn't want to affiliate
ourselves with.
Because we're all in this together.
We all contribute to the future of the world we live in.
And we have all contributed to the present in some way,
directly or indirectly,
though action or inaction.
To distance ourselves from what we would consider to be "them",
to distance ourselves from what we perceive as bad,
would be an attempt to absolve ourselves of responsibility.
Because we are /all/ responsible.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
``Us'' vs. ``Them''
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\Huge
``We''
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<3>{\Huge
``We'' Are All Responsible
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Pervasive Technology :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:30
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Technology pervades nearly every aspect of every modern user's life.
And it even touches those that don't or might not have the privilege to use
technology themselves.
Consequently,
/"we"/ collectively control nearly every aspect of modern users' lives.
/We/ touch,
either directly or indirectly,
nearly every person on this planet.
/Everything/ is affected by the consequences of our actions.
So, let's speak candidly to users everywhere,
and to ourselves.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \Huge
Technology Is Pervasive
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED We Control What You See and What\nbsp{}You\nbsp{}Do :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:25
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
We control what you see.
We control what you do.
News and information is targeted at you personally.
Your devices hold you hostage,
commanding /you/,
rather than the other way around.
The more that we fade into the background,
as something that is so integral in your life that it isn't noticed until
it goes wrong,
the more ignorant you become of just what you are losing control of.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 0.5in
[[./images/tp/dbd.png]]\incite{dbd}
#+END_CENTER
**** Bottom :B_columns:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: columns
:END:
***** Left :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: column
:BEAMER_col: 0.60
:END:
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 1.25in
[[./images/sky-ca.png]]\incite{sky:cambridge-analytica}
***** Right :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: column
:BEAMER_col: 0.40
:END:
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 1.25in
[[./images/tp/fb-news-feed.png]]\incite{w:fb-news-feed}
*** REHEARSED We Know Where You Are, Have Been, Will Be :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:25
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
We know where you are.
We know where you have been.
We know where you will be.
The apps you install on your devices violate and spy on you.
The cars you drive may track you.
Cameras everywhere constantly surveil you, inescapably.
We can track everywhere you go online.
And data brokers aggregate these data and then sell you out to others,
as a product.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 0.5in
[[./images/tp/facebook-logo.png]]
#+END_CENTER
**** TrustEV :B_columns:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: columns
:END:
***** Left :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: quote
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 1.15in
[[./images/tp/trustev-graph.png]]\incite{trustev:tech}
#+BEAMER: {\scriptsize
#+BEGIN_CENTER
TransUnion Trustev
#+END_CENTER
#+BEAMER: }
***** Right :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: quote
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 1.5in
[[./images/tp/alpr-capture.png]]\incite{eff:alpr}
**** Bottom :B_columns:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: columns
:END:
***** Bottom Left :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: quote
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 0.5in
[[./images/tp/onstar-logo.png]]
***** Bottom Right :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: quote
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 0.5in
[[./images/tp/ford-logo.png]]
*** REHEARSED We Live Inside Your Home :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:30
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
We live inside your home.
Microphones listening.
Cameras watching.
Your IoT thermostat or TV or bed or toothbrush or whatever it may be leaks
precious information about you.
And they might be hopelessly insecure,
with no way to upgrade them but to replace them entirely.
You are under assault---not just by the makers of your devices,
but also by those who can exploit them,
sometimes easily and often automated.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 1in
[[./images/insecam-bedroom.png]]\par\incite{insecam}
#+END_CENTER
**** Assistants :B_columns:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: columns
:END:
***** Left :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: quote
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 1in
[[./images/tp/amazon-echo.jpg]]
#+END_CENTER
***** Right :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: quote
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 1in
[[./images/tp/google-home.jpg]]
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED We Observe and Influence Your Children :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:20
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
We observe your children.
We influence their behavior.
Children are some of the most vulnerable among us.
What they experience now will shape the rest of their lives.
And what we can learn about those experiences now will allow us to exploit
them for the rest of their lives.
#+END_COMMENT
**** Top :B_columns:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: columns
:END:
***** Top Left :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: quote
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+ATTR_LATEX: :width 2.25in
[[./images/school-spy-home.png]]\incite{bb:school-spy-home}
***** Top Right :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: quote
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+ATTR_LATEX: :width 1.50in
[[./images/wp-google-student.png]]\incite{wp:google-student-tracking}
**** Bottom :B_columns:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: columns
:END:
***** Bottom Left :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: quote
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 1.5in
[[./images/guardian-doll-spy.png]]\incite{guardian:doll-spy}
#+ATTR_LATEX: :width 1.75in
[[./images/iot-baby.png]]\incite{register:baby-monitor}
***** Bottom Right :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: column
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 2in
[[./images/bbc-vtech-fine.png]]\incite{bbc:vtech-fine}
*** REHEARSED Any Of Us Can Do These Things :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:45
:ORDERED: t
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Any of us here can get involved in these types of things.
You may not be now,
and maybe you never will be.
But maybe your employer will one day ask you to do something uncomfortable.
Or maybe you will find yourself in a situation where someone has done you or
a loved one harm,
and you consider revenge,
knowing full well that it is within your ability to do so.
There have been studies about altruism.
About those that would risk their lives to save others.
When researchers interviewed these individuals---
they noticed something in common with many of them:
that they thought about that situation before-hand,
perhaps many years before the actual event.
They pre-committed.
When the situation presented itself,
they weren't caught off guard.
But what do we commit /to/?
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \Huge
Any Of Us Can Get Involved With These Things
#+BEAMER: \subskip\Large\uncover<1>{
But only some of us are prepared for when these situations present
themselves
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
** REHEARSED Moral Considerations
*** REHEARSED Something Feels Wrong :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:20
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Something feels wrong with the things I just covered.
But that "something" is a bit different depending on who you ask.
Here in this room,
we are somewhat aligned by our interests,
with I'm sure some notable exceptions.
And that type of echo chamber can make it difficult to realize others'
stance on these issues.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
\Huge Something Feels Wrong
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Snowden Revelations :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:01:00
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Let's consider the Snowden revelations as an example.
Edward Snowden addressed us at LibrePlanet 2016 as one of the keynote
speakers.
He received a /50 second standing ovation/ before he could even begin
speaking.
I was there.
The energy in the room was unlike andything I has experienced.
With this group of people here at LibrePlanet,
the consensus is clear:
what Snowden did was /more than/ just ethical:
he is considered a hero and a whistleblower.
But not everyone thought that way.
Then-congressman Mike Pompeo called for him to be tried as a traitor and
receive the death penalty.
The thing is:
he /did/ break the law.
He /did/ reveal State secrets.
He /can/ be tried for espionage.
So in the eyes of many citizens,
that isn't just /un/ethical---
it is /treason/.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \Huge
Did Edward Snowden Act Ethically?
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\medsubskip\Large
Received *50 second standing ovation* during LP2016 keynote /before/ he
started speaking
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\medsubskip
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 1.5in
[[./images/tp/lp2016-snowden-ovation.png]]\incite{lp:snowden-ovation}
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<3>{\medsubskip\Large
Contrast: Eric Holder had to promise that the US wouldn't seek the *death
penalty* in a civilian trial
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Moral Relativism :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:40
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
This difference in opinion is the topic of /moral relativism/.
/Descriptive/ moral relativism simply acknowledges that such differences do
in fact exist.
This is usually the academic viewpoint.
/Meta-Ethical/ moral relativism takes descriptive ethics a bit further and
argues that "right" and "wrong",
"good and bad",
don't have any inherent meaning,
because they are relative to the traditions and practices of individuals
and groups of people.
This directly contradicts those who believe in moral universalism---
that there is some universal moral conduct that everyone should be able to
agree on.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \uncover<2>{\Huge
Descriptive
#+BEAMER: }\uncover<3->{\Huge
Meta-Ethical
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \Huge
Moral Relativism
#+BEAMER: \uncover<3>{\medsubskip\Large
No Universal Code of Ethics
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Consequentialism :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:45
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Consequentialists believe that the /consequences/ of one's actions should be
the subject of moral judgment,
not the act in itself.
So Snowden and his supporters might treat the consequence of his actions---
informing the public of unlawful abuse of power---
as the subject of moral judgment.
In this case,
breaking the law was an acceptable and even /necessary/ path to /achieve/
that result.
And so,
/consequently/,
it was morally acceptable.
You may hear this phrased as "the end justifies the means".
Now, despite all of these viewpoints,
there /are/ certain things that large parts of the world /do/ recognize as
unethical.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \Huge
Consequentialism
#+BEAMER: {\subskip\Large
``The end justifies the means''
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
** REHEARSED Human Rights
*** REHEARSED United States Declaration of Independence (4\nbsp{}July\nbsp{}1776) :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:55
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
One of the most well-known sentences in the English language is the second
sentence of the United States Declaration of Independence.
<recite it>
Removing the religious and gender biases,
what this /appears/ to be saying is that all /people/ deserve these
unalienable rights.
Yet during the 1958 presidential race between Lincoln and Douglas,
Douglas argued that this sentence was referring to /White men/.
Lincoln had a different interpretation---
that this sentence was referring to the rights of /all people/.
It is /his/ interpretation that lives on today;
it is /his/ interpretation that we apply when we think of the Declaration
of Independence.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
We hold these truths to be *self-evident*,
that *all* men are *created equal*,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain *unalienable Rights*,
that *among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness*.
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip\hfill
---United States Declaration of Independence
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
*** REHEARSED Universal Declaration of Human\nbsp{}Rights\nbsp(1948) :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:01:00
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Original title: Coalition of Right and Wrong
Fast-forward eighty years.
World War II was over.
The horrors committed by Nazi Germany caused the world to think a lot about
the rights of people.
A few years later,
The United Nations General Assembly finished the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.
The first article states:
<read Article 1>
Article 12 is particularly relevant:
<read Article 12>
Privacy is one topic that is fairly well researched by many communities,
and represented in various codes of ethics.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
*All human beings* are born *free and equal* in dignity and rights. They are
endowed with reason and conscience and *should act towards one another in a
spirit of brotherhood*.
#+BEAMER: \hfill ---Article~1
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
No one shall be subjected to *arbitrary interference* with his *privacy,
family, home or correspondence*, nor to attacks upon his honour and
reputation. Everyone has the *right to the protection of the law* against
such interference or attacks.
#+BEAMER: \hfill ---Article~12
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
#+BEAMER: }
** REHEARSED Privacy
*** REHEARSED 2018 ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:01:20
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
The Association for Computing Machinery---
known as the ACM---
created a Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct back in 1992.
It is just now being revised,
and is still in draft status.\nocite{acm:ethics-draft-3}
How many of you here knew that the ACM had a code of ethics?
<react>
Even back then,
it contained a principle of respecting privacy.
Draft 3 acknowledges:
<read portion of §1.6>.
I put the two versions---
the original and Draft 3---
up for comparison.
It reads:
<read portion of §1.7 from 1992>.
It's interesting seeing how it has changed.
Collection of personal information is no longer unprecedented---
it is the /norm/.
So what does the ACM recommend that we do about it?
<read next>
Okay,
this seems fair.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{
- Originally created in 1992
- Now being revised, still a draft\nocite{acm:ethics-draft-3}
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
*Computing and communication* technology enables the collection and exchange
of personal information *on a scale unprecedented in the history of
civilization*.
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip\hfill ---%
§1.7, 1992 Code
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
#+BEAMER: \medsubskip
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
Technology enables the collection and exchange of personal information
*quickly, inexpensively, and often without the knowledge of the people
affected*.
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip\hfill ---%
§1.6, 2018 Draft 3
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<3>{
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
Computing professionals should *establish transparent policies and procedures*
that *allow individuals to give informed consent* to automatic data
collection, *review* their personal data, *correct* inaccuracies, and, where
appropriate, *remove data*.
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip\hfill ---%
§1.6, 2018 Draft 3
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
#+BEAMER: }
*** REHEARSED 2018 ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:DURATION: 00:00:55
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
The Code of Ethics does cover a few other important points which we won't be
getting into here.
But I do want to highlight a couple sentences from two paragraphs:
<read below>.
What does this mean exactly?
What are "legitimate ends"?
And what "rights" are they referring to?
Rights under the law?
The EU has more privacy rights under the law than the US does,
for example.
It also mentions the "minimum amount of personal information necessary".
We can argue what exactly "necessary" is,
but let's illustrate the point by entering a world where this type of
thing actually /does/ happen,
believe it or not.
A context where these sentences /do/ make sense.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
Computing professionals should *only use personal data for legitimate ends*
and without violating the *rights of individuals and groups*. [...]
Only the *minimum amount of personal information necessary* should be
collected in a system.
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip\hfill ---%
§1.6, 2018 Draft 3
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
*** REHEARSED HIPAA :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:01:00
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
HIPAA!
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.
The medical field already does this stuff.
HIPAA does many things,
but what we care about here is its provisions to protect patient health
records.
It defines "protected health information",
or "PHI".
Individuals are permitted under the law to request their own records for
inspection,
and heathcare providers have thirty days to fulfill that request.
The individual can correct information that is wrong.
HIPAA further restricts how PHI can be /shared/.
Outside of certain defined cases,
require /explicit written authorization/ from the patient.
And in /either/ case,
only /the minimum amount of information necessary/ to provide the service
can be shared.
#+END_COMMENT
- <1-> Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
- <1-> Defines Protected Health Information (PHI)
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
- <2-> Can *request own records for inspection*
- <2-> Can *correct information that is wrong*
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
- <3-> Requires *written consent for sharing PHI* outside certain parties
- <3-> Must disclose *minimum amount of PHI necessary* to provide service
*** REHEARSED When Is Data Collection Okay? :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:02:00
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
So let's use that highly subjective term ``good''.
Is HIPAA ``good''?
Overall,
it seems like it might be a pretty decent law with respect to patient privacy,
for the aforementioned reasons.
So what is ``good''?
Recall that meta-ethical moral relativism holds that nobody is objectively
``right'' or ``wrong'',
``good'' or ``bad''.
So we're just going to derive something within the context of this talk.
Let's consider a few more examples.
TransUnion's fraud detecton system,
which uses all of these data from many different sources.
Is that ``good''?
Well,
for people who want to detect fraud,
perhaps it is.
And to detect fraud accurately,
you need a lot of data.
In the words of the ACM,
is that ``legitimate''?
Those data are used to provide a useful service.
But these data brokers aggregate swaths of data without the user ever being
informed of the fact that it is happening.
And the user can't inspect the data.
Or correct it.
Or opt out and delete it.
And the sole purpose of data brokers' existence is to repurpose
and resell your data;
the user will never be able to consent to something when that
``something'' can be anything!
Is that ``good''?
Would you say this is more or less ``good'' than HIPAA?
Let's consider another example.
Late last year,
security researchers found that BLU Android phones---
a popular cheap brand that serves advertisements---
called home with contacts, IMSI numbers, text messages, telephone
numbers, call history, and more.
All of this without any consent.
Researchers found this on /accident/---
nobody knew this was happening!
Is this better or worse th---
no, you know what?
Nevermind.
This is ``bad''.
There's no ``good'' here.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Is HIPAA ``Good''?
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\Huge
What Is ``Good''?
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<3>{\Huge
Is This ``Good''?
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<4>{\Huge
More Or Less ``Good'' Than HIPAA?
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<3-4>{\medsubskip
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 2in
[[./images/tp/trustev-graph.png]]
\incite{trustev:tech}
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<5>{\Huge
Is /This/ ``Good''?
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<6>{\Huge
This Is ``Bad''
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<5-6>{\medsubskip
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 2in
[[./images/kryptowire-blu.png]]
\incite{kryptowire:adups}
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Privacy) :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:15
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Remember Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
<read first sentence up to "correspondence">
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
No one shall be subjected to *arbitrary interference* with his *privacy,
family, home or correspondence*, nor to attacks upon his honour and
reputation. Everyone has the *right to the protection of the law* against
such interference or attacks.
#+BEAMER: \hfill ---Article~12
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
*** REHEARSED Privacy Is A Human Rights Issue :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:05
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Privacy is a human rights issue!
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: {\Huge
Privacy Is A Human Rights Issue
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Introducing Personally Identifiable Information :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:15
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
From a technical perspective,
what is at the core of the privacy problem?
With HIPAA,
we saw PHI.
If we generalize that a bit further,
we get PII---
Personally Identifiable Information.
This is the term you'll see used frequently in information security.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Personally Identifiable Information (PII)
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Personally Identifiable Information (PII) :B_frame:rmc:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:55
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
NIST is the National Institute of Standards and Technology in the United States.
NIST Special Publication 800-122 defines PII as:
<read it>.
This "linked" and "linkable" terminology can be subtle and confusing,
and I unfortunately don't have time to provide examples.
But in a nutshell,
linked data is information that is logically assocaited with other
information about an individual.
/Linkable/ data has the possibility for such an association to be made.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
[...] any information about an individual maintained by an agency, including
(1)\nbsp{}any information that can be used to *distinguish or trace an
individual's identity*, such as name, social security number, date and place
of birth, mother's maiden name, or biometric records; and (2)\nbsp{}any *other
information that is linked or linkable to an individual*, such as medical,
educational, financial, and employment information.
#+BEAMER: \hfill ---%
NIST SP 800-122\nocite{nist:sp-800-122}
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
- *Linked*---logically associated with other information about the
individual
- *Linkable*---possibility of such an association
*** REHEARSED Information Security Well Researched :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:35
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Unlike other topics related to morality,
the nice thing about privacy is that it can be analyzed based on facts,
not opinions.
That isn't to say that there /aren't/ opinions.
Since we have defined what PII /is/,
it is a /fact/ whether or not some action leads to a violation of privacy
because PII is mishandled.
So we can look toward best practices in information security for strong
guidance in developing a code of ethics for privacy.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Best Security Practices Can Help to Guide Code of Ethics for Privacy
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:DURATION: 00:00:45
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
is an intergovernmental economic organization with 35 member countries.
In 1980,
they adopted Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows
of Personal Data.
Mouthful.
This framework is referenced both in US federal guidance and
internationally.
It also served as a foundation for the EU's Data Protection Directive.
The European Union is known to have strong data protection laws---
much stronger than the United States.
Many of the notable privacy cases in recent news have come out of the EU,
like Facebook's tracking of users across the web.
I mentioned that problem in last year's talk.
So let's take a look at some of those guidelines.
#+END_COMMENT
- Established in 1961
- 35 member countries
- /Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal
Data/\nocite{nist:sp-800-122}, adopted 1980
- Referenced internationally
- A foundation for the EU's Data Protection Directive
*** REHEARSED OECD Guidelines :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:01:30
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Just note that they use term "personal data" instead of PII,
which some consider to be more broad of a term.
<read them, inserting extra explanation as needed>
There are other government guidelines around the world with similar
guidance,
but they largely restate these principles.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEAMER: \setbeamercovered{transparent}
**** Left :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: column
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
- <1-> Collection Limitation
- <2-> Data Quality
- <3-> Purpose Specification
- <4-> Use Limitation
**** Right :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: column
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
- <5-> Security Safeguards
- <6-> Openness
- <7-> Individual Participation
- <8-> Accountability
**** Notes :B_block:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: quote
:END:
#+BEAMER: \setbeamercovered{invisible}
#+BEAMER: \medsubskip
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{
Limit PII collection; obtain lawfully and by fair means, with knowledge or
consent of data subject
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{
PII relevant to purposes for which they are used; accurate, complete,
up-to-date
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<3>{
Purposes specified before or at collection; only used for stated
purposes
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<4>{
PII should not be disclosed or used for unspecified purposes, except with
consent or authority of law
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<5>{
PII reasonably protected against unauthorized access, destruction, use,
modification, or disclosure
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<6>{
Policy of openness about developments, practices, and policies for to PII;
establish existence and nature of PII
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<7>{
Right to obtain data in reasonable and intelligible manner;
challenge denials; challenge to erase or amend data
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<8>{
Data controller should be accountable for complying with measures that give
effect to these principles
#+BEAMER: }
*** REHEARSED Framework Code of Ethics: Transparency :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:01:00
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
For the /most/ part,
these principles are fairly solid.
Let's start with our framework code of ethics.
First, we need <read it>.
Transparency isn't useful if a user doesn't know that the information
exists,
or can't understand it.
Privacy policies,
for example,
are notoriously difficult to understand.
Machine learning is a big issue.
Users have the right to know not only the data about them that was
collected,
but also what is being inferred about them.
I use the term "transfer" rather than "distribution" or "dissemination"
because I want it to cover another important topic:
data compromise.
It's important that users know /all/ parties that have their data,
/including/ parties that weren't supposed to have it at all.
#+END_COMMENT
*Transparency in data collection; transfer; use; and methodology, with a
clear and fair procedure to inspect and amend those data, both raw and derived*
- <2-> User must be made aware /in an apparent and intelligible manner/
- Even for non-PII
- <2-> Must be transparent with algorithms used for data processing
- <2-> Compromise of data by an attacker counts as a ``transfer''
*** REHEARSED Framework Code of Ethics: Consent :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:40
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Once a user is aware of what he or she would be consenting /to/,
we should require <read it>.
PII must always be consented by the user in some way.
If the user explicitly enters PII,
say to get an insurance quote on a website,
then that counts as consent,
since clearly the user knows that PII is being provided.
If /any/ data---
PII or not---
is being sent to a third party,
the user ought to explicitly consent.
#+END_COMMENT
*Explicit consent to collection, transfer, and use of both PII and any data
not offered by the user*
- PII must /always/ be consented
- Data explicitly entered by user is consented to first party
- /Any/ data transferred to third parties must be consented
*** REHEARSED Solid Principles, So Why Not Follow? :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:15
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
I'd imagine that pretty much /any/ individual would want their data handled
/at least/ in this manner,
as a /baseline/.
Yet, that's not what we see from private businesses.
We often see quite the /opposite/.
Why is that?
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Why Don't All Businesses Follow These Guidelines?
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Surveillance Capitalism :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:50
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Because you're lucrative.
You are a product to be sold.
And collectively,
we are worth a lot of money.
You may have heard the term "surveillance capitalism".
Companies try to extract as much information out of you as possible using
increasingly invasive means,
much of which I covered last year.
There is a move toward providing a more "personal" or "relevant" customer
experience to hide some of the surveillance,
or to make data collection a necessity for some service.
Or at least make you think that it is.
There's another consequence.
This more "relevant" experience caters search results,
new articles,
and all sorts of stuff to you based on your opinions, beliefs, race,
religion, age, gender identification, etc.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Surveillance Capitalism
\nocite{mreview:surv-cap}
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2->{\Huge
``More Relevant Customer Experience''
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\medsubskip\Large
Strong Influence Over Your Opinions and Actions
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Opinion :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:45
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Let's go back to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Article 19 states:
<read it>.
Personalized services compromise this.
And it's not just organizations like Facebook and Cambridge Analytica.
Ad networks are everywhere on the web.
Data are being collected everywhere you go.
If you are researching a cold and find advertisements for cold medication on
another website,
that is no coincidence.
You aren't being paranoid.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
Everyone has the right to *freedom of opinion and expression*; this right
includes *freedom to hold opinions without interference* and to *seek, receive
and impart information and ideas* through any media and regardless of
frontiers.
#+BEAMER: \hfill ---Article~19
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
#+BEAMER: \uncover<2>{
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 0.5in
[[./images/tp/facebook-logo.png]]
#+END_CENTER
#+BEAMER: }
*** REHEARSED You Can, But Should You? :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:50
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Many businesses think that,
just because they're following a law or regulation,
that they must be acting ethically.
But the law is just a /baseline/.
The law may even be /completely misguided/ or /unethical/ to some;
remember the mention of moral relativism earlier.
Most of the people in this room probably have strong feelings against the
Digital Millennium Copyright Act,
for example.
And this raises an interesting problem with the guidance we just talked
about.
The user should be made aware of the purpose of the data collection.
But what many users /don't/ understand is whether or not the data collection
is /actually necessary/.
The technical need might be /arbitrary/!
This is where the term "legitimate" in the ACM code of ethics falls short.
#+END_COMMENT
- <1-> ``We're following the law, so we must be ethical''
- The law is a /baseline/
- It may even be /completely misguided/ or /unethical/ to some (moral
relativism)
#+BEAMER: \medsubskip
- <2-> You may be collecting data ``for'' the declared purpose, but do you really
need it?
- Is there /actually/ a technical /need/?
- <2-> ``Legitimate'' in ACM Code of Ethics falls short
** REHEARSED Those Who Control
*** REHEARSED You Can, But Should You? Example: GPS :B_fullframe:rmc:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:45
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
How many people here think it's possible to use the Global Positioning
System anonymously?
For example,
the GPS receiver in your mobile device or your car.
<wait, react>
There have been so many privacy issues surrounding GPS that people just
assume that it's synonymous with surveillance.
That's not true.
GPS only /broadcasts/ data.
The GPS system has no idea who is using it---
it is /always/ broadcasting for anyone who wishes to receive it.
So when a program uses GPS to provide location-aware features,
it doesn't necessarily /have/ to call home with it.
There's no reason why map software can't operate without network access,
for example,
if you pre-download map data.
In fact---some /do/.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Example:
\medsubskip
Can You Use GPS Anonymously?
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\Huge
GPS Only /Broadcasts/
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
**** Left :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: column
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 1in
[[./images/tp/gps.jpg]]\incite{w:file:gps}
#+END_CENTER
**** Right :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: column
:BEAMER_col: 0.50
:END:
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{
#+ATTR_LATEX: :height 1.5in
[[./images/tp/osmand-nav.png]]\incite{osmand}
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
**** Bottom :B_ignoreheading:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: ignoreheading
:END:
- <2> Even some GPS mapping programs can work just fine /without/ network access
(e.g. OsmAnd)\nocite{osmand}
*** REHEARSED Software Cannot Be Trusted :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:25
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
The privacy threat is the /software/.
Security experts caution against turning GPS on /because the software on
your device can usually not be trusted!/
So when you see headlines like this one:
<read it>,
the problem isn't GPS,
it's the individual program.
The people writing this program are to blame.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Software Often Betrays Users
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
[[./images/moviepass-tracking.png]]\incite{tc:moviepass-tracking}
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
We watch how you drive from home to the movies.
We watch where you go afterwards.
#+BEAMER: \hfill%
---Mitch Lowe, MoviePass CEO
#+END_QUOTE
*** REHEARSED No Transparency Without Source Code :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:20
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
I was just talking about transparency.
The ACM Code of Ethics mentioned it.
The OECD guidelines called it "openness".
We can tell the user what we want them to know.
But there's only one way for anyone to truly know what a program is doing,
and what data it is collecting.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
What was that about transparency and consent?
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Programs That Keep Secrets Aren't Transparent or Safe :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:01:00
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
And the only way to know is to have access to the source code so that you,
or someone else who knows what they're looking at,
can inspect it.
But that's not enough to know what a program is doing.
Just because you have source code doesn't mean that it actually represents
the same software that is running on your system.
To verify that,
you have to be able to /compile/ the software yourself.
As inconvenient of a truth that it may be for some,
the only reason to ever keep source code from the user is to keep a
secret.
That secret may be something malicious like spying on the user,
it may be a trade secret,
or maybe it's just because the developer is embarrassed by the code---
but those are all secrets nonetheless.
#+END_COMMENT
- <1-> True transparency and consent *requires* ability to inspect *source code*
- <1-> Users must be *able to compile the code* to have confidence that it
*actually represents the program being run*
#+BEAMER: \medsubskip
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \uncover<2>{\Large
/The only reason to hide source code is to keep secrets from the user!/
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Keeping Secrets Means Keeping Control :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:25
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
And keeping secrets is the only way for us to keep control over you.
Remember,
/you are the product/.
If you could get wise by inspecting the program,
you could fight back.
If you had the source code and could compile it yourself,
that means you could also modify it.
You could /remove/ those antifeatures.
/You/ would then be in control.
How would we turn you into a commodity if /you/ were in control?
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1->{\Huge
Keeping Secrets \equiv Keeping Control
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \medsubskip
- Ability to build form source gives the user the ability to *modify the
program* and *reclaim control*
*** REHEARSED Universal Declaration of Human Rights :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:20
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Remember the Universal Declaration of Human Rights from earlier?
Article 1 stated that <read again>.
Is it dignifying to have your privacy stolen from you?
Is all of this acting in the spirit of brotherhood?
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
*All human beings* are born *free and equal* in dignity and rights. They are
endowed with reason and conscience and *should act towards one another in a
spirit of brotherhood*.
#+BEAMER: \hfill ---Article~1
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
- <2-> Is it dignifying to have your privacy stolen from you?
- <2-> Has everything covered been in the spirit of brotherhood?
*** REHEARSED Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Liberty :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:15
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Let's take a look at articles 3 and 4:
<read them, 4 up until "servitude">.
The point I made at the beginning of this talk was that we are /everywhere/.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
Everyone has the *right to life, liberty* and security of person.
#+BEAMER: \hfill ---Article~3
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
#+BEAMER: \medsubskip
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
*No one shall be held in slavery or servitude*; slavery and the slave trade
shall be prohibited in all their forms.
#+BEAMER: \hfill ---Article~4
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
*** REHEARSED No Servitude :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:10
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
If we do not act properly,
then by default,
we hold the user in servitude to /us/.
/We/ hold the power over the user.
We hold power over /one-another/.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1->{\Huge
The User Is Held In Servitude
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Philosophy of Control :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:BEAMER_opt: t
:DURATION: 00:01:00
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
There is this philosophy that the user is a subject to be controlled.
And I don't think most people really think about it.
When we write software,
we ask ourselves certain questions.
Like "what should we allow the user to do"?
I'm not talking about security.
I mean,
"what should we as developers allow the user to do with our software".
But instead we should be asking ourselves "What should we /empower/ the user
to do"?
Rather than wondering how to turn the user into a commodity like we've seen,
we should ask how we should /build mutual relationships/ with them.
Rather than trying to create vendor lock-in to keep users around,
ask yourself how to /earn the respect/ of users so that they come back
under their own free will!
Imagine that.
Rather than worrying about capitalizing on everything,
let's learn how to /socialize/.
Act in a spirit of brotherhood.
#+END_COMMENT
**** Don't Ask :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: column
:BEAMER_col: 0.45
:BEAMER_opt: T
:END:
*Don't Ask*
- <2-> What should we *allow* the user to do?
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
- <4-> How should we *commodatize* the user?
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
- <5-> How do we *lock in* the user?
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
- <6-> How do we *capitalize*?
**** Do Ask :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: column
:BEAMER_col: 0.55
:BEAMER_opt: T
:END:
*Do Ask*
- <3-> What should we *empower* the user to do?
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
- <4-> How should we *build mutual relationships* with the user?
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
- <5-> How do we *earn the respect of* the user?
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
- <6-> How do we *socialize*?
- <6> How do we *act in a spirit of brotherhood*?
*** REHEARSED User Freedom Is Software Freedom :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:25
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Because we are everywhere,
because the life of the user is so tied to software,
we have no choice but to conclude that:
User freedom cannot be hard without software freedom.
They are tightly coupled.
And since software freedom is tightly coupled with user freedom,
and since freedom is a human right,
I argue that /software freedom is too/ a human rights issue!
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
User Freedom \equiv Software Freedom
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\Huge
Software Freedom Is A Human Rights Issue
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Moral Imperative :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:30
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Software freedom defines a type of moral imperative.
From the perspective of those who follow the free software philosophy,
software that is /non-free/ or /proprietary/ is,
simply,
unethical.
A moral imperative is a type of categorical imperative in the deontological
moral philosophy of Immanuel Kant,
who defines the imperative as:
<read it>.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Moral Imperative
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\Huge
Categorical Imperative
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \medsubskip\only<2>{
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
Act as if the maxims of your action were to become through your will a
universal law of nature.
#+BEAMER: \hfill ---%
Immanuel Kant\nocite{kant:meta-morals}
#+END_QUOTE
#+BEAMER: }
*** REHEARSED What About Moral Relativism? :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:01:20
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Throughout this talk,
I've been introducing moral philosophies that aren't always compatible.
This is intentional,
since "we" don't all share the same philosophies.
There are three types of moral relativism.
We only went over two.
If you recall,
descriptive states simply that people have disagreements about what is
ethical,
and meta-ethical states that nobody is objectively right or wrong.
The last one is "normative",
and goes a step further.
It holds that <read quote>.
I don't believe that a universal code of ethics can exist.
But I also don't believe we should just tolerate others that do something we
consider to be immoral.
We should fight for what we think is right.
But we won't always agree universally.
And that's okay.
And why is it okay?
Because that's a human right---
freedom of opinion and expression.
I may wish for a universal moral of software freedom,
but I recognize that such a wish is logically unattainable.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
What About Moral Relativism?
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\Huge
Normative Moral Relativism
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<3>{\Large
We should fight for what we think is right!
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
But we won't always agree universally.
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\medsubskip
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
Holds that, because nobody is right or wrong, we ought to tolerate the
behavior of others even when we disagree about the morality of
it\nocite{w:moral-relativism}
#+END_QUOTE
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<4>{\medsubskip
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
Everyone has the right to *freedom of opinion and expression*; this right
includes *freedom to hold opinions without interference* and to *seek, receive
and impart information and ideas* through any media and regardless of
frontiers.
#+BEAMER: \hfill ---Article~19
#+BEAMER: \hfill\tiny
/(emphasis mine)/
#+END_QUOTE
#+BEAMER: }
*** REHEARSED Framework Code of Ethics: Serve the User :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:10
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
But I'm going to try anyway!
And it's a simple statement:
serve the user, not oneself.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
*Serve the user, not oneself*
#+END_CENTER
** READY A Moral Speedbump
*** REHEARSED A Moral Foundation: The Four Freedoms :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:50
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
It's very possible that some of us in this room disagree with my statement
that free software is a moral imperative.
And that's because we have two very close and overlapping communities that
both create free software,
but diverge wildly on the principles.
These are the "four freedoms"---
the moral foundation for software freedom.
These define the imperative.
Some found that these freedoms have a corollary:
that it sometimes produces higher-quality software than proprietary models.
They coined this development model as ``open source''.
The problem is...
they dropped the moral foundation from which it originated so that they
could advocate the development model to businesses.
That itself is a red flag.
Businesses are turned off by issues of morality?
#+END_COMMENT
**** Four Freedoms :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: column
:BEAMER_col: 0.5
:END:
0. [@0] Run program for any purpose
1. Study and modify to suit your needs
2. Share with others
3. Share changes with others
**** Corollary :B_column:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: column
:BEAMER_col: 0.5
:END:
#+BEAMER: \only<2->{%
*Corollary:*
#+BEAMER: }%
#+BEAMER: \only<3>{%
``Open Source''
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2->{%
Development model for creating potentially higher-quality software
#+BEAMER: }
*** REHEARSED Why Is ``Open Source'' Popular? :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:50
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
"Open source" is popular.
It is widely encouraged in many software communities,
and has even made its way into proprietary ones where we /never/ would
have expected,
like the walls of Microsoft!
But what are the reasons?
Well,
foremost,
it is a development model that claims to produce software that is of
superior quality to proprietary software.
You may have heard the phrase from Eric Raymond:
``given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow''.
Except that's not necessarily true.
Some people like ``open source'' because other people will fix bugs for
them.
Some people do it just to fit in with the crowd.
Or because it looks good on a résumé,
or to attract talented candidates to their business.
Some people do it because it feels good to give back.
#+END_COMMENT
- <1-> ``Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow'' (Eric S. Raymond,
``Linus's Law'')
- A successful development model
- /But it's not always true/
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
- <2-> Other people can fix bugs for me
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
- <3-> Everyone else is doing it!
- <3-> Looks good on a résumé / recognition
- <3-> Attract talent to business
- <3-> Feels good to give back
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
*** REHEARSED Open Source Misses the Point :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:20
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
But we often say that open source misses the point of free software.
When someone finds that there is a proprietary program that works better
for them,
they'll use that instead.
The free software philosophy argues,
however,
that a free program is /always superior/,
because it respects the user's freedoms.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
#+BEGIN_CENTER
/Open Source Misses the Point/
\nocite{gnu:open-source-misses}
#+END_CENTER
#+BEAMER: }
*** READY Perpetuating An Ethics Void :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:01:05
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
This talk has been about an ethics void.
A lack of discussion about morality.
And the true light to providing that morality is software freedom.
But when we talk about "open source",
we're confounding the situation,
because we're talking about software freedom without the moral aspects.
It's detrimental.
It perpetuates the void.
Some in the open source community are even /hostile/ toward software freedom.
As two communities that deeply overlap---
both creating free software---
we want to be able to get along.
And we largely do.
But "open source" rebranded the corollary and left the moral foundation
behind.
Why should we be surprised,
then,
when we don't talk about ethics in software,
when the two most popular models---
proprietary and open source---
avoid it?
Now, to be clear:
open source is not a scapegoat for this talk;
don't walk away thinking I said that it is.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Open Source Perpetuates the\nbsp{}Void
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Conformity Bias / ``Groupthink'' :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:25
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Here's a question:
Which of these three lines is as long as the first?
This isn't a trick question.
A psychologist found that,
when he asked subjects to answer a question like this one,
but put them in a group that gave obviously incorrect answers,
many people became /uncomfortable/ giving the correct answer,
or even purposefully gave an obviously /incorrect/ answer
just to fit in with the group.
#+END_COMMENT
\hfill =====================================
#+BEAMER: \subskip
#+BEGIN_CENTER
*Which line is as long as the first?*
#+END_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
*(1)* \hfill ===================================
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
*(2)* \hfill =====================================
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
*(3)* \hfill ================================
#+BEAMER: \medsubskip
#+BEGIN_CENTER
Solomon Asch, ``Opinions and Social Pressure''
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Follow the Leader :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:45
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
People follow their community and their leaders.
That should come as no surprise.
So when we have people actively working against the free software community,
we have a problem.
Tom Preston-Werner,
one of the three founders of GitHub,
wrote an often-cited post entitled ``Open Source (Almost) Everything'',
in which he described all the valuable ways to exploit people to do your
bidding,
and told people not to liberate anything of actual business value.
As long as we have people saying things like that,
and as long as we have people encouraging the use of permissive licenses
that allow others to violate users' freedoms,
and encouraging collaboration on sites like GitHub that discourage good
software practices and is itself proprietary,
then we are fighting an uphill battle almost from within.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
People Follow Their Community and Leaders
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{
#+BEGIN_QUOTE
Don’t open source anything that represents core business value.
#+BEAMER: \hfill ---
Tom Preston-Werner, GitHub Founder
#+BEAMER: \hfill
``Open Source (Almost) Everything''\nocite{os-almost-everything}
#+END_QUOTE
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Misjudging Oneself :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:30
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Let's take a step back from open source.
Let's look at the lack of moral guidance as a whole.
Some studies have found that 92% of Americans are satisfied with their own
moral character.
Further,
75--80% think they're more ethical than their peers.
Yet despite this,
many people don't think about ethics in software despite moral issues
staring them in the face.
So what's going on?
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \uncover<1->{\Large
92% Americans Satisfied With Own Moral Character\cite{jlse:behavioral-ethics}
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \subskip
#+BEAMER: \uncover<1->{\Large
75--80% Think They're More Ethical Than Peers
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Moral Clarity :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:01:20
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Moral myopia is a term used in behavioral ethics---
it is described as a distortion of "moral vision" that makes it difficult
for ethical issues to come into focus.
It's enforced by rationalizations.
I used the example earlier of "if it's legal, it must be moral".
Maybe you recognize the value in free software,
but don't see a problem with keeping the good stuff proprietary because
you did a good deed by liberating /some/ of your code.
Maybe you think that pervasive online tracking is wrong,
yet you use Google Analytics and Facebook "like" buttons on your own
website
because you don't see your actions are contributing to the larger
problem.
Another concept:
Ethical fading is when people focus on other aspects of a decision,
like profitability,
and don't see the ethical issue.
Maybe saying,
"we're not spying on you, we're just gathering detailed usage
statistics".
Let's further that:
Moral disengagement creates an almost alternate reality to rationalize bad
decisions.
For example,
"we didn't violate our consent decree, it was just a bad actor".
TODO: images of examples
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Moral Myopia
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip\Large
Difficult for ethical issues to come into focus
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\Huge
Ethical Fading
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip\Large
Distancing self from unethical implications
#+BEAMER: }
#+BEAMER: \only<3>{\Huge
Moral Disengagement
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip\Large
Creating another reality to rationalize actions
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Judged By Inaction :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:25
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
We need to stop making excuses for ourselves.
Don't be judged by your inaction.
Consequentialism also holds that inaction is judged no differently than an
explicit action,
because both may result in the same consequence.
Another bad example of inaction is IoT security.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Don't Be Judged By Your Inaction
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** REHEARSED Framework Code of Ethics: Be Mindful :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:35
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Inaction is sometimes due to a lack of care.
With respect to the other principles in this framework code of ethics:
<read>
I ask that we keep up with events and learn from them,
and adapt.
And that business actually put money into educating their employees and
securing their products and services.
Make consideration of ethics part of your development process.
And always ask yourself, "am I behaving ethically?"
#+END_COMMENT
*Be mindful of issues that give rise to consequences in violation of
these principles and act in good faith to mitigate those issues*
- Continuous education (self and corporate)
- Make ethics part of your development process
- Ask yourself: ``Am I behaving ethically?''
*** REHEARSED Framework Code of Ethics: Empower Others, Recursively :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:20
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
And shouldn't we help others to achieve that very same goal?
<read>
Don't just teach others about these topics---
encourage them to in turn teach others.
If I've talked about issues that are important to you,
issues that concern you,
then advocate for change!
#+END_COMMENT
*Impart your knowledge, skills, and experience to empower others,
recursively.*
- Teach others how to apply these principles
- Teach others how to teach others
- Advocate for what is important to you
** READY Conclusion
*** REHEARSED Framework Code of Ethics :B_frame:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: frame
:DURATION: 00:00:30
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
This framework code of ethics,
as I've called it,
is not intended to be used as-is,
and is /certainly not/ comprehensive.
Its purpose is to serve as something concrete to take away from this talk.
To provoke thought.
To start a discussion.
There is no universal code.
But maybe enough of us can find something compelling enough to agree on.
#+END_COMMENT
0. [@0] *Serve the user*, not oneself
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
1. [@1] *Transparency* in data collection; transfer; use; and methodology,
with a clear and fair procedure to inspect and amend those data, both raw
and derived
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
2. [@2] *Explicit consent* to collection, transfer, and use of both PII and
data not offered by the user
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
3. [@3] *Be mindful* of issues that give rise to consequences in violation of
these principles and act in good faith to mitigate those issues
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip
4. [@4] Impart your knowledge, skills, and experience to *empower others*,
recursively
*** REHEARSED Pragmatic Ethics :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:30
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Times are changing.
We see users becoming increasingly uncomfortable.
We see lawmakers increasingly attentive.
Pragmatic Ethics is a theory arguing that it is society,
not individuals,
that achieve morality.
That society and its norms evolve as a result of inquiry,
and what is considered to be moral in one age may not be in the next.
We can help to guide that direction.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
Pragmatic Ethics
#+BEAMER: \smallsubskip\Large
Societial norms and morals evolve as a result of inquiry
#+BEAMER: }
#+END_CENTER
*** READY We, You :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:45
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
That collective "we" that I declared at the beginning of this talk?
The truth is that I bundled everyone together to give a sense of moral
insecurity and urgency.
"We" are not all the same.
Here at this conference,
many of us are free software advocates and activists.
As members of the free software community,
it is our responsibility to provide moral guidance to others.
To connect with other communities.
Other fields have ethics built into their cirriculums.
Health, law, even business.
But I rarely hear of developers having been educated in technology ethics.
If you are an educator,
please,
fight to encorporate these ethical issues into your cirriculum.
It only takes one voice within a community or organization to start a
conversation and change how things are run.
Let that voice be you.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
#+BEAMER: \only<1>{\Huge
``We''
#+BEAMER: }%
#+BEAMER: \only<2>{\Huge
Free Software Advocates
#+BEAMER: }%
#+BEAMER: \only<3>{\Huge
Educators
#+BEAMER: }%
#+BEAMER: \only<4>{\Huge
You.
#+BEAMER: }%
#+END_CENTER
** Thank You :B_fullframe:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: fullframe
:DURATION: 00:00:01
:END:
#+BEGIN_COMMENT
Thank you.
#+END_COMMENT
#+BEGIN_CENTER
Mike Gerwitz
[[mailto:mtg@gnu.org][=mtg@gnu.org=]]
\bigskip
**Slides Available Online**
[[https://mikegerwitz.com/talks/ethics-void]]
\bigskip
**More Information: The Surreptitious Assault on Privacy, Security, and
Freedom**
[[https://mikegerwitz.com/talks/sapsf]]
\vfill
Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 4.0
International License
#+END_CENTER
** References :B_appendix:
:PROPERTIES:
:BEAMER_env: appendix
:END:
\printbibliography
* Exporting :noexport:
You should be able to simply export this buffer as a Beamer presentation
(=C-c C-e l P=) and get a slideshow.
* Local Variables :noexport:
# Local Variables:
# org-todo-keyword-faces: (("DRAFT" . org-upcoming-deadline) \
# ("DEVOID" . (:inherit org-warning \
# :inverse-video t)) \
# ("LACKING" . org-warning) \
# ("REVIEWED" . "yellow") \
# ("AUGMENT" . (:foreground "yellow" :bold t :underline t)) \
# ("READY" . (:inherit org-scheduled :bold t :underline t)))
# eval: (add-to-list 'org-structure-template-alist
# '("C" "#+BEGIN_COMMENT\n?\n#+END_COMMENT"))
# End: