Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ethics in Scientific Research

Posted by michael on from the grey-goo dept.

call -151 writes: "There is an interesting NYT article `When Science Inadvertently Aids an Enemy' discussing how some of the "encryption should be free for everyone" attitudes are changing with the WTC attacks. The article makes some interesting points and it is good to see discussions like these in more of the mainstream, even if the tone has definitely changed recently." Well, the questions are being asked again, but most of the researchers dealing with these issues have already answered the questions for themselves.

3 of 278 comments (clear)

  1. Registration-Proof Link by Accipiter · · Score: 3, Informative

    Right Here, Right Now. Enjoy.

    What the hell is this stupid postercomment compression filter?

    "Your comment must be THIS LONG to be posted to Slashdot."

    "You must be THIS TALL to ride this rollercoaster."

    Sheesh.

    --

    -- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
    (If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't. :P)

  2. If you agree that encryption should be free... by JohnnyX · · Score: 3, Informative

    Then you may be interested in Americans for the Preservation of Information Security, a group working to keep ill-advised legislation from being passed that would deny us tools to keep our information safe in the hopes of denying them to terrorists as well.

    Yours truly,
    Mr. X

    ...do something...

  3. Re:As a scientist.. by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Informative
    • Imagine if physicists were to take the arrogant attitude of today's security developers and say, "If I can build it, I should and also tell everyone else how to do it!"

    You mean like Niels Bohr and others did? This reference took me about 10 seconds to find, please don't insult us by re-writing history to suit an argument.

    That aside, I do actually agree with your point that inventors (and manufacturers) share in the moral burden of technologies.

    On the other hand, pragmatically, if we don't do it, someone else really will.

    On balance, I find myself agreeing with the NYT article's conclusion that it's a bitch of a decision and we need to find a thick skinned bastard to make it for all of us navel gazing pussies. (OK, I'm paraphrasing slightly...)

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.