Comment Ultimately? The user. (Score 1) 376
Just my $0.02 on the subject:
Responsibility for action stays with the person performing the action.
Depending upon how reprehensible the application is, everyone can jump up and down, shaking fingers and getting red-faced at the developer. If it's a particularly noxious piece of work, I'd probably join in.
Certainly there's a case to be made that, if a product is likely to be used in an 'unethical' manner (and I won't open that can of worms - determining what is and isn't 'ethical' is left as an exercise for the student) it is unethical to make the product more easily available (cf. the H-bomb). However, having a gun available in the house, an H-bomb in your armory, or a malicious piece of hardware/software at one's disposal doesn't negate the user's responsibility for using the thing.
If I make kitchen knives, I'm not responsible for domestic violence which employs them. If I'm a gunsmith, I'm not responsible for the mis-use of the guns I make (assuming, of course, that 'proper' use of guns can be said to be 'personal protection' and hunting for food). With items such as H-bombs, cigarettes (carcinogenic in their 'proper' use), or applications having no potential use other than malice (viruses, &c.), it gets a bit stickier.
Nonetheless, the fact that one is capable of using a thing does not relieve the individual from responsibility for using (or not using) the thing. If if did, we're in an endless-loop, trying to distribute the blame (The person(s) who first tamed fire would be responsible for all malicious uses of fire since, but the ones _they_ taught the techniques to would be responsible for passing them on and refining them, and so one has an endless chain of responsibility leading down to the arsonist who just torched your Uncle Jake's barn. After all, if fire hadn't been available in the first place, he couldn't've burned the thing, right?
No. Responsibility for an action lies with the person performing the action, IMO. I can sit at home and write trojans all day (I don't), but actually putting one to use is a different matter.
Same if I'm a script-kiddie, scanning RR, @Home, &c. using a prepackaged script. I may've wrote the thing, but you're responsible for how you use it.
Naturally, YMMV. HTH. HAND.
Responsibility for action stays with the person performing the action.
Depending upon how reprehensible the application is, everyone can jump up and down, shaking fingers and getting red-faced at the developer. If it's a particularly noxious piece of work, I'd probably join in.
Certainly there's a case to be made that, if a product is likely to be used in an 'unethical' manner (and I won't open that can of worms - determining what is and isn't 'ethical' is left as an exercise for the student) it is unethical to make the product more easily available (cf. the H-bomb). However, having a gun available in the house, an H-bomb in your armory, or a malicious piece of hardware/software at one's disposal doesn't negate the user's responsibility for using the thing.
If I make kitchen knives, I'm not responsible for domestic violence which employs them. If I'm a gunsmith, I'm not responsible for the mis-use of the guns I make (assuming, of course, that 'proper' use of guns can be said to be 'personal protection' and hunting for food). With items such as H-bombs, cigarettes (carcinogenic in their 'proper' use), or applications having no potential use other than malice (viruses, &c.), it gets a bit stickier.
Nonetheless, the fact that one is capable of using a thing does not relieve the individual from responsibility for using (or not using) the thing. If if did, we're in an endless-loop, trying to distribute the blame (The person(s) who first tamed fire would be responsible for all malicious uses of fire since, but the ones _they_ taught the techniques to would be responsible for passing them on and refining them, and so one has an endless chain of responsibility leading down to the arsonist who just torched your Uncle Jake's barn. After all, if fire hadn't been available in the first place, he couldn't've burned the thing, right?
No. Responsibility for an action lies with the person performing the action, IMO. I can sit at home and write trojans all day (I don't), but actually putting one to use is a different matter.
Same if I'm a script-kiddie, scanning RR, @Home, &c. using a prepackaged script. I may've wrote the thing, but you're responsible for how you use it.
Naturally, YMMV. HTH. HAND.
