Search results

AbstractEthical, social and human rights aspects of computing technologies have been discussed since the inception of these technologies. In the 1980s, this led to the development of a discourse often referred to as computer ethics. More recently, since the middle of the 2010s, a highly visible discourse on the ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) has developed. This paper discusses the relationship between these two discourses and compares their scopes, the topics and issues they cover, their theoretical basis and reference disciplines, the solutions and mitigations options they propose and their societal impact. The paper argues that an understanding of the similarities and differences of the discourses can benefit the respective discourses individually. More importantly, by reviewing them, one can draw conclusions about relevant features of the next discourse, the one we can reasonably expect to follow after the ethics of AI. The paper suggests that instead of focusing on a technical artefact such as computers or AI, one should focus on the fact that ethical and related issues arise in the context of socio-technical systems. Drawing on the metaphor of ecosystems which is widely applied to digital technologies, it suggests preparing for a discussion of the ethics of digital ecosystems. Such a discussion can build on and benefit from a more detailed understanding of its predecessors in computer ethics and the ethics of AI.

Part I: Images of war. - 1. Realism 35. - 2. Militarism 58. - 3. Pacifism 95. - 4. The Just War 115. - Part II: Principles and concepts of the Just War. - 5. Legitimate authority 139. - 6. Just cause and right intention 162. - 7. Proportionality and the recourse to war 183. - 8. Last resort 204. - 9. Proportionality and the conduct of war 224. - 10. Noncombatant immunity 249. - 11. Peacemaking 287. - Part III: Terrorism and counterterrorism. - 12. On defining terrorism 311. - 13. Terrorism: some moral aspects and variables 327. - 14. Counterterrorism 347

The article considers problems and contradictions arising from applications of the concept of Pareto-efficiency as the most widely used criterion for evaluating efficiency of economic outcomes. The author shows that this criterion is inadequate when applied to ethical issues. An accent on utility and strict adherence to the principles of freedom of choice are impediments to the correct evaluation of perverse needs, waste of resources or preferences which are potentially harmful for others. The article proposes another efficiency criterion based on minimizing resource waste. This criterion is better suited for following the principles of equity and justice than the Pareto-efficiency concept.