Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Philosophy
On The Responsibility For Uses Of Downstream Software, Marty J. Wolf, Keith W. Miller, Frances S. Grodzinsky
On The Responsibility For Uses Of Downstream Software, Marty J. Wolf, Keith W. Miller, Frances S. Grodzinsky
Computer Ethics - Philosophical Enquiry (CEPE) Proceedings
In this paper we explore an issue that is different from whether developers are responsible for the direct impact of the software they write. We examine, instead, in what ways, and to what degree, developers are responsible for the way their software is used “downstream.” We review some key scholarship analyzing responsibility in computing ethics, including some recent work by Floridi. We use an adaptation of a mechanism developed by Floridi to argue that there are features of software that can be used as guides to better distinguish situations where a software developer might share in responsibility for the software’s …
Interpreting, Stephanie Jo Kent
Interpreting, Stephanie Jo Kent
Doctoral Dissertations
What do community interpreting for the Deaf in western societies, conference interpreting for the European Parliament, and language brokering in international management have in common? Academic research and professional training have historically emphasized the linguistic and cognitive challenges of interpreting, neglecting or ignoring the social aspects that structure communication. All forms of interpreting are inherently social; they involve relationships among at least three people and two languages. The contexts explored here, American Sign Language/English interpreting and spoken language interpreting within the European Parliament, show that simultaneous interpreting involves attitudes, norms and values about intercultural communication that overemphasize information and discount …
Reply To Valverde, Paul B. Thompson
Reply To Valverde, Paul B. Thompson
RISK: Health, Safety & Environment (1990-2002)
Professor Thompson responds to Valverde's argument, in the last issue, that his approach to Risk puts too much emphasis on the distinction between Risk subjectivism and Risk objectivism. In doing so, he asserts, inter alia, that anchoring Risk judgments in a probabilistic framework does not go far enough in rejecting reigning Risk-analysis notions of "real Risk."