Q&A > CHALLENGES AT THE INTERSECTION OF LAW AND TECHNOLOGY. In "Reflections on Trusting Trust," how

downloaded from

Scholarfriends

https://scholarfriends.com Downloaded by: writerforacademic@gmail.com | https://scholarfriends.com/singlePaper/276874/qa-challenges-at-the-intersection-of-law-andtechnology-in-reflections-on-trusting-trust-how Distribution of this document is illegal.

CHALLENGES AT THE INTERSECTION OF LAW AND TECHNOLOGY 1. In "Reflections on Trusting Trust," how does Thompson illustrate the idea that a computer can "learn"?

-

He illustrate it with a compiler that serves to turn source code (the human-like syntax) into machine code, because that´s the language computers only understands. He said we can teach the compiler to compile itself by introducing a new character for the compiler to understand, and by teaching it what this vertical tab means. So, after we teach the computer to understand what this character is, it then can propagate into any other program that we write. So, the computer is learning effectively a new thing to interpret, and it can then interpret that in every other program.

2. Why are voice-activated controls inherently risky, from a data collection perspective?

-

Because when collecting this information for voice controls, it can be transmitted to a third party language processor who would be taking the commands they hear (sounds) and feeding them into their own database to improve the quality of understanding what these commands were, so the risk is that they would capture all of the information that it´s hearing and send it somewhere, encrypt it or not encrypt it, so there is no way to ensure and verify that the organization is properly interacting with our data, because we want to know whether or not what we are saying is secure and private, and we just need to trust that these companies are doing the right thing. The device would then collect IP addresses, cookies, hardware and software configuration, browser information, and that is why is inherently risky.

3. The Intel Management Engine interacts with your system via the BIOS. Read up on what a BIOS is, and in a few sentences in your own words, describe its function.

BIOS is the first software that runs when a computer is turned on, it loads the computer´s operating system, it configures and initializes the hardware by handling the data flow between the operating system and devices

This study source was downloaded by 100000859607764 from CourseHero.com on 01-03-2023 14:26:13 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/68582093/Challenges-at-the-intersection-of-law-and-technologydocx/

attached, allowing the user to access. It provides the orders to the operating system to execute its first command.

4. Per GPLv3, what is the distinction between "propagation" and "conveyance"?

Conveyance is associated to copyright protections that give the person who owns the copyright the ability to restrict certain behaviors associated with that work or that material. On the other hand, propagation is associated with copyleft, that instead of restricting the rights of others, it compels others who use code that has been licensed under the GPL to avoid allowing any restrictions at all such that others can also benefit from using and modifying that same source code. It propagates so extensively, that as soon as you use code that is GPL licensed, suddenly everything that it touches it´s also GPL licensed, which means you adhere to the same licensing terms and then you are also required to make the source code available to anybody, allowing anybody to have the same rights of modification and redistribution that you had as well and at the end, making more stuff available.

5. In no more than three sentences, explain why a developer may be inclined to license her code under GPLv3 or LGPLv3.

Because GPL compels others who use code that has been licensed under the GPL to avoid allowing any restrictions at all, such that others can also benefit from using and modifying that same source code, it´s making more stuff available, open source licensing.

LGPL only applies to library code, you can benefit from the changes that are specific to the library that you made but it does not necessarily reflect back into your own code, this is not necessarily need to be make publicly available.

DO YOU FEEL COMPELLED TO SHARE CODE WITH OTHERS AND YOU WANT TO INSIST THAT OTHERS SHARE THAT CODE AS WELL  GPL DO YOU POTENTIALLY WANT TO USE OPEN SOURCE CODE BUT NOT RELEASE YOUR OWN CODE FREELY TO OTHERS THE CHANGES THAT YOU MAKE TO INTERACT WITH THAT CODE  LGPL In case they feel compelled to share his code with others and ensuring reciprocity by insisting that those share that code as well (GPL), or if they want to use open source code but not release his own code and the changes he made freely to others (LGPL) 6. In no more than three sentences, explain why a developer may be inclined to license her code under the MIT license or something similar (such as the BSD-3 or BSD-4 license).

This study source was downloaded by 100000859607764 from CourseHero.com on 01-03-2023 14:26:13 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/68582093/Challenges-at-the-intersection-of-law-and-technologydocx/

-

Is one of the most permissive licenses available, you can make changes to the software and don´t needing to re-license those changes to others, you can take this code and profit from it or re-license it under some other scheme, you can make whatever you want. Using code that you find online is great to a budding developer who wants to profit from some larger program that they write if it incorporates MIT-licensed code, which might be an issue for those who are incorporating GPL-licensed code.

Because is one of the most permissive licenses available so is great to a developer who wants to profit from some larger program by don´t needing to re-license those changes to others, and if he wants his changes to propagate into the market more easily.

DO YOU WANT YOUR CHANGES TO PROPAGATE AND GET OUT INTO THE MARKET MORE EASILY? 7. Convert 010100010010 from BCD to decimal.

-

512

8. Convert 010100010010 from BCD to hexadecimal. Recall that the place values for hexadecimal numbers are ...256, 16, 1, rather that decimal's ...100, 10, 1. Recall also that we typically preface hexadecimal values with "0x".

-

0x50x10x2

Si tuviera que convertir de hexadecimal a decimal sería 5 x 16 2 + 1 x 161 + 2 x 160 = 1298 Por la standard formula: base en 16 al cuadrado, 16 en base 1 y 16 en base 0.

*Desde el 0 hasta el 15. Del 0 al 9 son mismos valores, a partir del 10 es A, hasta el 15 que es F. 9. The "Guns, Limbs, and Toys..." article presents a hypothetical 10parts framework for dealing with legal issues created by 3D printing. Based on your studies in this course and others, select any two (2) of those parts, and for each, identify a reason why that

This study source was downloaded by 100000859607764 from CourseHero.com on 01-03-2023 14:26:13 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/68582093/Challenges-at-the-intersection-of-law-and-technologydocx/

part of the framework should (or should not) be workable. There is not a specific right answer that we are looking for with respect to any of the ten parts; rather, we want you to dig into them a bit deeper into identifying unarticulated benefits or detriments with this proposed approach. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? article=1408&context=mjlst

Ways for the law may be able to keep up with 3D printing technologies: 1-Allow permission-less innovation. Should we just allow people to do whatever they want with it, and decide ex post facto this is not OK? Reactive base approach or should we be proactive in trying to prevent the production of certain things that we don´t want to be produced? This allows creativity. Regulated beforehand rather than regulated after we already printed and exchange copyrighted designs.

2-Inmunizing intermediaries. Should we allow people to do whatever they want or don´t do it but regardless don´t punish the manufacturers of 3D printers and the designers of the CAD files that go into 3DP? 3-Rely on existing common law. There is not a federal common law so this would potentially result in 50 different jurisdictions handling the same problem in different ways.

4-Allow the 3D printing industry to self-regulate. *It´s capable of violating trademarks, patents, copyrights,

1) Permissionless innovation as the default: I support the idea of public policy being guided by this principle and I think it should be feasible because wisdom is born from experience and that includes experiences involving risks and the possibility of occasional errors and failures, so if this were restricted to a precautionary policymaking, there would be less room for future entrepreneurialism and invention that fosters the economy in an open and free society, therefore, if public policy were guided by fear of potential worstcases and scenarios, innovation would be killed, and we would also miss the opportunity to enjoy those thousands of possible good scenarios and enjoy the advances of technology.

2) Social norms and pressures: I think it would be feasible because it is well known that the normative expectations that a society intends to protect evolve and change over time, because the vision of citizens also changes according to the new advances in different fields, so the citizens adapt to

This study source was downloaded by 100000859607764 from CourseHero.com on 01-03-2023 14:26:13 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/68582093/Challenges-at-the-intersection-of-law-and-technologydocx/

some changes that they start considering beneficial. So even if there are no laws or regulations for this issue, policymakers should consider whether these social norms and attitudes evolve according to how new technologies evolve, so it is primarily these private rules that will regulate the acceptable and improper uses of new technologies because there will be many practices that are not desirable for society because they destabilize those regulatory expectations that seek to protect , and others that the public will see more favorably in the future, so it would be a mistake to legislate right now about 3D printers use because the concerns might not materialize later according to this adaptation and evolution of thought.

10.Do you think we should treat potential crimes or civil infractions differently based on whether they happen in augmented reality versus "reality"? What about virtual reality versus "reality"? Why or why not?

Environments that are still interactive, it is still possible for multiple people in different parts of the world to be involved in the same VR or AR experience.

Virtual reality: immersive alternate reality, you don´t see real world you are transformed into another space. Immersed in a visual space but also in a soundscape. Studies have shown that people who are immersed in a virtual reality experience can have serious ramifications, real feelings that last for a long time based on their experiences in them, real feelings in the real world of what they feel in this reality. Does the jurisdiction only exist in the virtual world? Does anyone have jurisdiction over there? Who has jurisdiction over a crime that is committed in virtual reality?  Augmented reality: technical graphical overlay over the real world.

1.Generally in the virtual space all of our movements are tracked and the identities of everybody who´s entering and leaving that space are tracked by way of IP addresses, it may be easier for investigators to figure out who the perpetrators of those crimes are.

2.Usually you can mute them from happening, option to get away from the crime.

Law is not really equipped right now to handle what happens in an alternate virtual reality, it´s an untested space for lawyers in the law.

I agree to treat them differently, at least for now, because I think sometimes the most effective way to boost a new technology like VR or AR is for the law to not intervene and let it self-regulate, because if we set legal regulations too early those can become ineffective as technology is dynamic and evolves constant in time and in unexpected ways, or they could even interfere and harm the development of technology. Also, in VR or AR environments there is an option or advantage that we not have in real world: we can usually mute potential crimes or civil infractions from happening, we have that option of getting away from the crime, an also, the virtual

This study source was downloaded by 100000859607764 from CourseHero.com on 01-03-2023 14:26:13 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/68582093/Challenges-at-the-intersection-of-law-and-technologydocx/

space can track the movements of the perpetrator and identify him by his IP address. I think that in the absence of legal regulation, it is up to the companies and the VR and AR communities themselves to develop their own rules to govern social interactions and set limits on what behaviors are allowed and what is not to allow to contribute for a better virtual environment. In these sectors, the idea of an express, current and real consent is very important, since potential risks of physical injuries or psychological damage may be caused, and should not be limited to mere consent in terms and conditions of the service contract.

This study source was downloaded by 100000859607764 from CourseHero.com on 01-03-2023 14:26:13 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/68582093/Challenges-at-the-intersection-of-law-and-technologydocx/ Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)