<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Porn on boss' computer--the Ethicist speaks ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-21T07:05:10-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[This is a huge can of worms]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2612229]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Crikey, there's been a lot of posts to this one since I dropped in last time.Our company has a well documented IT policy that all employees are made aware of during their induction. This includes sections on pornography, excessive use of the internet for personal use, running a business electronically, gaming, gambling and the distribution of spam through company servers.Whether as individuals we agree with company policy regarding pornography due to our moral stance or work ethic, a company computer is for doing company work on, and policy is put it place so employess don't waste too much time surfing for porn, playing counterstrike and buying stuff on ebay whilst they should be working. Policy also protects a company from legal smacks, as ultimately, they are responsible for the use of company assets.Management should know better than to keep porn on their PC's.The IT elite in most companies can hack, crack, attack and ransack any PC they choose - a fact that most employees and employers quite often forget. This power is in our hands and it is up to us to wield it responsibly and wisely.If you find questionable material on your bosses PC when you weren't meant to be in there in the first place then you are going to get a smack for snooping.If you find it during routine operating system maintenance, then as an individual you must decide if you want to risk your career and possibly your mortgage and marriage by ending up at the unemployment office because of &quot;moral high ground&quot;.When faced with the reality of losing your job over a couple of pictures, is there any wonder that most people turn a blind eye when faced with this situation?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2612229]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[deathjester]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2008 17:15:01 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[As if the police are some sort of angels,]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2582715]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[who always do exactly the right thing.  That is so not the case.  The police in the US (and probably most other countries for that matter) are almost totally corrupt organizations whose only priority is getting convictions.  If they can paint a person as a &quot;child porn lover&quot;, they will hang him from the yard arm and not give a damn whether the label is deserved or not.  Most of their &quot;convictions&quot; are not in fact convictions at all but plea bargains exactly analogous to the extortion tactics of the RIAA.  They threaten a person with a thousand years in prison, then, rather than take a chance on that fate, the victim will plead guilty to something that gets them 3 or 4 years.  Hell, these days, half of their so-called &quot;crimes&quot; are not crimes at all, but just things that some people don't like, and are morally depraved enough to force their opinions on others.  The system is corrupt from top to bottom, and someone who participates in it by &quot;calling the police&quot; without damn good reason is easily as culpable as the person who ignores actual guilt of real child porn activities.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2582715]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[public@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 08:38:14 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[What would I do!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2581469]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[In my last post I stated I would do nothing.Years ago I had a rental property and I observed many cigarette burns on a five year old child's arm.  I asked her how did the burns occur.  She told me that &quot;Mummies man friend did it&quot;.  I was appalled and reported it to the Victorian Police &quot;Community Policing Squad&quot; and was assured that my report would be in strict confidence.  Imagine my shock and horror when the girl's mum and her friend went off their face at me telling me that the Seargent had told them that the landlord had made a complaint.  These people were members of a bikie gang and realy mean critters.  They threatened me with severe physical violence.  Assuming I could have called the cops (mobile phones were not around then) there would have been at least 10 minutes before I would have received any help.  I could easily have been dead by then.Maybe only in Australia the whistleblower gets a raw deal (I do not think the raw deal occurs only in Australia).Anyone who has seen &quot;Underbelly&quot; (which is a pretty true factual tv film about the Melbourne underworld killings of 20 or more criminals) soon convinces anyone about being too heroic.  Some of these crims loved killing for the sake of killing.  (This film is so accurate that in Victoria it has a court order preventing it being Telecast until several criminal trials are conducted including a Tony Mokbel and others)If you spill the beans your name will make its way into the public domain.  In Victoria we have an assistant Police Commisioner facing trial for &quot;leaking information to inappropriate people.&quot;Your name will allways be available from court records.I have asked a copper and my solicitor what they thought and was advised to forget it, it would bring more heartache for me than the villain.It really sounds nice to be so self rightous and do the correct thing.  It would be great if the baddies got smacked and the goodies got given the chocolates.  Maybe in our next life!!!!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2581469]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jmccardl2@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:50:55 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[That did happen not to long ago]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2580705]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[someone stole a safe.  In that save was a flash stick that had a video of the person molesting a child.It was turned in.I don't recall what became of the thief.  That part never makes the follow up headlines, ya know?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2580705]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jdclyde]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 07:59:56 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[It's actually an old ethical problem then.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2580569]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I can see what you're saying. It's actually the old ethical issue of a person who discovers a horrific crime while in the process of committing a relatively minor crime. He wants to report the horrific crime, but he knows that by reporting it he'll be punished for his minor crime. From what I remember it's normally told in context of a burglar who discovers a horrific murder while in the process of burglaring a house.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2580569]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[doug@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 05:56:17 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You are a bucketful of self serving assumptions]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579926]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[aren't you?If you were say there looking at the dialog of a virus checker and it came up scanningAmy 3yo takes it up the ass.jpg, WTF would you do?Tbe real ethical test is not should a tech snoop, it's not should a manager keep porn on a company Pc. It's not adherring to some moral standard about porn.It's if you were snooping (or not) and if you did find child porn, would you keep you gob shut to make it easy on yourself?The ethicist says you should, apparently you are saying you should. Me I'm saying, I'd risk being fired, prosecuted and jailed, before I let a paedo breathe comfortably for one more second.That's my base ethical position, I'm more than content with it.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579926]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Tony Hopkinson]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:58:17 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Then you don't have an ethical problem.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579824]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[You were told to look at media files to make sure they're not porn. So this ethical &quot;problem&quot; the ethicist talks about doesn't apply to you. You were told to look for porn, you found some, so you report it. He was snooping. Virus checkers don't require you to look at jpegs. Like most ethical problems you get the problem by first performing an unethical act. Snooping around the boss's is unethical, and dangerous. You could get caught. Or you could find out other stuff that puts you in an ethical bind. What if you find a file called &quot;List of Layoffs&quot;, when no one knows layoffs are coming?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579824]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[doug@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 07:49:35 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Ropes looks up.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579819]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[You look down.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579819]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[santeewelding]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 07:34:38 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Totally unrelated]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579818]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I MISS YOU, EVE! ]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579818]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Sonja Thompson]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 07:34:10 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I'd not bet my life on it...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579786]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[OK, maybe there is ONE good samaritan out of thousands out there somewhere.Google it. Here's one to get you started, but there were hundreds of thousands of hits, so you'll have a lot of reading to do...http://observers.france24.com/en/content/20080613-hit-and-run-torres-connecticut-united-states]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579786]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Marty R. Milette]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 07:29:21 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[And Gaffers Tape AKA as 200 MPH Tape]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579706]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[is quite often made for race teams in Team Colors so that when they tape up a car there is no noticeable different color on it.Holds very well in all weathers but is a sod to remove once you are back in the workshop.Col]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579706]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[HAL 9000]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 06:05:54 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Things have changed, that's true.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579349]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I'll accept it as a generalization but I stumble at everyone. Everyone isn't uncaring. Not much of a point for argument but I was in the mood.  Still am. Must be that time of the month. ]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579349]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[OnTheRopes]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:39:02 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Things have changed, that's true.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579348]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I'll accept it as a generalization but I stumble at everyone. Everyone isn't uncaring. Not much of a point for argument but I was in the mood.  Still am. Must be that time of the month. ]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579348]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[OnTheRopes]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:38:23 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[But as a Generalization it is right OTR]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579354]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[When I was younger it was normal to stop and help those who had broken down particularly when in the country here at least. Maybe it is wrong to say that people are scared of being sued as I don't know if that's right but there has been a massive change in attitudes since I was younger.The last time I was driving way out where there was no one I stopped to offer help to some people who had broken down and they seemed to think that I was going to Rape, Plunder, Kill whatever. Apparently it was OK as far as they where concerned to die at the side of the road rather than have someone offer them a lift into town or see if they could help fix the problem.Even in town I stopped for someone just up the road from where I live to see if I could be of any assistance and they locked themselves in their car and where on the phone calling for help. But the guy who walked out of his house to offer help was OK. Go figure. Mind you he only walked out because I stopped. Col]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579354]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[HAL 9000]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 17:39:21 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Yes,]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579248]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[we get sacked if we watch it at work...Huh ?That's a seriously dumbass generalisation. Would a lingerie catalogue be pornography, what about a female manikin in only underwear. It would have been once, in fact it probably still is in some societies.Engage your brain before you post.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579248]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Tony Hopkinson]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 15:31:03 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Please explain.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579148]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579148]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[OnTheRopes]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:34:06 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Please explain.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579153]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579153]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[OnTheRopes]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:33:29 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Please explain, (Duplicate post but note the time stamps)]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579155]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579155]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[OnTheRopes]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:13:33 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[What sort of major issues do you ascribe to people 'into' porn?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579144]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Please explain.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579144]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[OnTheRopes]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:12:42 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You can no more speak for everyone in the USA]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579107]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[than I can for everyone in the UK or everyone in the USA for that matter. Try again.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-205451-2579107]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[OnTheRopes]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:58:38 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

