@inproceedings{WeberDrueeke, author = {Weber, Karsten and Dr{\"u}eke, Ricarda}, title = {Privacy, personal data protection, and the need to differentiate}, series = {Ethics of New Information Technology. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference of Computer Ethics: Philosophical Enquiries (CEPE2005)}, booktitle = {Ethics of New Information Technology. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference of Computer Ethics: Philosophical Enquiries (CEPE2005)}, editor = {Brey, Philip and Grodzinsky, F. and Introna, L.}, pages = {13}, abstract = {The coming years will be characterized by the development of mobile ICT that will enable con - sumers to use information and communication services everywhere and anytime. Technologies like GPRS, WLAN, or UMTS can be used stand-alone or in combination with other technologies like RFID or GPS to provide, for instance, location-aware services. Mobile ICT is to be expected to evolve to that what often is called Ambient Intelligence, Ubiquitous or Pervasive Computing. It is likely that such new technologies will affect personnel privacy because providing mobile ICT services inherits the identification and often the exact localization of users. In the following text we shall analyze possible threats of privacy. We will distinguish different dimensions or aspects of privacy to show how new technologies can affect them. After that, we shall argue that it is necessary to make a distinction of privacy and data protection: privacy primarily is a matter of social norms and data protection the realm of technical measurements. Additionally, we will provide some empirical evidence that users of the Internet make that distinction. Finally, we will claim that the right to privacy and privacy itself only can be protected if there are widely accepted social norms regarding privacy.}, language = {en} } @incollection{Weber, author = {Weber, Karsten}, title = {Science Wars - Remarks from a Critical Rationalist's Point of View}, series = {Karl Popper: A Centenary Assessment. Volume II: Metaphysics and epistemology}, booktitle = {Karl Popper: A Centenary Assessment. Volume II: Metaphysics and epistemology}, editor = {Jarvie, Ian C. and Milford, Karl and Miller, David}, publisher = {Ashgate}, address = {Aldershot et al.}, pages = {95 -- 108}, abstract = {In this text I would like to make some remarks on the so called 'Science Wars' from a Critical Rationalist's point of view. First I will describe the beginning of this war, which was given public awareness by Alan Sokal in 1996 publishing his text Transgressing the Boundaries. Toward a transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity in the postmodernist journal Social Text. In 1997 Alan Sokal, together with Jean Bricmont, again attacked postmodernist and poststructuralist scholars with the book Impostures Intellectuelles. I will describe the aims of their book and in addition portray briefly the postmodernist relativistic epistemology. Since Sokal and Bricmont identify Critical Rationalism as a source of that relativism, I then will show possible reasons for this reproach. I will reject their critique, since it is based on false estimations about Critical Rationalism but I also will show that there are some good reasons to criticize Critical Rationalism. As a kind of conclusion I will argue that in the future it is necessary that Critical Rationalists will dispute more offensively against postmodernist thinking to prevent a deepening of the gap between the humanities and science and because science is an important means to the improvement of our society.}, language = {en} } @incollection{WeberHaug, author = {Weber, Karsten and Haug, Sonja}, title = {Demographische Entwicklung, Rationierung und (intergenerationelle) Gerechtigkeit - ein Problemb{\"u}ndel der Gesundheitsversorgung}, series = {Medizinethik Bd. 5}, booktitle = {Medizinethik Bd. 5}, editor = {Joerden, Jan C. and Neumann, J.N.}, publisher = {Peter Lang}, address = {Frankfurt am Main}, pages = {70}, language = {de} } @incollection{WeberDrueekeSchulz, author = {Weber, Karsten and Dr{\"u}eke, Ricarda and Schulz, Axel}, title = {Mobiler Wissenszugang: Digital Rights Management vs. Privacy}, series = {Wissensorganisation und Verantwortung. Gesellschaftliche, {\"o}konomische und technische Aspekte}, booktitle = {Wissensorganisation und Verantwortung. Gesellschaftliche, {\"o}konomische und technische Aspekte}, editor = {Ohly, Heinz Peter and Sieglerschmidt, J. and Swertz, C.}, publisher = {Ergon}, address = {W{\"u}rzburg}, pages = {180 -- 193}, language = {de} } @article{Weber, author = {Weber, Karsten}, title = {Die ethischen Leitlinien der Gesellschaft f{\"u}r Informatik e.V. werden {\"u}berarbeitet - Ein Arbeitsbericht}, series = {Ethica}, volume = {11}, journal = {Ethica}, number = {1}, pages = {6 Seiten}, language = {de} } @inproceedings{Weber, author = {Weber, Karsten}, title = {Computersimulationen im Entdeckungszusammenhang}, series = {Kreativit{\"a}t. Proceedings des XX. Deutschen Kongresses f{\"u}r Philosophie}, booktitle = {Kreativit{\"a}t. Proceedings des XX. Deutschen Kongresses f{\"u}r Philosophie}, editor = {Abel, G.}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag der TU Berlin}, address = {Berlin}, pages = {8}, language = {de} } @inproceedings{Weber, author = {Weber, Karsten}, title = {Wer bestimmt {\"u}ber den Tod? Interventionsrechtete von Familienangeh{\"o}rigen und anderen Personen}, series = {Familie versus Patientenautonomie? Zur Rolle der Familie bei Behandlungsentscheidungen ; Tagungsband der Taunus Winter School}, booktitle = {Familie versus Patientenautonomie? Zur Rolle der Familie bei Behandlungsentscheidungen ; Tagungsband der Taunus Winter School}, editor = {Roth{\"a}rmel, Sonja and Schmidt, K.W. and Wolfslast, G.}, publisher = {Haag + Herchen}, address = {Frankfurt am Main}, isbn = {978-3-89846-436-9}, language = {de} } @article{LoiChristenKleineetal., author = {Loi, Michele and Christen, Markus and Kleine, Nadine and Weber, Karsten}, title = {Cybersecurity in health}, series = {Journal of Information, Communication \& Ethics in Society}, volume = {17}, journal = {Journal of Information, Communication \& Ethics in Society}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1108/JICES-12-2018-0095}, pages = {229 -- 245}, abstract = {Purpose Cybersecurity in healthcare has become an urgent matter in recent years due to various malicious attacks on hospitals and other parts of the healthcare infrastructure. The purpose of this paper is to provide an outline of how core values of the health systems, such as the principles of biomedical ethics, are in a supportive or conflicting relation to cybersecurity. Design/methodology/approach This paper claims that it is possible to map the desiderata relevant to cybersecurity onto the four principles of medical ethics, i.e. beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy and justice, and explore value conflicts in that way. Findings With respect to the question of how these principles should be balanced, there are reasons to think that the priority of autonomy relative to beneficence and non-maleficence in contemporary medical ethics could be extended to value conflicts in health-related cybersecurity. Research limitations/implications However, the tension between autonomy and justice, which relates to the desideratum of usability of information and communication technology systems, cannot be ignored even if one assumes that respect for autonomy should take priority over other moral concerns. Originality/value In terms of value conflicts, most discussions in healthcare deal with the conflict of balancing efficiency and privacy given the sensible nature of health information. In this paper, the authors provide a broader and more detailed outline.}, language = {en} } @article{AltenbuchnerHaugMohretal., author = {Altenbuchner, Amelie and Haug, Sonja and Mohr, Christa and Scorna, Ulrike and Weber, Karsten}, title = {Methodenbericht einer Mixed-Method Evaluation von Multiprofessionalit{\"a}t in der Behandlung von Multipler Sklerose (MS)}, series = {Pflegewissenschaft - Journal f{\"u}r Pflegewissenschaft und Pflegepraxis}, volume = {20}, journal = {Pflegewissenschaft - Journal f{\"u}r Pflegewissenschaft und Pflegepraxis}, number = {11-12}, issn = {1422-8629}, pages = {523 -- 524}, abstract = {Therapieabbruch oder -unterbrechung erh{\"o}hen das Risiko von Krankheitssch{\"u}ben in der MS-Behandlung (Ennis et al., 2008). Der Abbruchanteil f{\"u}r die immunmodulatorische Basistherapie mit COPAXONE® betrug 2008 in den ersten drei Monaten bis zu 30 \% (COPAKTIV Schwestern-Service, 2008), worauf das Aktiv-mit-MS-Patientenbetreuungsprogramm, eine begleitende pflegerische Fachberatung und ein Servicetelefon, installiert wurde. Die Auswirkungen der Zusammenarbeit innerhalb des Teams und mit {\"A}rzt/innen sowie die peer-to-peer Beratung in einem Online-Forum auf Therapietreue und Krankheitsbew{\"a}ltigung der Patient/innen wurde im L{\"a}ngsschnitt untersucht. Ein Methoden-Mix wurde erfolgreich zur Evaluation der pflegerischen Multiprofessionalit{\"a}t eingesetzt. Es zeigte sich, dass die Angebote im Betreuungsprogramm zu einer Verminderung der Abbruchquote f{\"u}hrten und die Patient/innen eine gute Therapietreue einhalten.}, language = {de} } @article{Weber, author = {Weber, Karsten}, title = {Computers as omnipotent instruments of power}, series = {The ORBIT Journal - An Online Journal for Responsible Research and Innovation in ICT}, volume = {2}, journal = {The ORBIT Journal - An Online Journal for Responsible Research and Innovation in ICT}, number = {1}, publisher = {Elsevier}, doi = {10.29297/orbit.v2i1.97}, pages = {1 -- 19}, abstract = {With examples concerning the development and dissemination of computer technology in the Soviet Union, the U.S., and other Western countries it shall be demonstrated that computer development on the one hand and social change as well as changes in policy making and administration on the other hand are mingled with each other without a clear direction of causation being discernible.It also shall be shown that perceived social and political threats imposed by early computer technology sometimes actually helped to stop or at least slow down social change. One conclusion that can be drawn from the case studies described for RRI is that the conscious steering of innovations fails because of diffuse and uncoordinated resistance from very different stakeholders. The case studies also suggest that the effectiveness of RRI might be rather limited.}, language = {en} } @article{WeberHaug, author = {Weber, Karsten and Haug, Sonja}, title = {Ist automatisiertes Fahren nachhaltig?}, series = {TATuP - Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Technikfolgenabsch{\"a}tzung in Theorie und Praxis}, volume = {27}, journal = {TATuP - Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Technikfolgenabsch{\"a}tzung in Theorie und Praxis}, number = {2}, publisher = {Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)}, doi = {10.14512/tatup.27.2.16}, pages = {16 -- 22}, abstract = {Automatisiertes Fahren st{\"o}ßt derzeit noch auf große Skepsis. Eine disruptive Strategie bei der Einf{\"u}hrung (voll-)automatisierten Fahrens k{\"o}nnte daher auf fehlende Akzeptanz treffen. Um dem zu entgehen, laufen evolution{\"a}re Strategien darauf hinaus, durch die Entwicklung adaptiver Fahrassistenzsysteme Vertrautheit, Vertrauen und damit Akzeptanz bei den prospektiven NutzerInnen zu schaffen. Erste Ergebnisse einer Pilotstudie lassen jedoch Zweifel an der Nachhaltigkeit dieser Strategie aufkommen.}, language = {de} } @article{WeberPallasUlbricht, author = {Weber, Karsten and Pallas, Frank and Ulbricht, Max-R.}, title = {Challenges of Citizen Science: Commons, Incentives, Organizations, and Regulations}, series = {American Journal of Bioethics}, volume = {19}, journal = {American Journal of Bioethics}, number = {8}, doi = {10.1080/15265161.2019.1619862}, pages = {52 -- 54}, language = {en} }