Philosophers and others concerned with the moral good of personal privacy most often see threats to privacy raised by the development of pervasive computing as primarily being threats to the loss of control over personal information. Two reasons in particular lend this approach plausibility. One reason is that the parallels between pervasive computing and ordinary networked computing, where everyday transactions over the Internet raise concerns about personal information privacy, appear stronger than their differences. Another reason is that the individual devices (...) which can become linked in a pervasive computing environment: PDAs, GPS sensors, RFID chips/readers, publicly-located video surveillance cameras, Internet-enabled mobile phones, and the like, each raise threats to individual privacy. Without discounting the value of this approach, this paper aims to propose an alternative; and, as a result of recasting the threat to individual privacy from pervasive computing, to identify other, and deeper, moral goods that pervasive computing puts at risk that otherwise might remain concealed. In particular, I argue that pervasive computing threatens to compromise what I call existential autonomy: the right to decide for ourselves at least some of the existential conditions under which we form and develop our ways of life, including our relations to information technology. From this perspective, some moral goods at stake in protecting privacy in an environment of pervasive computing emerge that have less to do with furthering human well-being through the promotion of self-identity and subjectivity, than with stimulating curiosity, receptivity to difference, and, most broadly, openness to the world. (shrink)

Academic research into RFID technology has largely neglected ethics. What scarce research was being performed has now dwindled despite having some consumers continue to express their ethical concerns. This article aims at reducing this apparent void by exploring the antecedents that cause the public to react when consumers are targeted by RFID technology. Through the analysis of 11 real RFID implementations used to target consumers, our research indicates that several factors can influence consumer response through the distinct nature of the (...) technology, namely, Customization of communications, Imposition of tag use, Segmentation and targeting, Modified role of the sales representative, Physical distance between the consumer and the tag, and Security of transactions. The article then proposes a construct to determine the risk of raising consumer ethical concerns. The construct of “Connective Proximity” and its three components are defined. Our research highlights the need for further studies on the ethical considerations of tagging humans and specifically tracking consumers when performing marketing activities with RFID technology. Our article aims at invigorating research on this topic, which has a lot to contribute to both society and corporations. (shrink)