American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences ISSN (E): 2832-8019 Volume 6, | Nov., 2022 P a g e | 26 www.americanjournal.org PROBLEMS OF MODERN COMPUTER ETHICS Farrukh Usmonov Associate Professor of the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Samarkand branch of Tashkent University of Information Technologies, Samarkand, Uzbekistan A B S T R A C T K E Y W O R D S In this article highlights of problems modern computer ethics and the principles of solving ethical problems in the field of computer ethics are revealed, the general features of the new ethics of modern society are determined. information technology, computer ethics, information security, communication, virtual life. In recent decades, there have been discussions in the scientific literature and networks of cyberattacks about the need to regulate computer communications, social control during cyberattacks, their capabilities and limits. Because computerization and communication is a new type of communication implemented with the help of information technologies, which was created in the 70s of the last century as the fourth information revolution and radically changed the ability of the media to influence culture, consciousness and man. behavior. From a sociological point of view, the process of institutionalization of this new type of human activity - the production, storage and transmission of information using information technologies - has intensified in recent years. Institutionalization as a way of social recognition of a socially necessary form of joint activity and communication of people includes, at a minimum, the development of specific norms and rules for the interaction of subjects that regulate mutual relations, relations of a given group of people with other groups or society as a whole. The process of institutionalization of initiated computer communication is carried out in the conditions of coexistence and conflict of different worldviews, worldviews, and its comprehension is carried out from the standpoint of different philosophical, sociological and moral paradigms, therefore, different philosophical, social and moral paradigms require a scientific and technical "profile" of specialists, an integrated approach to disclosure and analysis of existing attempts of legal and professional-ethical regulation of virtual communication, interdisciplinary efforts. The advent of national, but especially global computer networks (such as the Internet) has fundamentally changed the way people communicate. Communication using a computer has created fundamentally new opportunities for the manifestation of personal freedom, which makes it necessary to briefly reveal its specific features. As a socially determined process of transmission and perception of information in the conditions of interpersonal communication carried out by means of computers and computer networks, virtual communication has a number of important differences from traditional forms of communication [1]. We mentioned the first one above: it is universal in nature, that is, it has American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 5, Nov., 2022 P a g e | 27 www.americanjournal.org a high degree of permeability, its participants can be located in any part of our planet or even beyond its borders. Computer communication is an interactive remote (remote) communication, the participants of which can be both recipients (recipients of information) and senders of messages, while remaining anonymous in their relationship with each other. Anonymity allows you to ignore many social conventions, norms of the outside world, socio-cultural space, status differences. This creates the illusion of complete freedom from the outside world. The participants of virtual communication do not have age, professional, gender and racial-ethnic differences. In the process of virtual communication, any image can be accepted, that is, it interacts not with specific personalities, but with simulacra, which make it possible to experiment with one's personalities. The ability for everyone to have access to everything that is almost absent in traditional culture, the ability to rise above religious, ethnic, legal, moral and even prohibitions, that is, the norms of culture as a whole, brings computer communication closer to a medieval carnival. . For a certain period of time, under the guise of carnival masks, the carnival made it possible to ignore the very strict social conventions that existed at that time (religion, moral norms, class restrictions). The blurring of social roles and statuses, the destruction of spatial, geographical and cultural barriers, and other features noted above, undoubtedly, make it difficult for traditional social institutions to manage the process of virtual communication. Some authors even write about its institutionalization, which is partly true, since at the end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st century this process is carried out consciously and purposefully. Of course, at the beginning of the information age (in the 70s and 90s of the twentieth century), the ideology of universal freedom prevailed in cyberspace. Anonymity, combined with the ability to disconnect at any time, gives the novice user the impression that laws and rules need to be observed only in the real world, and the Internet is a free space without restrictions and norms. This mood and attitude was reflected in the "Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace" (1996), whose author John Perry Barlow argued that the network is a purely self-regulating system, without any mandatory regulation, and should be built only in accordance with moral, but legal laws [2]. Proponents of such a regulatory approach rightly fear that state intervention may lead to information and legal totalitarianism of the state in the future, since the technical possibilities for this are quite real. According to the ideology of libertarianism, there can be no laws imposed from outside for the Internet, only network ethics, network etiquette and technical protocols are enough. At the same time, today many participants in this process are increasingly aware of the need to more or less manage and regulate the processes of virtual interaction. In this regard, the question arises, within what limits and on the basis of what principles legal regulation should be carried out. Or, as Barlow's proponents argue, the ethics, morality, and culture within the network should take precedence in network regulation. Without denying the attractiveness of the ideology of independence from state structures, it should be noted that in modern conditions, when the state continues to play such an important role in many areas of people's lives all over the planet, there is a complete absence of state regulation. telecommunication networks. That is, taking into account the global and transboundary nature of virtual communication noted above, effective legal regulation cannot be carried out only on the basis of national law, without a unified international policy regarding the global network, without global network law. But since this is a matter for the future, it cannot be said that national laws do not work in different countries. They American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 5, Nov., 2022 P a g e | 28 www.americanjournal.org are trying, if not to keep pace with the rapid development of telecommunications, then actively control cyberspace. In particular, among the most important legal documents adopted in the United States in the 1980s and 1990s are the Telecommunications Act, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the Access to Electronic Information, Services and Networks ", the program" National Information Infrastructure ". In Germany, changes can be noted in the law “On the regulation of the basic rules of information and communication services”, in the UK “On copyright”. Of course, the degree of strictness of laws varies from country to country, depending on the type of political regime. For example, in some eastern countries, any citizen who owns a computer can register it with the relevant government agencies under threat of criminal prosecution, and the owner of a website can even go to jail for publishing an article aimed at "subverting the state." System" (in China). In "developed democratic" countries, on the contrary, a liberal approach to the development of the Internet predominates, involving the intervention of a small state in its activities. Although there are no single conceptual approaches that would be international, these approaches seem to be the most realistic for the future. Based on the foregoing, it can be argued that the current legislation does not apply specifically to Internet communications, but regulates general information relations when using computers. Because the specifics of the Internet limits the possibilities of legal regulation. In addition, the law always lags behind the rapid development of the modern information society, which requires recognition of the importance of ethical regulation within the network. Consequently, the real situation requires network users and other network communication specialists to show personal moral responsibility for what is happening in cyberspace. The effectiveness of legal (as well as political, economic or technical) norms should always be ensured by the necessary, useful, fair and other internal justification of the individual, that is, ideally, legal norms should be developed on the basis of moral norms. What ethical principles, ideals, and values underlie the Good News Act? Most people probably knew the answer. This is the basic rights and freedoms of a person in the field of information, accepted by the international community as an international benchmark: the right to express one's opinion, thoughts and words, the right to receive information, the right to privacy, personal and family secrets. They are recorded in the international human rights documents adopted by the UN. That is, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948, Articles 12, 19), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966, Articles 17, 19, 23, 24, 29), protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms European Convention on making (1980, Articles 8, 10). The requirements of these international documents are still more political and moral in nature. Their real legal formalization is carried out in the constitutions of the countries that recognize these documents and in accordance with the laws adopted in these countries. It should be noted that the provisions of these basic political and legal documents have a declarative nature, that various state structures have violated them under various pretexts (mainly national security issues) or introduced new real information restrictions. It can be seen that state structures, computer corporations or copyright associations as large and well-organized associations have a real opportunity to introduce certain restrictions in the field of information in all countries, to protect their interests to the authorities. The rights of ordinary citizens interested in maximum access to information are protected by a large number of human rights organizations. For example, the Global Internet Liberty American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 5, Nov., 2022 P a g e | 29 www.americanjournal.org Campaign (GILC), the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), the Moscow Libertarium or the interregional group "Human Rights Network". Laws that recognize the need for external, inherently traditional legal regulation of computer communications must simultaneously promote the public availability of new information and protect copyright, guarantee privacy and prevent computer crime, protect the right to free access to information, and simultaneously protect citizens and society. intended to promote information security. Professional ethical rules are developed and adopted with the help of international or national public organizations, professional communities, voluntary associations of users who independently define the principles of behavior in the virtual space, develop their own internal standards of professional behavior. They are based on the principles of information ethics developed by R. Mason in 1986. That is, the principle of confidentiality, the principle of availability, the principle of inviolability of private property and the principle of accuracy of information [3]. These principles are concretized in the form of rules of conduct aimed at reducing the possible social consequences and moral conflicts of using information technologies and thereby achieving a certain degree of autonomy of the network community. They do not have the status of legal norms, but are accepted by these communities and act as one of the mechanisms of moral self-regulation of cyberspace. They define the basic ethical guidelines in information activities, violate the principles and standards of public morality in the virtual environment, and give clear recommendations for behavior in certain situations that are not always provided for by law. These norms are expressed in the form of self-formed prescriptions, prohibitions, permissions in the process of virtual interaction. But unlike others, the norms of these rules are essentially customary, they are the result of an agreement. They are intensively discussed and voluntarily accepted by the participants of virtual communication. Among the first regulations of this type are those adopted by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers in 1979, before the advent of the Internet. Also mentioned are the Code of Ethics of the Association of Information Processing Managers in 1981, the Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct of the Association of Computer Professionals in 1992, the Code of Ethics of the Certification Institute for Computer Professionals in 1996, or the Code of Ethics and Professional Practice of Software Developers in 1999 [4]. All of them were adopted in the USA and mainly reflect the attitude of the subject to his work, the object of information activity. Despite their differences and detailed level of requirements, they include the following general norms of information ethics: • to be responsible for the consequences of their decisions; • ensuring public welfare and safety; • conscientious performance of professional duties; • loyalty to the employer; • continuous improvement of the level of one's knowledge and skills; • promotion of increasing the prestige of the profession; • protect the confidentiality of computer data. Although these rules do not reflect the specific characteristics of computer communication except for exceptions, their norms are very declarative, but have been recommended by the International Federation of Information Technology to national computer associations as a basis for developing their own rules of computer ethics. American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 5, Nov., 2022 P a g e | 30 www.americanjournal.org However, the most cited set of ethical rules is a document called "Ten Rules of Computer Ethics" by A. Rinaldi of the Computer Ethics Institute at the beginning of the new millennium. These rules are as follows: 1. Do not use the computer to harm other people. 2. Do not interfere with the work of other users. 3. Do not "stick your nose" in computer files that are not intended for free use. 4. Do not use the computer for theft. 5. Do not use the computer for wrong information. 6. Don't use programs you haven't paid for. 7. Do not use computer resources without permission. 8. Do not infringe on someone else's intellectual property. 9. Think about the possible social consequences of the program you are developing. 10. Use your own computer, which determines your safety and respect for other people. It is not difficult to see that the main drawback of the above rules is reducing the regulatory capacity and causing psychological withdrawal. Some rules can be formulated in a positive recommendation form. For example, the first rule is "Don't use the computer only for the benefit of other people", the second rule is "Avoid interfering with the work of other users", the sixth rule is "Use only programs you have paid for", and the seventh rule is "Use only authorized computer courses". It should not be regretted that the level of familiarity with them is very low among the majority of users and that these aspects have not yet been paid attention to in the system of training computer users. Ethical rules written in the field of e-commerce and Internet business, which appeared as a kind of guarantee of the image of companies selling computers, are a real step towards the formation of computer ethics. The most famous among them is the Business Quality Bureau, developed in 2000. It contains requirements such as the accuracy and truthfulness of the information provided to the client, correct handling of the client's personal data, transparency of information, protection of children and adolescents from unfair advertising and offensive forms of marketing, etc. Rules in the field of telemedicine made an important contribution to the development of norms of ethical rules of cyberspace. These include "Telemedicine Code of Ethics" (2000), "Code of Ethics for Internet-Medical Sites" http://gradusnik.ru/kodex, which formed the criteria for the reliability of medical information available on the Internet. In addition to certain professional requirements, the reliability of information distributed on the Internet involves questionable issues. And the site builder gets almost no checks. Therefore, requirements such as mandatory display of the latest update or change of information on the site, mandatory reference to the original source of information, presentation of information in the most convenient form with mandatory comments are relevant not only in the field of medicine, but also in computer communication in general. But while these rules do not cover the entire range of interactions that occur on the Internet, the Electronic Rights and Responsibilities Bill, www.efa.org.au/Publish/ere.html, outlines the Internet's global self-regulatory initiatives. It is by far the most organized and universal document containing the principles of network ethics. It was created in 1996 by P. Meril based on long discussions with Internet users from different countries and consists of two sections. In the first part, the moral rights specific to the adult participant of Internet communication are presented, in the second - moral principles, the requirements that ensure the fulfillment of the above rights. Thus, in the first section, the right to communication, i.e. the right to receive any information, the right to control the distribution of intellectual property, the right to American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 5, Nov., 2022 P a g e | 31 www.americanjournal.org privacy (i.e. to refuse to disclose any information created or received), to encrypt, "solve" or change the password of any information the right, the right to refuse to disclose the source of information, the right to ignore information of any nature, the right to legal advice, the right to access any public information in an area limited only by price, the right of everyone to access any message, record that may belong to him, act, statute or law, etc. The second part consists of ethics of tolerance, ethics of trust, ethics of care, ethics of regulation (duties). In conclusion, the development and promotion of ethical codes of virtual communication is not a guarantee of their implementation. Nevertheless, getting to know them can encourage users, all participants of Internet communication, to reflect morally, contribute to the formation of a certain public opinion and the creation of reasonable criteria for moral evaluation, and ultimately awaken a person's conscience and duty. Finally, in the future, they can be the basis for the development of international information law norms. This adequately reflects the realities of this type of human communication and thus helps to accelerate the process of its institutionalization. References 1. Малькова Е.Ю.Этические проблемы виртуальной коммуникации. Автореферат диссертации…канд. Филос. Наук. – СПб., 2004. – C. 8. 2. Барлоу Дж.П. Декларация Независимости Киберпространства. 1996. Перевод с англ. Е.Горского (http://www/zhurnal/ru/staff/gorny/translat/deklare.html). 3. Ащеулова Н.А.История социологии науки в Ленинграде-Санкт-Петербурге. Автореферат дисс… канд. социолог. наук. – СПб., 2006. – C. 12. 4. Алексеева И.Ю.Этика Интернет: опыт международной команды. // Выступление на семинаре «Информационное общество»…28 июня 2000 г. (http://www.isn.ru/info/seminar- doc/ethics.doc). 5. Тураев Б. О. Фанда толерантлик ва интолерантлик //Oriental renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences. – 2022. – Т. 2. – №. Special Issue 23. – С. 41-48. 6. Усмонов Ф. Н., Усмонова Л. Р. Рациональный анализ восточной миниатюры //Молодой ученый. – 2016. – №. 2. – С. 987-991. 7. Каримов Б. Р., Тураев Б. О. Научное предвидение как высшая форма опережающего отражения действительности./Предвидение как форма научного познания. – 1985. – С. 59 8. Ризаев И. И., Муминова З. О. Профессиональная подготовка личности: оздоровление и духовное воспитание //Система менеджмента качества в вузе: здоровье, образованность, конкурентоспособность. – 2021. – С. 264-268. 9. Usmonov F. N. The role rationalization in the acceleration of life sequence //Theoretical & Applied Science. – 2020. – №. 3. – С. 227-229. 10. Muminova Z. Personality: wellness and spiritual education //Academicia Globe: Inderscience Research. – 2021. – Т. 2. – №. 6. – С. 20-23. 11. Alikulov X., Haqqulov N. Q. Духовная зрелость и философское мышление зависимость развития //Theoretical & Applied Science. – 2020. – №. 4. – С. 164-167. 12. Ulmasjonovich K. S. Mystical and Philosophical Foundations of Human Interaction //Middle European Scientific Bulletin. – 2021. – Т. 19. – С. 358-364. 13. Alikulov S. A., Rizaev I. I. Methodological problems of research of social systems //Theoretical & Applied Science. – 2020. – №. 2. – С. 717-720. http://www.isn.ru/info/seminar-doc/ethics.doc http://www.isn.ru/info/seminar-doc/ethics.doc American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 5, Nov., 2022 P a g e | 32 www.americanjournal.org 14. Ulmasjonovich K. S. Mystical and philosophical foundations of human interaction (based on the teachings of Makhdumi Azami Kasani). – 2021. 15. Mardonov R. Historical and philosophical analysis of Eastern and Western education systems //International Journal For Advanced Research In Science & Technology/A peer reviewed international journal. www. ijarst. in. – 2021. – Т. 11. – №. 02. – С. 252-256. 16. Ризаев И. И. и др. Коэволюционное развитие самоорганизации: взаимосвязь стабильности и нестабильности в социальной системе //Человек. Знак. Техника: II междунар. междисциплинар. молодеж. форум:[сб. ст.].-Текст: электронный.-Текст: электронный.- 2022. – 2022. 17. Mardonov R. Philosophical problems of modern education //ACADEMICIA. An International Multidisciplinary Research Journal (Double Blind Ref ereed & Peer Reviewed Journal). ISSN. – С. 2249-7137. 18. Khotambekovna E. M. Systematic Analysis of Education //ResearchJet Journal of Analysis and Inventions. – 2021. – Т. 2. – №. 07. – С. 85-96. 19. Husan M. Dialectics of Potentiality and Virtuality in Space and TIME //European Scholar Journal. – 2022. – Т. 3. – №. 1. – С. 40-42. 20. Yuldashevna Y. D. Science and Its Significance in the Process of Forming Spiritual and Moral Values //JournalNX. – 2021. – Т. 7. – №. 04. – С. 248-253. 21. Rizaev I. I. The structure of the social system as the basis for the self-organization of society //Scientific Bulletin of Namangan State University. – 2019. – Т. 1. – №. 7. – С. 151-156. 22. Усмонов Ф. Н. Эпистемологическая эволюция рационализма //Наука и современность. – 2012. – №. 19-1. – С. 194-198. 23. Ismoilovich E. I. The mechanism of evaluation of innovative investment processes effectiveness in the service sector //SAARJ Journal on Banking & Insurance Research. – 2016. – Т. 5. – №. 3. – С. 60-71. 24. Аликулов С. А., Ризаев И. И. Синергетический анализ онтологической сущности процесса либерализации общества //Социальные институты в правовом измерении: теория и практика. – 2022. – С. 280-286.