This is a fantastic statement, and the critical point from which all responsibility derives. The ability to predict the consequences of ones actions creates the requirement to do so because it creates the responsibility for the foreseeable outcomes of those actions. The real difficulty with responsibility is in assessing the ability for one to predict the consequences of their actions and whether they were foreseeable at the time when the assessor has the benefit of perfect hindsight. In the case of MIT the additional intelligence creates additional responsibility and diminishes the protection of an unpredictable consequence.
Is anyone arguing that MIT staff knew or should have known that by allowing the harassment of Aaron Schwartz that his life was in danger? Or is it that by allowing the harassment they created a dangerous and unpredictable situation where any number of bad things could happen?
Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds