近年来互联网规范研究综述(英文)

时间:2018-11-22 作者:博学论文网
  摘要:互联网与现实世界一样也是人们活动的空间, 人在互联网中的行为与在现实世界中一样也需要规范的指导和约束。互联网规范研究就是研究互联网中人的行为规范的新领域, 它涉及人们在互联网中的一切行为规范, 包括互联网伦理、互联网法律、互联网技术规范、互联网社交礼仪等多个方面。本文对近年来互联网规范研究的发展历程及其主要内容进行回顾, 总结了当前互联网规范研究的不足, 对未来互联网规范研究前景进行了前瞻, 这对互联网规范研究具有重要的意义。
  
  关键词:互联网; 互联网伦理; 互联网法律; 行为规范;
  
  Abstract:As the real world, the internet is the human activity space, the behavior of people in internet must be guided and restrained by the norms like in the real world.The network norm research is a new field which studies the norms of human behavior in the network, it involves in all the norms of people acting in internet, such as network ethic, network law, network technology norm, network etiquette and so on.Since the internet appears, the network norm research has achieved rich results and become one important part of the internet study.So it is of great significance for the network norm research to review its development process in the past years, summarize its shortage and expect its development future.
  
  Keyword:internet; internet morality; internet law; behavior norm;
  
  At present, the Internet has changed from a simple means of communication to a new way of life. “The wide application of a technology in society involves not only the progress of technology itself, but also the transformation of social structure and people's way of life and thinking in many ways”[1]. The change of people's way of life causes the change of people's way of behavior, which makes how to regulate people's behavior in the Internet become interconnected. An important aspect of network research. The study of Internet norms mainly focuses on the behavior norms of people in the Internet, including all the behavior norms of people in the Internet. It includes not only the technical norms of people in the development and application of computer technology and Internet, but also the social norms in the interaction process of people in the Internet. It covers Internet ethics and interaction. Internet law, Internet technical norms, Internet social etiquette and many other contents. The study of Internet norms provides theoretical support for people's practice in formulating Internet policies and laws, regulating Internet users'behavior, building a harmonious and secure Internet environment, and promoting the healthy development of the Internet. Therefore, it is of great significance to review the development course and main contents of Internet norm research in recent years, and to look forward to the future research of Internet norm.
  
  I. The Development Course and Major Achievements of Internet Standardization Research
  
  Berners Lee, the father of the World Wide Web, pointed out that “the World Wide Web is not only a treasure of information to be excavated, but also a reference or research tool” [2]. The Internet has undergone a transformation from research tools, communication tools to living space and lifestyle, which has changed the way of human life. From the development of the Internet and people's understanding of the Internet to divide the development process of Internet normative research, marked by the rise of the global Internet (1) can be divided into two periods. The first period is from the 1980s to the mid-1990s. The Internet has brought tremendous changes to people's lives, but also caused a series of ethical and legal problems. In this period, people are mainly concerned about the Internet problems in the process of Internet application, so the study of Internet norms in this period is mainly to analyze the causes of Internet problems and explore solutions. The second period is from the mid-1990s to the present. During this period, the development of the Internet has already exceeded its original purpose, playing an increasingly important role in business, politics, general social use and other aspects. It has become the space of human life in which people work, leisure, entertainment and complete most of the real world. Transactions. Therefore, how to regulate people's behavior in the Internet has become the focus of attention. People begin to turn to the study of Internet norms to regulate Internet behavior, such as Internet ethics, Internet law, Internet technical norms, etc.
  
  The main results of the research on Internet norms at home and abroad are basically launched along the course of Internet development. In 1985, James Moore, an American scholar, first studied computer-related norms of human behavior from the perspective of ethics in his article What is Computer Ethics. Since then, the study of ethical issues caused by computers and the Internet has been gradually carried out, such as Deborah Johnson's “Computer Ethics”, Tom Forrest and Perry Morrison's “Computer Ethics: Warnings and Ethical Dilemma in Computer Science”. There are also many studies on the legal issues brought about by the development of the Internet, such as Lawrence Lesger's Code 2.0: Law in Cyberspace, David Johnston's Online Game Rules: 11 Legal Issues in the Cyber Age, and so on. Some scholars are concerned about the changes in social structure caused by the development of the Internet, starting from the impact of the Internet on the whole society, such as Manuel Caster's two works “The Rise of the Internet Society” and “Network Star River”. Faced with the rapid development of the Internet, many scholars have also studied the impact of the Internet on people's way of life, thinking and development, such as Theodore Roszak's “Information Worship: Computer Myth and True Art of Thinking”, “Digital Survival” by Nicolo Ponty and “Screen” by Shirley Turker. Life on Internet: Identity Certificate in Internet Age, etc.
  
  From the domestic point of view, due to the late rise of the Internet in China, the domestic academic circles pay more attention to and study the Internet norms later than foreign countries. In 1988, Lu Xudong translated James Moore's What is Computer Ethics into Chinese and published it in World Philosophy that year, which was the earliest concern of domestic scholars on the issue of Internet norms. In 1994, when the Internet was connected to China, the tremendous impact of the Internet on our society and national life gradually emerged. The application of the Internet in ethics, law, technology, society and economy has gradually become a new hotspot in domestic academic research. From the time point of view, although the domestic academic circles pay attention to the Internet norms and research started relatively late, the domestic academic research shows a catching-up trend. Especially in the new century, the domestic academic research shows a state of omni-directional and multi-disciplinary cross-research, and has made great progress.
  
  The research on Internet norms in domestic academic circles is carried out at the same time by introducing foreign research results and combining independent research. On the one hand, a large number of foreign works on Internet and Internet norms have been introduced to China. For example, “Digital Survival”, “Compiling the World Wide Web”, “Hacker Ethics and the Spirit of the Information Age”, “Iron Cage or Utopia: Morality and Law in Cyberspace” and so on. Foreign research results have opened up an unfamiliar and miraculous field for domestic scholars. For example, Nigroponti's Digitized Survival, once translated, has become a textbook on Internet life in the domestic academic circles, depicting a future life with infinite possibilities for domestic scholars; The World Wide Web is a popular book about the past and present life of the Internet, Tim, the father of the Internet. In his persuasive capacity, Berners Lee reviews the birth of the Internet and describes the future of the Internet, popularizing the basic knowledge of the Internet to Chinese readers who are still unfamiliar with the Internet.
  
  On the other hand, with the rise and development of the Internet in China, domestic scholars have launched independent research on Internet norms, and some independent and applied research results have begun to emerge, such as Yan Geng, Lu Jun and Sun Weiping's “Perspective of the Internet Age Series” in “The Ultimate Market-the Coming of the Network Economy” and “Reconstruction”. Babylon Tower - Network in Cultural Perspective, New Game of Cat and Mouse - Cyber Crime and Its Governance, etc. With the rapid development of the Internet in China, domestic academia has turned its research direction to the people living in the Internet era, and began to study the problem of people and their behavior norms in the Internet space from multi-disciplinary and multi-angle. There are also many achievements in this regard. Such as Ethical Reflection on Cyberspace, Virtue under the Mouse, Consequences of Networking, Networking and Contemporary Social Culture, Digitalization and Humanistic Spirit, etc. At the same time, some special studies on the problems brought about by the Internet, such as intellectual property protection, Internet addiction, Internet information dissemination and Internet hackers, have also been emerging, such as the Intellectual Property Law of the Internet, the Analysis and Intervention of Internet Addiction, the Fifth Media Culture Research under Multi-Attention Domain, and the New Assassin-Internet Time. Generation hackers, etc. In addition, some graduate students have begun to complete their dissertations on Internet norms, including nearly 30 doctoral dissertations, such as Duan Weiwen's “Ethical Basis of Cyberspace”, Chang Jinfang's “Introduction to Cyberphilosophy”, Liu Danhe's “Cyberspace and Interaction between Cyberspace”, and so on.
  
  II. Main Contents of Internet Standards Research
  
  Generally speaking, from the domestic and foreign academic research process and research results of Internet norms, the main content of Internet norms research can be divided into two aspects: on the one hand, the study of Internet issues; on the other hand, the study of Internet norms. These two aspects are unified and intertwined, and it is difficult to make a clear distinction between them. Most researchers study from these two aspects at the same time, but different periods also have their own emphasis.
  
  (1) Research on Internet
  
  The application of the Internet has made a great impact on the traditional norms. The change of people's living space and behavior mode makes the traditional norms encounter difficulties in the process of standardizing netizens'behavior, which has caused a series of Internet problems. The emergence of problems often attracts people's attention first. Analyzing the causes of Internet problems and exploring solutions have become one of the main contents of Internet normative research. In dealing with the causes of Internet problems, most scholars at home and abroad have the same opinions. First of all, compared with the development of the Internet, the ethical, legal and technical norms guiding the application of the Internet are either blank, or the traditional legal, ethical and technical norms are ineffective. This makes people lack normative guidance and constraints in the process of Internet application, and makes people's behavior lose direction, which leads to Internet problems. Secondly, the technical characteristics of computers and the Internet itself lead to the emergence of Internet problems. On the one hand, the “design and manufacture of computers can make them machines with any function”[3]. Thus, there are numerous possibilities for the application of computers and the Internet. The traditional standardization system can not meet the unlimited development of computers and the Internet, and it will inevitably be guided by the continuous realization of new applications of computers and the Internet. To Internet problems. On the other hand, the operation and processing of computers are invisible, and the existence of such invisible factors makes the design and use of computers vulnerable, and the lack of norms leads to the growing problem of the Internet. For example, the use of programming vulnerabilities into the organization or organization of computer sabotage activities, as well as the design of a lack of public morality of the program for improper profit-making.
  
  Different scholars have put forward different ways to solve Internet problems. James Moore provides a list of core values, including happiness, life, autonomy, resources, knowledge and security. He points out that these values are “primitive values” for human beings and are recognized in different technologies and cultures. When faced with endless Internet problems, “these core values provide criteria for evaluating the rationality of our actions and policies” [4]. But these values are juxtaposed, and once they are opposed to each other, problems arise. For example, in formulating the Internet speech policy, on the one hand, to protect the freedom of speech of Internet users, on the other hand, to protect the security of personal information of Internet users, but sometimes the two can not be unified, people must weigh the relationship between the freedom of speech of Internet users and the information security of Internet users, and strengthen one side to weaken the other. Richard Spinello believes that “traditional ethics can provide sufficient theoretical basis to deal with these new problems.” [5] However, the development of the Internet has made traditional ethics face some new situations different from the real world in solving the Internet problems, such as the unbalanced development level of the global Internet, the globalization of the Internet problems, the virtualization of the identity of netizens, the trans-temporal behavior of netizens, and so on. These situations are all questions that traditional ethics can not deal with. Question. However, Li Lun, a Chinese scholar, believes that over-emphasizing the difference between traditional ethics and network ethics can easily lead to the formation of “digital illusion”[6]. That is, there are double standards for the same kind of behavior. In fact, some problems in the Internet, such as network theft, network rumors, network piracy and so on, are all variations of the reality of the Internet. It is the same. Overemphasizing the distinction between traditional ethics and network ethics can easily duplicate people's life world. In fact, he believes that with the penetration of the Internet into the real world, the network world is also the real world. Traditional ethics is not powerless to Internet behavior.
  
  (2) Research on Internet Standards
  
  Since entering the new century, people's life, study, work, communication and leisure in the Internet have gradually become a fashion. Just as human behavior is regulated in the real world, people's behavior in the Internet should also be regulated. However, for the regulation of Internet behavior, either the traditional norms are unacceptable, or the Internet norms that regulate people's Internet behavior are blank. Therefore, the construction of Internet norms has become a necessary condition for the normal operation of the Internet. At the same time, Internet problems such as pornographic information flooding, the spread of network viruses, online game addiction and so on are becoming more and more serious. These problems have become the main problems restricting the development of the Internet. Internet development must solve these problems, and the solution is to establish Internet norms that regulate people's Internet behavior.
  
  First of all, the Internet needs Internet standards. The Internet is a “geographically infinite, unrealistic space, in which - independent of time, distance and location - between people, computers and computers, as well as between people and computers to connect” [7], the Internet seems to open up a free and independent space. Initially, the theory of Internet space considered that Internet space was a completely free space, without the control of government or organization, or even without regulation. John Perry Barlow declared, “Governments of the industrial world! You horrible iron giants! I come from Internet space, a new home of ideas.” On behalf of the future, I ask you who are out of date to stay away from us.“ [8]3 However, freedom can only become real freedom because of norms. Internet space does not need norms. On the contrary, if Internet space wants to become a territory of freedom, it must be under the control of reasonable norms. Lawrence Lesger pointed out that ”in the world we build, freedom flourishes because it is placed under some kind of intentional control“ [8]4, and this control ”should be established from the bottom up, not through the guidance of the state“ [8]3. The government or the state can not achieve this kind of regulation, and the regulation of Internet space can only be. Self-discipline and self-management from bottom to top.
  
  Secondly, Internet behavior needs Internet regulation. Xie Guishan believes that ”the communication and moral relationship on the Internet are indirect, pluralistic and symbolic, which transcends the limitation of physical space“[9]. The emergence of the Internet heralds the emergence of a new mode of human communication, which is based on the Internet and is a ”new selective social relationship model to replace territorial bondage“. Human interaction form ”[10]. Liu Dachun believes that network communication is a form of communication that is present and not present. This new form of communication has the characteristics that traditional communication behavior does not have, such as the anonymity of the subject of communication, behavior beyond time and space, etc. He pointed out that “network communication has a tremendous impact on traditional ethics and morality, and traditional ethics and morality can not be fully competent for the evaluation of network social value” [11]. Therefore, the new form of communication means the formulation of new norms or the change of traditional norms. The form of Internet communication requires a set of normative system that can restrict and guide people's Internet behavior. Lesger put forward “Code is law” [8]6. He believed that people's Internet behavior should be regulated by code, “Code will determine the degree of freedom and regulation of Internet space” [8]7. Lesger believes that programs and codes developed by programmers are more binding than Internet laws or policies enacted by the government. However, Lesger is actually putting the formulation of Internet specifications on the basis of code development, which must be neutral. However, how to ensure the neutrality of code development brings the problem back to the ethical level. Irresponsible code writers may compile some code that violates the social public morality or value, because “code itself is a powerful control force, if it can not be properly written and managed, then it will certainly be prestigious.” Threaten the inheritance of these values “[12]. Therefore, although code is an effective specification, it should not be written on the basis of a weak personal neutrality attitude.
  
  III、The Deficiencies and Prospects of Internet Standard Research
  
  (1) The inadequacy of the research on Internet norms
  
  In recent years, people have changed the research object from Internet problems to Internet norms, and the research task has changed from solving Internet problems to constructing internet norms to guide and restrict people's behavior. However, in recent years, we can still find some shortcomings in the research process of Internet norms.
  
  Firstly, there are many ethical and legal studies on Internet norms, which have developed rapidly, while there are fewer normative studies on other aspects, and the development is slow. Normative research belongs to the field of ”should be“ and should ”take the overall norms as the research object. The overall norms include moral norms, legal norms, technical norms, scientific norms, artistic norms, religious norms, policies and regulations, team discipline, customs and social etiquette, etc.“[13]. The research on Internet norms should also take the overall norms as the research object. Internet ethics, Internet law, Internet technical norms, Internet social etiquette, Internet customs and habits are all indispensable parts of Internet norms. However, in recent years, most of the research results have focused on the ethics and legal research of computers and the Internet. Whether James Moore's Computer Ethics, Richard Spinello's Iron Cage, or Utopia-Morality and Law in Internet Space, or Lu Jun's Internet Ethics, a domestic scholar, are all concerned about Internet ethics and legal norms. It is the ethical and legal problems brought about by the emergence of the Internet, as well as the ethical and legal aspects of the norms of human behavior in the Internet. Other aspects of Internet norms, such as technology, customs, social etiquette, have received less attention than ethics and law, and the results are also less.
  
  Secondly, in recent years, the legislative process of Internet laws and regulations in China has accelerated, and the network legislative system has initially formed. At present, there are four specialized laws, 18 judicial interpretations, 50 administrative rules and regulations, and 90 other normative documents. However, compared with the rapid development of the Internet and the rapid growth of the number of netizens, the overall network legal system in China is still lagging behind. Many Internet behaviors are still in a situation of irregular or irregular dependence, such as the supervision of overseas websites, the protection of privacy of citizens, the regulation of network hype and marketing behavior, and the virtual network. There are still many legal gaps in the management of false and bad information dissemination. The legislative process of Internet law in China still needs to be accelerated. At present, domestic scholars have gradually increased their research on Internet legal norms, such as Zhang Ping's Discussion on Several Issues of Internet Legal Regulations (Intellectual Property Rights), Wang Sixin's Brief Discussion on Legal Protection of Internet Privacy (Journal of Southwest University of Political Science and Law), Zhou Qingshan's On the Integral Construction of Network Legal System (Hebei Law) As well as Rao Chuanping's ”Network Legal System“, Zhao Xinghong's ”Research on Network Legal and Ethical Issues“, and so on. However, most of the studies on Internet legal norms still focus on the solution of Internet problems. In theory, there are still relatively few studies on how to construct reasonable Internet legal norms and form a theoretical framework that can guide and regulate the construction of Internet law. This has also led to the lagging behind of the development of the Internet in the process of network legislation, but also led to the introduction of some Internet laws often accompanied by huge controversy, such as the ”Internet User Account Name Management Regulations“ once issued, the controversy followed, people's concern about information leakage led to the implementation of the real-name system on the Internet. Full of controversy. Therefore, although there are more and more studies on Internet legal norms, there are still some deficiencies on how to formulate a reasonable Internet legal norm.
  
  Thirdly, a conceptual system for analyzing problems has not yet been established, and more is the solution to the problem. Although the importance of conceptual analysis in addressing these normative issues has been noted, such as James Moore's attempt to establish a ”coherent conceptual framework within which action-oriented policies can be formulated“ [3]. However, a conceptual framework for analyzing and resolving Internet norms has not yet been formed in Moore's field. His core human values compete with each other under certain circumstances, so that people must be biased. Lawrence Lesger advocates using code to regulate human behavior in Internet space. However, how to ensure that the coder is in an impartial and neutral attitude has become an unsolvable problem in Lesger's theory. At present, there are more countermeasures and controversial Internet norms to deal with Internet problems, and the formulation of these Internet norms is only a simple application of general moral values in the Internet, such as the Internet Ethics and Professional Behavior Code formulated by the American Computer Association [9]: 1. Contributing to society and human beings; 2. Avoiding injury; Harm others; 3. Be honest and reliable; 4. Be fair and do not discriminate; 5. Respect property rights including copyright and patent; 6. Respect intellectual property rights; 7. Respect the privacy of others; 8. Keep secrets.
  
  The reasons for the deficiencies in the study of Internet norms can be roughly analyzed from two aspects.
  
  First, the logical plasticity of computers and the Internet itself and the enrichment of information have led to the lag of the normative research of the Internet. On the one hand, ”From a logical point of view, computers have plasticity, because people can operate computers to carry out any activity.“ [14] The logical plasticity of computers enables computers to be applied to any aspect of life, which means that the use of computers is faced with the opening up of new fields and the birth of new things all the time. This is a new subject and task for the study of Internet norms. On the other hand, the informationization of the living world has made it more difficult to study Internet norms. The use of computers and the development of the Internet have transformed all aspects of human life into data information. ”Information processing has become a key component of the implementation and understanding of activities itself“ [14]. The breadth and depth of information processing have been expanding, making the world in which people live an information world. Mastering and processing various digital information has become a key factor for people's survival in the Internet era. Therefore, in this information world, how to regulate people's behavior in dealing with digital information has become one of the main tasks of Internet normative research. With the deepening of information technology in the real world, the research on people's behavior norms of dealing with various digital information is facing new fields of digital information, so how to construct norms of dealing with digital information has become a new challenge.
  
  Secondly, the lag of normative research leads to the lack of the whole conceptual analysis framework of Internet normative research. Normative theory is the study of norm itself, which includes two aspects of law and value. Its analysis of ”how“ and ”how“ of norms is the basis of the study of the whole normative system. The study of normativism belongs to the field of ”ought to“ in social life. The study of all norms in the field of ”ought to“ such as morality, law, custom, etiquette and so on is included in the scope of normativism. The generation, development and judgment of rationality of norms belong to the main content of normativism, which can only be explained theoretically. Knowing how a kind of norm comes into being and develops and how to judge a kind of norm is reasonable can we construct a reasonable norm in practice, so that people's behavior conforms to the law and social expectations, and realize the orderly operation of society. Current studies mostly focus on the solution of specific network problems, and devote themselves to formulating various specific network norms at the practical level. However, there are relatively few studies on the network norms themselves, such as ”how can network norms be possible“, ”rationality and determination of network norms“. It is precisely because of the lag in the research field of normative theory that there are various shortcomings in the research of Internet norms. It is impossible to establish a conceptual framework for analysis and solution, which leads to difficulties in building an Internet normative system to regulate the behavior of netizens.
  
  (2) Prospect of Internet Standard Research
  
  Although there are many shortcomings in the normative study of the Internet, overall, it still shows a trend of continuous development and progress.
  
  Firstly, the research and construction of global Internet norms will become the main direction of the research and development of Internet norms. On the one hand, the development of the Internet has made people see the hope of building global Internet norms. According to the statistics of the International Telecommunication Union, by the end of 2016, 47% of the world's population will have access to the Internet, with a total of about 3.9 billion people. [15] About one-half of the world's population lives in a space free of territorial restrictions and free association. ”The uniqueness of interests in computer information internet technology and the common progress made by human moral concepts make computer ethics and morality have a certain“universal morality”nature.“ [16] The characteristics of computers and the Internet make it possible for people living on the Internet to express their feelings in the same language, think with the same set of logic, and face an information-based life together, all of which make it possible to construct Internet norms that can regulate the behavior of global netizens. On the other hand, the common values of human beings, such as life, freedom, happiness, knowledge and security, provide us with a set of criteria for evaluating policies even in the case of unprecedented policies, as well as a set of criteria for evaluating other value frameworks when disputes arise. Internet regulation is possible. Although some scholars hold negative attitudes towards global Internet norms for various reasons, at least in today's Internet development, the global netizens have reached some basic consensus and formed some basic codes of conduct [17]: 1. the principle of resource sharing; 2. the principle of consensus; 3. the principle of self-discipline.
  
  Secondly, building a conceptual framework that can analyze and solve Internet problems will become an inevitable requirement for the study of Internet norms. [18] At present, the research of normative theory has made preliminary progress, and Professor Xu Mengqiu of Xiamen University has made rich achievements in the research of the rationality of norms and its determination, the function and type of norms. Therefore, on the one hand, on the basis of normative theory, it is possible to construct a conceptual framework that can accurately analyze the concept, type, formation, rationality, judgment and function of Internet norms. In the future, it is possible to construct a set of reasonable Internet normative system as long as people have a dual analysis and grasp of the ”law“ and ”value“ of Internet behavior. On the other hand, it is possible to construct Internet ethics and Internet law based on normative theory and combined with the results of Internet research in ethics, law and technology. Internet technology norms, Internet social etiquette and other aspects of Internet norms have become an effective way to solve various specific Internet problems, but also become a reasonable way to regulate the behavior of netizens.
  
  Thirdly, multi-level and interdisciplinary research will become the main trend of Internet normative research. Today, the Internet has penetrated every corner of social life, covering the entire human society, economic, political, legal, military, scientific, artistic, religious and other aspects of society have become the domain of Internet applications. The wide application of the Internet has exerted a tremendous influence on traditional disciplines. The emergence of such interdisciplinary disciplines as Internet economics, Internet politics, Internet law, Internet sociology, Internet philosophy and Internet psychology is the inevitable trend of the development of the Internet. Therefore, the combination of the latest research results and research methods of economics, politics, law, military science, sociology, philosophy, anthropology, psychology and other disciplines with Internet norms research will become the main trend of Internet norms research.
  
  Reference
  
  [1] Lu Jun, Yan Geng. Overview of Internet Ethics Studies Abroad [J]. Social Sciences Abroad, 1997 (2): 15-19.  
  [2] Tim Berners-Lee, Mark Fischetti. WWW [M]. Zhang Hongyu, Xiao Feng, Translated. Shanghai: Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 1999:1.  
  [3] James Moore. What is computer ethics? [J]. Lu Xudong, Translated. World Philosophy, 1988 (1): 34-41.  
  [4] Terrell Bynum, Simon Rogerson. Computer Ethics and Professional Responsibility [M]. Li Lun, et al. Translated. Beijing: Peking University Press, 2010:31.  
  [5] Richard A. Spinello. Morality of the Century: Ethical Aspects of Information Technology [M]. Liu Gang, Translated. Beijing: Central Compilation and Publishing House, 1998:6.
  [6] Li Lun. Virtual Social Ethics and Realistic Social Ethics [J]. Journal of Shanghai Normal University (Social Science Edition), 2002, 31 (2): 7-11.  
  [7] Sith J. Hamlink. Cyberspace Ethics [M]. Li Shixin, Translated. Beijing: Capital Normal University Press, 2010:8.  
  Lawrence Lesger. Code 2.0: Law in Internet Space [M]. Li Lun, Shen Weiwei, Translated. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2009.  
  [9] Xie Guishan. Internet Morality: A New Field of Ethics [J]. Shandong Social Sciences, 2002 (2): 63-65.  
  [10] Manuel Caster. Internet Star: Reflections on the Internet, Business and Society [M]. Zheng Bo, Wu Wei, Translated. Beijing: Social Sciences Literature Press, 2007:127.  
  [11] Liu Dachun, Zhang Xingzhao. Several viewpoints of network ethics [J]. Teaching and research, 2003, V(7): 20-26.  
  Richard Spinello. Iron cage, or Utopia - Morality and Law in Internet Space [M]. Li Lun, et al. Translated. Beijing: Peking University Press, 2007:7.  
  [13] Xu Mengqiu. General Theory of Norms [M]. Beijing: Commercial Press, 2011:3.  
  [14] James Moore. Rationality, Relativity and Responsibility in Computer Ethics [J]. Journal of Shanghai Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2006, 35 (5): 1-10.  
  [15] Chinese Internet Data Center. ITU: Global Internet Coverage will reach 47% in 2016 [EB/OL]. 2016 [2017-02-04].
  [16] Wang Zhengping. Summary of Western Computer Ethics [J]. Research on Dialectics of Nature, 2000, 16 (10): 39-43.  
  [17] Shi Yunfeng. A Preliminary Study of Internet Ethics [J]. Journal of Zhengzhou University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2002, 35 (2): 63-66.  
  [18] Zeng Rui. Network Generation and Legal Regulation of Social Amplification of Environmental Risk [J]. Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications (Social Science Edition), 2015 (2): 28.
博学论文网(www.hndance.cn)版权所有
专业的代写英语论文,代写英文论文、assignment、各专业毕业论文网站,本站部分论文收集于网络,如有不慎侵犯您的权益,请联系客服,24小时内处理