Computer mouse Essay

It is found that repetitive movement by the wrist and arm, which occurs when using a computer mouse, can cause physical injury to the body parts involved. There has been an attempt from injured workers and their representatives, such as OSHA, to pass legislation requiring employers to develop programs that prevent these injuries. The workers are simply saying that the employers are responsible for these injuries. However, it is well known that most of these employees own personal computers and use them daily outside of work, making it difficult to determine where the injuries first occurred. The government should not establish standards of computer use. Individual employers should be allowed the right to establish special preventative programs if they see fit. However, in a world where people are using computers in all aspects of their lives, it is unreasonable for the government to hold only employers responsible for these injuries. Employers who truly care about their employees might not take full responsibility for this problem, but might still decide to implement programs to prevent losing exceptional workers. The responsibility falls more on the injured person than anyone else. The computer mouse is an accessory that causes much of these injuries, and ergonomic companies have created versions of the mouse to reduce and prevent these injuries. Workers who feel they are at risk for these injuries should be using these specifically designed tools in the workplace. If they are not using these special tools, then no one but himself or herself can be held responsible. Overall, it is the worker’s responsibility to maintain a level of personal safety in the workplace. The employer can provide a certain level of safety, however when it comes to detailed person decisions like what type of computer mouse to use, then it is ultimately the worker’s responsibility. Forcing all employers to develop preventative programs is unreasonable and expensive. Employers should have the choice to develop these programs, just as worker’s have the choice to work for their specific employer or not. Issue 6. 4 The concept of Internet wearables is an amazing one. Being able to access the Internet quickly through a pair of glasses is extraordinary. With all of their glitz and glamour however, Internet wearables do have their downsides. Overall, Internet wearables could allow certain individuals the information they need in a more timely and efficient manner, making them more productive. However, unless you are James Bond, it is unclear who exactly might benefit the most from this innovation. Internet wearables have the potential to be more of a hazard than a helper. Everyone is annoyed by drivers who are constantly making poor driving decisions due to their cell phone use while driving. Imagine someone trying to drive while also navigating his or her Internet wearable glasses. It is a crisis waiting to happen. The problem with these inventions is that most people will choose not to use them responsibly. It is not that people are born irresponsible; it is simply that they are easily distracted and have more confidence in their abilities to do a million things at one time than they should. Humans sometimes have faith that they can look away from the road for a few seconds and usually nothing bad will happen. There are even drivers who read the paper while driving, propping it up against the steering wheel. However, there are a few people who might benefit from these outrageous gadgets. Investigators or police officials might benefit greatly from these gadgets. Although most police cars have Internet access in their cabs, imagine them being able to be chasing a suspect on foot and access the Internet at the same time. These devices could in fact help the police fight crimes more effectively and efficiently. It could be incredible. Other people who may benefit from these devices are students. Students could access materials they need during class without even leaving their seats. The downside to this is students could also use these as negative devices to cheat as well. However, more than likely professors would rather not deal with the possibility of cheaters and prohibit these devices during tests and other exams. These devices would no doubt be a huge hit in places where people needed to access the Internet, but there was no physical space for a desktop computer. They would allow people in small spaces to get the information they needed. Internet wearables probably won’t break big on the scene for many years. Until there is more of a real need for this item, people will not be drawn to use them on an everyday basis. If and when they do become an enormous hit, there is no doubt there will be laws governing public use soon after. These laws may seem unreasonable to those who want to use their wearables wherever and whenever they choose, but since public safety is involved, the government will need to be involved in some way or another. Issue 7. 3 Copying CDs is a popular way for people to get the music they want without having to pay for the CDs. The music industry and some major artists are furious over this, with the reason being obvious. When one person copies a CD instead of buying the CD at the store, the music industry loses money. The music industry is concerned that soon they will lose almost their entire market, with just a few people buying their CDs and the rest of the market copying from the few purchasers. Many of the â€Å"CD stealers† get their music from the web; bringing up the question of whether or not it is ethical to download music from the web to burn on a personal CD. Anytime you take something from someone without paying for it, or without their permission, your actions are unethical. It is apparent that the music industry and artists are not giving permission for these actions, and the government is taking their side against it. Multiple lawsuits have been filed over the past few years targeting those who are illegally downloading music from the Internet. These cases have involved adults as well as minors. Many of the downloaders were not aware of their offense, however the publicity of these cases has left it next to impossible for downloaders to be oblivious to what they are doing. This being said, it is still up in the air of whether after the person purchases a CD if it is ethical for them to copy the CD for their own use. Many times someone will want one copy for their home and another copy for their vehicle. Having two copies would save them from transporting the CD to each location. Again, if the laws are read loosely, as long as the person purchased the CD they should be able to use it at their discretion. However, the music industry loses the potential money from patrons who would have bought more than one copy for themselves. If the person were to make a copy for someone else from their purchased CD however, it would be unethical, as the other person should buy their own copy. Recording companies should indeed be able to use special programs to prohibit copying of their CDs. However, they must realize that there will always be someone who can get around the yellow tape. That being states, with musicians and actors being paid disgusting salaries it makes one wonder why they even care if a few people are not contributing to their unnecessarily high income. Some production companies are already using programming to prohibit copying, however hacker software companies have already created programs to get around the production companies attempts. Overall, people should definitely refrain from copying CDs or downloading music without permission. The practice of taking something without permission will always be unethical and that fact clearly pertains to this scenario.