commit 1588457309a49a0bdbe429de59ec1e9cdeb46a6d
parent f3d7d30ed1a84c87ec4104304988185e1a7e2d6b
Author: Jonathan <ondesmartenot@riseup.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 18:18:20 +0800
major rewording of first paragraph for grammar/clarity
Diffstat:
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/usenix-security-2025/paper/ethic.tex b/doc/usenix-security-2025/paper/ethic.tex
@@ -1,15 +1,15 @@
\section*{Ethics considerations and compliance with the open science policy}
-Ethical considerations were at the root of this project.
-At their essence, donations are ethical acts outsourcing a moral drive for change to a third party that (promises to) act on them in a manner that is compatible with the value system of a donor.
-Current systems oblige people making donations to charities to go on record and report these donations to their government,
-explicitly linking them to the causes and institutions they supported.
-This has a self-censoring or chilling effect due to fear for future potential repercussions in complex and volatile political climates:
-information may linger on inside the bureaucratic system, and later cause unforeseeable harm.
-Such concerns about real-world ramifications on personal choices in the ethical domain cause stress to donors,
-and the current approach encroaches on the private sphere of those who do not wish for it to be known who they support.
-As identified in this paper, support for certain organizations and their linked causes
-can lead not only to stigmatisation but also to phyical harassement or far worse.
+Ethical considerations are at the root of this project.
+At their essence, donations are ethical acts that empower third parties to act in a manner compatible with the value system of the donor.
+Current systems oblige donors to go on record and report their donations to their government,
+explicitly linking them to the causes and institutions they support.
+This has a self-censoring or chilling effect, due to fear of potential future repercussions in complex and volatile political climates:
+information may linger inside of the bureaucratic system and later cause unforeseeable harm.
+Support for certain organizations and their linked causes
+can lead not only to stigmatisation but also to phyical harassement, or far worse.
+Such concerns about real-world consequences of revealing one's support for various causes creates stress for donors,
+and the current approach to provide tax benefits for donations encroaches on the privacy of those who do not wish to reveal who they support.
The current mechanism also has discriminatory aspects.
It places a higher bureaucratic cost on spreading an equivalent cumulative amount across smaller philanthropic causes -- denying intersectional interests donors may have, and disadvantaging smaller, early stage and more lean public causes. %XXX: "earlier stage"/"leaner"?
