In this section we consider the degree to which our proposal for Information Ethics is consistent with each of the requirements introduced in section 3.
Our proposal is evidently rigorous. The effect of an action on the pre-order of an entropy structure is a matter of proof or counterexample, working from the definition of the pre-order and specification of the action.
By being based on the mathematical properties of agents (that is, the specifications of their state spaces and actions) Information Ethics is stable: any changes to Information Technology, no matter how advanced, can still be described in mathematics.
Modularity has been demonstrated by the techniques for combining entropy structures. It, and the hierarchical reasoning it engenders, play an essential rôle in formal methods.
Finally we hope to have made a reasonable case for soundness by the variety of examples we have chosen.
By Computer Ethics most Computer Scientists mean Professional Ethics (for example [1], page 332). It is worth emphasising our view that Information Ethics provides a foundation for Computer Ethics which itself provides a domain for discussion of Professional Issues. Our proposal is not remote from application. Legal issues of Cyberspace are particularly pressing. In a legal action an entropy structure could in principle be agreed by plaintiff and defendant, presumably the former seeking to strengthen and the latter to weaken its pre-order. Perhaps the judge would need to arbitrate to reach a compromise. Then the plaintiff would argue by example that the action involved increases entropy, whilst the defendant would argue by proof that it (preserves or) decreases it. Thus in principle our proposal aims to provide an appropriate foundation for issues as critical as legal issues.