Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”

lore.kernel.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 1001 posts

Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”

#361

Post by colechristensen »

arkh wrote: post #342

> I will not be sending any more patches due to the attitude that is not only unwelcome but also intimidating to newbies and non experts. Maybe not being nice is part of the immune system of open source.

I think so. With a large project I think a realist attitude that raises to the level of mean when there’s bullshit around is somewhat necessary to prevent decay.

If not you get cluttered up with bad code and people there for the experience. Like how stackoverflow is lost to rule zealots there for the game not for the purpose.

Something big and important should be intimidating and isn’t a public service babysitter...

Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”

#363

Post by devmor »

arkh wrote: post #342

> I will not be sending any more patches due to the attitude that is not only unwelcome but also intimidating to newbies and non experts. Maybe not being nice is part of the immune system of open source.

I was enjoying Linus being less aggressive, but maybe we do need angry Linus.

Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”

#365

Post by fouric »

ansible wrote: post #164

I still don't get the point of this "research". You're just testing the review ability of particular Linux kernel maintainers at a particular point in time. How does that generalize to the extent needed for it to be valid research on open source software development in general? You would need to run this "experiment" hundreds or thousands of times across most major open source projects.

The Linux kernel is one of the largest open-source projects in existence, so my guess is that they were aiming to show that "because the Linux kernel review process doesn't protect against these attacks, most open-source project will also be vulnerable" - "the best can't stop it, so neither will the rest".

Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”

#366

Post by formerly_proven »

duxup wrote: post #360

I don't like this university ban approach. Universities are places with lots of different students, professors, and different people with different ideas, and inevitably people who make bad choices. Universities don't often act with a single purpose or intent. That's what makes them interesting. Prone to failure and bad ideas, but also new ideas that you can't do at corporate HQ because you've got a CEO breathing dow…

> The people banned didn't do anything wrong.

There are ways to do research like this (involve top-level maintainers, prevent patches going further upstream etc.), just sending in buggy code on purpose, then lying about where it came from, is not the way. It very much is wrong in my opinion. And like some other people pointed out, it could quite possibly be a criminal offense in several jurisdictions.

Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”

#367

Post by zulban »

duxup wrote: post #360

I don't like this university ban approach. Universities are places with lots of different students, professors, and different people with different ideas, and inevitably people who make bad choices. Universities don't often act with a single purpose or intent. That's what makes them interesting. Prone to failure and bad ideas, but also new ideas that you can't do at corporate HQ because you've got a CEO breathing dow…

It sends a strong message - universities need to make sure their researchers apply ethics standards to any research done on software communities. You can't ignore ethics guidelines like consent and harm just because it's a software community instead of a meatspace community. I doubt the university would have taken any action at all without such a response.

Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”

#368

Post by disintegore »

devmor wrote: post #363
arkh wrote: post #342

> I will not be sending any more patches due to the attitude that is not only unwelcome but also intimidating to newbies and non experts. Maybe not being nice is part of the immune system of open source.

I was enjoying Linus being less aggressive, but maybe we do need angry Linus.

Angry Greg is doing a great job. Effective, and completely without expletives or personal insults.

Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”

#369

Post by formerly_proven »

smnrchrds wrote: post #338
macspoofing wrote: post #290

Linux maintainers should log a complaint with the University's ethics board. You can't just experiment on people without consent.

According to duncaen, the researchers had gotten the green light from the ethics board before conducting the experiment. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26888978

IRB makes a decision based on the study protocol/design, so if you intentionally mislead / make wrong statements there, IRB approval doesn't really mean anything.

Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”

#370

Post by walrus01 »

duxup wrote: post #360

I don't like this university ban approach. Universities are places with lots of different students, professors, and different people with different ideas, and inevitably people who make bad choices. Universities don't often act with a single purpose or intent. That's what makes them interesting. Prone to failure and bad ideas, but also new ideas that you can't do at corporate HQ because you've got a CEO breathing dow…

> I don't like this university ban approach.

I do, because the university needs to dismiss everyone involved, sever their connections with the institution, and then have a person in a senior position email the kernel maintainers with news that such has taken place. At which time the ban can be publicly lifted.

Post reply on HN