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

Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

lore.kernel.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 384 posts

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#81

Post by neatze »

sombragris wrote: post #24

I really appreciate the apology and as they stated, its unconditional nature. Good. However, I find something very problematic. This quote shows it: "We have learned some important lessons about research with the open source community from this incident." This is something I don't like. This is not something about "research with the open source community". If anything, they should have learned something about treatin…

Additionally, would be right thing to do with there's apology email to also state that they retracted "hypocrite commit” paper from IEEE ?

After all before a ban, there where complaint(s) made regarding this paper, by other researchers and community members.

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#83

Post by burnished »

Ygg2 wrote: post #80
true_religion wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is something to be applauded about people who genuinely apologize even though they can't see things from the other person's point of view. They didn't decide to conduct this research on a whim. They had full approval of their university ethics board as well. They published a paper and had it peer reviewed without (as far as I know) anyone immediately calling for their heads. They can't immediately turn…

That only tells me, that there's more garbage than just one individual. If they lack knowledge of why it was bad, what will prevent them from doing another garbage study next time.

This incident, time, and reflection.

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#84

Post by austinkhale »

SquibblesRedux wrote: post #44

Whether it is appropriate or not, the Linux kernel is used in many mission critical and essential services. One could very convincingly argue that the open source Linux kernel is a vital part of mission critical infrastructure found all around the world. An apology, likely written under duress, for an inappropriate research method or for consuming the time of maintainers (either volunteer or paid) does not address th…

This is the most reasonable response in this chain. The number of unintended consequences this "research" could have caused is not quantifiable. This entire episode is shocking, disgusting, and should not be forgiven easily. Actions speak louder than words; this is especially true of apologies. Their words are empty and their actions are nonexistent.

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#85

Post by pxc »

true_religion wrote: post #65
sombragris wrote: post #24

I really appreciate the apology and as they stated, its unconditional nature. Good. However, I find something very problematic. This quote shows it: "We have learned some important lessons about research with the open source community from this incident." This is something I don't like. This is not something about "research with the open source community". If anything, they should have learned something about treatin…

I think there is something to be applauded about people who genuinely apologize even though they can't see things from the other person's point of view. They didn't decide to conduct this research on a whim. They had full approval of their university ethics board as well. They published a paper and had it peer reviewed without (as far as I know) anyone immediately calling for their heads. They can't immediately turn…

They only sought approval from the ethics board after the fact IIRC

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#86

Post by dane-pgp »

SquibblesRedux wrote: post #73
shash wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, you wouldn’t expect these individual researchers to address the governance question. That should come from the University or the department in question.

Indeed, I agree -- the University of Minnesota should shoulder a degree of responsibility. That is even more so the case given that the researchers do not seem to understand (or clearly acknowledge that they understand) the importance of informed consent in both research and security operations, how much reputational damage (for them and the university) can result from unethical research, and the potential for actual…

> the University of Minnesota should shoulder a degree of responsibility.

In fact the argument could be made that there is an ethical duty for every software project, and possibly every individual, to economically boycott the University of Minnesota until they put in place independently-verified changes to their IRB process such that research like this will not be approved again.

If the only "cost" to the university is that one of its researchers has to write a two-faced apology message, then there is nothing stopping future abuses of non-consenting humans. Moreover, with no real punishment meted out, it creates an incentive for other universities to similarly weaken their IRB process to the same level so that they can approve more research projects and remain competitive.

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#87

Post by burnished »

temp8964 wrote: post #68
sombragris wrote: post #24

I really appreciate the apology and as they stated, its unconditional nature. Good. However, I find something very problematic. This quote shows it: "We have learned some important lessons about research with the open source community from this incident." This is something I don't like. This is not something about "research with the open source community". If anything, they should have learned something about treatin…

Is it now not P.C. to discuss what they revealed? Or "nothing" has been revealed? Are we not allowed to discuss the possibility of someone hacked an university email address and then submit a patch?

You're being too coy. What do you think was revealed?

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#88

Post by tlb »

haswell wrote: post #2

I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but this is written like an apology they know they must write . It does not come across as apologetic. It comes across as rationalization veiled as an apology, and it doesn't sit well with me. I hope I'm just being overly sensitive here.

I agree. There are weasel-words throughout, starting with apologizing for "any harm". When you've been told what the harm was, don't apologize for "any harm" you might have caused. You should start an apology by demonstrating that you have listened and understood exactly what harm you caused.

Listing the harm you caused is also an important part of the public record, so that anyone else considering a similar scheme in the future can see what consequences were agreed to have happened the last time.

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#89

Post by neatze »

true_religion wrote: post #65
sombragris wrote: post #24

I really appreciate the apology and as they stated, its unconditional nature. Good. However, I find something very problematic. This quote shows it: "We have learned some important lessons about research with the open source community from this incident." This is something I don't like. This is not something about "research with the open source community". If anything, they should have learned something about treatin…

I think there is something to be applauded about people who genuinely apologize even though they can't see things from the other person's point of view. They didn't decide to conduct this research on a whim. They had full approval of their university ethics board as well. They published a paper and had it peer reviewed without (as far as I know) anyone immediately calling for their heads. They can't immediately turn…

This paper had multiple issues that they where aware of before the ban, original ban email indicates that complaint was made before to there's university, on twitter feed one of the researchers stated that IEEE received also complaint regarding ethics of the paper, way before ban.

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#90

Post by enw »

epage wrote: post #70
sombragris wrote: post #24

I really appreciate the apology and as they stated, its unconditional nature. Good. However, I find something very problematic. This quote shows it: "We have learned some important lessons about research with the open source community from this incident." This is something I don't like. This is not something about "research with the open source community". If anything, they should have learned something about treatin…

Several parts read strangely to me > we are very sorry that the method used in the “hypocrite commits” paper was inappropriate This reads more as "sorry you were offended" than "It was inappropriate and we are sorry". > As many observers have pointed out to us, we made a mistake by not finding a way to consult with the community and obtain permission before running this study; we did that because we knew we could not…

> Bringing up why you did something in an apology is very shaky. Like in this case, it can sound more like justifying / excusing.

Why is that a problem?

Post reply on HN