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

Linus Torvalds did not commit this

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 198 posts

Re: Linus Torvalds did not commit this

#171

Post by vacri »

WalterBright wrote: post #154
vacri wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A student's honor that he didn't cheat is considered good enough. Individual students certainly can have this integrity, but the demographic as a whole is demonstrably susceptible to cheating. It also offends basic scientific process, in that it suggests that you don't need to bother with trying to make sure your results are robust; instead it relies on someone's word. Why bother having exams, then? Just ask "Do yo…

Many times I honestly believed I understood the material, only to fall way short on the exam :-) Scientists can honestly believe their (wrong) results are correct, because it's easy to have unintended sources of error. This is why others try to replicate results, it's not necessarily about catching cheaters. Think of it like running a marathon. Is there any satisfaction from thinking "I honestly believe I can complet…

I agree with you, but the analogue is not scientists having their work replicated, it's doing the work in the first place. We don't accept 'trust me on this' in a scientific paper.

Regarding marathons, some people do cheat them - they're more interested in the social rewards than the personal growth. Some people flat-out lie about doing them at all. Different folks have different motivations.

Re: Linus Torvalds did not commit this

#172

Post by [deleted] »

ultramancool wrote: post #109
jrv wrote: post #93

Linus actually commented on this lack of identity handling in 2012 in his famous explanation of why he doesn't use GitHub: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/pull/17 "since github identities are random, I expect the pull request to be a signed tag, so that I can verify the identity of the person in question." And: "github throws away all the relevant information, like having even a valid email address for the person a…

Yeah, the GPG signing support in Git would be the best solution to this, unfortunately GitHub doesn't offer integration for that.

[deleted]

Re: Linus Torvalds did not commit this

#173

Post by timr »

dragonwriter wrote: post #148
tgb wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't you proctor exams? The time spent is small, less than 10 hours a semester, and the proctors can answer student questions or make corrections and clarifications to test questions. That it's a small disincentive to cheat is nice too, though in my experience only the most blatant of cheating would be caught. I say all this as someone who proctors exams.

> Why wouldn't you proctor exams? The time spent is small, less than 10 hours a semester, and the proctors can answer student questions or make corrections and clarifications to test questions. Because Caltech faculty (and, for undergraduate student exams, grad students) have better things to do with their time than proctor exams (and, perhaps more to the point, because Caltech wants to attract faculty and grad stude…

Having proctored my fair share of exams...you're there primarily to answer questions, not to enforce anything. The student who wants to cheat will find a way to cheat.

Re: Linus Torvalds did not commit this

#174

Post by WalterBright »

chrisfosterelli wrote: post #170
WalterBright wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand your feelings on this, but after you've been working for 3 years or so, nobody is going to give a damn about your degree or where you got it. They'll value what you can do, and that's where your education will pay off.

I'm actually working, and for almost 3 years :) I definitely agree with what you're saying, especially in startups it really isn't that relevant (part of why I like the startup community so much). But I do spend a lot of time outside startups as well, and that glass ceiling is definitely present in large companies and academia (especially academia).

I wasn't clear. Having a degree is important and not having one is often a blocker. For example, you can't get a mechanical engineering job without a degree. (There are legal reasons for that as well.) Where it is from does not matter, nor does your GPA.

Re: Linus Torvalds did not commit this

#175

Post by grayclhn »

gertef wrote: post #143
WalterBright wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the first I've heard that it had anything to do with saving money, and I spent 4 years there. It does, however, make life easier for professors and students when you can trust each other. I don't know what Caltech is like today. I attended in 70's, and the honor system was considered sacred by the students. If there were cheaters, they never bragged about it, and I don't know of any. I know one who fell asleep…

> The professor replied back that he was very sorry and was forced to give him an F. The student repeated the (required) class next year. Wow, way to prize process over people. Why not let the student drop the class and just re-take the test next time around? Is Caltech designed to teach science, or train paper-pushers?

I don't know about caltech, but many universities replace an F grade if you retake the class.

Re: Linus Torvalds did not commit this

#176

Post by thomasfoster96 »

undrcvr-lagggal wrote: post #145
jrv wrote: post #93

Linus actually commented on this lack of identity handling in 2012 in his famous explanation of why he doesn't use GitHub: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/pull/17 "since github identities are random, I expect the pull request to be a signed tag, so that I can verify the identity of the person in question." And: "github throws away all the relevant information, like having even a valid email address for the person a…

He called github "braindamaged". Isn't that against the CoC?

Who knows, but further down when he calls someone a moron and starts a little rant surely breaks any form of code of conduct.

Re: Linus Torvalds did not commit this

#177

Post by akshatpradhan »

ultramancool wrote: post #109
jrv wrote: post #93

Linus actually commented on this lack of identity handling in 2012 in his famous explanation of why he doesn't use GitHub: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/pull/17 "since github identities are random, I expect the pull request to be a signed tag, so that I can verify the identity of the person in question." And: "github throws away all the relevant information, like having even a valid email address for the person a…

Yeah, the GPG signing support in Git would be the best solution to this, unfortunately GitHub doesn't offer integration for that.

Maybe this is where Keybase.io could come in?

Re: Linus Torvalds did not commit this

#178

Post by imrehg »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #159
dragonwriter wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He called github "braindamaged". Isn't that against the CoC? So, you think he violated a Code of Conduct that did not exist at the time, in the course of explaining why he was not a user of the service (so that any Code of Conduct for that service would not apply to him even if it existed.)

He's making a sarcastic reference to this recent incident: https://b0wie.s3.amazonaws.com/second-response-full.jpg .

I wonder what would happen if I push some electromagnetic calculations to Github (I'm a physicist): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retarded_potential

Re: Linus Torvalds did not commit this

#180

Post by facetube »

thedoctor79 wrote: post #25

So it seems the author has identified a real issue here, but I will go meta on this and identify issues with his demonstration. In my organization this would count as a bug report, so I wondered why this issue was not communicated privately to the operators of Github so they can have a chance to fix it before some un-educated person does some damage. Then I realized this issue might affect other git content hosters,…

I reported this to Github privately about a year ago – specifically, I asked why there isn't some visual indication when Git's `user.email` fails to match any of the Github account's verified e-mail addresses. If you commit with a `user.email` that doesn't match _anyone_, you get a little question mark; it seemed like they could do a similar thing when you commit using a `user.email` that matches someone-who-isn't-you. Even just showing which Github user made the HTTP or SSH connection to push the changeset would be an improvement.

The tech told me that the current behavior was by design, and then pretty much said I didn't know how git worked and didn't understand Github's team/sharing/trust philosophy. I was pretty disappointed by their response, all told.

Post reply on HN