News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by chx on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @05:19PM (#26895577)
They claim they got the IRB to say it's IRB-exempt.
Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by anp on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @11:21PM (#26898367)
Which would suggest the IRB’s oversight is broken in that institution somehow, right?
Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by Tobu on Thursday April 22, 2021 @04:12PM (#26907589)
Well, the university of Minnesota managed to escape responsibility after multiple suicides and coercion of subjects of psychiatric research. From one regent: “[this] has not risen to the level of our concern”.

https://www.startribune.com/markingson-case-university-of-mi...

Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by gjack905 on Thursday April 22, 2021 @06:02PM (#26908707)
Wow, very interesting read (not finished yet though), thank you. To me, this seems like it should be considered as part of UNM's trustworthiness as a whole and completely validates GKH's decision (not that any was needed).
Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by woofie11 on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @05:48PM (#26895878)
A lot of IRBs are a joke.

The way I've seen Harvard, Stanford, and a few other university researchers dodge IRB review is by doing research in "private" time in collaboration with a private entity.

There is no effective oversight over IRBs, so they really range quite a bit. Some are really stringent and some allow anything.