Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research
by fhars on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @05:30PM
(#26895695)
That whole twitter thread is really interesting, starting from https://twitter.com/lorenterveen/status/1384954220705722369
Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research
by debaserab2 on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @06:12PM
(#26896094)
Yeah, it gets even worse:
https://twitter.com/SarahJamieLewis/status/13848713855379087...
Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research
by alisonkisk on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @08:59PM
(#26897398)
That's shameful of the IEEE committee that approved the paper.
Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research
by the_snooze on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @10:13PM
(#26897964)
Absolutely. I think this is more of a failure of the IEEE Security and Privacy program committee (PC) than that of the university. The chairs should have desk rejected it on ethical grounds. Failing that, at least one of the reviewers should have noticed this was fishy and raised the alarm. And failing that, someone in the full PC meeting should have been like "whoa, hol up." (though this last failure could be partially explained with PC meetings now happening online instead of in person, so less engagement)
Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research
by detaro on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @05:32PM
(#26895717)
Yes Twitter is "weird" about with sub-thread it picks as the "main" one (well, it choses one and didn't pick the interesting one here), so I had to explicitly link the latter point.
Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research
by zenir on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @06:33PM
(#26896279)
Basically now they can do a meta study on how the review process of IRB has flaws.
As shown, if you intentionally try to bypass the IRB, apparently you can. It's even reproducible.
Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research
by xwolfi on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @07:26PM
(#26896661)
Oh so interesting ! In my french uni, psych teachers were all doing wikipedia research to prove it was unreliable by timing correction delay of purposedly introduced mistakes,
They were so proud of their discovery. They didnt think to time what that would take if they went to a printer and changed the text there before a book is printed.
Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research
by CaffeineSqurr on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @05:49PM
(#26895890)
Terveen was always honest about what works and what doesn't work. Its good to see them acknowledge that this is something they need to dive into and fix.
Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research
by azernik on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @08:51PM
(#26897333)
Note from the reader: said associate department head, Loren Terveen, is one of the two signers of the CS&E statement.
Re:UMN CS&E Statement on Linux Kernel Research
by finnthehuman on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @06:08PM
(#26896053)
>it's been clear for awhile that IRBs often do not understand the issues and the potential risks/harms of doing research in online communities / social media.
Too bad he's not in a position of power to implement that additional review to CS department research.
> I do work in Social Computing, and this situation is directly analogous to a number of incidents on Wikipedia quite awhile ago that led to that community and researchers reaching an understanding on research methods that are and are not acceptable.
and https://twitter.com/lorenterveen/status/1384966202301337603
> Yes! This was an IRB 'failure'. Again, in my area of Social Computing, it's been clear for awhile that IRBs often do not understand the issues and the potential risks/harms of doing research in online communities / social media.
An interesting question is IMHO who people actually tried to contact in the first round of this getting publicity (and I guess how many did so at all), and if leadership should thus have been aware earlier that there was controversy worth looking into.