# I am the Watcher. I am your guide through this vast new twtiverse.
#
# Usage:
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/users View list of users and latest twt date.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/twt View all twts.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/mentions?uri=:uri View all mentions for uri.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/conv/:hash View all twts for a conversation subject.
#
# Options:
# uri Filter to show a specific users twts.
# offset Start index for quey.
# limit Count of items to return (going back in time).
#
# twt range = 1 21
# self = https://watcher.sour.is/conv/jmr7rbq
So the University of Minnesota was leading research into how to get buggy or vulnerable code into the Linux Kernel.
So the University of Minnesota was leading research into how to get buggy or vulnerable code into the Linux Kernel.
they obviously got caught by the maintainers red-handed, patches rejected and got banned for life!
they obviously got caught by the maintainers red-handed, patches rejected and got banned for life!
I’d say open source works quite well don’t you? 🤣
I’d say open source works quite well don’t you? 🤣
For life? That's a shame. I hope the maintainers reconsider that in a year or two. To my knowledge, umn.edu email addresses didn't make up the majority of known malicious patches.
For life? That's a shame. I hope the maintainers reconsider that in a year or two. To my knowledge, umn.edu email addresses didn't make up the majority of known malicious patches.
@mckinley pretty sure it was banned for life. But then later on I read that there was an open letter to the University to address some things before they would reconsider allowing them to contribute to the kernel again
@mckinley pretty sure it was banned for life. But then later on I read that there was an open letter to the University to address some things before they would reconsider allowing them to contribute to the kernel again
I kind of agree with the ban though. What they did was scrupulous and unethical. The Linux Kernel is in every critical system in the world and it’s not to be messed with or toyed or to be someone’s playground.
I kind of agree with the ban though. What they did was scrupulous and unethical. The Linux Kernel is in every critical system in the world and it’s not to be messed with or toyed or to be someone’s playground.
@prologic I agree it was unethical, but I don't think an entire university should be permanently banned from submitting patches because of the actions of a few people. If banning the whole school for a while is the only thing that would make them knock it off, then so be it. I just don't think it should be permanent.
@prologic I agree it was unethical, but I don't think an entire university should be permanently banned from submitting patches because of the actions of a few people. If banning the whole school for a while is the only thing that would make them knock it off, then so be it. I just don't think it should be permanent.
Yeah I'm not _entirely_ sure it's _actually_ permanent though. As I said there is an open letter to the University to make some changes and address open issues. So far I guess they haven't done any of that, so until they do, they are banned. At least this is what I've taken from the whole story. I agree banning the entire University is a bit harsh, "few spoil it for the many", etc; however as you said, if this is what has to happen -- So be it.
Bottom line (_for me_); the lead researcher on this project really ought to be quite ashamed. This is not the way to go...
Yeah I'm not _entirely_ sure it's _actually_ permanent though. As I said there is an open letter to the University to make some changes and address open issues. So far I guess they haven't done any of that, so until they do, they are banned. At least this is what I've taken from the whole story. I agree banning the entire University is a bit harsh, "few spoil it for the many", etc; however as you said, if this is what has to happen -- So be it.
Bottom line (_for me_); the lead researcher on this project really ought to be quite ashamed. This is not the way to go...
Yeah I'm not _entirely_ sure it's _actually_ permanent though. As I said there is an open letter to the University to make some changes and address open issues. So far I guess they haven't done any of that, so until they do, they are banned. At least this is what I've taken from the whole story. I agree banning the entire University is a bit harsh, "few spoil it for the many", etc; however as you said, if this is what has to happen -- So be it.\n\nBottom line (_for me_); the lead researcher on this project really ought to be quite ashamed. This is not the way to go...
@prologic Definitely not the way to go. This kind of research could have been extremely useful for the Linux maintainers and the free software community as a whole, so long as the researchers got approval from some kind of lead maintainer to do this.
@prologic Definitely not the way to go. This kind of research could have been extremely useful for the Linux maintainers and the free software community as a whole, so long as the researchers got approval from some kind of lead maintainer to do this.