5 ms·

That whole twitter thread is really interesting, starting from https://twitter.com/lorenterveen/status/1384954220705722369 https://twitter.com/lorenterveen/stat

by fhars 5y ago

That whole twitter thread is really interesting, starting from https://twitter.com/lorenterveen/status/1384954220705722369 https://twitter.com/lorenterveen/status/1384954220705722369

detaro 5y ago
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.
debaserab2 5y ago
Yeah, it gets even worse: https://twitter.com/SarahJamieLewis/status/1384871385537908736 https://twitter.com/SarahJamieLewis/status/13848713855379087...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- alisonkisk 5y ago
  That's shameful of the IEEE committee that approved the paper.
  - the_snooze 5y ago
    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)