3 ms·

To be fair, you wouldn’t expect these individual researchers to address the governance question. That should come from the University or the department in quest

by shash 5y ago

To be fair, you wouldn’t expect these individual researchers to address the governance question. That should come from the University or the department in question.

SquibblesRedux 5y ago
Indeed, I agree -- the University of Minnesota should shoulder a degree of responsibility. That is even more so the case given that the researchers do not seem to understand (or clearly acknowledge that they understand) the importance of informed consent in both research and security operations, how much reputational damage (for them and the university) can result from unethical research, and the potential for actual harm to occur when research or security operations are conducted in an exclusively clandestine manner.
- dane-pgp 5y ago
  > the University of Minnesota should shoulder a degree of responsibility. In fact the argument could be made that there is an ethical duty for every software project, and possibly every individual, to economically boycott the University of Minnesota until they put in place independently-verified changes to their IRB process such that research like this will not be approved again. If the only "cost" to the university is that one of its researchers has to write a two-faced apology message, then there is nothing stopping future abuses of non-consenting humans. Moreover, with no real punishment meted out, it creates an incentive for other universities to similarly weaken their IRB process to the same level so that they can approve more research projects and remain competitive.
- spfzero 5y ago
  The university should shoulder a huge degree of responsibility. They hired these "researchers". The apology should be coming from those who sponsored and funded the effort. Who cares about any "apology" these "researchers" cobbled together?

3 ms·

To be fair, you wouldn’t expect these individual researchers to address the governance question. That should come from the University or the department in quest

by shash 5y ago

To be fair, you wouldn’t expect these individual researchers to address the governance question. That should come from the University or the department in question.

SquibblesRedux 5y ago
Indeed, I agree -- the University of Minnesota should shoulder a degree of responsibility. That is even more so the case given that the researchers do not seem to understand (or clearly acknowledge that they understand) the importance of informed consent in both research and security operations, how much reputational damage (for them and the university) can result from unethical research, and the potential for actual harm to occur when research or security operations are conducted in an exclusively clandestine manner.
- dane-pgp 5y ago
  > the University of Minnesota should shoulder a degree of responsibility. In fact the argument could be made that there is an ethical duty for every software project, and possibly every individual, to economically boycott the University of Minnesota until they put in place independently-verified changes to their IRB process such that research like this will not be approved again. If the only "cost" to the university is that one of its researchers has to write a two-faced apology message, then there is nothing stopping future abuses of non-consenting humans. Moreover, with no real punishment meted out, it creates an incentive for other universities to similarly weaken their IRB process to the same level so that they can approve more research projects and remain competitive.
- spfzero 5y ago
  The university should shoulder a huge degree of responsibility. They hired these "researchers". The apology should be coming from those who sponsored and funded the effort. Who cares about any "apology" these "researchers" cobbled together?