3 ms·
I dunno, I think this is one case where outrage and rejection weren't too quick in coming. Let's say you're a software architect (dunno if you are or not). You
by bigwavedave 5y ago
I dunno, I think this is one case where outrage and rejection weren't too quick in coming.
Let's say you're a software architect (dunno if you are or not). You hire four new software devs, two of them from Colorado State University, and you put the two from CSU on the same team. After a year, you find out one of them has been secretly working for CSU's cyber security research department and poisoning your product with patches that do nothing or subtly introduce bugs on purpose purely so their professor can write a research paper about your company's process. Naturally, you fire the developer and that leaves a bad taste in your mouth and CSU promises not to interfere again. Then you get suspicious and start checking the work of the other CSU dev more closely and find out they're submitting bad patches too! They claim that these bad patches were submitted because their experimental static code analyzer didn't find any issues with them.
What conclusion should you reach?
- MilnerRoute 5y agoYou should conclude "I don't know whether or not these patches were submitted in good faith." People sometimes submit bad patches. Not all of them are malicious. I don't think we've fully addressed or explored the scenario where a young, bright-eyed aspiring student coder does in fact make an innocent mistake. And then is accused of deliberate malicious sabotage. And large chunks of the internet also start condemning them for deliberate and malicious sabotage. What does that say about our community?
- kuratkull 5y agoIt's also important to understand the situation you are in - if you are the second CSU dev you got some extra due diligence to do. This is the real world, it's not fair.