4 ms·

He wasn't disciplined for building an app or fetching data. He was disciplined for blatantly trying to "hack" (in the YC sense, in UW's view) the registration

by gowld 2y ago

He wasn't disciplined for building an app or fetching data. He was disciplined for blatantly trying to "hack" (in the YC sense, in UW's view) the registration process: https://registrar.washington.edu/winter-2025-registration-change-guide https://registrar.washington.edu/winter-2025-registration-ch... "Know that trading, selling, or buying open spots is a breach of the Registration Tampering Abuse Policy. Consequences include referral to the Student Code of Conduct process, a Registrar’s Hold on your record, and potential diploma withholding for graduating students until the conduct process is complete." https://registrar.washington.edu/registration/policies-procedures/ https://registrar.washington.edu/registration/policies-proce... "Registration Abuse The registration system is provided for the sole express purpose for students to register themselves into sections. Any use of the registration system other than for this purpose is considered abuse of the system. Such abuse includes, but is not limited to, buying or selling one’s seat in a class, holding seats for another student, or otherwise registering for a section that one has no intention of taking." Disclaimer: I am making no claim about the ethical validity of this policy, and I don't know how well the policy is communicated to students. I am not commenting on the allegation that the University demanded free labor in exchange for not-expelling OP.

pdpi 2y ago
> Such abuse includes, but is not limited to, buying or selling one’s seat in a class, holding seats for another student, or otherwise registering for a section that one has no intention of taking." This bit is important. At a glance, stubhub/ticketmaster/etc are pretty benign services that fulfil a pretty natural need for event tickets, but we've all seen the damage they can cause. There's a very real risk that OP's service could become a ticketmaster for UW classes, with all the perverse incentives that entails. Their reaction was probably excessive, but, from this perspective, understandable.
jjmarr 2y ago
If you look at the GitHub commit history, the repo was created before the blog post from UW, and also never contained actual courses. This is important, because it's the only explicit reference to "trading open spots" they've made. The Registration Abuse policy covers access to the registration system for: * buying or selling one’s seat in a class, * holding seats for another student, * or otherwise registering for a section that one has no intention of taking. It's unclear if HuskySwap actually violated this policy, given that it never actually accessed the registration system and no students used it in conjunction with the registration system of the school.
- uwthrowaway 2y ago
  UW student - see the "Tampering and Abuse" section of (https://registrar.washington.edu/registration/policies-procedures/ https://registrar.washington.edu/registration/policies-proce...) which has been around for much longer and is well communicated with students.
  - ChrisClark 2y ago
    How does a fake site, with fake classes, that had nothing to do with actual registration, violate that?
  - jjmarr 2y ago
    Yes, I saw that linked in the top comment. What isn't clear is how this site actually violated that policy, if there was no course slot trading actually occurring. You could describe it as an attempt, but in this situation, the student asked for permission from the school before doing something that would violate their policies. To use an analogy, if I sneak notes into an exam, that is likely academic misconduct. However, creating a formula sheet and asking the professor if I can use it is not academic misconduct. I wouldn't consider that to be attempted cheating.
    - croemer 2y ago
      He might have violated the following by testing alone: > The use of robots and other automated tools to submit registration requests is expressly forbidden. Some sort of testing will likely have happened, in which case an automated tool has been used. Even if only by TFA himself. Also note: > Because use of scripts, robots, or other automated queries can adversely impact University network and computing resources and interferes with equal access to registration, such automated querying of registration-related resources is expressly forbidden. Violators may have their access to University network and computing resources terminated and may be subject to action by the University under applicable law, regulation, or policy, including but not limited to, discipline under any applicable University conduct code. The whole purpose of the project is to violate this clause. I agree that if no testing had happened, no sanctions should apply because the clause above doesn't say anything about attempts of use being sanctioned.
charlieyu1 2y ago
Why is trading considered bad? It is solving some problems for both students and administrators. In my old days we did the same, only by finding someone who want to swap manually
- foota 2y ago
  Trading when it happens organically "oops I thought I wanted to take this class, but can't make the time slot work" is beneficial, but making it easy to register for a bunch of classes in high demand and then swap them with others messes with things.
- LPisGood 2y ago
  It opens up for abuse by offering to sell a spot.
  - charlieyu1 2y ago
    The downside is that you may be unable to sell it and actually have to take a course that you don’t want
    - isotypic 2y ago
      You can just drop the course - pretty much every university (in the United States, at least) allows students to drop courses one or two weeks into the semester without any record (on say, a transcript). Otherwise students cannot possibly plan their semesters, since courses may not make material available until after the semester actually starts. So if you are planning to sell the slots and it does not work out, you just drop the course, no harm to you.
      - charlieyu1 2y ago
        And the slot will be reallocated. I won’t say no harm but you have to be pretty desperate to try to pull this off
        2y ago
uwthrowaway 2y ago
I'm a uw cs student, it is made pretty clear that you're not supposed to trade spots or otherwise automate any part of the registration. Students typically know not to talk about this stuff. While well-intentioned, if this was commonly used it would mess registration up even more by making the "constrained" classes valuable and would be filled up quickly by people who wouldn't take them.
- buildbot 2y ago
  I was an EE student and worked for UW CSE back in the day, someone tried to do this back then as well and got very in trouble. There may have been some browser automation scripts about… I wouldn’t know.
  - loeg 2y ago
    I benefited from a UW CSE spot trade in like 2010 and didn't get in trouble for it at the time.
    - uwthrowaway 2y ago
      Yeah, a small amount of "organic" mischief isn't bad IMO, but it's problematic on a larger scale.
      - buildbot 2y ago
        Yeah I agree, not ideal given how limited capacity is in some classes.
  - hirvi74 2y ago
    How were said student(s) even caught? I am assuming someone spoke too loudly or shared too much, but I'd be lying if I said I was not hoping for some kind of technical solution.
    - buildbot 2y ago
MostlyStable 2y ago
It sounds like the actual demo site didn't actually interact with the registration system at all. He mentions "fake" classes. That's what he wanted the API token for; that would have allowed him to actually make the site function, and he (falsely) assumed that the documentation meant the university was open to the idea. So while it sounds like his site would almost certainly wound up violating policy had it gone live _it never did so_. That's a pretty good reason for them to deny the API request (which seems like may have not been intended for the public anyway?) But it does not in any way seem to merit the threat of expulsion, or, even worse, the fact that (according to the student in an update), even though he immediately complied they still put a hold on his account anyways. There is some nuance here for sure, but I do not see in any way that the universities response is proportional to what actually happened.
- hirvi74 2y ago
  Not to mention the fact that if it were so egregious, then why does the university want the creator's work or some modification of it?
  - Xelynega 2y ago
    The only source we have for this is the person saying it.
    - hirvi74 2y ago
      Good point.
- w0m 2y ago
  I'm guessing he had been running the 'demo' site for a fair minute using scrapped data; but didn't get noticed/caught until he requested the token. Still shit to lock him out after he pulled the site down.

by gowld 2y ago

pdpi 2y ago

> Such abuse includes, but is not limited to, buying or selling one’s seat in a class, holding seats for another student, or otherwise registering for a section that one has no intention of taking." This bit is important. At a glance, stubhub/ticketmaster/etc are pretty benign services that fulfil a pretty natural need for event tickets, but we've all seen the damage they can cause. There's a very real risk that OP's service could become a ticketmaster for UW classes, with all the perverse incentives that entails. Their reaction was probably excessive, but, from this perspective, understandable.

jjmarr 2y ago

If you look at the GitHub commit history, the repo was created before the blog post from UW, and also never contained actual courses. This is important, because it's the only explicit reference to "trading open spots" they've made. The Registration Abuse policy covers access to the registration system for: * buying or selling one’s seat in a class, * holding seats for another student, * or otherwise registering for a section that one has no intention of taking. It's unclear if HuskySwap actually violated this policy, given that it never actually accessed the registration system and no students used it in conjunction with the registration system of the school.

uwthrowaway 2y ago
UW student - see the "Tampering and Abuse" section of (https://registrar.washington.edu/registration/policies-procedures/ https://registrar.washington.edu/registration/policies-proce...) which has been around for much longer and is well communicated with students.
- ChrisClark 2y ago
  How does a fake site, with fake classes, that had nothing to do with actual registration, violate that?
- jjmarr 2y ago
  Yes, I saw that linked in the top comment. What isn't clear is how this site actually violated that policy, if there was no course slot trading actually occurring. You could describe it as an attempt, but in this situation, the student asked for permission from the school before doing something that would violate their policies. To use an analogy, if I sneak notes into an exam, that is likely academic misconduct. However, creating a formula sheet and asking the professor if I can use it is not academic misconduct. I wouldn't consider that to be attempted cheating.
  - croemer 2y ago
    He might have violated the following by testing alone: > The use of robots and other automated tools to submit registration requests is expressly forbidden. Some sort of testing will likely have happened, in which case an automated tool has been used. Even if only by TFA himself. Also note: > Because use of scripts, robots, or other automated queries can adversely impact University network and computing resources and interferes with equal access to registration, such automated querying of registration-related resources is expressly forbidden. Violators may have their access to University network and computing resources terminated and may be subject to action by the University under applicable law, regulation, or policy, including but not limited to, discipline under any applicable University conduct code. The whole purpose of the project is to violate this clause. I agree that if no testing had happened, no sanctions should apply because the clause above doesn't say anything about attempts of use being sanctioned.

charlieyu1 2y ago

Why is trading considered bad? It is solving some problems for both students and administrators. In my old days we did the same, only by finding someone who want to swap manually

foota 2y ago
Trading when it happens organically "oops I thought I wanted to take this class, but can't make the time slot work" is beneficial, but making it easy to register for a bunch of classes in high demand and then swap them with others messes with things.
LPisGood 2y ago
It opens up for abuse by offering to sell a spot.
- charlieyu1 2y ago
  The downside is that you may be unable to sell it and actually have to take a course that you don’t want
  - isotypic 2y ago
    You can just drop the course - pretty much every university (in the United States, at least) allows students to drop courses one or two weeks into the semester without any record (on say, a transcript). Otherwise students cannot possibly plan their semesters, since courses may not make material available until after the semester actually starts. So if you are planning to sell the slots and it does not work out, you just drop the course, no harm to you.
    - charlieyu1 2y ago
      And the slot will be reallocated. I won’t say no harm but you have to be pretty desperate to try to pull this off
      - 2y ago

uwthrowaway 2y ago

I'm a uw cs student, it is made pretty clear that you're not supposed to trade spots or otherwise automate any part of the registration. Students typically know not to talk about this stuff. While well-intentioned, if this was commonly used it would mess registration up even more by making the "constrained" classes valuable and would be filled up quickly by people who wouldn't take them.

buildbot 2y ago
I was an EE student and worked for UW CSE back in the day, someone tried to do this back then as well and got very in trouble. There may have been some browser automation scripts about… I wouldn’t know.
- loeg 2y ago
  I benefited from a UW CSE spot trade in like 2010 and didn't get in trouble for it at the time.
  - uwthrowaway 2y ago
    Yeah, a small amount of "organic" mischief isn't bad IMO, but it's problematic on a larger scale.
    - buildbot 2y ago
      Yeah I agree, not ideal given how limited capacity is in some classes.
- hirvi74 2y ago
  How were said student(s) even caught? I am assuming someone spoke too loudly or shared too much, but I'd be lying if I said I was not hoping for some kind of technical solution.
  - buildbot 2y ago

MostlyStable 2y ago

It sounds like the actual demo site didn't actually interact with the registration system at all. He mentions "fake" classes. That's what he wanted the API token for; that would have allowed him to actually make the site function, and he (falsely) assumed that the documentation meant the university was open to the idea. So while it sounds like his site would almost certainly wound up violating policy had it gone live _it never did so_. That's a pretty good reason for them to deny the API request (which seems like may have not been intended for the public anyway?) But it does not in any way seem to merit the threat of expulsion, or, even worse, the fact that (according to the student in an update), even though he immediately complied they still put a hold on his account anyways. There is some nuance here for sure, but I do not see in any way that the universities response is proportional to what actually happened.

hirvi74 2y ago
Not to mention the fact that if it were so egregious, then why does the university want the creator's work or some modification of it?
- Xelynega 2y ago
  The only source we have for this is the person saying it.
  - hirvi74 2y ago
    Good point.
w0m 2y ago
I'm guessing he had been running the 'demo' site for a fair minute using scrapped data; but didn't get noticed/caught until he requested the token. Still shit to lock him out after he pulled the site down.