4 ms·

Seeing as how the author has signed in with an account whose email address is username@mit.edu, MIT could just take over the account. Edit: this comment was on

Seeing as how the author has signed in with an account whose email address is username@mit.edu, MIT could just take over the account. Edit: this comment was only partially serious, not meant as legal advice to MIT.

kragen 1y ago
That kind of thing might lead to arXiv not accepting any more papers from MIT, or at least any more takedowns.
Aurornis 1y ago
That's not how it works in the real world. That would be a fraudulent request and I suspect they'd invite legal trouble by impersonating someone else to access a computer system. Furthermore, if the author could demonstrate to arXiv that the request was fraudulent, the paper would be reinstated. The narrative would also switch to people being angry at MIT for impersonating a student to do something.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
  >That's not how it works in the real world. That would be a fraudulent request and I suspect they'd invite legal trouble by impersonating someone else to access a computer system. Emails are not people. You can impersonate a person, but you can't impersonate an email. If I own a company and I issue the email dick.less@privateequity.com but then have to fire him... using this email address to transfer company assets back to someone who can be responsible for them isn't fraud (for that purpose, at least). How is this not the same issue?
  - IshKebab 1y ago
    If you misrepresent that you are dick.less then yes that would be fraud. They say only the authors can submit withdrawal requests, so you would have to present yourself as the author even though you aren't. That's fraud.
  - a2800276 1y ago
    This would be a coherent argument if the paper was submitted by an email address. Instead the paper was submitted by a person. The email address serves to identify the person. Only the person can redact the paper.
  - jand 1y ago
    > How is this not the same issue? Although not explicitly stated, i read previous comments as using dick.less@privateequity.com to cancel his personal Netflix account. (Let's say that privateequity.com allowed personal usage of company email.) I see a difference between accessing an email account and impersonating the previous account holder.
  - mattl 1y ago
    Are you referring to an email address or an email message here?
- kevin_thibedeau 1y ago
  I've done it for people who used my email to sign up for Facebook and Instagram. Presumably now they have a more rigorous verification flow but they used to let people use any email without checking. I can't have a potential criminal using a social account connected to me, so password reset and disable the account is the only rational solution. Obviously this is slightly more problematic for an institution.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - NikolaNovak 1y ago
    Nope. Still doing it. It's infuriating that Instagram, Facebook, etc send a "Email Verification" that has NO option to say "Nope, not me, don't want it, don't do it". Worse, I'd like to create my own Instagram now, but cannot, because somebody else tried to use my email a decade ago and now all I get is a very very confused loop. I'm sure these systems make sense to somebody, there's detail and nuance and practicality I'm horribly ignorant of, but they just seem insanely unprofessional to me as an outsider :-/
    - hawaiianbrah 1y ago
      > Worse, I'd like to create my own Instagram now, but cannot, because somebody else tried to use my email a decade ago and now all I get is a very very confused loop. Why not use a different email address? Nothing about that would make it less your “own” Instagram account.
      - NikolaNovak 1y ago
        Oh it becomes a rabbit hole :-) The email is attached and always has been to my personal Facebook account. But it's also now attached to not-mine instagram account. And because two are kind of independent but kind of integrated, it generates a lot of weirdness I'd like to remove by having my own properly owned and integrated and tagged Facebook and instagram accounts. It'd take 12 seconds for a human being to figure out but of course that's not an option.
- immibis 1y ago
  If they don't get prosecuted, it's legal.
FreebasingLLMs 1y ago
[dead]

kragen 1y ago

That kind of thing might lead to arXiv not accepting any more papers from MIT, or at least any more takedowns.

Aurornis 1y ago

That's not how it works in the real world. That would be a fraudulent request and I suspect they'd invite legal trouble by impersonating someone else to access a computer system. Furthermore, if the author could demonstrate to arXiv that the request was fraudulent, the paper would be reinstated. The narrative would also switch to people being angry at MIT for impersonating a student to do something.

NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
>That's not how it works in the real world. That would be a fraudulent request and I suspect they'd invite legal trouble by impersonating someone else to access a computer system. Emails are not people. You can impersonate a person, but you can't impersonate an email. If I own a company and I issue the email dick.less@privateequity.com but then have to fire him... using this email address to transfer company assets back to someone who can be responsible for them isn't fraud (for that purpose, at least). How is this not the same issue?
- IshKebab 1y ago
  If you misrepresent that you are dick.less then yes that would be fraud. They say only the authors can submit withdrawal requests, so you would have to present yourself as the author even though you aren't. That's fraud.
- a2800276 1y ago
  This would be a coherent argument if the paper was submitted by an email address. Instead the paper was submitted by a person. The email address serves to identify the person. Only the person can redact the paper.
- jand 1y ago
  > How is this not the same issue? Although not explicitly stated, i read previous comments as using dick.less@privateequity.com to cancel his personal Netflix account. (Let's say that privateequity.com allowed personal usage of company email.) I see a difference between accessing an email account and impersonating the previous account holder.
- mattl 1y ago
  Are you referring to an email address or an email message here?
kevin_thibedeau 1y ago
I've done it for people who used my email to sign up for Facebook and Instagram. Presumably now they have a more rigorous verification flow but they used to let people use any email without checking. I can't have a potential criminal using a social account connected to me, so password reset and disable the account is the only rational solution. Obviously this is slightly more problematic for an institution.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- NikolaNovak 1y ago
  Nope. Still doing it. It's infuriating that Instagram, Facebook, etc send a "Email Verification" that has NO option to say "Nope, not me, don't want it, don't do it". Worse, I'd like to create my own Instagram now, but cannot, because somebody else tried to use my email a decade ago and now all I get is a very very confused loop. I'm sure these systems make sense to somebody, there's detail and nuance and practicality I'm horribly ignorant of, but they just seem insanely unprofessional to me as an outsider :-/
  - hawaiianbrah 1y ago
    > Worse, I'd like to create my own Instagram now, but cannot, because somebody else tried to use my email a decade ago and now all I get is a very very confused loop. Why not use a different email address? Nothing about that would make it less your “own” Instagram account.
    - NikolaNovak 1y ago
      Oh it becomes a rabbit hole :-) The email is attached and always has been to my personal Facebook account. But it's also now attached to not-mine instagram account. And because two are kind of independent but kind of integrated, it generates a lot of weirdness I'd like to remove by having my own properly owned and integrated and tagged Facebook and instagram accounts. It'd take 12 seconds for a human being to figure out but of course that's not an option.
immibis 1y ago
If they don't get prosecuted, it's legal.

FreebasingLLMs 1y ago

[dead]