MIT: Disturbing Pattern in 2007

Parents Forum
1

<p>As a parent, I couldn't help but notice three events that occurred at MIT in 2007 that I personally find troubling.</p>

<p>First, three students were arrested while engaged in the time-honored tradition of "hacking", and charged with felonies:</p>

<p>Three</a> Students Face Felony Charges After Tripping E52 Alarm - The Tech</p>

<p>Although the charges were later dropped, fallout from the incident could be problematic with future employers. Security clearance requests, for example, require disclosure of arrests and arraignments, whether or not a conviction results. The incident was later attributed to a "...lapse in MIT procedures...".</p>

<p>The second debacle was the statement released by MIT after Star Simpson's brush with Logan airport officials, characterizing her actions as "reckless": </p>

<p>MIT</a> Sophomore Arrested for Innocuous LED Device - The Tech</p>

<p>The idea that the Institute would throw its own student to the wolves, issuing such a prejudicial comment without bothering to first determine the facts, is disturbing. While Ms. Simpson's legal proceedings continue, the faculty debates how they should respond (NEWS FLASH--IT'S BEEN NEARLY 4 MONTHS!), and the administration refuses to correct its obvious error.</p>

<p>Finally, and perhaps less noticed, is the MIT administration's willing cooperation with the RIAA, distributing pre-litigation letters to students suspected of illegal file-sharing:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14263%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14263&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Interestingly Harvard, home of the Berkman Center, has not seen any of its students so targeted by the RIAA. Could it be that the RIAA knows full well that Harvard has the moral fiber and the legal smarts to stand firm, putting a stop to their questionable tactics? Read the letter "Universities to RIAA--Take a Hike" by Charles Nesson and John Palfrey of Harvard:</p>

<p>The</a> Filter - Berkman Center for Internet & Society</p>

<p>As for MIT's administration, these are not simply three isolated incidents, but illustrate a pattern of flawed thinking--that doing what's best for the Institute sometimes means sacrificing a few students. Nothing could be more wrong. Yes, MIT teaches facts and figures, but our children are also learning ethics, morality and integrity by watching how the adults behave.</p>

<p>Thoughts?</p>

2

<p>You won't find too many MIT students who are particularly in love with the administration, because of recent events like these as well as others in the more distant past. They're not seen as representing the interests of students.</p>

<p>I find punishing hackers particularly egregious, since MIT loves to publicize particularly cool or daring hacks after the fact.</p>

<p>I'm sure Jessiehl will have more insightful commentary, since she was involved with the administration on a day-to-day basis due to her position in the student government, but for my part, I don't have much good to say about the administration.</p>

3

<p>I know one fallout of the sorts of episodes you mention above is that my son at MIT has started spending much of his free time working with the Berkman Center at Harvard.</p>

4

<p>Next thing you know the poor girl from Doonesbury will have to transfer, since her matriculation was alledgely a poll that was hacked by MIT students.</p>

5

<p>Let's just say not many people are happy with how Star Simpson's case was handled. </p>

<p>At</a> Meeting, Faculty Vote Not to Restrain MIT Press Releases - The Tech</p>

6

<p>I don't know anything whatsoever about MIT, but as a parent of 2 kids who collectively have spent time on campuses with 5 different administrations, I just want to say that these issues such as perceived support of administration for students and student/faculty/administration relationships can make a very big difference to the overall feel of a campus and student life. </p>

<p>It is a factor that is often overlooked by students and parents, but which I think should be taken into consideration when making the final choice of a college in the spring. This would apply to any college -- not just MIT. It certainly would not be the sole factor... but it is something to pay attention to that unfortunately cannot be discerned from brochures or published statistics. </p>

<p>I would think that student newspapers, particularly the op ed page, would probably be a good starting point to get a sense of where a particular school's administration fit along the spectrum, and what issues, if any, are causing concern.</p>

7

<p>Clarification: Are we talking traditional hacking as in computers or MIT hacking as in practical jokes like the police car on the dome?</p>

8

<p>In the context of the above comments, "hacking" at MIT refers to the clever large-scale "practical jokes" you mention. ("Hacks" are the instances of those jokes.)</p>

9

<p>I don't have a dog in this fight, so I can't comment on the overall relationship between the MIT administration and student body. But on the one issue, I can't see why it's a bad thing for the school to discourage its students from engaging in illegal file-sharing of copyrighted material. Seems like the school is just trying to do the right thing.</p>

10

<p>Mnay large state U's with solid civil rights traditions have gone along with efforts to stop illegal file sharing. Note the word--ILLEGAL. No university should knowingly foster such acts.</p>

11

<p>Atlmom, MIT is one of the few remaining places (besides the internets) where hacking computers means programming computers. Cracking is what we call those who try to break in and enter into computer systems unauthorized for manevolent purposes. It's not at all uncommon to go into a professors office and get told to wait a few minutes while he finishes hacking.</p>

12

<p>Yes, students and alums are unhappy about this. MIT students have a time-honored tradition of fighting with the administration, though. :)</p>

<p>I in fact worked a lot on hackers' rights issues in my three years as a student government rep (to clarify, yes, this is the exploring/pranking form of hacking, not computer hacking), and I personally knew all three of the hackers who got charged with felonies, and helped negotiate their case with admins. I will be fair and point out that in the end MIT dropped the case. I've also followed Star's case (and knew Star before the incident).</p>

<p>I think, though, that one of the reasons that MIT students get so alarmed about stuff like this is that we actually have quite a lot of freedom, as college students go, and we appreciate it, and are determined to make sure that it doesn't disappear. "Keep MIT special." A lot of changes in recent years that are perceived as anti-student culture are also perceived as trying to make us more like other colleges.</p>

<p>To be fair, I'm unconvinced that the RIAA thing has much to do with the MIT administration taking problematic attitudes toward students. There's not that much that the administration can do on that issue. I have personally (from when I was VP of MIT's Undergraduate Association) witnessed them showing more integrity than I expected regarding the RIAA.</p>

<p>I would also like to point out that many faculty (such as the ones who brought that resolution that didn't get passed) are very student-sympathetic. As are some administrators.</p>

<p>OP, if you're the parent of an MIT student, I encourage you to let MIT know what you think (and if you know other parents who feel as you do, encourage them to do the same)! MIT is often more concerned about pleasing parents with policies toward students than it is about pleasing students! Pro-student input from parents can be very useful, and a great boon to the students who work with the administration on political matters.</p>

13

<p>If parents have concerns about any aspect of the MIT experience, they'll find that MIT listens. Here's a recent example. On Friday 1/18, I received an email from the Associate Director of the MIT Parents Association. The first part of the letter is an invitation to an MIT Club event, but the second part is a request for a face-to-face conversation:</p>

<p>"While in the area, I would like to take the opportunity to meet with you to learn about your daughter's [named here] experience at MIT. Your feedback is important. I would also like to update you on what is happening at the Institute and the Parents Association. Are you available to meet on Thursday or Friday, February 7th or 8th? If you are planning to attend the event on Weds, I could meet with you before it at 4 or 5 pm. I can meet with you at your home, office or at a restaurant. Please advise if you are available and the times that are convenient for you..."</p>

<p>Any parent who has concerns about the administration could voice them in this sort of venue, or could contact the adminstration directly.</p>

<p>In answer to the initial post, I personally don't have a problem with the Institute taking a stand against illegal downloads. As other posters have noted, they're illegal. Philosophically, I'd like all downloads to be free. However, when my daughter lived at home, we stated that we would not support illegal downloading at our house and told her that if she opposed the music industry's stance, she could take political action. Simply stealing the music is not a political stance, imo.</p>

<p>As to the Institute's coming down on hackers, the bottom line is that charges were dropped, I think. When I visited MIT in August, the campus news reported all sorts of theft around campus. It seemed as if laptops were disappearing from labs and offices on a nearly daily basis. So hey -- I can understand if a frustrated MIT security officer or two over-reacted when they found students breaking into an office. There's a balancing act going on, between giving students a wide range of freedom and needing to increase security on the campus.</p>

<p>Finally, I also wish the Institute had spoken with the student who was arrested at the airport before making a public statement. Admittedly, I don't know the whole story. However, that is the one incident that I am going to bring up when I speak with the Associate Director of the MIT parents' association in February.</p>

14

<p>not too sure why the last two items would be of concern. Star was beyond "reckless"; but, why should the University need to comment on her legal proceedings? OTOH, since the student was off campus, I don't even know why they even made the first comment.</p>

<p>Second, by blocking ILLEGAL file sharing, the University is actually protecting its students (and likely itself) from legal proceedings by the RIAA. As you note, yay, "charges" of illegal file sharing, which the RIAA is filing everywhere, could hinder future opportunities. Isn't discouraging students from illegal acts a good thing?</p>

<p>While I have no connection to MIT, I would gather most colleges are doing same.</p>

15

<p>Anyone who goes to an airport these days must surely be aware of the high level of security. We all know not to joke around about carrying anything dangerous through security. So why on earth would someone go to an airport dressed in even a vaguely suspicious manner, let alone with blinking lights and visible wires – a la a suicide bomber?
Sorry, much as I like MIT hacks, I have no sympathy with Star. I think of the all the tired passengers – people on their way home from business trips, parents with children waiting to board planes – and then someone, who obviously possesses a desperate need for attention, has to show up and create a scene. At the very least she doesn’t seem able or willing to anticipate responses to her actions, and at worst she places her own desire for public theatrics above the public good.
Why should MIT protect a student who has so little consideration for others – or for the reputation of her school? It’s not as if she were making a moral statement, like protesting the war. She was simply seeking attention – and she succeeded in her mission.
Silly, and thoughtless, she was/is an embarrassment to MIT.</p>

16

<p>

Yes -- it's worth noting, perhaps, that disliking the administration is something that brings MIT students together. Very us vs. them. I don't think that the administration's boneheadedness (in many other areas than those mentioned in this thread) were too terribly detrimental to my college life, but I recognize that many student hours were dedicated to making sure this was so. There are also some offices of the administration that are seen as student-friendly and which are fighting the good fight, of which the admissions office is one. </p>

<p>I can't get into the Star debate again. She's a friend of mine (and a CC member, actually), and with whatever credibility I've built up after almost three years on this board, I can promise you that she didn't go to the airport that day with any desire for theatrics. She was just a normal person going to the airport, and however cringe-worthy her actions may have been in hindsight, they weren't done with malice aforethought.</p>

17

<p>Mollie: I've always had respect for your postings but do you really want to go on record asserting that Star "was just a normal person going to the airport?" Blinking lights, visible wires (just for starters)?
Again, if an MIT student does something foolish, without thinking of the consequences of their actions, and without regard for the public good, should the Institute really be honor-bound to defend them?
MIT has always been concerned for the welfare of the wider community and Star's actions at the airport definitely went against the spirit of the Institute.</p>

18

<p>
[quote]
Mollie: I've always had respect for your postings but do you really want to go on record asserting that Star "was just a normal person going to the airport?" Blinking lights, visible wires (just for starters)?

[/quote]

Yup.</p>

<p>My husband always flies with his remote-controlled airplanes in his carryon, and after this incident, he's realized that the wise thing is to either ship them ahead of time, or else pack them in his checked luggage. That's not something that would have occurred to either of us before, but we're forced to realize that other people consider things dangerous that we don't.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Again, if an MIT student does something foolish, without thinking of the consequences of their actions, and without regard for the public good, should the Institute really be honor-bound to defend them?

[/quote]

I don't think MIT was obligated to make a statement at all, although I have to admit that I would have liked to hear something along the lines of "All</a> Tech men carry batteries."</p>

19

<p>O.K., I guess you have to defend your friends.
For the record, though, I've travelled extensively, have been to many airports, and have encountered NO ONE geared up like your friend Star.<br>
"All Tech men carry batteries" -- of course -- but not wired up to blinking lights, and not with protruding wires. And I presume your husband had his remote-controlled 'planes packed in his carry-on, and did not enter airports with them buzzing around his hunky frame?
I'm glad MIT made the statement they did -- passivity would have implied acceptance -- and I still maintain her actions were irresponsible, thoughtless, self-serving, and ultimately rather stupid.</p>

20

<p>Suicide bombers with visible wires and blinking lights? I don't think so. That sounds more like someone dressed up as R2D2, to me.</p>