[FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by ttldomination

Oh man, I have never seen someone roasted so hard on CD.

Just stop and think for one second. You know there's an issue, and you know the people who can fix it. But, instead of acknowledging the issue, they tell you to go away? Then, you're determined to show them that this issue is real, and that it matters. All you can think of is proving them wrong and proving yourself right. So then you take actions that aren't good, but in your mind, they will serve a greater good.

In my short few years being around people, I've met a handful of people who are utterly brilliant but they have no social awareness and a lack of ability to see consequences. These people are nailed as socially awkward, but in their mind whatever they are doing, however they are doing it, is perfectly right.

As much as I can, I use the concept of gracious professionalism as an internal yardstick. However, I have a really hard time believing anyone would think that the correct way of carrying yourself when in possession of an issue like this is to disrupt the climax of FIRST's largest, most-anticipated, most-covered event.

I believe there are far better ways to demonstrate these bugs. FIRST has held Beta Day in Manchester. If the FTA and some volunteering teams were on board, I'd be okay with someone demonstrating a novel flaw the night before SCRIW and forwarding the information to FIRST. And if you feel the urge to break something at Championship, why not practice matches with your own team?

The phrasing of Jon's email makes me believe the individual involved is (well, was) a mentor on a team. As the guy in denim says, we get the best of what we celebrate. There is no room for celebrating interference with any competitive FRC match, whether it's Einstein or Q12 at some Box-On-Wheels Extravaganza of a regional. There is plenty of room to celebrate mentors that discover field issues and disclose them responsibly.

[Ether]

Originally Posted by Billfred

There is no room for celebrating interference with any competitive FRC match, whether it's Einstein or Q12 at some Box-On-Wheels Extravaganza of a regional.

Just to be clear, you're not implying that anyone who has posted to this thread is suggesting that "celebration" is the appropriate response to what happened, correct?

[Greg McKaskle]

Could someone summarize and explain the more detailed aspects of the Robot Testing and Failed Client Authentication Testing? Specifically, what intentional interference actually happened, how did it cause problems, and what are they planning to do to fix the issue?

To add to what Al suggested, if you don't understand something in the report, this forum is a great place to ask for further explanation. The above is a good example. It is nearly impossible for all items in the report to be understandable to all that read it.

Alan did a great job of answering the question, but I'll add that the FCA is not itself anything to be worried about. It could be due to a typo, a forgetful user, or an attempt at cracking the password. The access point with logging enabled may log the mac address of the FCA client.

As mentioned in a previous post, the FW bug means that teams who used encryption for build season, opened their programming laptop at the event and unknowingly attempted to connect to their own robot with their build-season password resulting in an FCA. This was investigated to determine if it contributed directly to issues on Einstein.

Greg McKaskle

Greg McKaskle

[Libby K]

Okay, it's that time again where Libby chimes in with a seemingly unpopular opinion.
I want to stress that I am not trying to be accusatory, and I'm also not speaking for any of my teams, for FIRST, or for my family.
This is all me, and only me.

Originally Posted by Billfred

As much as I can, I use the concept of gracious professionalism as an internal yardstick. However, I have a really hard time believing anyone would think that the correct way of carrying yourself when in possession of an issue like this is to disrupt the climax of FIRST's largest, most-anticipated, most-covered event.

If you'd like to make a point, to an FTA, email someone at FIRST. Don't ruin the biggest event of the year and make a fool (or, you know, a criminal) out of yourself in the process.

I personally hope for the team to come forward. If this individual were acting alone, and the team can honestly say they didn't know about it, then the team should be able to say "Yes, Jimmy (or Susie) McHacker was a part of our team, we didn't know at the time what was going on, but our team didn't condone the behavior and they are no longer on the team because of their action. We're really sorry." (Obviously, being banned from the team is no longer necessary since they're barred from FIRST, but that's not the point.) Yes, there will still be people in this community that will reflect the actions of the individual onto the team... but those people would be wrong, and we'd know that.

Originally Posted by Gigakaiser

...the team (or whoever on the team is aware of the individual) should release the information and acknowledge that it was an individual, not a team effort. Imagine the reputation of the team if the information came out sometime in the future by another source - it would not look good. If the team came out it would be seen as a gracious step forward...

Originally Posted by Gigakaiser

Should the team then remain anonymous to avoid potential scrutiny? Again, what if the information was released by another source? Coming forward now would be the best way to avoid scrutiny at a greater scale.

^Exactly. It looks far better for the team to come forward now than have it disclosed at a later date by another team/individual... and knowing our community, that's going to happen at some point.

Originally Posted by LeelandS

I'm sure (or at least, I hope) this person is truly remorseful for their actions. If they have seen a fraction of these responses, I'm sure they'd know that their actions deeply upset a large number of people. The last thing this person would need is to be forever known as "The person who ruined Einstein." If their identity were to become public, let's face it: No FIRSTer in the world could look at them the same way. They would be faced with eyes of raw disdain and disappointment. All respect from the FIRST community would be lost, or at least severely damaged. I, personally, don't think anyone deserves that.

You're taking an incredible moral high road, and saying that this person feels sorry. Good for you for believing in people, but what if they don't?! Unfortunately I've seen plenty of attitudes that say "I'm GLAD Einstein screwed up, because FIRST sucks and they had it coming". Paraphrased from many emails/FB comments/tweets/what have you, but that's the sentiment.

Originally Posted by Gregor

For this one person who deliberately tried to sabotage the event, there are literally hundreds of thousands of people who would condone in. Lets remember that one rogue person shouldn't be regarded as a significant change in FIRST culture.

I think you meant 'condemn' and not 'condone' but your point shines through. I sincerely hope this individual was acting alone and that this does not reflect a change in FIRST culture.

--

Regardless of the individual I want to thank the wonderful people at FIRST HQ, the volunteers that helped with the testing process, and, of course, the Einstein teams. This is the biggest disaster FIRST has ever seen and you all handled it with class and professionalism. Thank you for being shining examples of what FIRST teams and participants should be, even during the bad times.

I'll leave you with a Woodie quote...

"Understanding that gracious professionalism works is not rocket science. It is, however, missing in too many activities. At FIRST it is alive and well. Please help us take care of it."

Thank you, all, for helping us take care of it.

[Nate Laverdure]

Wow, I just found this:

14 Jul 2012 10:00 EST
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SAMSUNG TO WITHDRAW FROM AMERICAN MARKET FOLLOWING ATTACK BY ROGUE DEVICE

The actions of the individual Samsung Galaxy Nexus device that deliberately disrupted the 28 Apr 2012 Einstein matches were reprehensible and unjustifiable. Samsung vehemently denies any knowledge of, or participation in, these activities. These actions were undertaken without the knowledge and consent of Samsung and in no way should be considered to represent what is considered acceptable for a Samsung device.

Samsung will make all possible efforts to identify and bring to justice the specific device responsible for the actions of 28 Apr. In addition, Samsung is committed to prevent all future occurrences of this kind of attack by rogue devices. For this reason, Samsung and its corporate partners are taking immediate action to shut down all US and Canadian manufacturing and sales activity, followed by a phased withdrawal from the North American market. Additional details will be forthcoming.

For information contact:
Samsung Electronics America
85 Challenger Road
Ridgefield Park, NJ

I personally applaud this bold move from Samsung. They've understood that we won't be able to move forward as a community until the individual Galaxy Nexus phone, and Samsung as a whole, is held to account.

[shawnz]

Originally Posted by Nate Laverdure

Wow, I just found this:

[...]

I personally applaud this bold move from Samsung. They've understood that we won't be able to move forward as a community until the individual Galaxy Nexus phone, and Samsung as a whole, is held to account.

Too subtle?

[Nate Laverdure]

Originally Posted by shawnz

Too subtle?

Yeah, I guess. My fault.

All: Disregard the above, maybe I'll try again later.

[Ether]

Originally Posted by Nate Laverdure

Wow, I just found this:

I personally applaud this bold move from Samsung. They've understood that we won't be able to move forward as a community until the individual Galaxy Nexus phone, and Samsung as a whole, is held to account.

I assume you are making a joke, but I can't figure out what point you are trying to make.

[Greg McKaskle]

My own personal wish is that this situation will serve as a somber discussion point within each team. What would the correct response be if YOU found this or a similar issue? What if ... 's are a very valuable teaching tool for life, and the FIRST community is a safe harbor for learning so many of those life tools.

The fact that this statistically unlikely combination of wifi components left the door to the FIRST field partially unlocked doesn't make it that unique. A lost wallet, an unlocked or easily bypassed physical door, an online account with a weak password, all of these take place day-to-day and are worth considering and discussing along with the Einstein vulnerability. All systems have weaknesses, and for me it is cultural expectations more than the strengths of the locks that provide a sense of security in my day to day life. I am not intending to make excuses for the field issues. Locks and alarms are certainly a necessary part of the solution, but what really counts is how people behave when the lock is missing and there are no witnesses.

Relatively speaking, I'm still new to FIRST, and I'm still amazingly proud of the impact it has on people. The level of trust and generosity displayed within the community is practically unparalleled. And yet, it will not maintain itself. It can be improved. I hope that the ultimate outcome of this unfortunate situation is that thousands of individuals consider their own actions in this and similar what if ... scenarios and use it as motivation for self-improvement.

Greg McKaskle

[techhelpbb]

Originally Posted by Nate Laverdure

Wow, I just found this:

I personally applaud this bold move from Samsung. They've understood that we won't be able to move forward as a community until the individual Galaxy Nexus phone, and Samsung as a whole, is held to account.

Considering that Samsung just release the Samsung S3 I am holding in my hand forgive me if I doubt the validity of this statement in the sense it could be taken.

Such a move would financially utterly destroy their company and in point of fact cause massive financial damage to the manufacturers that support them.

Besides they are already banned from selling the Nexus:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...amsung-s-nexus

[O'Sancheski]

Originally Posted by Nate Laverdure

Wow, I just found this:

I personally applaud this bold move from Samsung. They've understood that we won't be able to move forward as a community until the individual Galaxy Nexus phone, and Samsung as a whole, is held to account.

Do you have the source for this? Because to my understanding, Apple sued Samsung and told them to stop producing the Nexus.

[IndySam]

I am constantly amazed at how sarcasm challenged many people are Nate.

[shawnz]

It's a joke, guys. I think he was trying to make an analogy between incriminating individuals and incriminating a whole team. It's not a great analogy for a lot of reasons, though.

EDIT: Late

[techhelpbb]

Originally Posted by O'Sancheski

Do you have the source for this? Because to my understanding, Apple sued Samsung and told them to stop producing the Nexus.

To be clear they can't stop the production of the Nexus or the Galaxy Tab 10.1. I can produce anything I like and so can they (assuming it's not something subject to military restriction). They just can't sell them in the American market.

I can in point of fact still buy the Nexus, the Galaxy Tab 10.1 (GameStop has them) and of course the Galaxy Tab2 10.1 (which I just returned the other day for specific technical reasons).

The court did not order them to even empty the distribution of the product. Merely to stop offering to sell new stock until the matter is resolved.

Adding:

Sorry but that's sort of not a funny joke. You do realize that I have relatives that supply parts to Samsung and I know other FIRST members that if they read that would be wondering where their paycheck will come from. It's a tough economy out there, and this is a popular topic for people to read. Please think before you spoof your joke might not be funny if someone else panics. Misunderstandings like that can themselves shift the value of a stock.

[Steven Donow]

Originally Posted by Nate Laverdure

Wow, I just found this:

I personally applaud this bold move from Samsung. They've understood that we won't be able to move forward as a community until the individual Galaxy Nexus phone, and Samsung as a whole, is held to account.

My mom's 3 day old Galaxy S3 randomly died this morning. This makes sense.

Anyway, I don't think the team nor the individual needs to come forward. The team could easily come out and say that they didn't know about it/weren't involved with it, but whose to say that's the truth? I could easily say right now, "I did it.", and if I phrased it as an eloquent apology, people would believe me.*

Also, just a random idea here, whose to say the team knows about it? Maybe the interferer didn't tell his/her team why they were leaaving, and just treated it as a retirement or something.

Just throwing out some possible scenarios here.


*For the record, no, that was not a confession, wasn't a smartphone owner when I was at CMP, and I was the only one on my team there.