Slashdot Mirror
UCLA Shooter Accused Victim Of Stealing His Computer Code
The gunman who shot and killed a UCLA professor on Wednesday has been identified as Mainak Sarkar, said Los Angeles police. Sarkar, a former doctoral student accused the vicitim William Klug, 39, of stealing his computer code and giving it to someone else. According to reports, Sarkar used a 9mm semiautomatic pistol to shoot the professor, and then turned the gun on himself. A March 10 blog post by Sarkar, now archived reads: William Klug, UCLA professor is not the kind of person when you think of a professor. He is a very sick person. I urge every new student coming to UCLA to stay away from this guy. [...] My name is Mainak Sarkar. I was this guy's PhD student. We had personal differences. He cleverly stole all my code and gave it another student. He made me really sick. Your enemy is your enemy. But your friend can do a lot more harm. Be careful about whom you trust.
They should teach software licensing to psychotic students.
If he had GPLed it first then his professor couldn't steal it.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
We're dealing with a lunatic here. It's possible the professor did nothing wrong at all. I knew someone who was convinced a teacher was stealing his work because the college he went to uses Google Drive. Once people have a psychotic break of some kind and start down the road to paranoia and persecution, reality simply takes a back seat, if it even exists for them at all.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Why are you assuming what this obviously deranged person said actually represents the facts?
#DeleteChrome
Academic plagiarism is a huge issue and very common. I have even seen different academic departments (e.g. math vs physics) fight each other over these issues. When undergrad students and graduate students do work for a professor and are not named in the paper or the work is given to another student for use and publication, students have no recourse. It is important to understand that many grad students have no grant or employment contract which cedes IP rights to the university/professor. University in-house counsel and IP departments have no oversight of publication or assignment of credit. I would only perform work for a professor (for free without an employment contract) if I could demand a contract outlining ownership.
Funny how you seem to think that the most important detail of a shooting story is the person's race, as if that means something in terms of condemning/exonerating persons of that/other races.
Funny how you seem to have taken that as the most important thing out of the post I wrote. Boy oh boy, that's sure one mess I'm making. But it sure seems to me you're very focused on race though. So it's also my fault that the media was painting that picture yesterday? Damn, didn't know I had such power. Oh wait...I don't. Don't be a retard, or would you prefer I just say "don't be mentally slow" or maybe I can point you in the direction of a safe space instead?
Om, nomnomnom...
Alas many posts from many people are rather crazy, yet very few of their authors go shoot people.
How do you tell one from the other ahead of time?
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
LOL it certainly was for the reporters. Isn't odd how they were willing to report on race and religion when they thought they were one thing but began erasing the details when it turned out it was otherwise ?
Even better, there could've been a good reason for the "code sharing" - perhaps he was asking the other student to verify the code, or verify the results, or something.
You know, as part of the whole "reproducible results" thing - where people are asking that data and the software processing it be made open for inspection and for reproducing the results.
Or maybe the professor was continuing the research by giving it to another student to extend the research - the data and code exists, so start from that rather than reinventing the wheel.
The problem is, both the professor and the shooter are dead, which means finding out the whole truth is going to be a lot harder.
There's lot of valid reasons for "sharing" the code, which may very well have happened. Then again, stress might've cracked the shooter (finals were starting next week, apparently). ;l
No, same amount of typing. Everyone uses auto-indentation anyway. Most editors have the tab do auto-indenting, only in really stupid editors (notepad) would someone type a tab to get a tab.
Also, ignore your own personal preferences and use the coding standards that your team or company has agreed upon.
I don't care, because once upon a time I did care, and was called "Racist" for pointing out the obvious. Because the only real "Black" family is completely dysfunctional and nobody in the Black Community actually wants to solve that problem because the problem itself doesn't reflect well on the black community as a whole. Black men killing each other, going to prison for hard crimes, and so on, leaving single women unable to get better educated because they are pregnant and on welfare because the dads are dead, in prison or simply hooked up with another woman.
The solution is simple, but labeled "racist". Fix the fucking family disintegration caused by all the "progressive programs" that are designed to "help" but instead lock people into a dysfunctional system, creating a feedback loop that looks impossible to solve otherwise. Yeah, I don't care anymore, because if THEY don't care about fixing the problem themselves, and resist my suggestions because I am "white" (and don't forget, racist), why should I actually care?
The Black population votes nearly lockstep (70-90%) with the DNC, which keeps offering the same tired solutions. One popular definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results. Tell me, how is THIS any different? 50 years and three or four generations of Progressive "Help" and the black community is in as bad a shape as it was 60 years ago. Perhaps worse. Tell me, how is that working out for you?
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Not really a coincidence. Islam demands men seek retribution for their honor. It's one thing Muslim men take seriously.
Over-generalization is always a bad idea. ;)
Many recent shootings have been clearly tied to this sort of BS, no argument there, but those were accompanied by declarations of faith - the motivation wasn't at all unclear. This one is different (so far, anyway, it's still early days). Not everyone who lists a religion on a form actually cares about the tenets of their religion - heck, I'd bet most don't. I'm suspicious given the recent pattern, but let's go with facts as they emerge over assumption.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
...that we have a serious culture-of-crazy-people-willing-to-kill-over-nothing problem; unfortunately, it's too politically useful to interpret it as a "gun problem".
-Styopa
Not really a coincidence. Islam demands men seek retribution for their honor. It's one thing Muslim men take seriously.
So do Texans, you don't see calls to build a wall around Texas every time someone gets killed in a bar fight.
Look at the number of girls killed by their own fathers because of perceived honor.
And in those cases there is a clear religious/cultural motive.
This is nothing new. We in America are only now really seeing what Islam really is. I was in and around the US military for 26 years. One thing I know for absolute certain that is not being discussed is that Islam is not really a religion--it's a political system with a religious element. Islam and its adherents base their actions on Sharia Law. Full stop. The media is very, very reluctant to point this out.
Isn't the US having a big debate about gay marriage? There seems to be a lot of arguments popping up based on Christian law.
Sure most Islamic nations take it a bit further, as do many Muslims. There's also a lot of Muslims trying to go the other way as well.
Notice the difference between how Islam and Christianity are treated today in the US. Ask yourself this question: What do you think homosexual activists are not asking Muslim bakers to bake them a cake for their weddings? Do you honestly think that this line of action would even be considered? There answer is no.
Those activists are trying to change laws and establish new norms. You do that by confronting the majority, not by picking fights with a small politically irrelevant minority.
For those not believing what I said above about Islam being a political system with a religious element need to look at this for themselves. You will come to see I am correct. The military used to operate under this understanding, but the current administration has forbidden this. Why? We all know why. This administration does nothing but coddle Islam, refuses to use the term "Islamic terrorism", allows a known terrorist organization, the Muslim Brotherhood into the WH, the list goes on.
They're trying to end fights, not start them.
You're basing this whole idea on speculation around the shooter's specific beliefs and motives, truthfully we have no idea of his specific motives or beliefs aside from the fact he probably agreed that the label "Muslim" described some of them.
Of course having that label "Muslim" I'm certain that a particular political candidate won't be able to keep their mouth shut.
I stole this Sig
You do realize there are over 3 million Muslims in the United States, right?
And too many radicalized Conservatives think these peaceful Muslims, many of whom escaped hellholes to live here, are all out to get us.
We should ask where our Conservatives were radicalized in the same way we look into how some Muslims get radicalized. I'm pretty sure hate-radio, wingnut blogs, and Fox News are the cause.
Notice the difference between how Islam and Christianity are treated today in the US. Ask yourself this question: What do you think homosexual activists are not asking Muslim bakers to bake them a cake for their weddings?
You know who else they're not asking? Jews. Hindus. Buddhists. Sikhs. Taoists. Jains. Zoroastrians. Satanists. Wiccans.
Clearly it's not Muslims that are getting some special treatment here, it's Christians. But is it because of some hypothesized 'War on Christianity'?
Or is it the fact that 70.6% of the US population is some form of Christian, and another 22.8% is unaffiliated with any religion. That leaves 6.6% of the US population split across all of the world's various other religions. Indeed, only 0.9% of the US population adheres to Islam. We should expect 1 in every 111 targets of homosexual-activists-asking-people-to-bake-them-gay-cakes to be Muslim. Are you suggesting that you're aware of this many such events, as well as the religious leanings of every baker targeted this way?
Of course, these estimates assume uniform distribution of religious minorities, gay activists, and homophobic bakers. If you actually had the demographic data to not rely on such a simplistic assumption, I wouldn't be surprised if the odds of targeting a Muslim baker were even lower-still (as I suspect that religious minorities are more well-represented in areas that are more tolerant, and that gay activists would be attempting this baking schtick in areas that are less tolerant).
But this is all conjecture. I fully grant that it's entirely possible that you're right and no gay rights activists are targeting Muslim bakers because Muslim bakers inspire such a profoundly deep fear in their enemies.
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.