Talk:Robert Tappan Morris/Archives/2015

move?

This would still be useful to move, although the current situation has improved things a lot. (Now the article about rtm's father is at Robert Morris (cryptographer), with a redirect from the incorrect Robert Tappan Morris, Sr.. There is also a redirect from the more correct Robert Tappan Morris to this article.) --Schoen 20:11, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

I've done the move. Talrias (t | e | c) 11:03, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Talrias. --Schoen 17:55, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup

The biography section needs to be cleaned up. --Flashflash; 22:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Notability?

I cannot imagine why an editor has placed a notability cite on this website. The man is famous (or notorious, depending on your slant) for his computer work. He has made at least 10 speeches/presentations to programmer groups, has authored or co-authored over 53 papers detailing internet connection projects, and has a zillion lists on Google. No question of his notability IMHO.Raymondwinn (talk) 10:08, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Writing 10 presentations to computers groups isn't particularly notable, not is having written 53 papers. Nor is writing malware, or founding a company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikemaccana (talk • contribs) 19:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

how about google hits? how about the-first-worm-ever(-that-started-serious-computer-security-research)? PratikMallya ☎ 22:32, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Questions

The article could answer some questions such as: (1) did he receive a light sentence because his father was influential? (2) why is he smiling? (3) are all people who damage networks considered to be heroes?Lestrade (talk) 14:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)Lestrade

(1) was the sentence light? it was 1988 (2) the fact he is smiling might be unrelated to his condemnation (this might be a casual photo, etc), (3) he is also considered a great programmer, specially amongst lispers.

now, the thing I don't understand is why his infobox is focused only on his criminal record. I came to this page looking for his Viaweb / Y Combinator / Lisp programming fame --187.40.229.167 (talk) 11:51, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

exactly. Enumerate the record, but not in the infobox PratikMallya ☎ 22:29, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Criminal or Scientist

I've changed the infobox from scientist to criminal as the article clearly states he is most widely known for his criminal activity related to the Morris Worm. It's much more appropriate and I've beefed up citations around it to steer clear of WP:BLP issues. Toddst1 (talk) 16:32, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Similarly, I've reverted the recent edit by 96.239.59.178 (talk · contribs) which appeared to minimize his criminal activity. The article clearly states that he is known primarily for his criminal activity, so that should be mentioned first. As a professor he is much less well known. Since all this is well cited with numerous WP:RS, it is completely in alignment with WP:BLP. Toddst1 (talk) 14:17, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

He is principally known for creating the Morris Worm, an act that happened to be criminal. Thus, it is far less antagonistic to note what he is, and what he did, and then note the consequences. Jed (talk) 16:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Jedgold. Here is the more wordy thing I was just about to post:

I really dislike the opening phrase of the opening sentence. RTM is best known for (inadvertently) creating the first Internet worm. He is not best known for being a criminal, even though the two are connected. Starting off an encyclopedia entry about him by saying he "is a convicted criminal" is highly prejudicial, particularly when we also consider (1) that the idea that what he did was a criminal act was and is not universally agreed upon, (2) that his punishment did not involve jail time (which is a lot less than what "convicted criminal" connotes), (3) that whatever you think about his action or his punishment, he has paid his debt to society and is and has been a perfectly fine citizen since that one event, and (4) because the Conviction section is already more than preachy enough. That section comes off as being excessively dominated by someone with a particular point of view, the introductory section just compounds the problem, and trying to use the biased tone of another section to justify being biased in the opening is ludicrous. I propose something like the following for the intro:

Robert Tappan Morris, (born November 8, 1965), is currently an American professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in the department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. He is best known for creating the Morris Worm in 1988, which is considered the first computer worm on the Internet. He was eventually charged and convicted for this action.

Actually, I guess I'll go ahead and make the change, given that due to his father's death today, there are probably going to be more people than usual looking at his page. Please don't just silently revert my changes. I don't want to get into a war about this, but the tone, and therefore quality, of this article as it stands now is considerably below what I think of when I think of Wikipedia. bjkeefe (talk) 16:29, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

[Added] I see someone else has already made an edit in the same spirit as I proposed, so I won't bother to try to force my exact words in. bjkeefe (talk) 16:31, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

You guys are amazing. Gary Ridgway is known for murdering at least 48 women - "an act that happened to be criminal" as well. Maybe we should be far less antagonistic in that article too. Toddst1 (talk) 18:15, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, Toddst1, but I don't think a one-time bit of computer experimentation gone awry is the same as forty-eight instances of murder. I don't know why you have such a problem with RTM but I really don't think it's in the spirit of Wikipedia to push your obvious point of view about him. I also don't know why you added the "lead missing" section when what appears right below it is perfectly satisfactory. Further, I think your revisions to the Infobox are childish and not at all neutral. I am going to delete the "lead missing" tag and leave the Infobox for when I have more time. bjkeefe (talk) 10:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Look, I don't know why you guys idolize this guy (POV much?), but he was convicted of a crime - a crime that made him famous. Infamous even - an infamous criminal. He wasn't convicted of performing an experiment - it was a criminal act. Argue with federal court, not me. Sorry if he's become some kind of folk-hero in your minds.

The "infobox criminal" is highly appropriate - he's far more well know for his crime than his scientific research. Toddst1 (talk) 23:07, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Lede

There is no lede - That section is the entire biographical sketch except for the timeline and the section about his crime. Toddst1 (talk) 23:00, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Citations

It seems as if the entire section on 'The worm' is in need of citation. Citations are similarly absent on the page for the Morris worm.--Anthonytordillos (talk) 23:10, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

web page

he does have an mit web page at the mit parallel and distributed operating systems site at http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/rtm/

Family Guy Guy (talk) 05:22, 12 February 2012 (UTC)