zlacker

Larry Ellison allegedly tried to have a professor fired for benchmarking Oracle

submitted by pavel_+(OP) on 2017-12-09 15:59:45 | 660 points 234 comments
[view article] [source] [go to bottom]

NOTE: showing posts with links only show all posts
1. maskli+n6[view] [source] 2017-12-09 17:10:02
>>pavel_+(OP)
And remember,

> Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphising Larry Ellison. You need to think of Larry Ellison the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn, you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower hates me' -- lawnmower doesn't give a shit about you, lawnmower can't hate you. Don't anthropomorphize the lawnmower. Don't fall into that trap about Oracle. — Brian Cantrill (https://youtu.be/-zRN7XLCRhc?t=33m1s)

And

> I actually think that it does a dis-service to not go to Nazi allegory because if I don't use Nazi allegory when referring to Oracle there's some critical understanding that I have left on the table […] in fact as I have said before I emphatically believe that if you have to explain the Nazis to someone who had never heard of World War 2 but was an Oracle customer there's a very good chance that you would explain the Nazis in Oracle allegory. — also Brian Cantrill (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79fvDDPaIoY&t=24m)

5. wildmu+47[view] [source] 2017-12-09 17:18:39
>>pavel_+(OP)
The one time such a clause was challenged in court it was struck down, but on narrower grounds related to the specifics of the particular case. The actual issue of whether such a clause is enforceable was not answered by the court. https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28511/has-the-d...
11. moyix+z7[view] [source] 2017-12-09 17:22:59
>>pavel_+(OP)
DeWitt clauses have spread outside of databases too, unfortunately. John Regehr got a nastygram from Coverity/Synopsys when he tried to post static analyzer benchmarks (not even his own; the benchmarks were done by researchers at the Toyota InfoTechnology Center):

https://blog.regehr.org/archives/1217

This has effectively dissuaded me from trying to perform benchmarks of Coverity and other commercial tools using LAVA [1], so I can attest to its chilling effect.

[1] https://seclab.ccs.neu.edu/static/publications/sp2016lava.pd...

◧◩◪
13. derefr+I7[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 17:24:31
>>bigzen+27
Machines are one of the only things most people are familiar with that don't hold to all the same values that living beings (humans, other mammals, most vertebrates) usually do. (You might call Ellison a "force of nature", but that might not play well for people who attribute an "eventually-consistent omnibenevolence" to nature.)

Really, without the metaphor, what's going on is that Larry Ellison has modified himself to hold the values that a corporation holds, in order to more efficiently drive said corporation toward optimizing on its corporate goals (i.e. increase share value, etc.) Where human values and corporate values are in conflict, Ellison has chosen to forget about his human values and, effectively, become the avatar of the corporation's interests. He's the "ideal CEO", in about the same way as Locutus of Borg is an ideal CEO.

A better analogy for this effect, for those who understand it, would be to compare Ellison to a https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Paperclip_maximizer, but that's not really that well-known a meme.

◧◩
18. rhinoc+m8[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 17:30:53
>>maskli+n6
I highly recommend his recent talk on technology leadership:

https://youtu.be/9QMGAtxUlAc

◧◩◪
19. theoh+r8[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 17:31:31
>>krylon+i7
There's another aspect, which is that some people find his aggressively dismissive style personally abusive and distressing.

I don't know enough to validate this perspective, but it's something for all of us to consider:

https://blog.valerieaurora.org/2016/10/22/why-i-wont-be-atte...

◧◩
23. userna+49[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 17:38:48
>>jedber+I6
Given his employment history, I'm guessing MS: https://twitter.com/danluu
◧◩
24. bright+59[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 17:38:50
>>trgv+F7
There’s a reddit thread benchmarking SQL Server vs Postgres where the all named references had to be removed IIRC.

Edit: here https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2mhpwp/postgre...

49. boodew+cc[view] [source] 2017-12-09 18:13:12
>>pavel_+(OP)
(edit: congress forbid review gag clauses last year)

I've pointed this:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/11/congress-passes-...

out to my employer's lawyers, who responded with "well, yes, but we'd still get sued, by Oracle, so... no."

◧◩◪
56. sulam+8d[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 18:21:41
>>userna+49
Not sure that's true, given easy-to-find examples of Azure benchmarks (and it doesn't even do well in this one):

http://www.acmebenchmarking.com/2015/11/benchmarking-cloud-p...

57. thisis+dd[view] [source] 2017-12-09 18:23:07
>>pavel_+(OP)
For a time I really idolised Larry Ellison. Then I saw a documentary on Oracle early years and someone said - "There was no Oralce v1, as Ellison, "knew no one would want to buy version 1". This sounded both stupid and an urban legend. Till I checked the Wikipedia entry:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Database#Releases_and...

It not only changed my perspective of the man but also the company. One can know a lot about a company's practices from the way it was founded. Now there is nothing about Oracle which surprises me any more.

◧◩◪
77. userbi+dg[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 18:55:54
>>chubot+Sa
You can legally get Oracle DB completely free, for "development":

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/indexes/downloads/index.ht...

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/licenses/standard-license-...

Of course there's the anti-benchmarking clause, but other than that, they offer the downloads free (as in beer).

92. jstewa+vi[view] [source] 2017-12-09 19:15:39
>>pavel_+(OP)
Standard "enterprise software" company operating procedure. I think VMware is equally jealous of their benchmarks.

It could be worse though. Cisco pressed criminal charges against this guy[0] for wanting to 3rd-party-service their equipment.

Happy 2017, peasants!

[0-0] http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Cisco+deceived+Canadian+cou...

[0-1] https://www.computerworld.com/article/2507735/cybercrime-hac...

◧◩◪
112. whack+4n[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 20:01:39
>>CalChr+ak
I think you and I might agree on "how things should be", but have different definitions for the term Free-Market. I understand that there are many different ways of defining this term, and that there is no right or wrong answer here. When I referred earlier to the ideals of Free-Markets, I was referring to the economic ideal of one with Perfect Competition. This is an ideal that can never be realized of course, but I believe that the closer we come to this ideal, the better off we will be. Banning of price-fixing, false-advertising, and trust-busting, are all examples of public policy that betray Libertarian principles in order to further Perfect Competition, and that's something we need a lot more of today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition#Idealizing...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_information

◧◩◪
120. Retric+xo[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 20:18:12
>>CalChr+ak
That's not the definition of free market. For one thing privately owned businesses are not required.

"In economics, a free market is an idealized system in which the prices for goods and services are determined by the open market and consumers, in which the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

The requirement is for individual trades to occurs without duress or manipulation outside of the trade. Also, prohibiting information exchange by government regulation is not allowed as that interferes with the market.

◧◩◪◨
121. CalChr+Yo[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 20:22:13
>>Retric+xo
Oxford

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/free_market

◧◩
140. anaraz+Hu[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 21:22:41
>>boodew+cc
Hm. I was going to say that I'm doubtful that the consumer review protection law applies here. But reading through both the law and oracle's license agreement, I'm not so sure anymore: law: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/45b oracle's license agreement: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/licenses/standard-license-...

While the consumer review protection law concerns individuals not companies (check the "form contract" definition), the license agreement seems to explicitly allow for individuals ("or as an individual"). There might be further license agreements after the download, but for that I'd agree to the terms of the license...

IANAL.

◧◩◪
143. anaraz+4v[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 21:28:14
>>dwheel+Yt
> Unfortunately, the law that protects reviewers does not protect people who publish benchmarks in software.

I'm not convinced that's generally true. The form contracts language [1] clearly talks about individuals, but at least one of the DB vendor license agreements allows for individuals. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15888236

If an individual were to decide to do such a benchmark, I don't immediately see how the DeWitt clause would be still valid. Not many people are going to risk that obviously.

> hese DeWitt clauses should be illegal in the United States on First Amendment ground

I agree that they shouldn't be allowed, I however fail to see how 1A applies. You willingly enter into a contract with a private entity. That contract has rules, and there are some consequences for breaking them.

I think the government has an important, and imo somewhat neglected, role in providing rules around valid contracts, but that's not 1A.

◧◩◪
145. moyix+dw[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 21:43:10
>>userbi+Fp
Sure, someone could post a paper like this anonymously. But anonymous papers don't benefit from all the incentives of the standard academic publishing system.

As a fun aside, here's an example of one of the few fully anonymous papers I know of:

http://census2012.sourceforge.net/paper.html

159. cpitma+MB[view] [source] 2017-12-09 22:55:41
>>pavel_+(OP)
This has often been abused by these companies to attack open source software that allows benchmarking (because what kind of open source license would ban that?). The company can perform a "benchmark" of their product and the open source product. They'll then release the results as a whitepaper. Even if they perform the benchmark correctly, they can always choose which results to actually publish.

But since the proprietary software has a "no benchmarking" clause, open source projects cannot respond to the whitepaper by performing their own benchmarking. They would need the permission of the proprietary vendor!

For example, here is an IBM blog post comparing the performance of IBM MQ and Apache ActiveMQ (https://webspherecompetition.wordpress.com/2015/03/12/ibm-mq...). I've tried to find a copy of the IBM MQ EULA to link, but cannot find one anywhere. But last time I reviewed it (several years ago) I believe it also had a "no benchmark" clause.

◧◩◪
160. nl+TC[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-09 23:15:04
>>user59+Rl
10 years ago it could handle 2PB. https://www.computerworld.com/article/2535825/business-intel...
◧◩◪
177. batbom+7M[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-10 01:45:04
>>virapt+zy
http://db.cs.yale.edu/hadoopdb/hadoopdb.pdf

Sorry, it’s actually “DBMS-X”

178. rasz+cM[view] [source] 2017-12-10 01:46:03
>>pavel_+(OP)
Eulas are toiled paper in EU, so just benchmark here. You can even buy the software second hand and avoid touching EULA completely. Oracle learned this the hard way, losing the lawsuit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UsedSoft#ECJ_ruling

◧◩◪◨⬒
182. Retric+CP[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-10 02:42:01
>>CalChr+Yo
That's a simplified version, the actual oxford dictionary is not free online and should look like this: http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/52325

Between them you have : http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.201...

1 A market that is free from government interference, prices rising and falling in accordance with supply and demand.

2 A security that is widely traded on a stock exchange, there being sufficient stock on offer for the price to be uninfluenced by availability.

3 A foreign-exchange market that is free from influence on rates by governments, rates being free to rise and fall in accordance with supply and demand.

So, I can see why that was used, but it's not definitive.

207. aloknn+h81[view] [source] 2017-12-10 09:42:58
>>pavel_+(OP)
Meanwhile, Aurora on AWS has an explicit performance assessment guide

https://d0.awsstatic.com/product-marketing/Aurora/RDS_Aurora...

With Oracle going all in on cloud, this mindset of Larry surely doesn't bode well?

◧◩◪◨
208. gaius+N81[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-10 09:53:14
>>simula+761
Yet, when Oracle prohibits publishing benchmarks you can find benchmarks about MySQL, Mongodb etc on the web

You can find all the benchmarks you want here http://www.tpc.org/default.asp including Oracle.

The thing is, a skilled DBA, given two databases and told which one should be the winner, can easily construct a benchmark that seems perfectly plausible, but favours one over the other. The MongoDB guys did it very blatantly e.g. by comparing Postgres writing to disk with them writing to memory, but that's because they don't know anything about databases and lacked the skill to do it subtly, e.g. by finding pathological edge cases in query optimizers. That's what the commercial vendors are most worried about.

◧◩◪◨⬒
214. dimini+jd1[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-10 11:39:34
>>gaius+N81
I would never rely on TPC for any benchmarking. Just read their history, founders and membership structure carefully and you'll get an idea what type of `neutral` benchmarking they do )

http://www.tpc.org/information/who/whoweare.asp

http://www.tpc.org/information/about/abouttpc.asp

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
231. _Tev+8a3[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-11 17:21:10
>>opo+Pk2
Well I heard those statements a lot, even on HN you can see them frequently.

And I don't think government does everything inefficiently, at least in our country (cz).

So what do libertarians represent really? Quick search for "libertarian manifesto" shows https://mises.org/library/new-liberty-libertarian-manifesto which talks about abolishing nation state and such. That is hard to reconcile with your PoV.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
232. opo+Ro4[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-12-12 05:40:27
>>_Tev+8a3
>...And I don't think government does everything inefficiently, at least in our country (cz).

I think smaller government is often more responsive. The Czech Republic is closer in population to some of the US states.

>...So what do libertarians represent really? Quick search for "libertarian manifesto" shows https://mises.org/library/new-liberty-libertarian-manifesto which talks about abolishing nation state and such.

I think Rothbard is probably promoting anarcho-capitalism there. Many libertarians would probably consider themselves closer to classic liberals. For example, here is a quote from a professor at NYU:

"...I consider myself both a libertarian and a classical liberal. … So there are important differences among liberals and libertarians but I view these are differences along a spectrum. Some are principled (“Never, ever, initiate the use of force”) and some are empirical (“Many public goods can be provided privately”) and some are hard to classify (“The NSA should not collect masses of meta data”). Some people will want to take these differences and harden them into different political philosophies with different names and so forth. But I suggest that libertarians and classical liberals have too much in common for any divorce."

https://thinkmarkets.wordpress.com/2014/02/05/libertarianism...

More practical ideas can be found in the works of groups like the Reason Foundation. As I mentioned in a different reply, at reason.org and you can probably find hundreds of pages of commentary, practical solutions, reviews, etc. The top story on the site looks like it is on the details of the current state of the air traffic control system. You can read the digital version of their magazine for free and in fact every issue they have ever published for close to 40 years. Another group is the The Institute for Justice (ij.org). IJ is a libertarian non-profit law firm that in their words:

>...Since 1991, IJ has come to the aid of individuals who want to do the simple things every American has the right to do—including own property, start and grow a business, speak freely about commerce or politics, and provide their children with a good education—but can’t because they find the government in their way.

IJ have brought 5 cases to the US Supreme Court, winning four. The case they lost was the Kelo case but there was a big enough outrage on that decision, that a number of states put in protections to their eminent domain laws.

[go to top]