“We determined after careful evaluation of the potential outcomes that the time wasted by kernel maintainers was, in total, sufficiently low that no significant impact would occur over a multi-day time scale.”
If I can come up with the scientific paper gibberish for that in real-time, and I don’t even write science papers, then these people who understand how to navigate an ethical review board process surely know how to massage an unpleasant truth into dry and dusty wording.
I think that they just screwed up and missed the word “precious” in editing, and thus got caught being dismissive and snide towards their experiment’s participants. Without that word, it’s a plausible enough paragraph. With it, it’s no longer plausibly innocent.
