3 ms·

You can type to Cortana. I find it very useful and would most definitely turn it on. It will also become a lot better in the future when software is integrated

by blahi 10y ago

You can type to Cortana. I find it very useful and would most definitely turn it on. It will also become a lot better in the future when software is integrated with it (office coming in the next update). The "spying" has been greatly exaggerated, I think, by people who suddenly found themselves without a reason to hate on Microsoft and it was the obvious choice.

Sylos 10y ago
Considering that Microsoft's Privacy Statement now asks for complete access to all data on your computer, I cannot see how any privacy concerns should be too exaggerated.
- bmer 10y ago
  What's so terrible about Microsoft having complete access to all data on my computer? I am pretty sure that's a massive exaggeration (could you back up that claim?), but for the moment I'll assume it isn't. So what? Why should I be worried and/or scared? For reference, I am not a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, and actually come from a group that tends to be (in my opinion) unfairly painted in people's minds. I kind of like the idea of Microsoft having access to all of my data. Maybe one day in the future, people will be like..."hmm...you know that random group X that we generalized in order to hate on? turns out we can't really generalize them so easily -- we even have data to back it up!" I'd be like a primary source in future archaeology!
  - oxide 10y ago
    Honestly, if my data is being used or sold I want something in return. A service, a product, a bribe. Something of tangible value. If my data is being taken and I'm not interested in the service being provided in return, I feel like I'm being ripped off.
  - Sylos 10y ago
    I don't think, I have to explain that your stance on privacy is not the norm, at all, and that other people can very realistically have a different stance, i.e. a major problem with Microsoft (and the NSA and whoever else is involved) sifting through all of their data. As for the part in their Privacy Statement (https://privacy.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/ https://privacy.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/), which boils down to that, it's this section: "Finally, we will access, transfer, disclose, and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails in Outlook.com, or files in private folders on OneDrive), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to: 1. comply with applicable law or respond to valid legal process, including from law enforcement or other government agencies; 2. protect our customers, for example to prevent spam or attempts to defraud users of our products, or to help prevent the loss of life or serious injury of anyone; 3. operate and maintain the security of our products, including to prevent or stop an attack on our computer systems or networks; or 4. protect the rights or property of Microsoft, including enforcing the terms governing the use of the services - however, if we receive information indicating that someone is using our services to traffic in stolen intellectual or physical property of Microsoft, we will not inspect a customer's private content ourselves, but we may refer the matter to law enforcement." "Access, transfer, disclose, and preserve" is what I summarized as "complete access", as that is everything you can do with data, except maybe destroy it, but that doesn't make much sense in a privacy-context. And then "when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary", that's the part where you sign away the rights for Microsoft to do that whenever the fuck they want. I mean, they list a few points, for what it would be necessary, so you might be able to make a case in court, that Microsoft could never have had that good faith belief for one of those points, but then one of those points is "protect the [...] property of Microsoft". And without a doubt would Microsoft have a good faith belief that selling your personal data is necessary to protect their property.
    - blahi 10y ago
      Can you tell me how this differs from the other vendors?

by blahi 10y ago

Sylos 10y ago

Considering that Microsoft's Privacy Statement now asks for complete access to all data on your computer, I cannot see how any privacy concerns should be too exaggerated.

bmer 10y ago
What's so terrible about Microsoft having complete access to all data on my computer? I am pretty sure that's a massive exaggeration (could you back up that claim?), but for the moment I'll assume it isn't. So what? Why should I be worried and/or scared? For reference, I am not a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, and actually come from a group that tends to be (in my opinion) unfairly painted in people's minds. I kind of like the idea of Microsoft having access to all of my data. Maybe one day in the future, people will be like..."hmm...you know that random group X that we generalized in order to hate on? turns out we can't really generalize them so easily -- we even have data to back it up!" I'd be like a primary source in future archaeology!
- oxide 10y ago
  Honestly, if my data is being used or sold I want something in return. A service, a product, a bribe. Something of tangible value. If my data is being taken and I'm not interested in the service being provided in return, I feel like I'm being ripped off.
- Sylos 10y ago
  I don't think, I have to explain that your stance on privacy is not the norm, at all, and that other people can very realistically have a different stance, i.e. a major problem with Microsoft (and the NSA and whoever else is involved) sifting through all of their data. As for the part in their Privacy Statement (https://privacy.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/ https://privacy.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/), which boils down to that, it's this section: "Finally, we will access, transfer, disclose, and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails in Outlook.com, or files in private folders on OneDrive), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to: 1. comply with applicable law or respond to valid legal process, including from law enforcement or other government agencies; 2. protect our customers, for example to prevent spam or attempts to defraud users of our products, or to help prevent the loss of life or serious injury of anyone; 3. operate and maintain the security of our products, including to prevent or stop an attack on our computer systems or networks; or 4. protect the rights or property of Microsoft, including enforcing the terms governing the use of the services - however, if we receive information indicating that someone is using our services to traffic in stolen intellectual or physical property of Microsoft, we will not inspect a customer's private content ourselves, but we may refer the matter to law enforcement." "Access, transfer, disclose, and preserve" is what I summarized as "complete access", as that is everything you can do with data, except maybe destroy it, but that doesn't make much sense in a privacy-context. And then "when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary", that's the part where you sign away the rights for Microsoft to do that whenever the fuck they want. I mean, they list a few points, for what it would be necessary, so you might be able to make a case in court, that Microsoft could never have had that good faith belief for one of those points, but then one of those points is "protect the [...] property of Microsoft". And without a doubt would Microsoft have a good faith belief that selling your personal data is necessary to protect their property.
  - blahi 10y ago
    Can you tell me how this differs from the other vendors?