That's not really true. However, we do have very strong views on privacy and security, and in connection with those, on mandatory telemetry. These aren't just o

That's not really true. However, we do have very strong views on privacy and security, and in connection with those, on mandatory telemetry. These aren't just on a whim. They arise as a practical consequence of the types of client and data we often work with, and our formal obligations and ethics in connection with those. Ubiquiti isn't special in this respect. We don't have any Windows 10 systems either, for example. The problem here is only partly the original decision. It's actually much more concerning that they don't really seem to understand why that decision was a problem for some people or that they did anything wrong. How can anyone trust an organisation that would pull a stunt like this and then think a simple opt-out added under protest was sufficient to address the issue?