4 ms·

> The "adverts" are benign. Right now it says to check out microk8s and also to look at livepatch. My distro shouldn't be advertising to me. Call me "old schoo

> The "adverts" are benign. Right now it says to check out microk8s and also to look at livepatch. My distro shouldn't be advertising to me. Call me "old school" but this has no place in Linux. Also, if you're in a position of trusted compute then you don't want this sort of information leaving your network. > Also if you're in the position to care about motd, you're going to have the skill to change it yourself. Yeah - and I feel I shouldn't have to add it to my images/recipes/whatever to fix this. I use Linux for a lot of reasons, and some of the most important ones are that it doesn't advertise to me and/or leak data. This is telemetry and it's unacceptable.

Androider 7y ago
They've also distributed security notices through the MOTD. I find it useful.
- folkhack 7y ago
  I find features like this to be useful as well - as long as I've opted-in. This is not a "sane default" - this is telemetry enabled out-of-box which is something that I'm vehemently against with Linux.
- smittywerben 7y ago
  I use email for security notices so I can subscribe to the lists I use and view it on my phone.
kylek 7y ago
I don't think that's old school at all. I was really hoping Ubuntu would fall in line after NPM was pummeled for their ads.
kick 7y ago
Alternatively: Why not let the people actually making the distros decide what and what not to throw in them? Users can decide what to use, and users have decided to let Canonical win. I don't use Ubuntu, and you don't have to either! It's almost like there are millions of Linux distributions!
- folkhack 7y ago
  > Alternatively: Why not let the people actually making the distros decide what and what not to throw in them? I'll argue that utilization of Linux comes with certain "expectations" which is why so many of us decide to use it in the first place. Some of those expectations include (but are not limited to) rock-solid stability, "be good at one thing", lack of bloatware, sane update/upgrade cycles/policy, privacy, and security. I've been using Linux professionally for just over 15 years now, sometimes in highly compliant/systems-critical infrastructure. The privacy and security bullet points above are the most important factors to me when designing and/or hardening systems. > I don't use Ubuntu, and you don't have to either! It's almost like there are millions of Linux distributions! Actually - I had to at my last position. When people make technology decisions they often go with the most popular/"safe" options and then dictate the decision to those implementing it. Welcome to corporate America (which is where the jobs are). Everything new was spun-up with Ubuntu as a base distro and you better believe I manually opted-out of this "feature". --- There's a big problem when the most popular distro starts making moves like this as it sets precedent that it's OK. Canonical has made the decision against privacy/security in regards to their motd and that's a huge issue, and I argue it goes against the ethos of Linux and OSS.
  - kick 7y ago
    Actually - I had to at my last position. It's a seller's market for labor. There's a big problem when the most popular distro starts making moves like this as it sets precedent that it's OK. Canonical has made the decision against privacy/security in regards to their motd and that's a huge issue, and I argue it goes against the ethos of Linux and OSS. You're using "OSS." "OSS" is the word that caused this situation! "OSS" was intentionally a term to make free software corporate. Canonical's just doing what people who use and coined "OSS" started: making free software corporate. In the Free Software world, this is bad, but in the corporate world that "open source" advocates have brought among us, this is normal. It's perfectly fine: open-source software is for-profit, not for the common good.
- idclip 7y ago
  Not all users are happy, qnd those users should be heard aswell. Democracy works, for better or worse. Social activism is part of a healthy society. Shutting down people because “but the majority” is a tad fascist.
Barrin92 7y ago
>This is telemetry and it's unacceptable. I dislike the idea of tying particular political or economic philosophies together with a tech stack like Linux. Everyone can distribute linux distributions however they see fit, it's an open platform and if that includes telemetry by default that's fine too as users have choice. I don't think anyone uses a Canonical distro and is genuinely upset or surprised about this particular benign case. The linux distribution space is truly one of the few places where we can't make any excuses about market power or lack of choice. There are a billion distributions, almost all of them free. Users will pick accordingly, and my sense is that virtually nobody cares about this particular case of telemetry.
- tjoff 7y ago
  I am upset, and I do use ubuntu, and I am reconsidering that. It isn't about politics nor economics. It's about privacy and control. That is linked with Linux for a lot of users. And Linux users have a pretty good situation in regard to this. But it is starting to erode and if allowed can only get worse. It is unacceptable and the fact that canonical don't realize this is why I'm thinking of alternatives. Especially considering the use case. Either they haven't got a clue, or they are testing the waters. Does not look good any way you look at it.
  - zerkten 7y ago
    >> I am upset, and I do use ubuntu, and I am reconsidering that. Good for you, but don't you sort of expect this with Ubuntu? It's obviously pushing in a different direction from the likes of Debian. I'm not sure most reasonable people have much sympathy for you here. >> It isn't about politics nor economics. It's about privacy and control. That is linked with Linux for a lot of users. And Linux users have a pretty good situation in regard to this. Privacy and control are intermingled with politics and economics. A quick analysis of Ubuntu and Canonical would have suggested that this risk exists for you. >> But it is starting to erode and if allowed can only get worse. You are naive if you think that it won't erode further in your view. Economics and the desires of Ubuntu audience will result in further "features" like this. It's inherent in their mission and they don't particularly care about you. >> It is unacceptable and the fact that canonical don't realize this is why I'm thinking of alternatives. They do realize this. They just don't care. You are the type of customer they want to fire because you aren't their audience, yet fight their choices. >> Especially considering the use case. Either they haven't got a clue, or they are testing the waters. Does not look good any way you look at it. It doesn't look good to you, but it's a trade-off with their users because it's intrinsically tied to their audience, economics, politics, etc. Don't forget that audiences can change. The customers that brought them to this point may not be those who take them to their next goal. It's just business. You can say Linux is more than business, but it doesn't really make an impactful argument.

Androider 7y ago

They've also distributed security notices through the MOTD. I find it useful.

folkhack 7y ago
I find features like this to be useful as well - as long as I've opted-in. This is not a "sane default" - this is telemetry enabled out-of-box which is something that I'm vehemently against with Linux.
smittywerben 7y ago
I use email for security notices so I can subscribe to the lists I use and view it on my phone.

kylek 7y ago

I don't think that's old school at all. I was really hoping Ubuntu would fall in line after NPM was pummeled for their ads.

kick 7y ago

Alternatively: Why not let the people actually making the distros decide what and what not to throw in them? Users can decide what to use, and users have decided to let Canonical win. I don't use Ubuntu, and you don't have to either! It's almost like there are millions of Linux distributions!

folkhack 7y ago
> Alternatively: Why not let the people actually making the distros decide what and what not to throw in them? I'll argue that utilization of Linux comes with certain "expectations" which is why so many of us decide to use it in the first place. Some of those expectations include (but are not limited to) rock-solid stability, "be good at one thing", lack of bloatware, sane update/upgrade cycles/policy, privacy, and security. I've been using Linux professionally for just over 15 years now, sometimes in highly compliant/systems-critical infrastructure. The privacy and security bullet points above are the most important factors to me when designing and/or hardening systems. > I don't use Ubuntu, and you don't have to either! It's almost like there are millions of Linux distributions! Actually - I had to at my last position. When people make technology decisions they often go with the most popular/"safe" options and then dictate the decision to those implementing it. Welcome to corporate America (which is where the jobs are). Everything new was spun-up with Ubuntu as a base distro and you better believe I manually opted-out of this "feature". --- There's a big problem when the most popular distro starts making moves like this as it sets precedent that it's OK. Canonical has made the decision against privacy/security in regards to their motd and that's a huge issue, and I argue it goes against the ethos of Linux and OSS.
- kick 7y ago
  Actually - I had to at my last position. It's a seller's market for labor. There's a big problem when the most popular distro starts making moves like this as it sets precedent that it's OK. Canonical has made the decision against privacy/security in regards to their motd and that's a huge issue, and I argue it goes against the ethos of Linux and OSS. You're using "OSS." "OSS" is the word that caused this situation! "OSS" was intentionally a term to make free software corporate. Canonical's just doing what people who use and coined "OSS" started: making free software corporate. In the Free Software world, this is bad, but in the corporate world that "open source" advocates have brought among us, this is normal. It's perfectly fine: open-source software is for-profit, not for the common good.
idclip 7y ago
Not all users are happy, qnd those users should be heard aswell. Democracy works, for better or worse. Social activism is part of a healthy society. Shutting down people because “but the majority” is a tad fascist.

Barrin92 7y ago

>This is telemetry and it's unacceptable. I dislike the idea of tying particular political or economic philosophies together with a tech stack like Linux. Everyone can distribute linux distributions however they see fit, it's an open platform and if that includes telemetry by default that's fine too as users have choice. I don't think anyone uses a Canonical distro and is genuinely upset or surprised about this particular benign case. The linux distribution space is truly one of the few places where we can't make any excuses about market power or lack of choice. There are a billion distributions, almost all of them free. Users will pick accordingly, and my sense is that virtually nobody cares about this particular case of telemetry.

tjoff 7y ago
I am upset, and I do use ubuntu, and I am reconsidering that. It isn't about politics nor economics. It's about privacy and control. That is linked with Linux for a lot of users. And Linux users have a pretty good situation in regard to this. But it is starting to erode and if allowed can only get worse. It is unacceptable and the fact that canonical don't realize this is why I'm thinking of alternatives. Especially considering the use case. Either they haven't got a clue, or they are testing the waters. Does not look good any way you look at it.
- zerkten 7y ago
  >> I am upset, and I do use ubuntu, and I am reconsidering that. Good for you, but don't you sort of expect this with Ubuntu? It's obviously pushing in a different direction from the likes of Debian. I'm not sure most reasonable people have much sympathy for you here. >> It isn't about politics nor economics. It's about privacy and control. That is linked with Linux for a lot of users. And Linux users have a pretty good situation in regard to this. Privacy and control are intermingled with politics and economics. A quick analysis of Ubuntu and Canonical would have suggested that this risk exists for you. >> But it is starting to erode and if allowed can only get worse. You are naive if you think that it won't erode further in your view. Economics and the desires of Ubuntu audience will result in further "features" like this. It's inherent in their mission and they don't particularly care about you. >> It is unacceptable and the fact that canonical don't realize this is why I'm thinking of alternatives. They do realize this. They just don't care. You are the type of customer they want to fire because you aren't their audience, yet fight their choices. >> Especially considering the use case. Either they haven't got a clue, or they are testing the waters. Does not look good any way you look at it. It doesn't look good to you, but it's a trade-off with their users because it's intrinsically tied to their audience, economics, politics, etc. Don't forget that audiences can change. The customers that brought them to this point may not be those who take them to their next goal. It's just business. You can say Linux is more than business, but it doesn't really make an impactful argument.