6 ms·
Just to be clear, is this a closed source application that I am supposed to install to modify my OS and the only contact information for the people who made it
by slg 6y ago
Just to be clear, is this a closed source application that I am supposed to install to modify my OS and the only contact information for the people who made it are Steam accounts? And the primary motivation for installing this software is that I don't trust the multinational corporation that could lose hundreds of billions of dollars if they inappropriately abuse my privacy? But of course I trust Barnacle, Vegetorius, and Janeyris.
- nvr219 6y agoYeah... this is the kind of thing I'd have installed in the '90s but not today no sir
- xook 6y agoThis particular statement is sobering in an unexpected way. How the times change wrt software and personal sovereignty.
- prepend 6y agoWhat more do you need beyond their press kit?
- oddlama 6y agoWhile I get your point, I think when using Windows, the majority of ibstalled software will be closed source. And most, if not all of them have been granted the same level of priviledge a some point during installation.
- romanovcode 6y agoMajority of applications do not require UAC access allowance as well so those are not a problem.
- slg 6y agoThat is fair. I would be lying if I said I never installed potentially dodgy software from the internet. My primary problem here is the motivation behind the software. The reason this software exists is fundamentally about a lack of trust. We don't trust Microsoft with the level of data that Windows 10 collects. That is a perfectly reasonable position to have. However if that is your opinion, it seems frankly bizarre to trust these nameless developers who have zero accountability for this software. Microsoft is at least accountable to the law, the stock market, and their customers. There is hundreds of billions on the line if they screw you over. If Barnacle screws you over, the only thing on the line is their copy of Ultra Street Fighter IV.
- bproven 6y agoYeha I agree, considering it is free why not open source it to alleviate those concerns?
- tonyedgecombe 6y agoOpen source comes with a cost to the developer. There was an interesting discussion about it on HN a couple of months ago.
- prophesi 6y agoIt's possible to set up your repo to have issues disabled, which will get rid of the majority of FOSS's costs. When it comes to privacy/security tools, it makes sense to make it open source, since they usually are given an insane amount of privileges to modify your machine.
- tonyedgecombe 6y ago* the law, the stock market, and their customers* In that order. We are last. In fact I'm not even a customer anymore, I haven't paid for an update to Windows since Windows 8 was released.
- bastardoperator 6y agoI thought it looked like a fake GitHub page on mobile too. It has some distinction but you’re right, it’s suspect. Steam, LOL.
- DaiPlusPlus 6y agoAnd their logo is too similar to Stardock's - I thought this was an actual Stardock product to begin with (because this is exactly the kind of program Stardock would make). I downloaded it, but I won't install it - there's something fishy about this whole thing. There's no reason for this program to not be open-source - especially if it all it does is tweak the registry and apply GPO settings.
- userbinator 6y agoThis sort of paranoic fearmongering is exactly the sort of propaganda that pushes society towards that authoritarian corporate dystopia in which trust is forced by those in power, and which you have no control over. We are slowly losing our freedom to choose even whom to trust, thanks to this idea that these "multinational corporations" are somehow deities. You highly underestimate the skill of the community, and how it only takes one person to find out and spread the news if something is amiss. Source isn't needed, and doesn't tell the whole story anyway. (See: Ken Thompson Hack.) the multinational corporation that could lose hundreds of billions of dollars if they inappropriately abuse my privacy The corporation which has lawyers and knows exactly how to spin their spyware to carefully evade such laws? Windows 10 would clearly be considered spyware 10 or even 5 years ago. Yet somehow Microsoft has convinced the general public that it isn't, and we are supposed to still trust them? Edit: downloaded it to take a look. Appears to be written in easily-reversible .NET and not even obfuscated, so go ahead and analyse it yourself if you don't trust it. (If it was obfuscated, that would make my suspicion jump.) Edit2: looks like people still think I'm wrong - go look at the binary yourself instead of blindly downvoting just because you don't want to do the thinking yourself. The more power you let them have, the more they will abuse it.
- catalogia 6y agoIt's not fearmongering to question the low standard Windows developers and their users seem to consider routine. That Windows users have chosen to accept Windows becoming spyware is just another manifestation of that same problem, not a refutation of it!
- vezycash 6y agoKnowledge comes before acceptance. Apart from those of us who live on tech sites, normal users would be completely clueless. Even among those who know, only a fraction would be bothered enough to take action.
- catalogia 6y agoMany Windows users may not know there's a better way, but I can hardly think that's an excuse for developers writing proprietary freeware for Windows. Surely they've heard of open source at some point, they just don't give a damn.
- CawCawCaw 6y agoFortunately for you the whole thing is written in unobfuscated .NET so the source can be easily recovered.
- lvs 6y agoWhy couldn't they just put up the source then? A closed-source privacy tool is quite the contradiction.
- userbinator 6y agoI wish people would stop thinking of open-source like it's some sort of panacea. The Ken Thompson Hack should be enough proof that what really matters is what gets run, not what the source code says. For decades, the Windows community thrived with mods and such, all without source code. If you have an unobfuscated .NET binary you pretty much have the source, and it will be honestly what it says it does.
- prophesi 6y agoIt's not a panacea, but it's objectively better than closed-source. Thank you for pointing out that the binary is unobfuscated.
- lanisik655 6y agocorrect. Шt amazes me that people blame WPD for closedsource, but they themselves use shutup10 :facepalm:
- lvs 6y agoStraw man. Nobody said it's a panacea.
- lanisik655 6y agosure sure, shutup10 - closed source (with Obfuscated DLL inside), Microsoft partner :3
- fsflover 6y ago> corporation that could lose hundreds of billions of dollars if they inappropriately abuse my privacy In fact they are already doing this, most probably breaking the GDPR.