4 ms·
This is now the 2nd "clarification" that Muse group, the new team in charge of Audacity, has recently put out - the first one being here[0]. At this point, it's
by akersten 5y ago
This is now the 2nd "clarification" that Muse group, the new team in charge of Audacity, has recently put out - the first one being here[0]. At this point, it's clear that they are taking the product in an unpopular direction. So why keep pushing an online-first privacy policy and telemetry? Certainly it is not one of the pressing needs of the core product.
Honestly, it will take some convincing to make me think this isn't nefarious at this point. At a minimum, the community is not being listened to, just placated.
[0]: https://github.com/audacity/audacity/discussions/880 https://github.com/audacity/audacity/discussions/880
- rStar 5y agowhen this happens the product dies. in my mind it’s as if audacity never existed. hopefully a project emerges from a forked code base that’s useable going forward.
- zxzax 5y agoI'm not sure why the word "fork" is being repeatedly mentioned or why people are thinking this is making the code unusable. At most, I would expect a patched distribution similar to VSCodium to pop up, i.e. not a hard fork. If there was willpower in the community to fork the project and fix all the other long standing issues, that would have happened already, so there is no reason to expect a fork here.
- xtracto 5y agoI dont understand all the ruckus around this. Just fork the repo and remove the spying code (I dont want an audio editor to share my CPU and IP with anyone). It has been done for larger codebases like OpenOffice and MySql.