4 ms·

That is what it once meant. "Spyware" was the term used for any process that called home regarding any information about you, your computer or your usage in the

That is what it once meant. "Spyware" was the term used for any process that called home regarding any information about you, your computer or your usage in the background. Calling home for anything other than "Check for updates" menu items or other actions where calling home was the explicit action the user wanted would get your name tarnished in the media and added to the signature list of software built for the sole purpose of finding and forcefully removing software like that. Practically any Android app these days would be considered "spyware" if we were still applying the "spyware" definition of the early 2000s. And we would be better off if we had never stopped.

mortenlarsen 4y ago
I would call that malware. Telemetry is just malware with a marketing department.
- a1369209993 4y ago
  > Telemetry is just malware with a marketing department. Malware is more broad, and includes things that don't send any information back, like viruses. Telemetry is spyware with a marketing department.
  - mortenlarsen 4y ago
    Yes, malware is a broader category. But one that includes spyware.
judge2020 4y ago
I don’t see why the makers of an app aren’t entitled to seeing how the app is used for the people who opt to use it. If I’m using windows terminal, I want them to know how often I use the hot keys, how often I split a terminal vertically then horizontally (alt-shift-d), etc. lest it be removed, since I know they don’t have infinite resources to dedicate to this single project to maintain every feature forever and ever.
- JadeNB 4y ago
  > I don’t see why the makers of an app aren’t entitled to seeing how the app is used for the people who opt to use it. If I’m using windows terminal, I want them to know how often I use the hot keys, how often I split a terminal vertically then horizontally (alt-shift-d), etc. lest it be removed, since I know they don’t have infinite resources to dedicate to this single project to maintain every feature forever and ever. The makers of an app are entitled to no more information about me and my use of it than I allow them to have. I think that it's reasonable to argue whether my allowance of sharing should be opt-in or opt-out, but I don't think that there is much scope for argument about whether I should be able to block the sharing of information if I choose explicitly to do so. (One could argue that, as long as everything is disclosed up front, then the makers of an app have the right to demand whatever they want, and I have the right to accept their demands or else not to use their software. This is surely true in one sense; but, in another sense, it's exactly what the notion of "contract of adhesion" is meant to describe, and in many other contexts it's recognised as not a good thing.) To the argument that the makers of app can use telemetry information to make their app better, I would say that that is doubtless true; but I would argue that is also true that I, and not they, have the right to decide where the boundary lies between my desire for privacy and their desire to improve their app. For example, perhaps—even likely—browser makers could make their browsers better if they knew exactly what sites I visited, but, if I found my browser reporting my history information back to Mozilla, then I would not say "ah well, as long as it makes for a better browser."
- userbinator 4y ago
  I don’t see why the makers of an app aren’t entitled to seeing how the app is used for the people who opt to use it. They are entitled to ABSOLUTELY NOTHING beyond, if it is commercial software, my payment. I want them to know What the fuck happened to just TELLING THEM!? Oh, that's right, they didn't want to listen because they'd rather take complete control of your machine, forcing you into what they want, and monetising every last aspect of "your" life, all the while hiding behind the excuse of "the data says" to do what they want. The amount of pro-spyware comments here is, quite frankly, excruciatingly abhorrent. So many comments here smell strongly of corporate propaganda, since they also always repeat the same tired talking points --- and it makes me wonder how much shillage MS does. Or how many others think that because MS is big and "successful", they should emulate the increasingly abusive behaviour that it (and to be fair, the rest of Big Tech) engages in.

mortenlarsen 4y ago

I would call that malware. Telemetry is just malware with a marketing department.

a1369209993 4y ago
> Telemetry is just malware with a marketing department. Malware is more broad, and includes things that don't send any information back, like viruses. Telemetry is spyware with a marketing department.
- mortenlarsen 4y ago
  Yes, malware is a broader category. But one that includes spyware.

judge2020 4y ago

I don’t see why the makers of an app aren’t entitled to seeing how the app is used for the people who opt to use it. If I’m using windows terminal, I want them to know how often I use the hot keys, how often I split a terminal vertically then horizontally (alt-shift-d), etc. lest it be removed, since I know they don’t have infinite resources to dedicate to this single project to maintain every feature forever and ever.

JadeNB 4y ago
> I don’t see why the makers of an app aren’t entitled to seeing how the app is used for the people who opt to use it. If I’m using windows terminal, I want them to know how often I use the hot keys, how often I split a terminal vertically then horizontally (alt-shift-d), etc. lest it be removed, since I know they don’t have infinite resources to dedicate to this single project to maintain every feature forever and ever. The makers of an app are entitled to no more information about me and my use of it than I allow them to have. I think that it's reasonable to argue whether my allowance of sharing should be opt-in or opt-out, but I don't think that there is much scope for argument about whether I should be able to block the sharing of information if I choose explicitly to do so. (One could argue that, as long as everything is disclosed up front, then the makers of an app have the right to demand whatever they want, and I have the right to accept their demands or else not to use their software. This is surely true in one sense; but, in another sense, it's exactly what the notion of "contract of adhesion" is meant to describe, and in many other contexts it's recognised as not a good thing.) To the argument that the makers of app can use telemetry information to make their app better, I would say that that is doubtless true; but I would argue that is also true that I, and not they, have the right to decide where the boundary lies between my desire for privacy and their desire to improve their app. For example, perhaps—even likely—browser makers could make their browsers better if they knew exactly what sites I visited, but, if I found my browser reporting my history information back to Mozilla, then I would not say "ah well, as long as it makes for a better browser."
userbinator 4y ago
I don’t see why the makers of an app aren’t entitled to seeing how the app is used for the people who opt to use it. They are entitled to ABSOLUTELY NOTHING beyond, if it is commercial software, my payment. I want them to know What the fuck happened to just TELLING THEM!? Oh, that's right, they didn't want to listen because they'd rather take complete control of your machine, forcing you into what they want, and monetising every last aspect of "your" life, all the while hiding behind the excuse of "the data says" to do what they want. The amount of pro-spyware comments here is, quite frankly, excruciatingly abhorrent. So many comments here smell strongly of corporate propaganda, since they also always repeat the same tired talking points --- and it makes me wonder how much shillage MS does. Or how many others think that because MS is big and "successful", they should emulate the increasingly abusive behaviour that it (and to be fair, the rest of Big Tech) engages in.