7 ms·

> a good example of the benefit of telemetry For what it's worth, I have no issues with telemetry as long as they are opt-in and there is transparency on exact

> a good example of the benefit of telemetry For what it's worth, I have no issues with telemetry as long as they are opt-in and there is transparency on exactly what is collected. It's having to opt-out (or not being to opt-out at all) and vague explanation on what and why there is telemetry that I take issues with.

scrollaway 4y ago
Opt-in telemetry is nearly worthless for most uses as it's a very biased sample from the get-go. Crash logs are a different beast.
- tjoff 4y ago
  That hardly makes them worthless. And very biased towards what? People not triggering bugs?
  - hunter2_ 4y ago
    There might be a correlation between people who push their memory consumption to the limit and people who never opt into anything they don't directly benefit from, thinking that such optional stuff would hinder them from using all of their memory for personal benefit. OTOH, those people might realize that telemetry will eventually increase efficiency, allowing them to do more with their available memory...
  - naikrovek 4y ago
    biased against most users. opt-in telemetry is effectively the same as no telemetry. if you have (or anyone has) a problem with crash statistics being tracked via telemetry then I have absolutely zero idea how to convince you that it's a good idea that this blog post doesn't already clearly state. it's the same with OS updates; people (generally) simply will not perform system or security updates unless they are forced, because everyone thinks they are smarter than the "script kiddies" who would use an attack against them. the user thinks they would see an attack coming and avoid it. in short, they don't. viruses spread, the US Congress calls Microsoft in and asks why the systems weren't patched, and Microsoft says "the users are responsible for patching" and Congress doesn't like it. so now we are where we are. OS updates are forced after a time, and telemetry is not only the norm, but a very good idea for applications in use by millions of people, like Firefox.
    - tjoff 4y ago
      A lot of baseless claims, I disagree.
      - tunap 4y ago
        Agreed. There is a pop-up asking if you want to help at install(FF & TB). Big data has earned a reputation for just cause. If the Mozillas want to differentiate themselves to get that trust, aka opt-in, I encourage them. So far, "No, thanks".
    - hulitu 4y ago
      > it's the same with OS updates; people (generally) simply will not perform system or security updates unless they are forced, because everyone thinks they are smarter than the "script kiddies Updates were not the default. And when they became almost mandatory Microsoft started bundling "features" with security updates. That's when people started to disable this "feature". > so now we are where we are. OS updates are forced after a time, and telemetry is not only the norm, but a very good idea for applications in use by millions of people, like Firefox. And this doesn't change anything. Ransomware attacks are still the norm.
    - JamesianP 4y ago
      Or maybe Microsoft finds it's a cheaper and easier to leverage their monopoly position if they operate in "perpetual beta" by rushing out new features before competition can get a foothold, then using their (paying) users as their testers. Rather than, say, testing and hardening their products sufficiently before launch.
    - nonrandomstring 4y ago
      The tone you employ - "users" having "a problem", needing to be "convinced" and "forced" - doesn't help. It's reminiscent of PEBKAC [1]. [1] https://www.cio.com/article/274775/it-organization-luser-pebkac-and-other-ways-it-insults-users.html https://www.cio.com/article/274775/it-organization-luser-peb...
      - 4y ago
  - maccam94 4y ago
    The only telemetry you get will be from users that are experiencing a severe problem who also have the technical know-how to turn it on. You will have no idea how prevalent the problem is amongst the general user base. There would be no way to prioritize debugging the issues.
    - tjoff 4y ago
      The technical know-how required to check a checkbox during install or something? Maybe that is a good filter... There are other ways to test software... Especially the use-cases mostly used by users not well versed in the tech world.
- ihatepython 4y ago
  > Crash logs are a different beast. I was under the impression that Firefox was written in Rust. Doesn't this eliminate crashes? Rust is a safe language after all. There should not be any crash logs with Rust.
  - smw 4y ago
    Very small (but important) parts of firefox are written in Rust
    - cpeterso 4y ago
      And even if Firefox was written in 100% Rust, Rust can still panic for logic errors. And system libraries have their own bugs and crashes that can bring down Firefox.
    - steveklabnik 4y ago
      It is 9.5% of the total code base, that’s even counting things like tests. I wouldn’t personally call that “very small” but ymmv. That also said your parent equating memory safety to “no crashes” is also not correct. A process can exit early while never violating memory safety.
  - Karellen 4y ago
    It depends a bit on your definition of "crash". Rust has a `panic!()` macro which will hard-terminate the program and log a stack trace in what is functionally equivalent to a crash. It can be called in various scenarios... including out-of-memory situations (like the ones being addressed in the fine article and this thread).
  - colejohnson66 4y ago
    Is this satire? Rust eliminates memory errors such as use-after-free. Unlike C and C++, `myVec[usize::MAX]` will `panic!` if `myVec` isn't actually that large.
dibt 4y ago
Data also needs to not be shipped to a third-party (e.g. Google) to be correlated with other activity outside the app sending the telemetry. There's likely lots of data going to Google Analytics that the software/service owner never looks at, but Google uses for their own purposes.
philipwhiuk 4y ago
And when they abuse their telemetry system for marketing.
- tintor 4y ago
  ... for marketing and monetization.
mordae 4y ago
I would like Linux distributions to ship a system wide telemetry service that can be enabled / disabled at the installation time or anytime later on. This service would be guaranteed to be unidirectional, would store data publicly on non-profit-run servers and domains and fully comply with GDPR (by not storing any PII and ano/pseudonymising everything). Developers would connect to this service over dbus and consume the uploaded data in daily batches. Hosting and hardware fees would come from donations by distributions and other organizations distributing money to the FLOSS ecosystem.
- bornfreddy 4y ago
  Or they could just charge some nominal fee (/amount of computing resources?) from the consuming entities. Love the idea!
- jlarocco 4y ago
  > I would like Linux distributions to ship a system wide telemetry service that can be enabled / disabled at the installation time or anytime later on. There's nothing stopping a person from creating that. You'd package it up and get it added to the Debian, Ubuntu, RedHat, etc. repos and people would be able to install and use it. That's about as close as you'll get to having it generally available for all Linux distros. Personally I don't see the value, and think it's invasive, so I would never install it, but people who wanted it would be able to use it.
  - seqizz 4y ago
    I think what they meant is to configure proxying all possible telemetry via this service, and enforce anonymisation. Sounds good imho. I'm trying to disable telemetry but it's always a losing game, each version adds something new to each app.
    - jlarocco 4y ago
      I don't think that changes my answer. The telemetry proxy service would need packages for each distro, including scripts to work with systemd and init, and maybe a "libtelemetry" package to make using the service easier. The way I see it working is that if the system service isn't installed, isn't running, or has remote telemetry turned off then the commands for sending telemetry will succeed but send the data to /dev/null. Otherwise the data gets anonymized and uploaded to the user's configured telemetry host. It could almost be built on syslog, now that I think about it more, but that would be terrible.

scrollaway 4y ago

Opt-in telemetry is nearly worthless for most uses as it's a very biased sample from the get-go. Crash logs are a different beast.

tjoff 4y ago
That hardly makes them worthless. And very biased towards what? People not triggering bugs?
- hunter2_ 4y ago
  There might be a correlation between people who push their memory consumption to the limit and people who never opt into anything they don't directly benefit from, thinking that such optional stuff would hinder them from using all of their memory for personal benefit. OTOH, those people might realize that telemetry will eventually increase efficiency, allowing them to do more with their available memory...
- naikrovek 4y ago
  biased against most users. opt-in telemetry is effectively the same as no telemetry. if you have (or anyone has) a problem with crash statistics being tracked via telemetry then I have absolutely zero idea how to convince you that it's a good idea that this blog post doesn't already clearly state. it's the same with OS updates; people (generally) simply will not perform system or security updates unless they are forced, because everyone thinks they are smarter than the "script kiddies" who would use an attack against them. the user thinks they would see an attack coming and avoid it. in short, they don't. viruses spread, the US Congress calls Microsoft in and asks why the systems weren't patched, and Microsoft says "the users are responsible for patching" and Congress doesn't like it. so now we are where we are. OS updates are forced after a time, and telemetry is not only the norm, but a very good idea for applications in use by millions of people, like Firefox.
  - tjoff 4y ago
    A lot of baseless claims, I disagree.
    - tunap 4y ago
      Agreed. There is a pop-up asking if you want to help at install(FF & TB). Big data has earned a reputation for just cause. If the Mozillas want to differentiate themselves to get that trust, aka opt-in, I encourage them. So far, "No, thanks".
  - hulitu 4y ago
    > it's the same with OS updates; people (generally) simply will not perform system or security updates unless they are forced, because everyone thinks they are smarter than the "script kiddies Updates were not the default. And when they became almost mandatory Microsoft started bundling "features" with security updates. That's when people started to disable this "feature". > so now we are where we are. OS updates are forced after a time, and telemetry is not only the norm, but a very good idea for applications in use by millions of people, like Firefox. And this doesn't change anything. Ransomware attacks are still the norm.
  - JamesianP 4y ago
    Or maybe Microsoft finds it's a cheaper and easier to leverage their monopoly position if they operate in "perpetual beta" by rushing out new features before competition can get a foothold, then using their (paying) users as their testers. Rather than, say, testing and hardening their products sufficiently before launch.
  - nonrandomstring 4y ago
    The tone you employ - "users" having "a problem", needing to be "convinced" and "forced" - doesn't help. It's reminiscent of PEBKAC [1]. [1] https://www.cio.com/article/274775/it-organization-luser-pebkac-and-other-ways-it-insults-users.html https://www.cio.com/article/274775/it-organization-luser-peb...
    - 4y ago
- maccam94 4y ago
  The only telemetry you get will be from users that are experiencing a severe problem who also have the technical know-how to turn it on. You will have no idea how prevalent the problem is amongst the general user base. There would be no way to prioritize debugging the issues.
  - tjoff 4y ago
    The technical know-how required to check a checkbox during install or something? Maybe that is a good filter... There are other ways to test software... Especially the use-cases mostly used by users not well versed in the tech world.
ihatepython 4y ago
> Crash logs are a different beast. I was under the impression that Firefox was written in Rust. Doesn't this eliminate crashes? Rust is a safe language after all. There should not be any crash logs with Rust.
- smw 4y ago
  Very small (but important) parts of firefox are written in Rust
  - cpeterso 4y ago
    And even if Firefox was written in 100% Rust, Rust can still panic for logic errors. And system libraries have their own bugs and crashes that can bring down Firefox.
  - steveklabnik 4y ago
    It is 9.5% of the total code base, that’s even counting things like tests. I wouldn’t personally call that “very small” but ymmv. That also said your parent equating memory safety to “no crashes” is also not correct. A process can exit early while never violating memory safety.
- Karellen 4y ago
  It depends a bit on your definition of "crash". Rust has a `panic!()` macro which will hard-terminate the program and log a stack trace in what is functionally equivalent to a crash. It can be called in various scenarios... including out-of-memory situations (like the ones being addressed in the fine article and this thread).
- colejohnson66 4y ago
  Is this satire? Rust eliminates memory errors such as use-after-free. Unlike C and C++, `myVec[usize::MAX]` will `panic!` if `myVec` isn't actually that large.

dibt 4y ago

Data also needs to not be shipped to a third-party (e.g. Google) to be correlated with other activity outside the app sending the telemetry. There's likely lots of data going to Google Analytics that the software/service owner never looks at, but Google uses for their own purposes.

philipwhiuk 4y ago

And when they abuse their telemetry system for marketing.

tintor 4y ago
... for marketing and monetization.

mordae 4y ago

I would like Linux distributions to ship a system wide telemetry service that can be enabled / disabled at the installation time or anytime later on. This service would be guaranteed to be unidirectional, would store data publicly on non-profit-run servers and domains and fully comply with GDPR (by not storing any PII and ano/pseudonymising everything). Developers would connect to this service over dbus and consume the uploaded data in daily batches. Hosting and hardware fees would come from donations by distributions and other organizations distributing money to the FLOSS ecosystem.

bornfreddy 4y ago
Or they could just charge some nominal fee (/amount of computing resources?) from the consuming entities. Love the idea!
jlarocco 4y ago
> I would like Linux distributions to ship a system wide telemetry service that can be enabled / disabled at the installation time or anytime later on. There's nothing stopping a person from creating that. You'd package it up and get it added to the Debian, Ubuntu, RedHat, etc. repos and people would be able to install and use it. That's about as close as you'll get to having it generally available for all Linux distros. Personally I don't see the value, and think it's invasive, so I would never install it, but people who wanted it would be able to use it.
- seqizz 4y ago
  I think what they meant is to configure proxying all possible telemetry via this service, and enforce anonymisation. Sounds good imho. I'm trying to disable telemetry but it's always a losing game, each version adds something new to each app.
  - jlarocco 4y ago
    I don't think that changes my answer. The telemetry proxy service would need packages for each distro, including scripts to work with systemd and init, and maybe a "libtelemetry" package to make using the service easier. The way I see it working is that if the system service isn't installed, isn't running, or has remote telemetry turned off then the commands for sending telemetry will succeed but send the data to /dev/null. Otherwise the data gets anonymized and uploaded to the user's configured telemetry host. It could almost be built on syslog, now that I think about it more, but that would be terrible.