Opt-out telemetry opens the door to abuse and is invasive. We can see this happening today already, and that the current trend for opt-out telemetry + forced up

Opt-out telemetry opens the door to abuse and is invasive. We can see this happening today already, and that the current trend for opt-out telemetry + forced update is not a reaction to "opt-in is useless". Regardless of how strongly you feel about telemetry and its perceived "benefits", the choice should always rest in the hands of the individuals using the software first and foremost. Your customers should always be informed of their choice and if they feel like they are willing to participate, they can opt-in. How would you feel if building architects decided to install a camera in your bathroom in order to analyze how you use your toilet and the shower to assist in improving future constructions? > Lots of people say they will turn it on, and then never do. Because most of the time, there is no benefit. The software is already made, and further development is rarely informed by telemetry data. Furthermore, customers are rarely informed exactly what data is being collected - and not given the opportunity or benefit to inspect the contents of any telemetry or crash logs that need to be sent. > If people understood the kinds of things that are collected, at least the things I collect in the software I write for work But they don't. And no one takes the time to educate or inform them or give them the choice to opt-in with a detailed disclosure of what is being shared, rather than having to opt-out. As people become more aware of these telemetry practices, you're going to see a wider backlash at the kind of unnecessary data that are being collected. Maybe you're not doing it - but others are.