4 ms·

> as you admit people won't voluntarily turn it on, you've admitted it's a user hostile behavior That is presuming people aren't turning it on because they do

> as you admit people won't voluntarily turn it on, you've admitted it's a user hostile behavior That is presuming people aren't turning it on because they don't like it, while the reason they aren't turning it on could be they are lazy and don't want to do any extra work. If you had a HTML sanitizer that most people weren't turning on, you might just turn it on by default to improve safety (like Rails did at one point). Just because people weren't turning something on themselves doesn't make turning it on by default "hostile".

anonymousab 4y ago
> That is presuming people aren't turning it on because they don't like it, while the reason they aren't turning it on could be they are lazy and don't want to do any extra work The solution in these scenarios is to simply ask the user, with no default, whether they want telemetry to be enabled or disabled. To do so in a modal or required dialogue in fresh install and the update in question. If the telemetry is worth changing defaults to you then IMO it should be worth a bit of friction to introduce it more ethnically.
- cube2222 4y ago
  I think a lot of users don't actually interact directly with the CLI. Think IDEs, editors, CI/CD. You'd be cutting them out, again skewing the stats heavily.
  - anonymousab 4y ago
    That's true. I think this would therefore need to be a bit of a breaking change for that tooling - systems that integrate with Go would need to be updated to deal with this prompt. Whether that's showing it to users or autofilling an answer with a --telemetry==x flag, that's up to them and their community. Is that painful? Yes. Would it turn some people away from Go through this kind of friction? Sure. IMO those kinds of costs and pain points should be necessary considerations of adding telemetry. Worth at least a minor version change, and therefore not too crazy that it would cause some annoyance.
- groestl 4y ago
  > The solution in these scenarios is to simply ask the user, with no default, whether they want telemetry to be enabled or disabled. And this is the way the Debian installer asks for participation in the Debian Popularity Contest. Which is the ethical (and legal) way.
bheadmaster 4y ago
> while the reason they aren't turning it on could be they are lazy and don't want to do any extra work Why would you assume that? I think most people care and wouldn't turn it on if asked to.
- joshuamorton 4y ago
  Because the 90/9/1 rule applies to most things. 90% of people are content with the defaults, whatever they are. They have no opinion on telemetry, especially telemetry that is privacy respecting. They're not going to go to the effort of modifying configs for that purpose, but that's true either way. They wouldn't turn it on if asked, but they also wouldn't turn it off if you told them about it.
  - bheadmaster 4y ago
    > Because the 90/9/1 rule applies to most things I'm not very convinced by that line of reasoning. By that logic, most people don't care whether or not their government is a dictatorship. Which is (I hope) obviously not true.
    - joshuamorton 4y ago
      I said most things. "Privacy preserving, minimally invasive telemetry" and "literal fascism" are obviously not comparable and it's disingenuous to try and equivocate them.
      - bheadmaster 4y ago
        What a coincidence that "most things" applies when you want it, but doesn't when you don't.
- mattmcknight 4y ago
  >> while the reason they aren't turning it on could be they are lazy and don't want to do any extra work > Why would you assume that? I didn't assume it, I said "could be". > I think most people care and wouldn't turn it on if asked to. If people don't like it, they can turn it off. Are you assuming most won't if asked to?

anonymousab 4y ago

> That is presuming people aren't turning it on because they don't like it, while the reason they aren't turning it on could be they are lazy and don't want to do any extra work The solution in these scenarios is to simply ask the user, with no default, whether they want telemetry to be enabled or disabled. To do so in a modal or required dialogue in fresh install and the update in question. If the telemetry is worth changing defaults to you then IMO it should be worth a bit of friction to introduce it more ethnically.

cube2222 4y ago
I think a lot of users don't actually interact directly with the CLI. Think IDEs, editors, CI/CD. You'd be cutting them out, again skewing the stats heavily.
- anonymousab 4y ago
  That's true. I think this would therefore need to be a bit of a breaking change for that tooling - systems that integrate with Go would need to be updated to deal with this prompt. Whether that's showing it to users or autofilling an answer with a --telemetry==x flag, that's up to them and their community. Is that painful? Yes. Would it turn some people away from Go through this kind of friction? Sure. IMO those kinds of costs and pain points should be necessary considerations of adding telemetry. Worth at least a minor version change, and therefore not too crazy that it would cause some annoyance.
groestl 4y ago
> The solution in these scenarios is to simply ask the user, with no default, whether they want telemetry to be enabled or disabled. And this is the way the Debian installer asks for participation in the Debian Popularity Contest. Which is the ethical (and legal) way.

bheadmaster 4y ago

> while the reason they aren't turning it on could be they are lazy and don't want to do any extra work Why would you assume that? I think most people care and wouldn't turn it on if asked to.

joshuamorton 4y ago
Because the 90/9/1 rule applies to most things. 90% of people are content with the defaults, whatever they are. They have no opinion on telemetry, especially telemetry that is privacy respecting. They're not going to go to the effort of modifying configs for that purpose, but that's true either way. They wouldn't turn it on if asked, but they also wouldn't turn it off if you told them about it.
- bheadmaster 4y ago
  > Because the 90/9/1 rule applies to most things I'm not very convinced by that line of reasoning. By that logic, most people don't care whether or not their government is a dictatorship. Which is (I hope) obviously not true.
  - joshuamorton 4y ago
    I said most things. "Privacy preserving, minimally invasive telemetry" and "literal fascism" are obviously not comparable and it's disingenuous to try and equivocate them.
    - bheadmaster 4y ago
      What a coincidence that "most things" applies when you want it, but doesn't when you don't.
mattmcknight 4y ago
>> while the reason they aren't turning it on could be they are lazy and don't want to do any extra work > Why would you assume that? I didn't assume it, I said "could be". > I think most people care and wouldn't turn it on if asked to. If people don't like it, they can turn it off. Are you assuming most won't if asked to?