4 ms·

> Audacity is an indispensable utility. It’s great to see it and other “real” software on the web. It's been a very long time since I used it, but didn't Audac

> Audacity is an indispensable utility. It’s great to see it and other “real” software on the web. It's been a very long time since I used it, but didn't Audacity turn evil, add a bunch of networking code it never needed before, and start spying on people? (https://fosspost.org/audacity-is-now-a-spyware/ https://fosspost.org/audacity-is-now-a-spyware/). I remember people reverting to older "safe" versions. I guess that doesn't much matter for this web app since it's collecting your IP and data by design (their privacy policy seems very vague and handwavy), but for the desktop app it seemed like kind of a big deal at the time.

asddubs 3y ago
IMHO the spyware angle was overblown. they added telemetry to the dev builds. the real thing I took issue with was adding a CLA after the fact
- lost_tourist 3y ago
  So the stuff available on ubuntu/arch don't have spyware? I never heard about these changes, I did know some company bought it but didn't think much about it at the time as I don't use it a lot, but when I need it, it's quite handy
  - asddubs 3y ago
    I haven't kept up with what happened since the original controversy, but at the time it was about telemetry in dev builds (i.e. building from the repo) only. In any case it doesn't have spyware unless you think firefox and various other programs are also spyware.
rcme 3y ago
I'll never understand peoples' obsession with equating telemetry with spyware. As an application developer, I need to know that my application is working appropriately for my users. It's not sufficient to rely on manual bug reports. If someone doesn't like that, then that's perfectly fine in my opinion. Just don't use the product. To accuse an application developer of spying on users is a bit much imo.
- zlg_codes 3y ago
  Why should a user ignore when a developer has the means to spy? Telemetry is used as a false metric for a lot of bad decisions that make sense for the numbers but don't improve the product itself. Even A/B testing could be considered an ethical hazard because it disrupts the user's understanding of the software for the sole purpose of decisions that, frankly, devs should have made before telemetry. Users should be able to trust that their software won't be blabbing over the network about what you're doing. In an age where privacy is attacked from all angles, it's the least a developer could do.
  - rcme 3y ago
    I’m not advocating that users ignore the possibility of spying. All software has the potential to spy on you. But that does not mean you can publicly accuse a developer who wants to add telemetry of spying. > Users should be able to trust that their software won't be blabbing over the network about what you're doing. Says who? That’s just your opinion. My opinion is that if an exception happens in my software that makes it harder for me to use, the developer should be aware of the issue and fix it so that the software works correctly in the future. There isn’t anything wrong with your opinion, but there is something wrong of accusing the developer of some type of impropriety just because they want to use telemetry.
    - zlg_codes 3y ago
      Says responsible developers. Good software doesn't need to phone home or report to the dev that they clicked widget X instead of Y. Telemetry is what happens when lazy or complacent devs move forward in their software but decide to be 'data driven'. What's wrong with accusing someone of having the ability to spy of maybe spying? The point with technology and humans is, if the ability is there, it's not 'if' it will be abused; it's when. Software that doesn't phone home or have telemetry never has to worry about that moral hazard. User data doesn't belong to developers, and that includes behavioral data.
      - rcme 3y ago

asddubs 3y ago

IMHO the spyware angle was overblown. they added telemetry to the dev builds. the real thing I took issue with was adding a CLA after the fact

lost_tourist 3y ago
So the stuff available on ubuntu/arch don't have spyware? I never heard about these changes, I did know some company bought it but didn't think much about it at the time as I don't use it a lot, but when I need it, it's quite handy
- asddubs 3y ago
  I haven't kept up with what happened since the original controversy, but at the time it was about telemetry in dev builds (i.e. building from the repo) only. In any case it doesn't have spyware unless you think firefox and various other programs are also spyware.

rcme 3y ago

I'll never understand peoples' obsession with equating telemetry with spyware. As an application developer, I need to know that my application is working appropriately for my users. It's not sufficient to rely on manual bug reports. If someone doesn't like that, then that's perfectly fine in my opinion. Just don't use the product. To accuse an application developer of spying on users is a bit much imo.

zlg_codes 3y ago
Why should a user ignore when a developer has the means to spy? Telemetry is used as a false metric for a lot of bad decisions that make sense for the numbers but don't improve the product itself. Even A/B testing could be considered an ethical hazard because it disrupts the user's understanding of the software for the sole purpose of decisions that, frankly, devs should have made before telemetry. Users should be able to trust that their software won't be blabbing over the network about what you're doing. In an age where privacy is attacked from all angles, it's the least a developer could do.
- rcme 3y ago
  I’m not advocating that users ignore the possibility of spying. All software has the potential to spy on you. But that does not mean you can publicly accuse a developer who wants to add telemetry of spying. > Users should be able to trust that their software won't be blabbing over the network about what you're doing. Says who? That’s just your opinion. My opinion is that if an exception happens in my software that makes it harder for me to use, the developer should be aware of the issue and fix it so that the software works correctly in the future. There isn’t anything wrong with your opinion, but there is something wrong of accusing the developer of some type of impropriety just because they want to use telemetry.
  - zlg_codes 3y ago
    Says responsible developers. Good software doesn't need to phone home or report to the dev that they clicked widget X instead of Y. Telemetry is what happens when lazy or complacent devs move forward in their software but decide to be 'data driven'. What's wrong with accusing someone of having the ability to spy of maybe spying? The point with technology and humans is, if the ability is there, it's not 'if' it will be abused; it's when. Software that doesn't phone home or have telemetry never has to worry about that moral hazard. User data doesn't belong to developers, and that includes behavioral data.
    - rcme 3y ago