4 ms·

What telemetry are you objecting to? Telemetry has good and bad uses. For example, sending in automatic crash reports helps companies find bugs. It can also

What telemetry are you objecting to? Telemetry has good and bad uses. For example, sending in automatic crash reports helps companies find bugs. It can also expose sensitive information which was in ram at the time of the crash. Another example is usage telemetry tells developers what part of the app is being used and can help them focus popular features or on working to let people know about useful but under used portions of the app. My main complaint about people who dislike telemetry is they never acknowledge its good uses and they never state what telemetry is objectionable.

kortilla 3y ago
If “being useful” is your argument for it, I don’t think you’re ever going to see eye to eye with people who don’t want it. It’s like you’re arguing about the good things the church does when it’s a discussion on separation of church and state.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  Religion seems like a needlessly incendiary example that is going to bring up some strong rhetoric. But I mean I’m an atheist and I think religion is, on net, bad. But we’ve allowed a sort of less dangerous version of it to persist in most advanced countries, in the form of separation of church and state. If it was really just all bad, I suppose we’d ban it altogether. I think people can generally see that there are some pros to things they don’t like. Not engaging with the aspects of something that are inconvenient to your case puts you in the realm of propaganda and rhetoric, not good faith discussion.
Fnoord 3y ago
> My main complaint about people who dislike telemetry is they never acknowledge its good uses and they never state what telemetry is objectionable. There's a good reason for that: it is an asymmetric relationship. The person who enabled telemetry isn't necessarily the user of the software. Ie. it can be mandated or put on by a sysadmin (even by mistake), without user's say. On top of that, the user of the software and/or sysadmin are unable to assess whether they want to share the data because they cannot analyze the data beforehand. They lack the expertise in doing so. Meanwhile I have to disable telemetry every friggin' time I use Mozilla Firefox. It gets old, having to say 'no' all the time, ya know? I now realize how it feels being a young woman on the market. Geez, I feel sorry for my daughter. The shit she'll have to endure, sayin' 'no' all the time.
JohnFen 3y ago
> they never acknowledge its good uses Probably because there's little disagreement about the existence of the benefits of it or what they are. That's not the issue. For me, the issue (as with all things like this) is about consent. Opt-in telemetry? I have no issue with it. Opt-out telemetry? Very sketchy, but at least you can opt out. Undisclosed or mandatory telemetry? Completely unacceptable.

kortilla 3y ago

If “being useful” is your argument for it, I don’t think you’re ever going to see eye to eye with people who don’t want it. It’s like you’re arguing about the good things the church does when it’s a discussion on separation of church and state.

bee_rider 3y ago
Religion seems like a needlessly incendiary example that is going to bring up some strong rhetoric. But I mean I’m an atheist and I think religion is, on net, bad. But we’ve allowed a sort of less dangerous version of it to persist in most advanced countries, in the form of separation of church and state. If it was really just all bad, I suppose we’d ban it altogether. I think people can generally see that there are some pros to things they don’t like. Not engaging with the aspects of something that are inconvenient to your case puts you in the realm of propaganda and rhetoric, not good faith discussion.

Fnoord 3y ago

> My main complaint about people who dislike telemetry is they never acknowledge its good uses and they never state what telemetry is objectionable. There's a good reason for that: it is an asymmetric relationship. The person who enabled telemetry isn't necessarily the user of the software. Ie. it can be mandated or put on by a sysadmin (even by mistake), without user's say. On top of that, the user of the software and/or sysadmin are unable to assess whether they want to share the data because they cannot analyze the data beforehand. They lack the expertise in doing so. Meanwhile I have to disable telemetry every friggin' time I use Mozilla Firefox. It gets old, having to say 'no' all the time, ya know? I now realize how it feels being a young woman on the market. Geez, I feel sorry for my daughter. The shit she'll have to endure, sayin' 'no' all the time.

JohnFen 3y ago

> they never acknowledge its good uses Probably because there's little disagreement about the existence of the benefits of it or what they are. That's not the issue. For me, the issue (as with all things like this) is about consent. Opt-in telemetry? I have no issue with it. Opt-out telemetry? Very sketchy, but at least you can opt out. Undisclosed or mandatory telemetry? Completely unacceptable.