4 ms·

> being spied on Please explain what specifically Manjaro is proposing to do that you classify as being "spied on." Don't handwave this away, actually answer t

> being spied on Please explain what specifically Manjaro is proposing to do that you classify as being "spied on." Don't handwave this away, actually answer the question.

JohnFen 2y ago
The collection of any data about me, my machines, or my use of my machines without my explicit informed consent is spying.
- coldpie 2y ago
  What data is Manjaro collecting?
  - JohnFen 2y ago
    I had trouble finding exactly what MDD collects, but my assumption is that it collects data about the hardware in use and what packages are installed, at a minimum.
    - coldpie 2y ago
      Okay. So you can't explain how you are harmed by this data collection, and you have an opt-out mechanism you can use to disable it anyway. What are we complaining about?
      - JohnFen 2y ago
        I'm not saying I can't explain harm, I'm saying that the presence or absence of harm is orthogonal to the issue. What I'm complaining about is the evasion of having to get informed consent to collect personal data. Opt-out is a way to try to cover your ass while at the same time being able to avoid asking for consent. The argument for it is always the same: if we make it opt-in, then not enough people will opt in. Which is another way of saying "if people won't give us permission to collect data about them, then we need to stop asking permission."
        coldpie 2y ago
        Well, yeah. If opt-in doesn't lead to useful results, then you may as well not have the feature at all. But they want the feature, because it helps them improve their software. So, "collect data in a way that preserves as much privacy as possible by default, and provide a mechanism to opt-out entirely" is the least-bad option. It gives them the data they want, and it provides an opt-out mechanism for people who don't trust them with the collected data. It seems like the best compromise to me.
        JohnFen 2y ago
        > It seems like the best compromise to me. It's not really a compromise. It's devs declaring that they deserve access to this data regardless of what users want, and trying to make it less objectionable. It remains the case that this is a back door method of extracting data from users that they don't really want to give. If users didn't mind giving it, then enough would say "yes" to the opt-in screen that it wouldn't matter. But they don't, so these devs are trying to impose the very thing users don't want as forcefully as they can get away with. This is all about disempowering users.
        eth0up 2y ago
        >Which is another way of saying "if people won't give us permission to collect data about them, then we need to stop asking permission." Precisely!
bondarchuk 2y ago
"espionage: The act or process of learning secret information through clandestine means." That is, the specific information does not matter; the fact that someone wants to keep it hidden (which is their stated preference), and someone else wants to collect it through clandestine means (which is how we could interpret a sneaky opt-out mechanism) is enough to define it as being spied on.
- pdimitar 2y ago
  1. Your hardware specs are secret information? How many times you clicked on i3wm's settings panel is secret information? I mean OK, you might really want to keep the latter for yourself, sure, but calling it a secret information is reaching. 2. It very much matters what the specific information is. I too wouldn't want my Linux distro scanning my GMail inbox through their distro-bundled browser, of course. But how many times I started Kitty is something I don't quite enjoy being shared but I also wouldn't be outraged if it was. Nuance matters, just doing an extremist takes does not help anyone.
  - account42 2y ago
    > Your hardware specs are secret information? How many times you clicked on i3wm's settings panel is secret information? Yes it is, until I choose to share it. That is the point of consent - I decide what I want to share, not you.
    - pdimitar 2y ago
      Of course, that's your right. That's why I vet my software on a per-piece basis. It can be exhausting but I at least know that stuff that I'd be very not okay with being shared, is not in fact shared. As said in another comment of mine posted just minutes ago -- practice shows that anonymous telemetry is the only viable way of getting some usage data. Almost nobody fills out surveys. Do most software need those stats? I'd say they don't, but I worked on pieces of software that absolutely needed to know which parts are most used and which are almost not used because the extra features cluttered the UI and confused people, leading to less buys / subs.

> being spied on Please explain what specifically Manjaro is proposing to do that you classify as being "spied on." Don't handwave this away, actually answer the question.

JohnFen 2y ago

The collection of any data about me, my machines, or my use of my machines without my explicit informed consent is spying.

coldpie 2y ago
What data is Manjaro collecting?
- JohnFen 2y ago
  I had trouble finding exactly what MDD collects, but my assumption is that it collects data about the hardware in use and what packages are installed, at a minimum.
  - coldpie 2y ago
    Okay. So you can't explain how you are harmed by this data collection, and you have an opt-out mechanism you can use to disable it anyway. What are we complaining about?
    - JohnFen 2y ago
      I'm not saying I can't explain harm, I'm saying that the presence or absence of harm is orthogonal to the issue. What I'm complaining about is the evasion of having to get informed consent to collect personal data. Opt-out is a way to try to cover your ass while at the same time being able to avoid asking for consent. The argument for it is always the same: if we make it opt-in, then not enough people will opt in. Which is another way of saying "if people won't give us permission to collect data about them, then we need to stop asking permission."
      - coldpie 2y ago
        Well, yeah. If opt-in doesn't lead to useful results, then you may as well not have the feature at all. But they want the feature, because it helps them improve their software. So, "collect data in a way that preserves as much privacy as possible by default, and provide a mechanism to opt-out entirely" is the least-bad option. It gives them the data they want, and it provides an opt-out mechanism for people who don't trust them with the collected data. It seems like the best compromise to me.
        JohnFen 2y ago
        > It seems like the best compromise to me. It's not really a compromise. It's devs declaring that they deserve access to this data regardless of what users want, and trying to make it less objectionable. It remains the case that this is a back door method of extracting data from users that they don't really want to give. If users didn't mind giving it, then enough would say "yes" to the opt-in screen that it wouldn't matter. But they don't, so these devs are trying to impose the very thing users don't want as forcefully as they can get away with. This is all about disempowering users.
      - eth0up 2y ago
        >Which is another way of saying "if people won't give us permission to collect data about them, then we need to stop asking permission." Precisely!

bondarchuk 2y ago

"espionage: The act or process of learning secret information through clandestine means." That is, the specific information does not matter; the fact that someone wants to keep it hidden (which is their stated preference), and someone else wants to collect it through clandestine means (which is how we could interpret a sneaky opt-out mechanism) is enough to define it as being spied on.

pdimitar 2y ago
1. Your hardware specs are secret information? How many times you clicked on i3wm's settings panel is secret information? I mean OK, you might really want to keep the latter for yourself, sure, but calling it a secret information is reaching. 2. It very much matters what the specific information is. I too wouldn't want my Linux distro scanning my GMail inbox through their distro-bundled browser, of course. But how many times I started Kitty is something I don't quite enjoy being shared but I also wouldn't be outraged if it was. Nuance matters, just doing an extremist takes does not help anyone.
- account42 2y ago
  > Your hardware specs are secret information? How many times you clicked on i3wm's settings panel is secret information? Yes it is, until I choose to share it. That is the point of consent - I decide what I want to share, not you.
  - pdimitar 2y ago
    Of course, that's your right. That's why I vet my software on a per-piece basis. It can be exhausting but I at least know that stuff that I'd be very not okay with being shared, is not in fact shared. As said in another comment of mine posted just minutes ago -- practice shows that anonymous telemetry is the only viable way of getting some usage data. Almost nobody fills out surveys. Do most software need those stats? I'd say they don't, but I worked on pieces of software that absolutely needed to know which parts are most used and which are almost not used because the extra features cluttered the UI and confused people, leading to less buys / subs.