4 ms·
To make this assertion also makes it clear that you probably haven't worked on much desktop software distributed to a large number of users. There are so many d
by tghw 14y ago
To make this assertion also makes it clear that you probably haven't worked on much desktop software distributed to a large number of users. There are so many different configurations that the only real way to figure out why it isn't working for a particular user is to have it phone home with a stack trace and basic system info. Otherwise, pretty much every bug would not be reproducible.
If you don't like your software doing that (and, believe me, most of it does), then lock down your firewall and only let a whitelist of programs communicate with the outside world. A lot of your software will stop working, but at least you'll know that no information (well, not none, just less) is getting sent out to various servers.
- gradstudent 14y agoLet me see if I have this right: instead of asking nicely for permission to send your errors and crash reports you want your users to setup a firewall and prevent your program from phoning home. What a dick move. It shows you care not a whit for your customers' privacy or consent; only the data on their computers which, for some bizarre reason, you feel entitled to.
- tghw 14y agoI've stated elsewhere in this thread, I don't write Blurity. It seems that you so want someone to attack for perceived violations of user privacy that you haven't even stopped to consider who you're attacking. As I said before, most desktop software phones home. In fact, by necessity, any software that auto updates and most software that requires registration phones home. Thinking otherwise is just naive.