6 ms·

Ubuntu Community Manager: RMS's Post Seems a Bit Childish To Me and spreads FUD

44 points by cooldeal 14y ago

josephlord 14y ago
Actual link rather than to Slashdot discussion: http://www.jonobacon.org/2012/12/07/on-richard-stallman-and-ubuntu/ http://www.jonobacon.org/2012/12/07/on-richard-stallman-and-... The problem for me is that isn't addressed by this is the decision to make it default on in Ubuntu. That failure of judgement* means that I can't trust them not to change something else that I have to notice and find out how to easily disable. Easy to turn off is not good enough for such a feature. Edit to add: Basically I think RMS is right about this one (as he often is) although in many cases I make compromises that he would find wholly unacceptable. * It might be ethics but I would give Canonical the benefit of the doubt on that one.
- yungchin 14y ago
  I think I've written this before, but: this feature would go nowhere if it was disabled by default. If you want to know whether mainstream users will or will not like it, you can't stick it in some obscure alpha (they'll never test it), and you can't make it optional (only a few percent will ever come across the tick box at all). So yeah, I don't like this feature either (for all the reasons RMS pointed out), but I don't see how otherwise they could have tested it. Maybe not a failure of judgement then, but rather choosing innovation over privacy? (Note the 12.10 betas also had all these queries going over the network in plain text... so I kind of see the whole experiment as taking the "move fast and break things" mantra taken to the extreme)
  - josephlord 14y ago
    Opt in doesn't necessarily mean hidden in settings. For this feature it probably should be a pop up that appears the first time each user enters a search request before it gets sent over the network. The question could have a positive spin "Would you like to see network enhanced search results?" with details and privacy policy links. Options of "Yes", "Ask later" and "Disable enhanced search". They could even put an "Are you sure?" If disable is selected.
    - yungchin 14y ago
      This seems bizarre in retrospect, but somehow none of the above had occurred to me before. Thanks for taking the time to type it and enlighten.
klearvue 14y ago
Dear Jono, It may very well be that RMS's comments were over the top but please check the numbers on DistroWatch - those numbers will testify that Canonical is not making the right decisions, at least not on the desktop, and RMS's sentiments are quite likely shared by plenty of your former users.
- pettazz 14y ago
  Distrowatch is probably the least accurate measurement of usage numbers that exists. The fact that Mint is beating Ubuntu on Distrowatch is a result of a lot of Mint users saying "Hey, let's keep hitting Distrowatch so we make sure we beat Ubuntu on Distrowatch" and has nothing to do with actual use of the OS.
- yock 14y ago
  And to some extent I would think Canonical is okay with that. A cull of their core users expecting an unencumbered free tool is probably in their best interests. People who are willing to trade something of monetary value arguably should be the focus of any business. Also, don't leave here thinking that DistroWatch is a good metric of mindshare among Linux users... "The DistroWatch Page Hit Ranking statistics...show the number of times a distribution page on DistroWatch.com was accessed each day, nothing more." http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=popularity http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=popularity
  - Zigurd 14y ago
    There is a problem with "A cull of core users" Before this point, Canonical sold support as their approach to monetizing their investment in creating a distribution. Data collection, applying analytic, and selling user data is incompatible with both the free-to-use Ubuntu community, and the enterprise customers. Canonical has fundamentally changed what the Ubuntu brand means, and that is reflected in people finding that good alternatives exist.
    - yock 14y ago
      In other words then, Canonical has modified their business plans with respect to Ubuntu, probably because the previous revenue model didn't work. What makes these so-called "alternatives" so much more viable? How will they succeed where Canonical failed?
digitalengineer 14y ago
Great reply in the comments from Ubuntu users here: http://www.jonobacon.org/2012/12/07/on-richard-stallman-and-ubuntu/ http://www.jonobacon.org/2012/12/07/on-richard-stallman-and-...
- tucosan 14y ago
  you just posted a link to the story itself. check your url...
chris_wot 14y ago
This, unfortunately, is a common GNOME-like mentality. Our users aren't right, we are. We don't need to listen to strong criticism, because we are making awesome things. Seriously, some of these guys live in a bubble.
- yarrel 14y ago
  GNOME isn't Ubuntu.
  - chris_wot 14y ago
    No, but Jono Bacon was extremely entwined in GNOME for a long time.
    - ealexhudson 14y ago
      Moreso KDE though, surely?
    - bratsche 14y ago
      I had never heard of Jono until he was working for Canonical.
      - chris_wot 14y ago
        That doesn't negate my point in any way.
        bratsche 14y ago
        Well, I'm a former GNOME and GTK+ developer and a former Canonical/Ubuntu developer and I had never noticed him being involved in GNOME outside his Canonical duties. Of course you could still be right about him being entwined in GNOME though, but I don't think you are.
        chris_wot 14y ago
danieldk 14y ago
The post speaks of facts and then states: The goal of the dash in Ubuntu has always been to provide a central place in which you can search and find things that are interesting and relavent to you; it is designed to be at the center of your computing experience. So, did they conduct a survey to check that majority of Ubuntu users thinks that getting Amazon affiliate links is 'interesting and relevant'? I'd wager that a majority dislikes the integration of Amazon affiliate links. If so, Jono, is not providing factual information either. Of course, we all know ulterior motive is generating more income. Then, at least be honest (or silent) about it. [1] Yes, I know, you can use Super+a, but most users will just click the Dash or press the Super key. It's the most obvious thing to do.
- ealexhudson 14y ago
  It's difficult to see where the "uncertainty" or "doubt" that RMS is alleged to be spreading is: as far as I can tell, both he and Jono agree on the facts, they just disagree on the fear. Accusing RMS of spreading FUD seems a tad alarmist. It is interesting to examine the claim that the Amazon search should be included because it would provide interesting and relevant things - unlike something like Google, Amazon's search engine has a single goal in life, to sell things. Whether users like the integration or not, even the more fundamental question seems to want answering: I cannot think of a time when I've been searching for stuff, locally or online, and thought, "You know what, I wish Amazon results were integrated into this - that'd be great!".
  - jeremyjh 14y ago
    > unlike something like Google Please tell me you are joking. Google exists only to sell your eyeballs and whatever it can figure out about you.
    - shardling 14y ago
      FFS, you know damn well what the post meant. Your comment adds nothing to the discussion.
glogla 14y ago
> In his reply, Jono claims that Stallman's views on privacy do not align with Canonical's That's pretty obvious. The question is every user needs to ask himself is precisely this one, "do my views on my privacy align with Canonical?"
deeqkah 14y ago
We're all capable of configuring our chosen distro in such a way that it's comfortable for us to use. We're all also capable of applying our values when choosing that actual distro (in the same way that Richard Stalman does). Having said that, and i don't mean to insult anyone here, but why are we actually going to go directly into the meta of discussing other people's opinions here? Why is this discussion relevant here on Hacker News? I don't see this as thought provoking, rather i see it as an open invitation for everyone to contribute to a perverted gossip column. Resistance to this design decision by Canonical should have been intense when it was announced, and not when someone with an audience decided to state their opinion. Again, this is in no way meant to insult anyone currently involved in talking about this. As much as everyone here has the opportunity to state why they support either side of the issue, it's also important to make opinions on it's context.
- tjr 14y ago
  Resistance to this design decision by Canonical should have been intense when it was announced, and not when someone with an audience decided to state their opinion. It probably should have been. I don't use Ubuntu, and I had never heard of the issue at all until Richard's article. Knowing about the issue doesn't have an immediate practical impact on me, but I will likely make it a point to avoid Ubuntu in the future.
  - klez 14y ago
    Actually multiple venues talked (sometimes critically) about this problem, Mark Shuttleworth made a blog post about it, criticizing the critics. So it's really nothing new.
doe88 14y ago
I love when a post starts or ends with "This is a personal post and does not neccessarily represent the views of XXX". I know even before reading it that their post will be in the interest of their employer 99% of the time. I'm not against it sometimes there are insightful posts but there are also not very objective by definition.
EthanHeilman 14y ago
This is one issue in which RMS is completely right. I don't know why Ubuntu thinks it can cynically sell it's users searches to amazon but I want nothing to do with it. Think of the dangers posed by this to human rights activists who chose linux as the safer OS. For instance: 1. Consider a journalist who doing an investigative story on amazon's warehouse working conditions. The journalist has been given some internal documents used by amazon and happens to search for one of these documents. Amazon could detect that someone has this file and learn of the investigation. 2. Or someone has pirate a movie and searches for the file on their harddrive. Given certain search strings it should be possible for amazon to detect that this purpose engages in piracy. What is to prevent amazon from reporting this information to "The Authorities". I hope someone develops an Ubuntu fork that doesn't have spyware (spyfree-ubuntu?).
- mibbitier 14y ago
  FWIW, It's better to stick to the facts rather than spreading even more FUD - "sell it's users searches to amazon" Ubuntu is not "selling" your searches to amazon. Ubuntu will only get paid any money if you click through, and purchase something from Amazon. Ubuntu is sending your searches to Amazon which may or may not be 'right', but they only get paid if you buy stuff. I'd guess Ubuntu are desperate for revenue and have run out of other ideas. Also FWIW, the number of people who use these desktop search things seems likely to be tiny. Particularly amongst those who use linux. Do people here use desktop search on any OS?
  - chadwickthebold 14y ago
    I don't understandd how that can be a legitimate mindset for Canonical. Ubuntu is on the verge of becoming the major player in the early-stage linux convert market. They have the best supported platform, the largest and most accepting community and userbase, and are beginning to branch out towards more traditional markets like gamers with the soon-to-happen inclusion of Steam. It would seem a better move politically to make this feature either opt-out or opt-it, and not required. I've used Ubuntu's dash search when looking for an app that's not readily available. Who keeps things on the desktop nowadays? :)
  - 14y ago
h2s 14y ago
> These statements simply generate fear, uncertainty, > and doubt about Ubuntu; > This just seems a bit childish to me. I once read an article that said you should be very careful of anybody who can disagree vehemently and convincingly with another person's point without ever categorically accusing them of being wrong. I think it applies here, because RMS is right about this one.
- handelaar 14y ago
  > "I once read an article that said you should be very careful of > anybody who can disagree vehemently and convincingly with another > person's point without ever categorically accusing them of being > wrong." In fact you should seek out such people, because in matters of opinion that is the exact definition of someone with whom you can have a civilised discussion.
  - kyberias 14y ago
    I think you missed the point entirely. The assumption was that the matter under discussion can be argued and it is possible to determine what is correct.
  - scott_s 14y ago
    Actually, I came away confused, because he never stated "This is exactly what Ubuntu does, and here are my reasons for why it is okay." I disagree with your point - in fact, I think you are wrong. But we can still have a civilized discussion. My reasoning is that when facts and disagreements are not clearly stated ("here are the facts; the other party came to conclusion X, but I come to conclusion Y for these reasons"), it's easy to get bogged down in points that are not central.
  - h2s 14y ago
    Good point. In fact, Jono says this: > With this in mind, just because someone may have differing > views to mine on the implementation of privacy in software > doesn’t mean they are wrong. Likewise, just because my > views may differ to theirs doesn’t mean I am wrong. We are > all different and we all manage our information and our > expectations around information sharing in different ways. I kind of regret the way I said what I said above now, but I still think Jono has failed to address my privacy concerns. From the point of view of somebody who is worried about the privacy implications of the Amazon integration, all the post really does is to say "Well I'm not worried". It does say it in quite a reasonable and comforting way though.
Puer 14y ago
I've been a Ubuntu fanboy for years. When my old desktop running XP completely failed, my older brother installed Ubuntu on it and I fell in love with it. A few months ago I did a clean install of Ubuntu 12.04 on my netbook that had previously been running Windows 7. Unity didn't bother me. What bothered me was how much unnecessary software was installed. I felt like I had no control. After only a few weeks of using Ubuntu I decided to install Arch Linux for the first time. I haven't looked back since. I think people underestimate just how good it feels to be in complete and utter control of your system. I know exactly what is installed on my system, how to fix it if something goes wrong and exactly what I'm getting myself into when I upgrade. I felt like I had that power back when I was running Ubuntu 8.04, but I was slowly losing it with each new release, and that's why I stopped using Ubuntu.
leephillips 14y ago
Jono Bacon's little essay convinces me that RMS is right, and I plan to wean myself from Ubuntu and find another distribution to install on my laptops -- and I will cease my practice of recommending Ubuntu to people starting out with linux. This is entirely because Bacon's reply to RMS fails to address his criticisms. He ignores RMS's specific points, instead going on about how great Ubuntu is, delving into RMS's character and personality, and attacking straw men, mainly the notion that the problem arises from Ubuntu's policies not being precisely in alignment with RMS's preferences. All of this convinces me that Canonical has no answer to RMS's challenge, and that they have indeed become purveyors of spyware; in addition, that it is likely to become gradually more abusive with time, so better to get out now.
nicholassmith 14y ago
Ubuntu should have just kept quiet (even if the post does not necessarily represent the views of Ubuntu, Canonical or any others involved in this project, forever more, IDST; he still is a public presence for it), and let it burn itself out. It wouldn't have gone away, not completely, but they've made the issue bigger now. RMS says things, that's what he does. He's committed to a very specific path in life and that's okay. Ubuntu as a project needs to have a revenue stream to survive, and from what I've read Canonical makes some reasonably decent money from private enterprise and so on, so they probably don't need the revenue stream all that bad. I personally have no issues with the idea of affiliate links being embedded, it actually sounds like a nice idea to hack into Alfred so when I want a movie it'll check Amazon/iTunes/so on for it, but it needs to be made clear. For those concerned about this being a HUGE security breach, have you audited the source? It's available online. Does it confirm your suspicions that Amazon is tracking everything search? The code is there, so if it's acting as spyware it's hardly the most secretive way of doing it.
- drumdance 14y ago
  Yeah, this is one of those things where unless there is a major factual error, they are better off just letting it blow over. (Speaking purely in terms of PR strategy, I don't know anything about Ubuntu or this issue.)
- wnight 14y ago
  How can auditing one copy of a program prove what Amazon chooses to record with another copy? >RMS says things, that's what he does. I see. And probably without a license... Tisk, tisk.
  - nicholassmith 14y ago
    Well, auditing it would show what data is being sent where, and when. Unless of course we assume that the source published for th global search lens is in some way not what's being shipped. That'd be a whole other kettle o fish.
    - 14y ago
dasil003 14y ago
It's funny how the acronym FUD has such an extremely negative connotation that the entire discussion is whether something is FUD or not rather than asking if there is any legitimacy to the FUD. I mean let's be honest here: FUD is RMS's bread and butter. But just because FUD is his tactic doesn't mean he doesn't have legitimate concerns. Certainly he's operating at a much more realistic level than the Microsoft marketing FUD of decades past that was so completely full of bullshit that it deserved little more than acronymical dismissal. I'm sure it's pretty galling to be on the receiving end of one of RMS's absolutist rants, but no matter how over the top or strongly worded they are, they can't be made to go away with a sober appeal to level-headed moderation. Regardless of the words we choose, Canonical's actions are cause for concern.
meaty 14y ago
Well that seals it. We had the same crap from shuttleworth. Don't piss of your customers canonical. Unlike windows, there are plenty of compatible alternatives.
chj 14y ago
This time I completely sided with RMS. Sorry, It is not Childish.
segmond 14y ago
how do you disable it, that's the question.

44 points by cooldeal 14y ago

Actual link rather than to Slashdot discussion: http://www.jonobacon.org/2012/12/07/on-richard-stallman-and-ubuntu/ http://www.jonobacon.org/2012/12/07/on-richard-stallman-and-... The problem for me is that isn't addressed by this is the decision to make it default on in Ubuntu. That failure of judgement* means that I can't trust them not to change something else that I have to notice and find out how to easily disable. Easy to turn off is not good enough for such a feature. Edit to add: Basically I think RMS is right about this one (as he often is) although in many cases I make compromises that he would find wholly unacceptable. * It might be ethics but I would give Canonical the benefit of the doubt on that one.

yungchin 14y ago
I think I've written this before, but: this feature would go nowhere if it was disabled by default. If you want to know whether mainstream users will or will not like it, you can't stick it in some obscure alpha (they'll never test it), and you can't make it optional (only a few percent will ever come across the tick box at all). So yeah, I don't like this feature either (for all the reasons RMS pointed out), but I don't see how otherwise they could have tested it. Maybe not a failure of judgement then, but rather choosing innovation over privacy? (Note the 12.10 betas also had all these queries going over the network in plain text... so I kind of see the whole experiment as taking the "move fast and break things" mantra taken to the extreme)
- josephlord 14y ago
  Opt in doesn't necessarily mean hidden in settings. For this feature it probably should be a pop up that appears the first time each user enters a search request before it gets sent over the network. The question could have a positive spin "Would you like to see network enhanced search results?" with details and privacy policy links. Options of "Yes", "Ask later" and "Disable enhanced search". They could even put an "Are you sure?" If disable is selected.
  - yungchin 14y ago
    This seems bizarre in retrospect, but somehow none of the above had occurred to me before. Thanks for taking the time to type it and enlighten.

klearvue 14y ago

Dear Jono, It may very well be that RMS's comments were over the top but please check the numbers on DistroWatch - those numbers will testify that Canonical is not making the right decisions, at least not on the desktop, and RMS's sentiments are quite likely shared by plenty of your former users.

pettazz 14y ago
Distrowatch is probably the least accurate measurement of usage numbers that exists. The fact that Mint is beating Ubuntu on Distrowatch is a result of a lot of Mint users saying "Hey, let's keep hitting Distrowatch so we make sure we beat Ubuntu on Distrowatch" and has nothing to do with actual use of the OS.
yock 14y ago
And to some extent I would think Canonical is okay with that. A cull of their core users expecting an unencumbered free tool is probably in their best interests. People who are willing to trade something of monetary value arguably should be the focus of any business. Also, don't leave here thinking that DistroWatch is a good metric of mindshare among Linux users... "The DistroWatch Page Hit Ranking statistics...show the number of times a distribution page on DistroWatch.com was accessed each day, nothing more." http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=popularity http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=popularity
- Zigurd 14y ago
  There is a problem with "A cull of core users" Before this point, Canonical sold support as their approach to monetizing their investment in creating a distribution. Data collection, applying analytic, and selling user data is incompatible with both the free-to-use Ubuntu community, and the enterprise customers. Canonical has fundamentally changed what the Ubuntu brand means, and that is reflected in people finding that good alternatives exist.
  - yock 14y ago
    In other words then, Canonical has modified their business plans with respect to Ubuntu, probably because the previous revenue model didn't work. What makes these so-called "alternatives" so much more viable? How will they succeed where Canonical failed?

digitalengineer 14y ago

Great reply in the comments from Ubuntu users here: http://www.jonobacon.org/2012/12/07/on-richard-stallman-and-ubuntu/ http://www.jonobacon.org/2012/12/07/on-richard-stallman-and-...

tucosan 14y ago
you just posted a link to the story itself. check your url...

chris_wot 14y ago

This, unfortunately, is a common GNOME-like mentality. Our users aren't right, we are. We don't need to listen to strong criticism, because we are making awesome things. Seriously, some of these guys live in a bubble.

yarrel 14y ago
GNOME isn't Ubuntu.
- chris_wot 14y ago
  No, but Jono Bacon was extremely entwined in GNOME for a long time.
  - ealexhudson 14y ago
    Moreso KDE though, surely?
  - bratsche 14y ago
    I had never heard of Jono until he was working for Canonical.
    - chris_wot 14y ago
      That doesn't negate my point in any way.
      - bratsche 14y ago
        Well, I'm a former GNOME and GTK+ developer and a former Canonical/Ubuntu developer and I had never noticed him being involved in GNOME outside his Canonical duties. Of course you could still be right about him being entwined in GNOME though, but I don't think you are.
        chris_wot 14y ago

danieldk 14y ago

The post speaks of facts and then states: The goal of the dash in Ubuntu has always been to provide a central place in which you can search and find things that are interesting and relavent to you; it is designed to be at the center of your computing experience. So, did they conduct a survey to check that majority of Ubuntu users thinks that getting Amazon affiliate links is 'interesting and relevant'? I'd wager that a majority dislikes the integration of Amazon affiliate links. If so, Jono, is not providing factual information either. Of course, we all know ulterior motive is generating more income. Then, at least be honest (or silent) about it. [1] Yes, I know, you can use Super+a, but most users will just click the Dash or press the Super key. It's the most obvious thing to do.

ealexhudson 14y ago
It's difficult to see where the "uncertainty" or "doubt" that RMS is alleged to be spreading is: as far as I can tell, both he and Jono agree on the facts, they just disagree on the fear. Accusing RMS of spreading FUD seems a tad alarmist. It is interesting to examine the claim that the Amazon search should be included because it would provide interesting and relevant things - unlike something like Google, Amazon's search engine has a single goal in life, to sell things. Whether users like the integration or not, even the more fundamental question seems to want answering: I cannot think of a time when I've been searching for stuff, locally or online, and thought, "You know what, I wish Amazon results were integrated into this - that'd be great!".
- jeremyjh 14y ago
  > unlike something like Google Please tell me you are joking. Google exists only to sell your eyeballs and whatever it can figure out about you.
  - shardling 14y ago
    FFS, you know damn well what the post meant. Your comment adds nothing to the discussion.

glogla 14y ago

> In his reply, Jono claims that Stallman's views on privacy do not align with Canonical's That's pretty obvious. The question is every user needs to ask himself is precisely this one, "do my views on my privacy align with Canonical?"

deeqkah 14y ago

We're all capable of configuring our chosen distro in such a way that it's comfortable for us to use. We're all also capable of applying our values when choosing that actual distro (in the same way that Richard Stalman does). Having said that, and i don't mean to insult anyone here, but why are we actually going to go directly into the meta of discussing other people's opinions here? Why is this discussion relevant here on Hacker News? I don't see this as thought provoking, rather i see it as an open invitation for everyone to contribute to a perverted gossip column. Resistance to this design decision by Canonical should have been intense when it was announced, and not when someone with an audience decided to state their opinion. Again, this is in no way meant to insult anyone currently involved in talking about this. As much as everyone here has the opportunity to state why they support either side of the issue, it's also important to make opinions on it's context.

tjr 14y ago
Resistance to this design decision by Canonical should have been intense when it was announced, and not when someone with an audience decided to state their opinion. It probably should have been. I don't use Ubuntu, and I had never heard of the issue at all until Richard's article. Knowing about the issue doesn't have an immediate practical impact on me, but I will likely make it a point to avoid Ubuntu in the future.
- klez 14y ago
  Actually multiple venues talked (sometimes critically) about this problem, Mark Shuttleworth made a blog post about it, criticizing the critics. So it's really nothing new.

doe88 14y ago

I love when a post starts or ends with "This is a personal post and does not neccessarily represent the views of XXX". I know even before reading it that their post will be in the interest of their employer 99% of the time. I'm not against it sometimes there are insightful posts but there are also not very objective by definition.

EthanHeilman 14y ago

This is one issue in which RMS is completely right. I don't know why Ubuntu thinks it can cynically sell it's users searches to amazon but I want nothing to do with it. Think of the dangers posed by this to human rights activists who chose linux as the safer OS. For instance: 1. Consider a journalist who doing an investigative story on amazon's warehouse working conditions. The journalist has been given some internal documents used by amazon and happens to search for one of these documents. Amazon could detect that someone has this file and learn of the investigation. 2. Or someone has pirate a movie and searches for the file on their harddrive. Given certain search strings it should be possible for amazon to detect that this purpose engages in piracy. What is to prevent amazon from reporting this information to "The Authorities". I hope someone develops an Ubuntu fork that doesn't have spyware (spyfree-ubuntu?).

mibbitier 14y ago
FWIW, It's better to stick to the facts rather than spreading even more FUD - "sell it's users searches to amazon" Ubuntu is not "selling" your searches to amazon. Ubuntu will only get paid any money if you click through, and purchase something from Amazon. Ubuntu is sending your searches to Amazon which may or may not be 'right', but they only get paid if you buy stuff. I'd guess Ubuntu are desperate for revenue and have run out of other ideas. Also FWIW, the number of people who use these desktop search things seems likely to be tiny. Particularly amongst those who use linux. Do people here use desktop search on any OS?
- chadwickthebold 14y ago
  I don't understandd how that can be a legitimate mindset for Canonical. Ubuntu is on the verge of becoming the major player in the early-stage linux convert market. They have the best supported platform, the largest and most accepting community and userbase, and are beginning to branch out towards more traditional markets like gamers with the soon-to-happen inclusion of Steam. It would seem a better move politically to make this feature either opt-out or opt-it, and not required. I've used Ubuntu's dash search when looking for an app that's not readily available. Who keeps things on the desktop nowadays? :)
- 14y ago

h2s 14y ago

> These statements simply generate fear, uncertainty, > and doubt about Ubuntu; > This just seems a bit childish to me. I once read an article that said you should be very careful of anybody who can disagree vehemently and convincingly with another person's point without ever categorically accusing them of being wrong. I think it applies here, because RMS is right about this one.

handelaar 14y ago
> "I once read an article that said you should be very careful of > anybody who can disagree vehemently and convincingly with another > person's point without ever categorically accusing them of being > wrong." In fact you should seek out such people, because in matters of opinion that is the exact definition of someone with whom you can have a civilised discussion.
- kyberias 14y ago
  I think you missed the point entirely. The assumption was that the matter under discussion can be argued and it is possible to determine what is correct.
- scott_s 14y ago
  Actually, I came away confused, because he never stated "This is exactly what Ubuntu does, and here are my reasons for why it is okay." I disagree with your point - in fact, I think you are wrong. But we can still have a civilized discussion. My reasoning is that when facts and disagreements are not clearly stated ("here are the facts; the other party came to conclusion X, but I come to conclusion Y for these reasons"), it's easy to get bogged down in points that are not central.
- h2s 14y ago
  Good point. In fact, Jono says this: > With this in mind, just because someone may have differing > views to mine on the implementation of privacy in software > doesn’t mean they are wrong. Likewise, just because my > views may differ to theirs doesn’t mean I am wrong. We are > all different and we all manage our information and our > expectations around information sharing in different ways. I kind of regret the way I said what I said above now, but I still think Jono has failed to address my privacy concerns. From the point of view of somebody who is worried about the privacy implications of the Amazon integration, all the post really does is to say "Well I'm not worried". It does say it in quite a reasonable and comforting way though.

Puer 14y ago

I've been a Ubuntu fanboy for years. When my old desktop running XP completely failed, my older brother installed Ubuntu on it and I fell in love with it. A few months ago I did a clean install of Ubuntu 12.04 on my netbook that had previously been running Windows 7. Unity didn't bother me. What bothered me was how much unnecessary software was installed. I felt like I had no control. After only a few weeks of using Ubuntu I decided to install Arch Linux for the first time. I haven't looked back since. I think people underestimate just how good it feels to be in complete and utter control of your system. I know exactly what is installed on my system, how to fix it if something goes wrong and exactly what I'm getting myself into when I upgrade. I felt like I had that power back when I was running Ubuntu 8.04, but I was slowly losing it with each new release, and that's why I stopped using Ubuntu.

leephillips 14y ago

Jono Bacon's little essay convinces me that RMS is right, and I plan to wean myself from Ubuntu and find another distribution to install on my laptops -- and I will cease my practice of recommending Ubuntu to people starting out with linux. This is entirely because Bacon's reply to RMS fails to address his criticisms. He ignores RMS's specific points, instead going on about how great Ubuntu is, delving into RMS's character and personality, and attacking straw men, mainly the notion that the problem arises from Ubuntu's policies not being precisely in alignment with RMS's preferences. All of this convinces me that Canonical has no answer to RMS's challenge, and that they have indeed become purveyors of spyware; in addition, that it is likely to become gradually more abusive with time, so better to get out now.

nicholassmith 14y ago

Ubuntu should have just kept quiet (even if the post does not necessarily represent the views of Ubuntu, Canonical or any others involved in this project, forever more, IDST; he still is a public presence for it), and let it burn itself out. It wouldn't have gone away, not completely, but they've made the issue bigger now. RMS says things, that's what he does. He's committed to a very specific path in life and that's okay. Ubuntu as a project needs to have a revenue stream to survive, and from what I've read Canonical makes some reasonably decent money from private enterprise and so on, so they probably don't need the revenue stream all that bad. I personally have no issues with the idea of affiliate links being embedded, it actually sounds like a nice idea to hack into Alfred so when I want a movie it'll check Amazon/iTunes/so on for it, but it needs to be made clear. For those concerned about this being a HUGE security breach, have you audited the source? It's available online. Does it confirm your suspicions that Amazon is tracking everything search? The code is there, so if it's acting as spyware it's hardly the most secretive way of doing it.

drumdance 14y ago
Yeah, this is one of those things where unless there is a major factual error, they are better off just letting it blow over. (Speaking purely in terms of PR strategy, I don't know anything about Ubuntu or this issue.)
wnight 14y ago
How can auditing one copy of a program prove what Amazon chooses to record with another copy? >RMS says things, that's what he does. I see. And probably without a license... Tisk, tisk.
- nicholassmith 14y ago
  Well, auditing it would show what data is being sent where, and when. Unless of course we assume that the source published for th global search lens is in some way not what's being shipped. That'd be a whole other kettle o fish.
  - 14y ago

dasil003 14y ago

It's funny how the acronym FUD has such an extremely negative connotation that the entire discussion is whether something is FUD or not rather than asking if there is any legitimacy to the FUD. I mean let's be honest here: FUD is RMS's bread and butter. But just because FUD is his tactic doesn't mean he doesn't have legitimate concerns. Certainly he's operating at a much more realistic level than the Microsoft marketing FUD of decades past that was so completely full of bullshit that it deserved little more than acronymical dismissal. I'm sure it's pretty galling to be on the receiving end of one of RMS's absolutist rants, but no matter how over the top or strongly worded they are, they can't be made to go away with a sober appeal to level-headed moderation. Regardless of the words we choose, Canonical's actions are cause for concern.

meaty 14y ago

Well that seals it. We had the same crap from shuttleworth. Don't piss of your customers canonical. Unlike windows, there are plenty of compatible alternatives.

chj 14y ago

This time I completely sided with RMS. Sorry, It is not Childish.

segmond 14y ago

how do you disable it, that's the question.