Ubuntu wants to slurp PCs' vital statistics – even location – with new desktop installs Desktop computers powered by future versions of Ubuntu GNU/Linux may collect information on the PCs – unless users opt out. "We want to be able to focus our engineering efforts on the things that matter most to our users, and in order to do that we need to get some more data about sort of setups our users have and which …
"We want to be able to focus our engineering efforts on the things that matter most to our users"
How about a small amount of privacy and not needing to slurp everything I do or see?
Also consider the average Linux user is more savvy than an average Windows user when it comes to this sort of thing and can just change distro. Windows users like your mum and dad dont know anything else and/or generally wont/dont care.
"Windows users like your mum and dad don't know anything else and/or generally wont/don't care."
Hay! I'm a Linux user, I do admit it's not Ubuntu. And I'm well the wrong side of 70, a Dad, and a Granddad, and this year will become a Great Granddad as well! So there you youngsters!
My Dad is almost 80 and a great grandad. Besides Linux, he also has a Mac and Windows 7 (safely disconnected from the network of course). His old system76 was about to give up the ghost, so I ordered him a new bare bones and gave him a link to the Ubuntu ISO. Not wanting to fuss with BIOS settings and such, he went to Fry's to get a teenager to install it for him for $50. Afterwards, I had him install the full development toolkit:
sudo apt-get install build-essential dos2unix unix2dos
With that he is in full business
> I'm well the wrong side of 70
It's always bothered when I was doing requirements when people would use that idiotic cliche "so easy that your mum could use it". Considering that in my mother's generation computers were much more difficult to use than today (you basically had to know how to build them to know how to use them), I knew right away I was sitting in front of an imbecile when those words were uttered.
I could see this as plausable if they hadn't previously integrated the system search with Amazon, providing affiliate links which would make them money, as a default feature. Now I'm wondering if this really is just being helpful or if it's another way we'll find out they planned to profit
"Windows users like your mum and dad dont know anything else and/or generally wont/dont care."
My parents are long gone. I'm the senior around here, a Linux user and Unix user since well before Windows was even a thing. SWMBO (who, in fact is really the senior round here) is right now sitting working on her Debian laptop. Two of my older cousins have also been converted to Zorin. It's my children and grandchildren who're on Windows.
TL;DR Stop making ageist assumptions. And put the apostrophes in "don't" and "won't".
You know, I'd be quite happy to tell a vendor of free software a little bit about the hardware I'm running, as long as it was *really* upfront about exactly what information it was, and how it would be anonymised.
I trust Ubuntu about as far as I could throw an uninterruptible power supply.
If one reads the article ignoring the sensationalist spin that Simon tries to put into it, and not having checked Ubuntu's actual statements, it appears to be the same sort of thing as Debian and a few other distros do: you can send the developers a list of what software is installed on your computer and some basic architectural characteristics of it.
I don't use Ubuntu, I do not much like Canonical as a company, and I am aware of their previous form trying to become what Microsoft was during whatshisface's term, the bloke after Gates. But I think Simon just went for his usual easy clickbait approach instead of writing a proper informative piece.
@Ubuntu: either stop slurp, or I move on to Debian or CentOS
With the recent news that Microsoft and Canonical partner up, it looks very bad for Ubuntu and Linux in general.
We all know their "Embrace, extend, and extinguish", also known as "Embrace, extend, and exterminate", phrase that the U.S. Department of Justice found was used internally by Microsoft to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences to disadvantage its competitors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
"Richard Stallman vs. Canonical's CEO: 'Will Microsoft Love Linux to Death?"
https://linux.slashdot.org/story/17/09/24/2132218/richard-stallman-vs-canonicals-ceo-will-microsoft-love-linux-to-death
To quote one comment from that Slashdot story:
"Pretty much M$ embracing Linux at this stage is a shear act of panic and desperation. They are loathsome scum, they thought of Windows anal probe 10 (because when doctors use, M$ follows you right into the proctologists surgery and now monitors that camera hooked to a Windows 10 PC right up your butt). Strictly speaking according to law, Windows 10 should be legally banned from doctors offices https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physician%E2%80%93patient_privilege , yet it doesn't happen, why doesn't it happen, well, guess who M$ has guaranteed a back door to, yep, corrupt government agencies, hence no prosecution for a clear cut criminal act. You also have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney%E2%80%93client_privilege , windows anal probe 10 again floating law by not ensuring the privacy of client lawyer discussion (both sides by law are require to be secure, guess who wants that back door), take M$ to court, when you and your lawyer have windows 10 installed, yep, uh huh, good luck with that.
It is not only evil, it is factually illegal and it is not being prosecuted, why the fuck not?!?"
"Also consider the average Linux user is more savvy than an average Windows user when it comes to this sort of thing and can just change distro"
But maybe this sort of information is exactly what's needed to help make Linux not the utterly crappy end user experience it is at the moment?
"Linux doesn't spy on its users. Ubuntu does."
Exactly ...
I've sort of felt this coming on for a while, a gut feeling if you will.
After trying Ubuntu and Mint and then watching the systemd environment develop, I have temporarily settled for PCLinuxOS/Devuan combo with a VM in each install for the odd MS stuff I may need a few times a year.
But I will finally settle with anything Devuan based when it all gains some more momentum.
Cheers,
Ubuntu have just shot themselves in the foot by sounding like MS
And that's just their latest foot-shotgun incident. I was using Ubuntu (from about the time that Mandrake/Mandriva started to fail as a distro) but stopped once they started to decide that the way that they would operate would move closer to the usual closed-source model. Implementing systemd didn't help..
So now, my default is FreeBSD or Devuan.
"You are correct, Ubuntu have just shot themselves in the foot by sounding like MS. Dix."
So far as I'm concerned, Ubuntu shot themselves in the foot four times already.
One: Putting in a default window manager not suited to real desktop use.
Two: Mir
Three: Ubuntu Edge (The price was ridiculous for what would effectively have been an experimental product. Pity, because it had a lot of potential.)
Four: Systemd
At least we have a choice to switch to another 'non slurping' distro. Those of you unfortunate enough to still be handcuffed to Windows and bending over to take whatever Redmond sends your way.
I ditched Ubuntu around the time of 12:10 because of their policy towards feeing back changes into the kernel source. Since then I use Debian or CentOS for everything these days.
>> "It'll be interesting to see how the Linux fan bois who are always bashing Microsoft's data collection respond to this"
Easy!
1) Canonical provided a simple and clear list of what they want to collect, right from the off. MS didn't.
2) Canonical provide an "Off" option that completely disables the data collection, and presents it to you during installation. OK it might be better if it was opt-in rather than opt-out, but the point is that it's easy to switch it off.
Hence, you can see what they collect, and easily switch it off. If MS were clear and provided a functioning "Off" switch, there'd be a lot less animosity aimed towards them.
PS: Also, not a Linux fanboi. I have Ubuntu on one system, but all my main machines run Windows 7.
The office is in the UK, but developers are spread around the world. If anything, few people from developers up to CxOs have any idea about what GDPR really means, and even fewer if you look at developers outside of EU.
Manglement makes everyone look at a PowerPoint so they're free of wrongdoing though.
"Its really worrying when someone like that doesnt grasp GDPR, and theres no soft opt-in"
GDPR applies to "personal data". According to the GDPR FAQs personal data is "Any information related to a natural person or ‘Data Subject’, that can be used to directly or indirectly identify the person. It can be anything from a name, a photo, an email address, bank details, posts on social networking websites, medical information, or a computer IP address." (https://www.eugdpr.org/gdpr-faqs.html)
I don't see anything in the list of what Canonical intends to collect that fits that description. The closest example in the FAQ description that could cause Canonical issues is IP addresses, which may be why they seemed to be very clear that IP addresses would not be collected.
I'm not sticking up for Canonical here, just making the point that I don't think GDPR will affect them based on the list in the article.
Does it apply to products that are offered free, like Ubuntu? If so, how would the EU administer penalties for non-compliance against them if they can't fine them for a portion of their revenue/profit when they have neither (they get donations from crowdfunding I believe, as well as money from the personal fortune of Mark Shuttleworth)
As far as I can tell, they are effectively immune from the provisions of the GDPR if it even applies to them at all.
"According to the GDPR FAQs ..."
No thanks. That site is an advertisement for Trunomi products. Trunimo's site itself contains references to "Trunomi Ltd", appears to have British employees and mentions London a few times
But it carefully avoids giving any idea of the company's actual location. No physical address, or any of the usual items such as Company Registration Number that one would expect of a legitimate UK or EU business or ogranisation.
It's a Yank company hoping to cash in on fears about GDPR, and uses SEO to get there.
I think I found the one you mean. Try running whois on them. It doesn't look anything like what I'd expect from an official EU site.
Googling GDPR FAQ brings up pages of ads, all from service vendors. Oddly enough it doesn't seem to bring up anything from the EU itself. Attempting to search the actual EU official site, http://ec.europa.eu for GDPR FAQ doesn't actually lead to anything like an FAQ although, bizarrely, even though I'm querying an https page entering the query brings up a warning that the information I've entered is to be sent over an insecure link.
> It's a Yank company hoping to cash in on fears about GDPR, and uses SEO to get there.
Indeed. People should just go to EUR-LEX as usual for the source of this or any other European law.
If interested on more general / consolidated references, this is another authoritative source: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection_en.
Interestingly, if you type in "GDPR" or "general data protection regulation" in Gurgle, all you get is crap CEO sites. Mind, that's what you get most of the time when you type in anything in Gurgle these days.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
