Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 177

Thread: Richard Stallman Calls Ubuntu "Spyware"

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    since people know about it and help making it work right, spyware is not the correct term. Because 'spying' is a covert activity. You could also argue that installing ubuntu and using that functionality is explicit consent.
    By that definition, Kazaa didn't have spyware either.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peperoni View Post
    I think he should have told that Windows, OS X, iOS, Android and Ubuntu are all spyware.
    It is clear you didn't read any of what Stallman said. If you are going to criticize someone for not saying something, it might be nice to actually check whether they said this or not. If you had, you would have seen he did, in the second paragraph no less (to be pedantic he did not explicitly accuse Os X of included spyware in the Os).

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,151

    Default

    Stallmanís comment is by definition not FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt). There is absolutely no uncertainty that Ubuntu sends without any doubt the userís search terms to Canonical.
    Canonical even openly stated to calm the crowd that they get the search terms, not Amazon.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by locovaca View Post
    Your definition of Spyware is misguided. Spyware is simply software that reports back to an outside entity your actions without your explicit consent.

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Spyware?s=t

    Identity theft, blackmail, etc. doesn't play into it.
    Indeed. Spyware is not always also malware. Ubuntu in its default config is spyware and adware. That's a fact and nothing to fight about. Either you don't care any happily use Ubuntu with that option still turned on or you care and simply don't use Ubuntu.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Awesomeness View Post
    Indeed. Spyware is not always also malware. Ubuntu in its default config is spyware and adware. That's a fact and nothing to fight about. Either you don't care any happily use Ubuntu with that option still turned on or you care and simply don't use Ubuntu.
    You are missing one option: you don't know about the problem because you don't follow the news sites that have brought it up yet. That is why publicizing it is important.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    353

    Default

    most linux nerds who support the amazon ads entirely miss the point. the problem is not that its inconvenient, but that it is EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY distasteful. its the same reason that terminal is not pinned to the taskbar by default, you don't want to look like you are stuck in 1970s. the ads essentially made ubuntu look like a clown OS, even though the stupid brown toy theme already made it look like a mentally retarded version of osx.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Lol. I don't like Ubuntu but this guy's just so deluded.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    people who want FREEDOM also should avoid the FSF. Because they don't care about FREEDOM. They care about their agenda.


    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    I want to be free and install non gpl, non mit, non bsd licenced software on MY computer. FSF wants to take that away from me.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArchLinux View Post
    Lol. I don't like Ubuntu but this guy's just so deluded.
    An old, but always funny and relevant joke: How do you know someone uses Arch Linux? They'll tell you.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    156

    Default

    Stallman again is right as ever.


    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    people who want FREEDOM also should avoid the FSF. Because they don't care about FREEDOM. They care about their agenda. I want to be free and install non gpl, non mit, non bsd licenced software on MY computer. FSF wants to take that away from me.
    You Sir are either an idiot a troll, or an agent.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    552

    Default

    [QUOTE=Rallos Zek;300302]Stallman again is right as ever. [QUOTE]

    Stallman is an idiot, full stop.

    This is the same guy who opposes Steam on Linux because playing closed proprietary games with DRM is evil and unethical.

    Once again he has proven himself to be completely clueless to what most people WANT to do on their computers. People want software and application, not licenses.

    If this luddite really cares about user freedom he should just shut up about people installing non-free software on a free operating system.

    Linux users complain about commercial software vendors not offering Linux versions of their software, and when said vendor actually takes the trouble to provide a Linux port, they get flamed because their software is not FOSS.

    Case in point:
    - AMD did not support Linux with binary blobs until recently. FOSS cried foul that Linux was not suppoted
    - AMD released buggy fglrx. FOSS cried foul that the drivers were subpar
    - AMD improved fglrx greatly. FOSS cried foul because the closed nature of fglrx prevented them from leaching code that could be used for the free Radeon driver
    - AMD released specifications for graphics chipsets. FOSS cried foul because those specifications were 'insufficient'...and they can't even get RadeonSI working properly after alll the noise they make

    - Nvidia produces an impressive binary driver for Linux which is updated to support newer versions of xserver much faster than AMD. FOSS cried foul because they cannot steal code from the Nvidia driver to improve their really subpar Nouveau driver

    If the FOSS community is so capable, why can't they do everything without crying foul on how they cannot leech code from proprietary sources? Or rather, why do they even have to create 'alternatives' to popular commercial software instead of thinking up of those programs themselves right from the get go? Case in point:

    - Adobe KNOWS that people need creative tools like sophisticated video editors and image editing software (think Creative Suite). So did Sony (Vegas), Apple (Final Cut + Aperture) and Pinnacle (Pinnacle Studio), among many others. Why did it take so long for FOSS to come out with GIMP and a bunch of crappy excuses for non-linear video editors a whole decade AFTER Adobe, Apple, Sony and Pinnacle already entrenched themselves in the creative market?

    A developer community which has no idea of what today's users actually need to do on a computer has no right to tell people what they should/should not do. Period.

    Somebody should steal RMS's passport and netbook again so that he can't post anything for another month or two. Then I'll laugh in his face and proclaim about how his stuff have been claimed by the Free Baggage Foundation, whose goals are to ensure that everybody's baggage and property are supposed to be free for anybody to take.

    EDIT: Yes, I use tons of non-free software on my copy of Fedora. Intel's proprietary wifi firmware, Microsoft's Skype, Microsoft's proprietary Office 2007 fonts, Opera browser, Nvidia's drivers, proprietary codecs, etc etc, and nobody, not even Stallman, can tell me that this is wrong. I, and I ALONE, decide what's right for my use. Even if it means spitting in the face of FOSS.
    Last edited by Sonadow; 12-08-2012 at 01:15 AM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •