Richard Stallman Calls Ubuntu "Spyware"

[GreatEmerald]

In the same vein, pundits predicting or even outright calling for the death of Apple and Microsoft simply have no idea about the consequences of such situations. If Apple goes under, the creative industry is going to take a huge hit considering how deeply entrenched Apple is in this particular sector. It does not matter if Adobe Creative Suite is available in both OS X and Windows versions: those graphics artists, designers and what-else-have-you have grown accustomed to their personal workflow in OS X and telling them to take their work over to Windows is as good as breaking their hands and forcing them to draw a picture after that.

Well, to use an analogy from my field of studies, Ecology - empty niches do exist, but if a species goes extinct and leaves a large, fertile niche, it will not take long for other species to take its place. So while it is true that if Apple or Microsoft went bankrupt, a void would be created, it would not stay for long and others would take their place. If we're lucky, it would be several competing companies. That would lead to healthy competition, which would, in the long run, increase creativity and user benefits.

[ElderSnake]

Come on guys, let's be fair. Stallman and by extension the FSF may seem pretty extreme and we may disagree with them on a number of things, but they provide that balance in this increasingly locked down proprietery world where $$$ seems to rule everything. If not for the likes of Stallman etc, we would be in a closed computing nightmare already.

So whilst extreme, he's entitled to his views and we should respect that.


On the subject though, whilst I wouldn't go around shunning Ubuntu itself, I would make people aware of this "feature" and how to turn it off if they desire.

At THE VERY LEAST, my opinion is it should be opt-in or ask the user at first-boot whether they would like the feature enabled and explain what it does. That's true freedom and transparency.

Leaving it the way it is and hoping more unknowing users will just use it and not be aware what's going on in order to make a few bucks is really not cool in my opinion.

[TheBlackCat]

Since that any web browser, Windows, Apple OSs, XBOX, PS3, Android, Steam, and including Phoronix phorums..., etc gathers user information about his preferences and habits, who cares about the definition of spyware?

This is not "preferences and habits", it is search terms you use when looking for your own local files, which could include any sort of personal information, names, addresses, phone numbers, financial information. And it is not anonymized, it is kept uniquely identifiable.

One thing is that a system take usage data information, and another very different thing is to steal data, and Ubuntu is not stealing data.

I think I see the problem here. You think it is just collecting usage data. It is not, it is collecting search terms. If someone is up someone's contact information using their search, then Canonical has that's person's name. If you search for documents related to your banking, then Canonical knows which bank you use. If you search for documents related to you work, then Canonical knows that too.

For the most part people know that what they do on the internet is not fully anonymous. But usually people expect stuff they do solely on their own computer, without anything related to the internent, to be private. But with Ubuntu, it isn't, and they don't go out of their way to warn people about that.

[not.sure]

Come on guys, let's be fair. Stallman and by extension the FSF may seem pretty extreme and we may disagree with them on a number of things, but they provide that balance in this increasingly locked down proprietery world where $$$ seems to rule everything. If not for the likes of Stallman etc, we would be in a closed computing nightmare already.

So whilst extreme, he's entitled to his views and we should respect that.


On the subject though, whilst I wouldn't go around shunning Ubuntu itself, I would make people aware of this "feature" and how to turn it off if they desire.

At THE VERY LEAST, my opinion is it should be opt-in or ask the user at first-boot whether they would like the feature enabled and explain what it does. That's true freedom and transparency.

Leaving it the way it is and hoping more unknowing users will just use it and not be aware what's going on in order to make a few bucks is really not cool in my opinion.

This exactly.

[Vadi]

I believe this feature is off by default now, given a recent code change.

[AJenbo]

Stallman may be extreme, but he IS right about Ubuntu. Ubuntu spies the user and sends the information directly to Amazon.

That is actually not true.

[peperoni]

This is not "preferences and habits", it is search terms you use when looking for your own local files, which could include any sort of personal information, names, addresses, phone numbers, financial information. And it is not anonymized, it is kept uniquely identifiable.


I think I see the problem here. You think it is just collecting usage data. It is not, it is collecting search terms. If someone is up someone's contact information using their search, then Canonical has that's person's name. If you search for documents related to your banking, then Canonical knows which bank you use. If you search for documents related to you work, then Canonical knows that too.

For the most part people know that what they do on the internet is not fully anonymous. But usually people expect stuff they do solely on their own computer, without anything related to the internent, to be private. But with Ubuntu, it isn't, and they don't go out of their way to warn people about that.

Others have been gathering data from their users for decades. What's the problem with Canonical?

[Xake]

Until they address problems like high performing apps that get things done and highly performing HW with FOSS firmwares better rename themselves to Unusable Computer Foundation.

It is a good thing that you highlighted the most important part yourself. Because there has never been reports of closed source programs not getting stuff done. Or closed source stuff doing things wrong.
Because the nvidia binary driver never crashes, works every time, including with prime, and has never ever had a security problem.

I do not promote Free Software out of Closed Source software being Evil, I promot Open Source software because there is the possibility that you yourself can audit the code or hire someone to audit the code. That way you know that the DRM-protection you just bought for your videos was not just something where the first bits where bit-shifted with the text RANDOM_STRING. And that your random generator truly is random. And that your application really uses SSL in a secure fashion, and not in a way that you information can be decrypted in predictable ways.

Yeah, I am an CS, and have a lot of friends working for businesses only to audit code.

[Xake]

Others have been gathering data from their users for decades. What's the problem with Canonical?

I think the problem is not with Canonical gathering data here, but that they let Amazon buy itself the possibility to get this information directly from the users computers without a clear opt-in/opt-out.

[peperoni]

I think the problem is not with Canonical gathering data here, but that they let Amazon buy itself the possibility to get this information directly from the users computers without a clear opt-in/opt-out.

I read several times they usually sell statistical information about products, etc, that are one of the things I'm very concerned because that way organizations can base their marketing campaigns. The problem, in my opinion is that those kind of strategies are legal. I think it should be ilegal to share even statistical data. But while they continue being legal, though unethical, I think it's unfair to blame some companies for using that kind of strategies.

I think that it's very important to know that those kind of strategies exist and they exist to sell us products that we don't need, and to make us to think wether we need to buy something or we are buying it because they are manipulating us.