O Canonical
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tuxchick Dec 07, 2012 7:05 PM EDT |
They've stepped in it yet again. There are some pretty good comments, and I think this one sums it up best: " it sounds like you're saying RMS is right, and it's just a question of framing." |
| BernardSwiss Dec 07, 2012 11:14 PM EDT |
The comments are pretty interesting. I particularly liked this comment to JB's post -- I thought it captured the essence of JB's expressed P.O.V. rather succinctly... phonebanshee • Not seeing the FUD here - seems straightforward. After reading your post (and not reading Stallman's yet), you've convinced me that you're intentionally installing spyware and you're upset that someone has objected. |
| tuxchick Dec 08, 2012 12:48 AM EDT |
Good one, Bernard. Jono offers rather too many yesbuts. This really is a dumb move. If any feature is all wonderful and good for users, we'll opt in. Forcing opt-out is proof that they know it stinks and users won't like it. |
| Steven_Rosenber Dec 08, 2012 12:52 AM EDT |
Ubuntu needs to figure out a different way to make money that doesn't involve stepping on its users. |
| notbob Dec 08, 2012 10:25 AM EDT |
Steven wrote: Ubuntu needs to figure out a different way to make money that doesn't involve stepping on its users. You are assuming screwbuntu users mind having their toes stepped on. Silly you. JB is correct in one respect. Ppl do like screwbuntu and they will flock to it for jes the reasons he gives, which is lotsa do-it-for-you bling. I don't think anyone will argue that screwbuntu is so popular cuz it attracts lotsa Wbloz users. What did Wbloz users like about M$? M$ did it all for them! Likewise, so does screw-u. If Mark wants to make a buck and make life easier for all users, who's to bitch? ....well, besides RMS. None of this is really newsworthy and it should come as a surprise to no one. Wbloz fans didn't mind that there were exploits by the dozens and back doors by the score or that the DIFY apps were tracking/controlling their every move. Why should screw-u users? The bottom line is: They Don't!! Why? They don't want to! How do I know this? The numbers make it pretty obvious. Let's face it, total control of your computer requires some effort, usually more effort than most are willing to exert. If the authors aren't gonna take control and DIFY, who is? You? Nevermind. That's too much like work. They'd rather get screw-u'd. |
| flufferbeer Dec 08, 2012 4:09 PM EDT |
....and now back to blaming Ppl OTHER THAN Baboontu's mostly helpless users... >> Jono offers rather too many yesbuts. This really is a dumb move. If any feature is all wonderful and good for users, we'll opt in. Forcing opt-out is proof that they know it stinks and users won't like it. Double ++ to Tuxchick on talking about $huttleworthless's ever-increasing $TINKY tactics!! Too bad that the Jono bacon continues gettin' fried in the skittle 'n spoiled over this, and he remains SUPER clued-out. TG for savior Linux Mint! 2c |
| tuxchick Dec 08, 2012 4:23 PM EDT |
It's worth noting that this is a Dash feature, which is only in Unity, so Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Edubuntu, etc. users won't be afflicted by it. |
| slacker_mike Dec 08, 2012 4:30 PM EDT |
To me this is a perfect example of why I don't think it matters if Jono had more say in Ubuntu than Mark. These guys believe in what they are doing, which is fine, I can respect people who are passionate about their work. However if Canonical can't figure out how to proactively engage their users to go along with their business model these types of growing pains are going to erode their user base. When you lose the trust of your user base it doesn't come back easily. Reputational hits are sometimes more damaging than financial hits and have the potential to linger much longer. I don't get why Jono would even bother with taking offense from what Stallman would say as Canonical and the FSF have very different goals and motives. People who want Stallman to compromise his views don't realize that how personal and political Stallman's viewpoint is. No-compromise is essential to a man whose life has been this crusade. It would be ridiculous to expect Stallman to be anything other than critical of an opt-out, shopping/advertisement program, enabled by default without the consent of the end user. |
| tuxchick Dec 08, 2012 5:33 PM EDT |
Maybe we should think of Unity as Mark Shuttleworth's personal playground; it keeps him busy while the rest of the Ubuntu community is concentrating on doing good work. |
| Steven_Rosenber Dec 09, 2012 3:35 AM EDT |
Quoting:Maybe we should think of Unity as Mark Shuttleworth's personal playground; it keeps him busy while the rest of the Ubuntu community is concentrating on doing good work. The situation is probably extremely complicated. Having a SABDFL can give a project focus and direction, but like any boss, if you don't listen to those who work for you and to your customers (and your name's not Steve Jobs), bad things will happen. |
| caitlyn Dec 10, 2012 11:55 AM EDT |
I actually think both sides in this little tempest in a teapot made very good points. The on by default transmission of information to a commercial interest in obnoxious. Today, Amazon, tomorrow, who knows? It is sending information about the user to a third party without explicit consent. RMS may have used strong language in calling it spyware but he has raised a very valid issue and his portrayal of that issue is accurate. OTOH, Jono is absolutely right that RMS sees everything related to Free software in black and white terms when there are myriad shades of grey in between. To me, this is a fairly dark grey, but grey nonetheless. By now most Ubuntu users should know about this feature. Not only did Canonical not try to hide it, they announced it and touted it. I'm also sick and tired of all the name-calling thrown at Ubuntu and the derision expressed to the Ubuntu user community. I know plenty of sophisticated Linux users, including Linux professionals, who choose Ubuntu because it works well for their needs. That includes some of the regulars on LXer. Hurling insults never, ever is a convincing argument as far as I am concerned. |
| Steven_Rosenber Dec 10, 2012 2:24 PM EDT |
One positive: This makes GNOME 3 look like the non-commercial, spyware-free alternative. |
| Steven_Rosenber Dec 10, 2012 2:56 PM EDT |
The fact that numerous web sites spy on us like crazy is no excuse to move that practice to the desktop itself. This episode should draw our attention to why pervasive data mining of our web-browsing activity is not in our best interest as Internet users. |
| Fettoosh Dec 10, 2012 3:08 PM EDT |
Quoting:I'm also sick and tired of all the name-calling thrown at Ubuntu ... @caitlyn, I agree and well said. Ubuntu/Canonical is a business entity and it has to create revenue some how. It hasn't been able to create it from sales or services yet and we don't expect it to continue furnishing its distro and facilities for free and for ever. Aside from some of the decisions made and I don't agree with, I don't see any issues in being creative as long as it sticks to its FOSS principles. I wouldn't call it spyware since it is not hidden or obscured. But Canonical would be better off if they make an attempt at notifying users before they send any information about users to a third party. |
| caitlyn Dec 10, 2012 3:43 PM EDT |
Quoting:But Canonical would be better off if they make an attempt at notifying users before they send any information about users to a third party.I agree completely. Had they done that I doubt RMS would get as much support on this issue. |
| BernardSwiss Dec 10, 2012 7:35 PM EDT |
Steven_Rosenber wrote: The fact that numerous web sites spy on us like crazy is no excuse to move that practice to the desktop itself. I nominate this as an LXer "Quote of the Day" -- and possibly even "Quote of the Week". |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!