Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fix Ubuntu

fixubuntu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 304 posts

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#171

Post by iwasanewt »

stolio wrote: post #131
rlpb wrote: post #51

I (still) don't think online searches are a privacy violation. 1) It's a search box. Stuff not typed in the search box never leaves the machine (unless you count things that do by design, such as web browsers and email, obviously). 2) It's plainly obvious the first time you use it that results are coming back from the Internet. No real user is going to be misled into believing that searches are local. This makes it n…

I'll respond, though I'm sure the reason nobody's responded is they're as tired of this conversation as I am. 1) Yet. When boiling frogs it's best to turn the heat up slowly. Canonical isn't providing a service for free here, they make money mining your searches and sending them to 3rd parties like Amazon. Compare this with its parent distribution's Social Contract. [0] Especially the phrase "We will be guided by the…

2b) which part of the Adobe Flash EULA prevents you from working on GNU Gnash?

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#173

Post by efuquen »

Karunamon wrote: post #140
jenius wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I see why people are unhappy with the sale of their data and ads, I have to agree with you on this. While obviously I don't enjoy having my information collected and sold without me really knowing by default, they do need to get money somehow. I feel like we're in a weird transitional period where the "free internet" in which all major apps and services we used were VC funded and growing, completely free with n…

Somehow, every other publicly available Linux distro doesn't need to include spyware in order to do their job.

And is every other publicly available Linux distro working on the same scale and trying to accomplish the same goals Ubuntu is trying to?

Also, is it just me or do most HN users now do not know what spyware means? Openly conducting a search that is clearly sending that data over the internet is not a covert way of collecting data, quite the opposite it's very much in your face.

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#174

Post by mixmastamyk »

pritambaral wrote: post #98
rodolphoarruda wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with Nautilus? I'm just curious.

GNOME (the devs, not the libraries or shell) is what's wrong with nautilus. They kept removing useful features. That was the very reason why Nemo was forked in the first place.

Right, nautilus was never big on features, but it had the basics. Now it has less than the file manager in Windows 3.1. Yet it still uses plenty of ram.

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#175

Post by Brakenshire »

nikatwork wrote: post #85
Piskvorrr wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bzzt, logical fallacy - "either work for free, or snoop around in user's data for monetizable content." Hint: there's a very, very wide spectrum between these extremes.

Bzzt, middlebrow dismissal. How about you make a concrete proposal on how you think Canonical's business model should be constructed, instead of "computer says no"?

> Bzzt, middlebrow dismissal. How about you make a concrete proposal on how you think Canonical's business model should be constructed, instead of "computer says no"?

They should offer a ad-free system, which you pay $10 for, or a free version, supported by ads.

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#176

Post by nivla »

rlpb wrote: post #168
nivla wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it does, how is it going to ask for my permission in a server environment? It automatically sets "report_crashes=true" under (/etc/default/whoopsie) when Ubuntu is first installed. Here are some resources with more people reporting the same: [1] http://blog.retep.org/2012/07/05/whoopsie-how-to-disable-it-... [2] http://glog.procrasstination.com/index.php?/archives/47-Ubun... [3] http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread…

It's vestigal on a server. It's there because the server installation and the desktop installation share that component. But since there's no UI for you to approve transmission, currently the crash reports sit on the server awaiting (local) examination and do nothing. All the resources you pointed appear to be people who have found a setting and do not understand that it does not do anything. Like my posts elsewhere…

>It's vestigal on a server.

Do you have any source for that? If it is vestigial, why would it need to suck up so much ram? Unless I explicitly activate it, what is point of draining the power and filling up the ram by default. Not everyone does and know how to inspect the crash dump, they are mostly useful to the OS manufacturer and the developer of the crashing application.

> currently the crash reports sit on the server awaiting (local) examination and do nothing.

So Ubuntu (Canonical) doesn't collect any crash data from servers but only from desktops despite having the technology built-in and activated? Highly unlikely.

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#177

Post by stolio »

takluyver wrote: post #167
stolio wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll respond, though I'm sure the reason nobody's responded is they're as tired of this conversation as I am. 1) Yet. When boiling frogs it's best to turn the heat up slowly. Canonical isn't providing a service for free here, they make money mining your searches and sending them to 3rd parties like Amazon. Compare this with its parent distribution's Social Contract. [0] Especially the phrase "We will be guided by the…

I don't like that the default is to search online as well as locally. But calling it spyware is hyperbole - the interface makes it quite obvious that it's doing a combined online+local search. I'd rather stick to more factual criticisms.

Since we're keeping it factual I accused them of blurring the lines between open source and spyware. I linked to Richard Stallman directly calling it spyware on the Free Software Foundation website.

I think collecting, mining and sharing information about your user-base for money is deeply troubling. We may not have a good word to describe this type of activity but spyware at least gets us in the right neighborhood.

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#178

Post by cdash »

zx2c4 wrote: post #102

Solution: stop using Ubuntu. There are lots of other very able distributions out there, many of which not only have better privacy features but also are technologically superior in one way or another. In no particular order, these are all very capable operating systems for a variety of needs: * https://fedoraproject.org/ * http://www.centos.org/ * http://www.opensuse.org/ * http://www.mageia.org/ * https://www.archli…

No thanks, I am fine.

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#179

Post by krelian »

stolio wrote: post #131
rlpb wrote: post #51

I (still) don't think online searches are a privacy violation. 1) It's a search box. Stuff not typed in the search box never leaves the machine (unless you count things that do by design, such as web browsers and email, obviously). 2) It's plainly obvious the first time you use it that results are coming back from the Internet. No real user is going to be misled into believing that searches are local. This makes it n…

I'll respond, though I'm sure the reason nobody's responded is they're as tired of this conversation as I am. 1) Yet. When boiling frogs it's best to turn the heat up slowly. Canonical isn't providing a service for free here, they make money mining your searches and sending them to 3rd parties like Amazon. Compare this with its parent distribution's Social Contract. [0] Especially the phrase "We will be guided by the…

>Canonical isn't providing a service for free here

Canonical is providing the operating system for free.

Re: Fix Ubuntu

#180

Post by rlpb »

nivla wrote: post #176
rlpb wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's vestigal on a server. It's there because the server installation and the desktop installation share that component. But since there's no UI for you to approve transmission, currently the crash reports sit on the server awaiting (local) examination and do nothing. All the resources you pointed appear to be people who have found a setting and do not understand that it does not do anything. Like my posts elsewhere…

>It's vestigal on a server. Do you have any source for that? If it is vestigial, why would it need to suck up so much ram? Unless I explicitly activate it, what is point of draining the power and filling up the ram by default. Not everyone does and know how to inspect the crash dump, they are mostly useful to the OS manufacturer and the developer of the crashing application. > currently the crash reports sit on the s…

> Do you have any source for that?

Yes. "apt-get source whoopsie". What other source would you prefer? Canonical, who it seems that you don't trust and won't believe anyway?

> So Ubuntu (Canonical) doesn't collect any crash data from servers but only from desktops despite having the technology built-in and activated?

Correct, because the server end is not implemented. A summary of the gathered data is at https://errors.ubuntu.com/. You may see "server" packages there, but if this is true then this is only because you can install these packages on the desktop, too, and desktop users can agree to send crash reports for crashes on server packages. But the numbers on this site speak for themselves. Clearly server crash reports are not being reported there.

Post reply on HN