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

“I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 475 posts

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#371

Post by tailspin2019 »

simosx wrote: post #290
tailspin2019 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too have started to notice some increased “friction” when trying to setup Ubuntu these days. Like you, I don’t care about “snaps” (though in my ignorance I’m willing to accept I may be missing out on something useful...) Even when you go to their Download page for Server, the first option is not a download link but some blurb about “Multipass” which I’m pretty sure is not what the majority of people are looking for…

That's the page, https://ubuntu.com/download/server You get three options to run Ubuntu server. The first option is to run Ubuntu server in a VM, and most users will want to run Ubuntu server in a VM. Multipass is a tool that helps you run Ubuntu server in a VM. Multipass is just a front-end for KVM when you use a Linux distribution. If you use Windows, it is a front-end for Hyper-V, etc. The second option is to perf…

I agree that most people will want to run Ubuntu server in a VM.

I don’t agree that Multipass is the obvious default way that most people will want do this, given that Multipass is clearly aimed at local workstations for dev/testing and not actually servers.

I’m working on the assumption that “Ubuntu Server” is designed primarily for servers, and Multipass, by its own description page is categorically not designed for servers. It’s for a secondary use-case of running a test environment locally on a dev machine.

My point was that it seems strange to push a secondary use-case as the first option on the download page.

I’m not saying this is absolutely terrible, but it was just an example of some seemingly unnecessary friction being introduced.

From the Multipass info page: [0] > “Ubuntu VMs on demand for any workstation”

[0] https://multipass.run

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#372

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

hobofan wrote: post #111
WrtCdEvrydy wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$10 says there's an Excel sheet that's passed around with all of your info in it.

Of course there is, but there shouldn't be. _Especially_ in a bigger company like Canonical.

Yeah, they should definitely be using Libre office ;)

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#373

Post by inetknght »

michaelmrose wrote: post #291
ojnabieoot wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just FYI, this is bad manners. I deleted the comment because I didn't want to continue the conversation and I especially didn't want to engage with you - specifically, your comments here and elsewhere indicate that you are frequently toxic and hostile. You deciding to resurrect the comment because you happened to see it before I deleted it is really not OK. It's the exact kind of toxic hostile, creepy interaction I w…

To be clear are we to suppose one has a right to say something and then insist others never bring up anything because one has at that point deleted? Furthermore is strenuous disagreement now toxic and hostile? Wouldn't it be more trivial to say I do not wish to engage and leave it at that? Ironically calling someone toxic hostile and creepy is... pretty toxic.

> are we to suppose one has a right to say something and then insist others never bring up anything because one has at that point deleted?

I think someone has the right to change their mind about something they've said. That's why I edited my comment to remove it.

> Furthermore is strenuous disagreement now toxic and hostile?

I don't think so. But I know that I sometimes get passionate about my opinions. I welcome someone's input to keep me friendly.

> Wouldn't it be more trivial to say I do not wish to engage and leave it at that? Ironically calling someone toxic hostile and creepy is... pretty toxic.

I would like to think better than that. I think it was good of @ojnabieoot to let me know that they thought I'd wronged them.

Some people can feel very anxious or awkward to conversation for very good reasons. They can state opinions and then choose to retract their opinions for any reason -- even if the opinion is held but they choose to remove themselves from the conversation. I think that's a good thing to discuss but this isn't the venue to.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#374

Post by fader »

xorcist wrote: post #362
curtis3389 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all know that you can't trust Microsoft, but a lot of people blindly trust Canonical just because they create a Linux distro. I haven't trusted Canonical since I noticed their pattern of creating competing alternatives to new Linux standards instead of helping them (Mir & Wayland, Snap & Flatpack, Unity & Gnome 3). It'd be one thing if they were bringing better ideas and long-term support to their alternatives, bu…

Launchpad, Bazaar, Upstart. Some of them nice projects in their own right, but it's hard the shake the feeling of NIH syndrome.

Since Launchpad existed before Github, Bazaar before Git, and Upstart before systemd, I am not sure where the NIH feelings are coming from.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#375

Post by btown »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #173
duxup wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the Marketplace quote is worth noting too: >A look at the terms for the Azure Marketplace throws up this sentence: "If you purchase or use a Marketplace Offering, we may share with the Publisher of such Offering your contact information and details about the transaction and your usage." So the publisher of something on their Marketplace gets some information. This doesn't seem 'that' weird (well the linked in…

But I think that these comments from the Twitter thread are very valid: > I belive you spun up the VM based on an image from the Azure Marketplace, specifically one from Ubuntu. That is not a microsoft image, you accepted an offer from Ubuntu and now they contact you to follow up. That's my understanding of the situation. Hopefully someone can clarify > Where exactly it is visible any ToS?! As soon as I clicked on "a…

I think this is one of the points that the spirit of GDPR and similar legal frameworks gets right: users have the right to opt-in, without service being degraded if they don't, to data sharing unless that data sharing is "necessary" to fulfill the transaction (I believe this is the basis for "legitimate interest").

If I'm buying a SaaS or DBaaS from a vendor over a marketplace, or launching a metrics collector where phoning those metrics home is a core value prop, I'd be fine to be told that sharing information with the end operator, not just the marketplace, is necessary to fulfill the transaction. And there should be contracts in place to ensure my data's not used for unrelated purposes. If the operator breaches those contracts, the operator is liable.

But in what possible way is "using a pre-packaged Linux distribution" a transaction where sharing information with the packager is "necessary?"

I have no doubt that Microsoft's lawyers have covered their posteriors here. But the spirit of these regulations would be that users don't have the expectation that they're opting into Canonical getting their info just because they use a bog-standard Ubuntu distro. Users didn't knowingly consent to this.

(EDIT: not a lawyer, not legal advice)

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#376

Post by dredmorbius »

asien wrote: post #350
ubermonkey wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, not morally. Once you send me a message, it's mine. I can tell anybody I want you sent me a message. I can post it publicly if I want.

In fact no. Once I send you a message it’s neither yours or mine, it’s owned by the platform. Thus if the platform does not allow for « sharing » without consent you must follow their instructions. Also if you believe privacy is a right, you should ask that person before sharing this digital content he created that has hid identity in it, otherwise you should hide it. For a paper letter it’s obviously different, once…

The object may be yours. Copyright in the contents unless specifically assigned elsewhere (in many service agreements a grant but not an assignment is made to the service operator), remains with the author.

Fair-use affirmative defence (under US law), fair dealing (UK),or equivalents elsewhere, may apply. Infringement claims, if any, would rest on thin grounds. Under the specific circumstances here, privacy claims likewise.

There is no copyright protection in the fact of communication. Nor in the details of who did so.

Generally I'd argue for a legitimate public interest in sharing the communication in cases such as this.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#377

Post by tohmasu »

reaperducer wrote: post #264
thom_nic wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the salesman wasn't supposed to TELL YOU that we are monitoring what you install Exactly. The old "I'm sorry I got caught" and not "I'm sorry I did it."

We can do better™

Legal wishes to remind you that that statement always needs this accompanying statement.

The word "better" does not imply a commitment towards customers and/or investors. *The word "do" should not be seen as referring to the taking of any specific course of action which may or may not yield tangible change. *The word "can" does not signify a concrete ability and is not forward-looking. *The word "We" should not be interpreted as Canonical Ltd. nor any of its subsidiaries or affiliated entities.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#378

Post by rkangel »

tfehring wrote: post #279
rkangel wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the full quote from MS, provided in The Register article: "Customer privacy and trust is our top priority at Microsoft. We do not sell any information to third-party companies and only share customer information with Azure Marketplace publishers when customers deploy their product, as outlined in our Terms and Conditions. Our terms with our publishers allow them to provide customers with implementation and te…

Yeah, I agree with your interpretation and that makes sense from Microsoft's perspective. Just one open question that that raises: does a name and employer count as "contact details"? Do Microsoft's terms allow Canonical to reach out to someone on LinkedIn for marketing purposes as long as they don't look them up using the email address Microsoft gives them? And if the answer to that last question is no, what can Can…

So I don't know the answers to your questions - but here's one interesting thing - according to GPDR your email address is personal information as you'd expect. However your work email address is not. Companies can do all sorts of harvesting and collection on professional information that they can't on personal.

Re: “I saw that you spun up an Ubuntu image in Azure”

#380

Post by Wxc2jjJmST9XWWL »

somehnguy wrote: post #129

I installed Ubuntu onto a physical machine recently because I needed to use a Linux package for something real quick. Upon trying to install the incredibly common package I was given some error about it not existing and some nonsense about using snaps. I don't care about learning how to use snaps, I just want to get something done. I quickly installed Debian instead and got back to doing the work I needed to do. It r…

I seriously don't get the hate... snaps are easy to manage, probably more secure than adding a bunch of PPAs (what many are doing blindly as soon as apt fails them), and I didn't notice any performance hits using them. And it seems like it's probably far easier to simply create and maintain a snap than the alternatives. If this means creators distributing and packaging their programs on their own more often rather than unreliable package maintainers being in the driver's seat, what's to lose here exactly? From the user's perspective the interface is also very lean and clutter free.

$ snap search x

$ snap list

$ snap info x

$ sudo snap install x

I've interacted with snaps to a bare minimum, and I am sure all of those are correct. I am sorry, but "some nonsense about using snaps" -> "I quickly installed Debian" -> "this furthers my negative opinion of Canonical".

Talk about Canonical getting a bad rep for pretty much everything they do...

Post reply on HN