Page 10 of 18 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 177

Thread: Richard Stallman Calls Ubuntu "Spyware"

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pallidus View Post
    Stallman makes it sound more nefarious than it actually is.


    This is quite simply a way that canonical found to monetize linux.

    Their goal is to get revenue from what you buy AND NOT to spy or compile info on you.
    where is the line though ? if sending personal info next year gives them more revenue from amazon on the searches... then what ?

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Funny how that goes Without a free compiler, toolchain, and editor there likely wouldn't be a free OS for you to use today. If that's not "getting things done", I don't know what is.
    And as you can see FSF projects (and other FOSS) that get things done are used by a big percentage of people (GCC, Kernel, Firefox etc). However look at how many people use Gnash for example. It doesn't get things done but RMS will tell you that Flash is Evil. The user won't care because he wants to browse porn and touch himself.

    Hope you get my point. I have big respect for what RMS offered us (GPL toolchain etc) and what was built upon it but his views on Closed Software are stupid when practical problems arise.






    PS.

    Sarcasm doesn't work over TCP/IP

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SuperUserLand
    Posts
    538

    Default

    What about canonical's and mark shuttleworth's contribution??

    Why isn't everyone mentioning that?



    FACTS:

    1. The ubuntu distro AND derivatives like mint etc, are the most widely used open source OS's and are the larger percentage in HOME linux ecosystems.

    2. Canonical CHANGED the way people perceive linux.

    3. Ubuntu not only made linux widely available to the masses it also presented a unique product.



    THERE is absolutely NO WAY you can deny that ubuntu is the easiest to use distro and makes linux adoption available not only to computer hobbyists.

    NOW THIS IS WHY YOU HAVE ALL DECIDED TO THROW SHIT AT CANONICAL AND UBUNTU:

    https://youtu.be/_g3sLYNmqtM

    it literally takes 10 seconds.


    BTW do I like the amazon thing? NO I FUCKING HATE IT

    DOES CANONICAL DESERVE TO BE DEGRADED ON THE FIRST PAGE OF ARS? DOES UBUNTU DESERVED TO BE CALLED SPYWARE FOR THIS SHIT?


    WHY DOESNT STALLMAN INSTEAD OF BEING A FAT ATTENTION WHORE DOESN'T SPEND A COUPLE OF HOURS WITH UBUNTU'S SOURCE CODE AND DELETES ALL AMAZON SHIT AND THEN RELEASES IT AS 'STALLMAN'S UBUNTU' ??????????????????? IS THERE ANYONE KEEPING HIM FROM DOING IT?

    NOT ONLY DO YOU HAVE THE CHOICE OF TURNING IT OFF YOU CAN ALSO NOT USE UNITY ALTOGETHER IN UBUNTU, YOU CAN USE ONE OF THE FUCKING DOZENS OF SPINS KUBUNTU< LUBUNTU , I WILL MAKE ONE JUST FOR YOU FUCKS: NECKBEARDEDFUCKCUNTUNTU

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,247

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pallidus View Post
    What about canonical's and mark shuttleworth's contribution??

    Why isn't everyone mentioning that?
    Because nobody has claimed that Ubuntu didn't have any contribution. Please quote anyone who has claimed this. Lots of people, however, asserted that Stallman has had no contribution.


    Quote Originally Posted by Pallidus View Post
    DOES CANONICAL DESERVE TO BE DEGRADED ON THE FIRST PAGE OF ARS?
    Geez, calm down. People are allowed to voice their criticisms of what they perceive as unethical behavior. You are allowed to disagree with them. But please stop telling people that they are not allowed to voice their disagreement with the policy, because they are, and no amount of yelling or caps lock will change that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pallidus View Post
    DOES UBUNTU DESERVED TO BE CALLED SPYWARE FOR THIS SHIT?
    It is spyware, no matter how many excuses you make. No amount of yelling or caps lock will change that.

    You have your own ultra-special, unique, personal definition of spyware that doesn't include Ubuntu. Great, good for you. But stop yelling at everyone else merely for using the standard definition.


    Quote Originally Posted by Pallidus View Post
    WHY DOESNT STALLMAN INSTEAD OF BEING A FAT ATTENTION WHORE DOESN'T SPEND A COUPLE OF HOURS WITH UBUNTU'S SOURCE CODE AND DELETES ALL AMAZON SHIT AND THEN RELEASES IT AS 'STALLMAN'S UBUNTU' ??????????????????? IS THERE ANYONE KEEPING HIM FROM DOING IT?
    Yeah, how dare anyone actually try to bring attention to a common problem in modern computing in hopes that people will try to improve the situation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pallidus View Post
    NOT ONLY DO YOU HAVE THE CHOICE OF TURNING IT OFF YOU CAN ALSO NOT USE UNITY ALTOGETHER IN UBUNTU, YOU CAN USE ONE OF THE FUCKING DOZENS OF SPINS KUBUNTU< LUBUNTU , I WILL MAKE ONE JUST FOR YOU FUCKS: NECKBEARDEDFUCKCUNTUNTU
    I am glad we are conducting this conversation at a mature, adult level.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    568

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pallidus View Post
    *snip*
    Dude, you're better than this.

    ANYWAY, long story short (and very off-topic, but I just need to say it):

    - if anyone wants to hold Ubuntu to the dictionary meaning of spyware, then yes, it is. By all means, do so. But leave the real, industry-accepted definition to those who actually deal with real, neferious and much more diabolical spyware that captures information from your computer and sends it to some shady, unnamed third party and not a well-known, established and legitimate organization bound by privacy laws of their respective country.

    - Drop the name calling. It's getting sickening.

    - I of all people should know how it feels to have your favourite tool attacked by people over stupid reasons (eg: hating Office Windows and wishing that Microsoft will die within the next year just because it's Microsoft, even though their software have areas that are clearly superior to any Linux / OS X offering and vice versa). Feel free to defend it all you want, but you're only going to prove that you are no better than the other trolls if you lower yourselves to their level with the personal attacks.

    - Also, i've come to realize that, unlike how Windows and OS X users can still co-exist (just barely) without letting OS discussions degenerate into an all-out flame war, the Linux community cannot even agree to disagree on many fundamental principles. Things like 'you-are-using-nonfree-software-on-Linux-you-have-destroyed-everything-free-software-stands-for-because-of-selfish-interests', 'proprietary-is-evil-and-must-be-eradicated' or 'nonfree-firmware-is-a-menance-you-should-not-even-use-it' only shows how black-and-white the vocal Linux proponents view the software world today. Welcome to the real world, which is painted in shades of grey, not just black and white.

    Although I have to admit that if you are going to fill up a desktop Linux install (notice my emphasis on the word 'desktop') with proprietary commercial software, Windows or OS X will definitely do a much better job than Linux. At the very least, unless Microsoft's market share drops to 10% tomorrow, Windows users are virtually assured of the availability of an astronomical software library consisting of both FOSS and commercial proprietary software AND drivers for all common desktop hardware and pheripherals. And OS X's two-digit market share means that it can no longer be ignored by developers, so OS X users get to take such availability for granted too, albeit in a much smaller scale (at the very least, vendor-released driver woes for third-party desktop pheripherals in OS X are virtually non-existant today save for WiFi sticks).

    - But more importantly, my observation is that the community spends most of its time fretting over the 'what if <insert nasty development> happens in the future' that it has forgotten to look at the 'NOW'. I can use Secure Boot as an excellent example: when Microsoft announced the UEFI Secure Boot requirements for Windows 8, virtually everybody sat on their collective butts and whined about how it would affect Linux installations when the standard finally kicks in upon Windows 8's launch, and what if Microsoft decides to one day mandate that OEMs should not offer a Secure Boot killswitch. And when a handle of developers (most noticibly Mathew and Bottomley) decided to take the initiative to obtain a Microsoft key to sign shimloaders with and tackle the problem head-on, they were greeted not with thanks, but with complaints that it was like 'selling out' Linux, while worrying about what if Microsoft revokes the keys used by Matthew and Bottomley. And now we're seeing that same 'what if' mentality with Canonical's arrangement to include the Amazon lens in Ubuntu searches, with the peanuit gallery starting to while about what if Canonical decides to to anything more with such arrangements.

    Seriously, unless you have the divine ability to predict the future, lay off the 'what if' paranoia and start focusing on the more important 'now' problems. Cross that bridge when you come to it, or you'll never even reach it to begin with. People need to do their work now and provide deliverables to their bosses/employers, who are not going to care whether the work was done on FOSS or on a proprietary tool. At best, give due thought to what may happen with subsequent developments in the IT space, but really, stop putting the cart before the horse. Secure Boot is so overblown it's almost painful to watch, and now this whole hoo-ha about Ubuntu's Amazon lens.

    Agree or disgree or hate it, I've finished saying my piece. Any subsequent posts made by me to Phoronix will be on a Windows machine, not a Fedora box anymore. I think I'm finally ready to call it quits after having to deal with such politics and conflicts about what should 'the right way' be, along with issues of having some of my pheripherals not supported because of the total lack of proper working drivers for the entirety of 4 years on Linux. If i ever feel the need to OS hop again, it will be to OS X, not Linux. That is, unless some huge breakthrough captures my attention again, like how i first tried out Red Hat when the book I borrowed from the library came with an install CD for loan, or how the release of the 2.6.24 kernel way back in 2008 captured my attention because it supported my WiFi card.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    845

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    - if anyone wants to hold Ubuntu to the dictionary meaning of spyware, then yes, it is. By all means, do so. But...
    Yes, it's spyware, just like all those 'install our search toolbar' is spyware. And like these spyware toolbars which was bundled with other software it's opt-out and not opt-in, but in the aforementioned you were atleast presented with the choice at installation, not as a setting after installation as in Ubuntu.

    Now I think Ubuntu is a good thing for Linux overall, and I think it's nothing wrong with them trying to gain money out of their efforts, but this is just a poorly implemented way of doing so.

    Make this optional at installation, with a disclaimer clearly defining what it means. Yes, alot fewer people will enable it than if it is done by default, but they also won't alienate their own users and tarnish their brand.

    Actually I think that when giving people a good heads-up with a thorough explanation and giving them a clear choice, alot of people who would never go for this normally will think, 'hey, they are honest about this, I will allow this because they are up-front and I like Ubuntu'.

    SO much better than trying to sneak it past users which will obviously cause a 'this sucks, what the hell else are they planning/sneaking past me?' knee-jerk response from said users.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    - Also, i've come to realize that, unlike how Windows and OS X users can still co-exist (just barely) without letting OS discussions degenerate into an all-out flame war
    Oh please, have you ever been out on the world wide web?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    the Linux community cannot even agree to disagree on many fundamental principles.
    How can you not 'have observed' the 'Metro or no Metro' war amongst the Windows fanboys? Seriously hard to take your 'observations' as nothing but your own prejudices.

    Bottom line is that fanboys are fanboys, they are no different in the Linux, Microsoft, Apple, BSD etc camps.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    Welcome to the real world, which is painted in shades of grey, not just black and white.
    Even if I live in the 'real world' I can make up my mind on what I think is right and wrong in the 'real world' and say so. I can also choose to not use or do things I don't think is right while living in 'the real world'. There are tons of things that exist in 'the real world' that I find unacceptable and I will say so.

    What is black, white or a shade of grey is obviously subjective, for example I personally don't think proprietary code is 'black', I do however think vendor lock-in through keeping user-data in proprietary or severely obfuscated formats to be 'black'. Other people are entitled to their personal opinions and have the same right as me to voice them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    - But more importantly, my observation is that the community spends most of its time fretting over the 'what if <insert nasty development> happens in the future' that it has forgotten to look at the 'NOW'
    Because NOW has no certain bearing on the FUTURE. The 'what if' mentality is natural since we don't want to reach a place where we need a bridge only to find that there is none no more.

    Microsoft wants Linux gone, that is simple truth. They are also coming across as increasingly desperate (likely fueled by their continously failed attempts at entering the mobile market, resulting in things like the pathethic Scroogled and DroidRage compaigns for example).

    Linux user's 'paranoia' concerning Microsoft is well deserved given their track-record of foul-play, and having to rely on Microsoft in any way shape or form in order to run Linux on hardware you've bought is obviously not something that sounds reassuring.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonadow View Post
    Any subsequent posts made by me to Phoronix will be on a Windows machine, not a Fedora box anymore.
    LOL, the typical 'I was once one of you but now I'm outta here' attempt to lend credibility to your claims, please try something atleast remotely original.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    You sir are either a troll or completely brainwashed.

    The FSF corrupted the terms 'free' and 'freedom'. And you fell for it. I am sorry for that but there might be help.

    I want to be free to do with MY computer what I WANT. That includes software that is 'evil' by FSF's agenda.
    In their perfect world, it would be impossible to do so. So they want to take away MY FREEDOM. I am sorry, but this people are like those 'revolutionaries' who behead everybody who critizeses them to 'protect free speech'.
    You sir, are misinformed...

    The FSF exists purely to protect this freedom : to install what you want. If corporations had their way, we'd already be locked in walled gardens and you could install only software they approved. The FSF won (sort of) in the PC space, but the mobile space is in big trouble (appStores/Markets are the worst kind of lock-in that can exist).

    let's get into the FSF philosopohy :
    • The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
    • The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
    • The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
    • The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
    Point one : imagine you were only allowed to run an OS to edit text files. That sucks, you can't do what you want with your software/hardware.
    Point 2 : got a new device, the PC you have doesn't have a driver for it. I am not allowed to modify the software on my PC, thus rendering my device useless.
    Point 3 : Classical lending, but within the digital world that becomes copying.
    Point 4 : I figured out a way to make my device (from point 2) work, I am FREE to help others by documenting what I did.

    This is what the FSF stands for. If you want to install software that is 'evil' go ahead, you are FREE to do so, in no small part thanks to the FSF.

    Now Stallman is changing his tune a bit from pure FLOSS, to FLOSS + privacy protector. Has ubuntu become spyware? Yes. Does google collect information about you? Yes. Is this trend of information collecting dangerous? Hell yes! Information is power and control. Whoever controls information controls everything else. All Stallman does is point it out and tell us "do something about it!". He can't do much more.

    Some people pointed out Steam. I must say that while I admire what they are doing, I will never become their customer (because of freedom 0). The fact that other people may choose otherwise is a direct consequence of said freedom 0.

    This to say : RMS sees the big picture, not the now. Most people want the now! This is a sure way to hell. Always take a step back, and ponder the consequences.
    The now is already shaped, all we can do is survive it, the future is what we can affect. Act per your beliefs to shape the future as you want to see it.

    Serafean

    tl;dr version : RMS is right, ubuntu is spyware, don't use it.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    845

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Serafean View Post
    tl;dr version : RMS is right, ubuntu is spyware, don't use it.
    I agree that yes it is spyware, however it's up to each and everyone to decide for themselves if they want to use it or not. What is important is that people have all the related information when making that choice for themselves, and here RMS and others like him does a good service by as you say, painting a different and broader picture than that presented by Shuttleworth et al.

    If someone, with all the information regarding this 'feature' at their disposal, decides to enable it then I can see nothing wrong with that. But enabling it by default rather than informing the user of exactly what it means and presenting them with a choice of enabling it is just bad practice, it's an attempt to sneak something in which they think the end user won't like. And as pretty much always is the case when things like this happen, the motivation is money.

  9. #99
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Colombia
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Serafean View Post
    You sir, are misinformed...

    (insert long post)
    You sir are a gentleman and a scholar

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XorEaxEax View Post
    Yes, it's spyware....

    <snip>
    .
    Well said on every point. Those who favour convenience over freedom can choose to do so, but they should keep in mind to respect why many of us think the way we do. Microsoft (at least those running the show at the top) are a proven horrible, horrible anti-competitive organization bent on destroying the likes of Linux. I doubt one can be blamed for hating something that tries to kill the thing they use/like/love.

    The future does need to be considered lest we fall into the same traps that MS have set over the years. Canonical is obviously nothing like Microsoft, but we need to be mindful of some of the changes they are implementing and their reactions.

    I agree that if they were completely up front and honest about the Amazon "feature", so every user is fully aware, many of us would probably not care so much.

    But as it is, they are not and they are strangely quiet when anyone puts forth such proposals (and IMO it's a pretty reasonable request). This isn't a good sign IMO but hopefully the situation will improve.

    BTW is Palladus Mark Shuttleworth? LOL

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
  •