Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora's FESCo Approves Of A "Sane" Approach For Counting Fedora Users Via DNF

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fedora's FESCo Approves Of A "Sane" Approach For Counting Fedora Users Via DNF

    Phoronix: Fedora's FESCo Approves Of A "Sane" Approach For Counting Fedora Users Via DNF

    Monday's weekly Fedora Engineering and Steering Committee approved of a means for the DNF package manager to integrate some user counting capabilities as long as it's a "sane" approach and not the UUID-driven proposal originally laid out...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...Sane-DNF-Count

  • #2
    wont it be Opt-Out? if that's the case that it will be, why even bother implementing this Feature ?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Anvil View Post
      wont it be Opt-Out? if that's the case that it will be, why even bother implementing this Feature ?
      I'm not sure what purpose an opt-out would serve. You can't opt out of having an HTTP server record your IP address in their access logs, independent of any personal information, which is commonplace. It's even exempt from GDPR rules because it's a necessary component of threat management.

      This is basically just adding an uptime counter to that (except that, instead of uptime, it's a very coarse indication of how long the copy of Fedora has been installed on the machine) so short-lived VM installs don't skew their results.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by ssokolow View Post

        I'm not sure what purpose an opt-out would serve. You can't opt out of having an HTTP server record your IP address in their access logs, independent of any personal information, which is commonplace. It's even exempt from GDPR rules because it's a necessary component of threat management.

        This is basically just adding an uptime counter to that (except that, instead of uptime, it's a very coarse indication of how long the copy of Fedora has been installed on the machine) so short-lived VM installs don't skew their results.
        i think the first implementation of this feature was not a Sane one, so it was revised as i remember reading on the ML about it that they wanted an OPT-OUT thing during the anaconda installation? something like that

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Anvil View Post

          i think the first implementation of this feature was not a Sane one, so it was revised as i remember reading on the ML about it that they wanted an OPT-OUT thing during the anaconda installation? something like that
          It was sane, unfortunately some people started crying like babies that somehow a randomly generated non-personally identifying number that was opt-in was analogous to the tracking in Windows and Android.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Britoid View Post

            It was sane, unfortunately some people started crying like babies that somehow a randomly generated non-personally identifying number that was opt-in was analogous to the tracking in Windows and Android.
            Annoying. It feels like there's so much cognitive waste in Linux-related development like that. Open source is very emotional, not very logical.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Compartmentalisation View Post
              Annoying. It feels like there's so much cognitive waste in Linux-related development like that. Open source is very emotional, not very logical.
              If you think closed source is different, I have some news for you.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Britoid View Post
                It was sane, unfortunately some people started crying like babies that somehow a randomly generated non-personally identifying number that was opt-in was analogous to the tracking in Windows and Android.
                I'm sure that there will still be a significant amount of idiots still crying even with this newer "sane" system.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
                  I'm sure that there will still be a significant amount of idiots still crying even with this newer "sane" system.
                  Of course. It's all a conspiracy.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Britoid View Post

                    Of course. It's all a conspiracy.
                    Pathological paranoia is a Thing in many internet linked communities. The actions of bad players (on both sides) merely serves to reinforce and amplify the echo chambers till even otherwise provably benign statistics counting becomes unfortunate collateral damage.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X