Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

If a program isn't evil, then it does only things that shouldn't require permission. Example: include the OS version and RAM amount in the http request to the upgrade server that is done on every startup.

Any info ever collected by no-permissions-asked telemetry must be such that it doesn't matter who has the information or what they do with it. If it isn't information of that kind then of course a program should ask permission. But that in my view isn't "telemetry" then. If it collects anything even remotely user-identifying or personal then it's in my definition not telemetry and should never be done without permission (if at all).

If a program really is malicious, then it doesn't matter if it asks for permission because why would that wouldn't respect the users wish anyway?

My argument wasn't pro/against telemetry, it was that asking permission doesn't change anything. Permission isn't what tells malicious programs from others. A benign program doesn't do things that needs permission to begin with.




One problem is that several seemingly innocuous pieces of data can be combined to create a unique ID. See the Panopticlick for an example.


Yeah, if someone e.g. gets my complete hw fingerprint, I'm identifiable. But it's no worse than I'm already uniquely id'd by visiting pretty much any website today. I don't like it, but I also don't see a point in being outraged when my music player does it but not when my favorite website does it.


You seem very willing to just dish your data over to everyone - can I install some software on your computer, too?


Well if you make a piece of useful software I'll install it (I'd rather install it myself).

I'm not very generous with my data at all - but I'd rather trust my firewall to protect my data, than a dialog that asks me if I'm OK with sharing it. That was my point.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: