fix ubuntu

Fix Ubuntu.

-- Tom

 

https://micahflee.com/2013/11/canon...-to-silence-critics-of-its-privacy-decisions/

 

Great website. Geeze looks like I switched from Windows into another Windows.

 

Was wondering why some pointless remote searching remains after following guides on disabling Unity ads, thanks.

 

Cool, thanks.

 

Not that bad at all.

You expose much more of your privacy by using Facebook/Twitter and any other online shopping sites, than these scopes introduced into Ubuntu.

I am still grateful for what Ubuntu has been offering. It is Ubuntu/Canonical who leads Linux to what it is today. I still remember back in the beginning of this century, how hard it was to have a Linux desktop up and running. It was a huge project for even ppl with good educational background, not to mention average joe. Nowadays everyone can use Ubuntu without much efforts.

Compared to what Ubuntu offered, this privacy concern is nothing in today's world, when you are spied by many others whenever you go online. It does not hurt adding one more.

 

That argument only works if you actually use those sites, or expose the same kind of information. Do you type the same things on Facebook/Twitter as your own system?

It's also a waste of resources. Who actually searches online while looking for local content? There's a reason web browsers exist.

 

Sure I use facebook but I control how much information goes on it. I also use it from my cell phone and not my computer.

 

when we talk about privacy here, what really matters is mainly your shopping habbits and so forth but not the real physical "you", because that's the business (who paid for the ad that are presented to you based on your shopping habbits) are really interested. Other than that, to be honest, unless you (the plural "you", in which case me and the majority of wilders here also included) are a big fish, the ad sponsors could not care less about who we really are (i.e., our true privacy). There is a reason why Amazon is presented in Ubuntu, because as long as you use Amazon and similar, THEY will track your shopping habbits and present targeted ads to you, it does not matter you use Linux/Windows or mobile OS.

The same thing on FB/TT. Facebook/Twitter might not be the best examples. Please consider Amazon/Ebay/Newegg and the like. ad sponsors there are mainly interested in your shopping habits, you as an identity, not the physical you (physical means name, address, appearance, etc), because as long as they know your shopping interests through Amazno/Ebay and other e-business, they can deliver targeted ads to the virtual "you" as an identity. They don't need to know who you really are. So it does not matter you use a computer or cell phone or whatever.

I am not in any form associated with Canonical but I feel they are not asking too much from us, based on their contributions to the popularity of Linux. To be honest, if there were no Ubuntu, you and me and majority of us are probably still using Windows and Windows could as well be our only choice today.

Plus, there are ways to turn off the shopping scope in Ubuntu. So, imho, I will still gladly use Ubuntu and I am using it typing this message. If you don't want to deal with Ubuntu, you still have other Linux distroes to choose from. But even then, the usability of Linux distros, may still partially due to the long term efforts by Canonical.

@J_L
As I said above, I don't think Ubuntu steal your information you typed into Ubuntu as an OS. I am not CS major, so I don't know what information Ubuntu collect, however I guess its only shopping related. Ubuntu is an open source OS after all. So if you are worried about your account information being stolen by Ubuntu, then why not worry aobut Mozilla/Google/Opera, these browser vendors, they can as well steal your information, based on your logic. Then what about MS? hey maybe they are better, right?


I don't endorse the online shopping scope thing, but it's totally understandable. Canonical as a company, needs to seek some financial support to make the long-term development of Ubuntu, after they made huge progress making Linux more popular and more usable. It is time now for them to follow the "economic laws" to propell the developmetn of Linux.

 

I wonder how much NSA/GHCQ is paying Canonical for a tap into that search data. Then again, I suppose they could be playing the inter-datacenter communications snooping game.

 

@oliverjia: The information it collects is clearly related to what you're searching on Unity. That usually means local files, folders, and programs. You don't do the same online. Don't make me repeat myself again.

Your logic of shifting the blame is fundamentally flawed. You simply don't overlook one for another when protecting your rights. Mozilla is more FOSS than Canonical anyways.

 

I won't repeat myself either. Sure, I searched my local folders under windows, does it mean MS knows what I have on my local HDD? Sure, if they want to know, they will, because they are proprietory software. Ubuntu, on the other hand, is free and open source software. If you care so much about your privacy, and you worried so much about Ubuntu, then do not use it. Better yet, don't use Internet. Simple.

"Your logic of shifting the blame is fundamentally flawed""Mozilla is more FOSS than Canonical anyways". Yours are fundamentally flawed. I used your logic which is ridiculous in the first place, just to show how stupid your logic is. Do you have any evidence "Mozilla is more FOSS than Canonical anyways"?

For your convenience, I linked the licence terms for Ubuntu and Mozilla below. Please make a statement with FACT, HOW mozilla is more FOSS than Ubuntu. PLease note in my previous post I referred to Mozilla as browser/software and Ubuntu. I also suggest you read what FOSS means before make yourself look more ignorant.

I hate plain statement based on pure subjective imagination.

http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/licensing
http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/

 

Unbelievable, just continue ignoring my main points then and focus on attacking side notes.

You've shown nothing, but contempt. Where did I shift the blame and overlook Mozilla entirely? That's what you did for Canonical.

As for the licensing links, I could care less since that's not even the point. You can highlight the difference if you want, but I'm not feeding flames.

 

LOL

Side notes? No, I don't think they are side notes, they are the FACTAL basis of my points.

I have no intention to flame here but just want to make some reasonable points. Like it or not, without Canonical, Linux wouldn't be this popular today. And although the unity shopping scope thing is not for the pure and traditional spirit, it will surely help the development of Linux in teh long run. In reality, money talks.

 

Missed an edit: Comparing (not contrasting) Windows privacy with Ubuntu's shouldn't even be considered, but now here we are. As if it's that simple, the Internet is far from the only monitored area, try living in the middle of nowhere outside the reach of even satellites.

I did include "my" right? Cause our focus is clearly different on the issue.

Nobody denied any of that. What I didn't agree on is treating Unity scopes as the same as "Facebook/Twitter and any other online shopping sites". You don't enter the same information, and you've always sidestepped that factual basis of my points.

 

The only problem with Ubuntu privacy is that they don't ask you to choose your settings during the install. Windows does this btw. But you have the full option to disable it.
Mrk

 

If you work with personal or business data you could be breaking contractual agreements and/or data protection laws by allowing certain searches to even hit the internet.

 

The point here, I think, is that processes in Unix/Linux have traditionally accessed remote resources only when explicitly configured to do so. The only system utilities that use remote resources by default are package-management tools. It's a major break with tradition for something like Dash, which is the only user-friendly way to find installed apps, to be querying remote servers by default. It's unexpected behavior, and it blind sides users.

 

I was wondering what exactly unity search does? I suppose its open source so someone should be able to check the source code and find out?

 

Ubuntu’s trademark folly fueled by confusion over law, EFF says.

-- Tom

 

I fixed Ubuntu. I installed Debian.