
Ubuntu Spyware: What to Do? - cs702
http://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/ubuntu-spyware-what-to-do
======
belorn
A lot of people are pointing out that if you do not like something, don't use
it. It's simple enough, and have a "sounds right" tone to it. As an implied
statement with this, anyone complaining should just shut up then.

This is a rather crazy line of thought once one actually starts to think about
it. If I see a poisonous (say rotten) food being sold, I find it almost my
duty to inform people. Somehow it's now being argued, that I should stay quiet
and vote with my feet/wallet instead? If a company does something clearly
distasteful and harmful to others, staying quiet and voting with your feet is
not a good idea. This should be obvious to everyone. At best, you are ignoring
the problem, and at worst, you are implicitly allowing the situation to
continue.

If something is harming others, staying quiet or saying that "users should
know better and not act like they do" is not the way to go. If the search box
was labeled "ask amazon about this", then this would have been a no-brainer
and no one would object to this. Its the same as labeling some food-like
objects as non-edible. Canonical search however does not do this, and tricks
users to send data that they believe is private.

Imagine a worker at a company, using this function to search for internal
document including a string with company secrets. Whooops, now that data is at
Amazon. Imagine a police worker, seaching for email with witness details.
whooops, now that data is also sent to Amazon. Imagine a normal person
searching for emails that includes their credit card. Whoops, gone gone. And
let's not discuss things that private people honestly, truly, do not wish
other people know, or for that matter, journalists.

This is not fair to the users, and RMS points this out. It might even be
illegal in some if not all european countries. At the least it's something to
write about and inform users about the risk involved.

~~~
drzaiusapelord
This is a great example of how nothing is free. Linux isn't free, not only
does it cost time, it costs privacy. I do enjoy playing with it, so the first
cost is meaningless to me, but the second absolutely is not.

Frankly, Ubuntu is mismanaged. From the absurd new UI to a built-in privacy
trojan? I'd rather just pay for an OS that doesn't hate me or use a different
distro. Not sure what the allure of Ubuntu is at this point. If you can
install and use Ubuntu, you can install and use Debian. Or Xubuntu if you're
still an Ubuntu loyalist.

~~~
nathanb
> Linux isn't free, not only does it cost time, it costs privacy.

How does that follow?

I'm assuming you're using an economic rather than ideological definition of
the world "free", which sort of misunderstands the point of the article, but
OK.

The Linux kernel does not, to my knowledge, include anything which explicitly
violates your privacy. If a Linux system distributor chooses to install
privacy-invading bits on your hard drive, I don't see how you can blame the
kernel or the entire free software ecosystem for this invasion.

(The argument about time is possibly valid, though I find it takes more time
to configure Windows to a point that I consider it usable than it does to do
the same for a Linux system. As it turns out, learning new things does take
time. You had to learn how to use Windows or MacOS as well, though chances are
you learned it through assimilation. Some of us learned Linux this way, and
thus don't quite understand people griping about how it's hard to use or takes
too much time to set up).

~~~
drzaiusapelord
>The Linux kernel

Its 100% obvious from the context of my post that I was using linux as a
shorthand for this distro.

I really hate this disingenuous rhetorical trick. When people start talking
about stupid things distros do suddenly its "OH WAIT, LINUX IS JUST A KERNEL!"
Err, no one is just running the kernel. We're all running some distro.

Its like a 'god of the gaps' argument for geeks. You get backed into a corner
and suddenly its "wait wait, its just a kernel, how dare you criticize it?!
Its pure." Yeah but we're still all running some distro. Why do distros like
ubuntu and mint have these privacy issues and have ads in them? Lets not sweep
these important issues under the rug of technical minutia.

~~~
jlgreco
"Linux" is not a valid shorthand for "Ubuntu" when you are saying things like
"Linux costs privacy". Using such unannounced "shorthands" makes you appear to
be a troll, and because of Poe's Law it is exceedingly difficult to rule out
the possibility that trolling is exactly what you are doing.

If you want to avoid these accusations, be _clear_ and either type out Ubuntu
instead of saving a single letter by writing Linux, or explicitly announce
your "shorthand".

------
rlpb
"When the user searches her own local files for a string using the Ubuntu
desktop, Ubuntu sends that string to one of Canonical's servers."

That's not how I see it. I'd correct this to "When the user performs a global
search for a string using the Ubuntu desktop, Ubuntu sends that string to one
of Canonical's servers to perform that search".

If a user wants to search his own local files without searching the entire
Internet, then perhaps he shouldn't perform a global search.

The global search box (the Dash) _didn't previously exist_ before Canonical
invented it. I think it's fair that they get to define what it does. If you
don't like it, then don't use it, or change its behaviour (it is open source,
and you don't need a fork to change what is effectively a setting), or just
use Xubuntu, Lubuntu or Kubuntu, all of which are acknowledged as official
flavors by Canonical and none of which use Unity or the Dash by default.

"People will certainly make a modified version of Ubuntu without this
surveillance."

And Canonical even support the existence of these modified versions! If you
don't like it, just vote with your feet and install Xubuntu instead. Install
popularity-contest to show people your vote. Job done.

By all means go ahead and complain that the default doesn't do what you want
it to do, but please stop with the hyperbole that is actually misleading to
readers about what the real situation is.

~~~
reidrac
"stop with the hyperbole that is actually misleading to readers about what the
real situation is"

I wonder if readers do really understand the situation or not. I don't think
the hyperbole is a bad idea when features like these should be opted in and
not a default for everybody. I don't know if this feature is properly
advertised by the system and if there will be someone that didn't know about
it.

I'm a happy 12.04 user and, since it's LTS, I'll avoid 12.10 until this issue
is sorted out.

~~~
JasonFruit
I think Canonical has been appropriately forward with discussion of what the
situation is, and who gets information. I think it's an awful idea — who
really wants commercial results built into their desktop? — but calling it
spyware is disingenuous.

I also think it'll kill adoption of Ubuntu. It made me adopt a different
distribution, and I think it will cause others to do the same.

~~~
rlpb
> who really wants commercial results built into their desktop?

The distinction between the desktop and the Internet is going away. Some argue
that "the desktop is dead"; I just think that it'll get more integrated.

I don't think that this is necessarily a bad thing, providing that you have
adequate control over your own privacy settings and have a choice of providers
(both large and small). An open source project that is promised to always
remain so is the safest place for this, since you'll always be able to find
instructions to turn things off if the defaults don't suit you.

I much prefer this over the world switching to web-based hosted solutions for
everything.

~~~
reidrac
In fact it turns out that 12.04 has some lens making queries to different
services when I was searching stuff using the dash, and I didn't know about
it.

I fixed it with: sudo apt-get remove unity-scope-musicstores unity-lens-video
unity-lens-music

(I couldn't find how to disable it)

It's not like I agreed to this when I installed the system, because I upgraded
from a previous version (and a previous version, etc), and that behaviour
wasn't there.

I don't know how Canonical could advertise these changes, but in the Amazon
lens case I think RMS did it right.

~~~
jcastro
You can disable it via the GUI in the Privacy settings:
<http://askubuntu.com/a/192270/235>

~~~
reidrac
I said 12.04 and not 12.10. There's no way of disabling the lens I removed in
12.04 (may be because they got introduced in that release).

EDIT: at least I couldn't find a way to disable them. Nothing in privacy
settings and nothing with dconf-editor.

------
EwanToo
It's always interesting to read RMS' posts, though I don't agree with a lot of
them.

In this case, he's got a very valid point (I disabled the adverts on my Ubuntu
install), but he uses such over the top language that it makes much of his
writing seem like a parody.

Ubuntu sending all desktop searches to Amazon by default (even if it's via a
proxy) isn't cool, and isn't what most users would expect, but I don't believe
screeds like this aren't going to make Canonical think again.

~~~
jessaustin
What was "over the top" about the linked piece? It's got to be the most even-
tempered thing I've ever read from RMS. Did you actually read TFA before
posting this comment?

~~~
estel
I found referring to the Kindle as being for "virtual book burning" straying
into rhetoric.

~~~
belorn
Its a very loaded and picturesque description to use, but is it an wrong
description?

The goal of book burning is to remove information, private owned books in this
case, from the public by destroying them. While one could smash them and
disintegrate them through the use of massive force, burning was the practical
tool used.

If kindle suddenly create a goal of removing information from the public, in
this case some private owned books, and goes through this act by destroying
the information from private people own devices, doesn't that act align itself
perfectly with book burning, through instead of using fire, they used
electronic means.

Sure, its not something I would like to see on Wikipedia. Its not neutral, and
there are better, impartial wording one could use to describe, but is it wrong
to use in a blog?

~~~
rimantas

      > doesn't that act align itself perfectly with book burning,
      > through instead of using fire, they used electronic means
    

If that was the primary purpose of Kindle, you'd be right. However, for that
to be true you constructed a scenario which is opposite to the real and
intended use of Kindle.

~~~
belorn
Of course its not the primary purpose of the Kindle to destroy information.
They have however made it their goal once before in regard to one book.

The original blog post could be interpreted as claiming what the kindles main
purpose is, but I doubt RMS would defend such interpretation. A one time act,
while notable, does not equal primary purpose, and he and everyone else knows
that.

------
btilly
Canonical is not the first to do this. And nobody minded.

In Chrome, every time you start to type a URL, it tries to autocomplete. One
source of autocompletions is that it contacts Google, which sends back
suggestions. Therefore by default Google knows every search you do in Chrome,
even if you didn't want to go to Google. (They turn this off for incognito
mode.)

I don't know how long this has been the case for Chrome, but I use this
feature a lot more than I'd use Canonical's search.

~~~
yungchin
Yes, but it's somewhat less of a privacy violation, because you usually expect
to send out the URL you type over the internet. That's different from trying a
local search on your machine and finding it ended up on the internet.

~~~
drcube
No, you only expect it to send the URL when you hit "enter". For instant
results, however, it must send each character typed to Google. Also, when I
type a non-google URL into my address bar, I don't expect Google to be
notified. As it is, they can track all your internet travels from Chrome, and
I don't like it. Hence why I use Firefox and Duck Duck Go.

~~~
yungchin
You're absolutely right, that's why I wrote "somewhat less".

It's happened to me more than once that I accidentally pasted a password into
the Chrome bar so that I had to go and change it, and so like you, I much
prefer having an address bar without function creep. All I meant is that the
potential for much worse privacy leaks is much much greater with the Unity bar
than with the Chrome bar.

------
retube
I have to say, having been a huge ubuntu fan for many years, I am seriously
dismayed and dissapointed. This destroys my trust in Ubuntu completely. They
have ruined a great thing.

Was just about to put Ubuntu on a new machine, now I'll have to switch distos.
Any recommendations?

Edit: I think I have misunderstood. I assumed this referred to a commmand line
(s)locate or find or grep or similar. Apparently it refers to a GUI search box
on the desktop from which you can do global searches (local plus web). OK not
so bad - in fact I have no problem in supporting Ubuntu in this way, providing
local searches remain private.

~~~
meaty
Local searches do not remain private as there is only one search box for
global and local stuff.

So when you type "goat porn" expecting it to open your folder of goat porn on
your workstation, it will send it to amazon and show goat porn that you didn't
want to see and tell amazon and canonical that you are interested in goat
porn.

In a few years time[1], on your lifetime leased IPV6 address you will pop up a
legitimate web site and get adverts for goat porn. Look at the display on the
fridge: goat porn. Walk into the bedroom to see your Android Clock showing you
the latest "Russian Bride Goats".

[1] This is apparently not possible at the moment as they "don't store or
process your IP address", but we all know how Mark bends over when someone
waves cash at him. After all he is a businessman.

~~~
takluyver
Not fully accurate. The main search box does local+global search unless you
turn off the global part in settings. But you can easily do local searches
only: Super+F for files, Super+A for applications.

~~~
meaty
Yes fully accurate.

By DEFAULT it does local+global search.

Motivation for user to turn this off - low.

Education on what it's going to do - none.

This is about as unethical as it can get. Even Windows 8 asks religiously
before sending anything.

~~~
takluyver
To be clear, my 'not fully accurate' was in response to your "Local searches
do not remain private". Local searches do remain private, and there are
several ways of doing them. But the default search is not a local-only search.

I agree with you: I expect the default search to be local-only, and I've
turned off remote results. But it's not as though it hides the fact that it's
searching remotely. So I stand by my words: it's not fully accurate to say
that local searches are exposed.

------
itry
I find this spyware by default as wrong as Stallman. I dont want my machine to
send anything anywhere without me explicitly telling it to do so.

What I find even more frightening is Mark Shuttelworths view of this:

<http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1182>

"Don’t trust us? Erm, we have root."

Looks like he gets the issues of privacy and trust completely wrong. Imagine
catching your cleaning lady reading your diary. And she says, without a sign
of guilt, "Don't trust me? Erm, I got keys to your apartment.".

Time for a new cleaning lady.

Time for a new distro. I happily switched to Mint.

~~~
antidoh
"Time for a new distro. I happily switched to Mint."

Does my irony meter need calibration?

------
harel
You can always turn it off. You can always use Gnome Shell over Unity (should
anyway as its nicer). You can always buy another operating system. You know,
vote with your wallet. Ah, wait...

There has to be a price for free. In RMS world everybody is a hacker,
everything is free (as in love) and open and nobody needs to eat, kids grow up
not costing a penny. But in my world, I understand that sometimes I'm getting
something for free that is actually superior to the paid stuff, and sometimes
those giving it to me need to feed a kid or two, or buy their Mrs that new
outfit on the high street. And since they don't charge me outright they try
different things, one of which is trying to sell affiliate links to Amazon.
They don't even force me to do it because I can turn it off. But they do it by
default hoping that I won't. Its a revenue channel, albeit probably a small
one at the end of the day. And you know what, had I used Unity I'd probably
keep it on and do my Amazon shopping via the OS to give something back.

I also understand RMS-style extreme is vital to balance out the Corporate
extreme of the software world. But come on man, choose your battles better and
you'll have my support. This one is a waste of time.

~~~
Surio
>>> I'm getting something for free that is actually superior to the paid
stuff, and sometimes those giving it to me need to feed a kid or two, or buy
their Mrs that new outfit on the high street.

Classy. You get my vote for that and subsequently pointing out that _"They
don't even force me to do it because I can turn it off"_. This.

I also liked the way you ended it. We definitely need RMS, but he _definitely_
needs to choose his battles wisely.

~~~
dradtke
But why not present it as an option to the user on first launch, or first
search? Considering how relatively few people actually _want_ shopping
suggestions on their desktop, I expect the majority of users who don't turn it
off to be people who simply can't be bothered to find the setting and change
it. Exploiting user apathy is not my idea of software that respects its users,
which is what the FSF is all about.

~~~
harel
Because, realistically, given choice upfront most will probably choose to
disable it even though they won't mind it if its there. When installing an OS
I don't want many questions. I just want to get on with it. Ask me a question
and you won't get my full attention and given the option to disable something
I might just disable it.

Maybe a compromise is a notice while installing that the default is to search
with Amazon and instructions on how to disable it. Those who really mind it
can find their way there after the OS is installed.

------
damian2000
Do people using Ubuntu not also use web browsers? If so, then they are also
being spied on by others such as google, amazon, facebook, twitter - every
time they use one of their sites.

I just find it overly dramatic to be focusing on this one point of Ubuntu's
search being harvested for keywords when this sort of thing is commonplace on
the web. At least with Ubuntu you have the option to turn it off.

~~~
sparkie
We don't associate google, amazon, twitter and facebook with free software and
personal liberties though - where Ubuntu is traditionally associated with
these due to it's origins.

Just because something is commonplace does not make it justified, and it's
perfectly right to criticize the decision to do it. We criticize google and
the rest for doing the same - just that most people are not concerned, or not
informed.

IMO, any communication done by your OS to any server, without informed consent
is a direct threat to privacy, and should be criticized, even if it's
"convenient".

~~~
demetrius
As for me, I’ve became wary of Ubuntu since it started shipping Ubuntu One
pre-installed. It was clear back then that personal liberties are not that
important for Canonical.

------
takluyver
Relevant: Canonical have just said there will be more retailers integrated in
13.04 (which was always expected). And: "We are also testing a few additional
user controls like filters for local and global searching – more to come on
this front as we learn from those sessions."

[http://blog.canonical.com/2012/12/07/searching-in-the-
dash-i...](http://blog.canonical.com/2012/12/07/searching-in-the-dash-in-
ubuntu-13-04/)

~~~
rlpb
"...we have made it dead easy to switch the online search tools off with a
simple toggle in settings."

~~~
takluyver
That bit's not new, though - the toggle is already in place, and I have used
it.

------
bitcartel
This should help de-Amazon your Ubuntu.

1\. Ubuntu Settings --> Privacy -->Include online results [OFF]

2\. sudo apt-get remove unity-lens-shopping unity-scope-video-remote unity-
scope-musicstores unity-webapps-service

3\. Launch dconf-editor, navigate to: com -> canonical -> unity -> webapps,
and then remove everything under allowed-domains, dontask-domains and
preauthorized-domains

References:

[http://askubuntu.com/questions/192269/how-can-i-remove-
amazo...](http://askubuntu.com/questions/192269/how-can-i-remove-amazon-
search-results-from-the-dash)

[http://askubuntu.com/questions/214755/how-to-remove-unity-
we...](http://askubuntu.com/questions/214755/how-to-remove-unity-web-apps)

[http://xchamitha.blogspot.com/2012/11/de-amazonising-
ubuntu-...](http://xchamitha.blogspot.com/2012/11/de-amazonising-ubuntu-
removing-webapps.html)

~~~
devcpp
Can we keep a sort of page where we put all the commands to remove the
bullshit from Ubuntu? I think it's starting to grow and stink more and more.

------
apawloski
Ubuntu is also shipping with two new Firefox extensions that ask to "install"
certain web apps when you visit them. Havent audited them yet, but my tinfoil
suspicion is that these add-ons are leaking private information to Canonical
by asking "is this a web app that can be downloaded?" (this is in addition to
the current controversy that Unity searches are being leaked).

By the way, Amazon is pre-installed. I noticed yesterday that Amazon web pages
still open up in the Amazon icon on Unity -- even after I had removed the
unity-shopping-lens.

~~~
quarterto
That's almost certainly implemented by looking for HTML offline cache
manifests.

[https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/docs/HTML/Using_the_appl...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/docs/HTML/Using_the_application_cache)

------
nicholassmith
Ubuntu install a custom application that does something involving sending data
out -> We're doomed! They're spying and tracking you! Grab the pitchforks!

Of course, that's RMS' viewpoint and he's entitled to it, and it often
provokes some very interesting discussions around it, but he's terrible at
being anything other than over the top. For what it's worth I don't think what
Ubuntu did was that a bad a thing, it's a nice revenue stream for those that
use it and that's a good thing for the future of the project, but I can also
understand the view point of people who are uncomfortable with search results
peppered with ad's.

~~~
keithpeter
_"...it's a nice revenue stream for those that use it..."_

I'm not entirely convinced that this is going to make a lot of money for
Canonical. It will be interesting to see figures in a couple of releases if
Canonical (which is a private company) decide to tell us.

What do we think the value to Amazon is of my random desktop searches for
files & stuff on my desktop?

The 'slow typing' problem is real: search is dynamic and can, as a result of
network latency and fat fingering show results of unfortunately shortened
search terms. There is no content filtering on the results. That is actually
why I switched it off.

~~~
chipaca
Could you re-enable it for a little bit and test that slow-typing thing? We
did a bit of work to make it a little bit better at that.

~~~
keithpeter
Which version, QQ or 13.04? I'm on QQ with Unity. Everything Everywhere is
having some fun with their 'profile generator' at present, and we have exactly
0.24Mbit/s of bandwidth, so that might be an issue.

~~~
chipaca
12.10. It was one of the last changes before the freeze on QQ (re:
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity-lens-shopping/+bug/1060979> ), and a server-
side change.

BTW, you seem to have the name/numbers convention backwards :) it's codename
during dev, numbers once released. So it's 12.10 or RR now.

~~~
keithpeter
I was never one for convention :-)

Yes, much better. Working off a USB stick with persistent space, (I have the
Gnome Ubuntu Remix as PC os at present) and this box has Nvidia graphics,
_and_ we have problems with the broadband. So as slow a combination as I can
imagine anyone new to Ubuntu seeing.

Searches now seem to be completing before sending to Amazon, and my maths
related file name terms were bringing up sensible UK relevant suggestions from
Amazon, mainly textbook titles. This 'feature' has got a lot smoother since I
first saw it.

------
16s
I've used Debian GNU/Linux as my primary desktop OS and as a server OS since
1995. Many ditros (such as Ubuntu) are derived from it. People who have grown
accustomed to deb packages and synaptic, etc may like to try it.

------
pasbesoin
Stuff like this should be opt-in. And, if you want it to succeed, it should be
good enough that people _want_ to opt-in.

People search on Google -- they _opt-in_ to Google Search -- because the
results satisfy them (more than the competition).

If Canonical's partners want people to opt-in to their collaborative
offerings, they should make them offer significant value. And Canonical, for
its part, if they want to successfully build out this revenue stream, should
ensure that they partner with partners who demonstrably do so.

I already use affiliate links _when I think that the affiliate has given me
something of value_ [1], in discovery or qualified opinion or some other
combination of factors.

I think Canonical provides me and the broader community things of significant
value. Offer a monetization scheme that is 1) opt in, and 2) Respects my
concerns, e.g. privacy, and I would be consciously, favorably inclined to use
it.

\--

[1] One example, although Amazon may not particularly like this one:

<http://us.camelcamelcamel.com/>

~~~
slowpoke
> _People search on Google -- they opt-in to Google Search -- because the
> results satisfy them (more than the competition)._

Um, no. A lot of people don't even _know_ there is competition to Google. They
don't "opt-in" to Google just as much as they don't "opt-in" to using Windows,
they've just always used it because it comes with their browser/PC. There's a
reason Google pays Mozilla a few million every year to be the default search
engine.

~~~
pasbesoin
Fair point!

------
justinf
I'd guess that the only way to really dislodge the Amazon widget would be to
make sure it remains unprofitable. If it remains a major talking point and
doesn't pull in enough money to compensate for its negative effect on
community evangelism, it won't last long.

I have mixed feelings about the new system. On the one hand, I respect a lot
of what Canonical is doing with linux regarding mainstreaming, streamlining,
and even Unity. I also recognize that they are a company and need to make
money, and think Amazon integration is preferable to dozens of preinstalled,
hard-to-remove junkware applications.

On the other hand, I really don't like the intrusive-by-default nature of the
integration, and the fact that I'll have to go tell all the folks I've
installed Ubuntu for that they need to essentially disable spyware the next
time they do a distribution upgrade.

On the third hand (what, you don't have one?) I'm not sure what other
profitable solutions Canonical might implement in a community that values
privacy and freedom.

~~~
curiousdannii
Amazon postage is prohibitively expensive for those outside the US (except
perhaps for those who live in another country where Amazon is based?) The only
time I'd ever use Amazon is if I'm after an old rare book which is out of
print and Amazon is the only place I can find a second hand copy. And in those
times I'd actually be deliberately searching for it, checking many sites in my
browser, not casually using Unity!

~~~
takluyver
According to Wikipedia, Amazon has national sites covering North America, most
of Europe, Brazil, Japan & China. That's a pretty substantial slice of the
world's population.

~~~
zurn
Only a handful of European countries: Germany, UK, France, Italy I think.
That's 15.2% of Europe by area.

~~~
takluyver
But probably rather more by population. Also, I'd guess that at least some of
the other countries get reasonably cheap shipping from those sites.

------
mistercow
It's a pretty big stretch to call this "spyware". It's an ill-advised feature,
sure, but "spying" indicates secrecy and subterfuge. If I came up behind you
while you were typing, and started reading aloud your words as you typed them,
would you call me a "spy"? I think real spies would be offended.

------
jasonkostempski
Are there other distros with Wubi (or something like it) and automatic
updates? If it weren't for Wubi I don't think I would have ever fully switched
to Linux. VMs are OK for a bit and repartitioning is right out if all you want
to do is try something out for a while. I don't use Ubuntu anymore but Wubi
really was the gateway drug for me. I personally don't care about automatic
updates but I think it's a big one for some others. When I switched away from
Ubuntu I thought I'd be missing out on the community behind it but it's really
the Linux community in general that's awesome, a lot of the stuff just ends up
on Ubuntu forums and much of the advice is universal. I think people need to
know that.

~~~
icebraining
Wubi-like: <http://goodbye-microsoft.com/>

------
kokey
I find it ironic reading this article on a site that collects my visitor data
using piwik stats without explicitly asking me first.

------
jdangu
Was pleased to see a reference to Fravia in RMS's article.

For the sake of comparison, here's a 1998 essay about what Microsoft was
specifically doing in Win95:

<http://71.6.196.237/fravia/mmstory.htm>

~~~
idm
Good old Fravia. Like Stallman, Fravia seems to have been "hard to swallow" by
the community at large. However, just like Stallman, when you dug into
Fravia's stuff it turned out to be pretty great.

------
zellyn
I'm slightly surprised to feel this way, but upon reflection, I actually like
rms's rebranding of DRM as "digital restrictions management".

Calling DRM "Digital rights management" is about as accurate as calling prison
"freedom management".

------
acabal
I'm pretty surprised that Shuttleworth didn't see this kind of reaction
coming, considering his long-time involvement in free software. Or maybe he
did see it coming, and just doesn't care?

In either case, you're in a bad position when you're distributing a Linux
distro that RMS starts to call out. Shuttleworth would do well to observe what
happened to GNOME: they ignored their core user base, and they've been in such
hot water for it that now they're backpedaling (GNOME Legacy). If Linux can't
even please its core user base--aka the evangelists--it doesn't stand a chance
in the wild.

~~~
fixermark
Seeing this reaction coming and not caring is a reasonable strategy. In free
software, RMS holds a lot of philosophical sway, but Ubuntu operates in the
larger open-source ecosystem.

Let's say that free software adherents decide that Ubuntu is bad for their
interests. How will they react? The GPL prevents them from forbidding Ubuntu
from bundling their work as long as Ubuntu's use of the work is GPL-compliant.
This leaves them with few options. They can refuse to support Ubuntu, which is
fine; other software developers can patch the bugs and fork projects that the
original maintainers refuse to update. They can call out why Ubuntu is bad for
a free software ecosystem; this is a good thing to do, but has little impact
on those who are familiar with the four freedoms but don't buy into their
absolute necessity.

As a tool to exercise free use of software, GPL is very strong. But as a
coercive tool, GPL is pretty weak (by design). Shuttleworth recognizing these
strengths and weaknesses and adapting the company's motion to account for it
is shrewd business.

Accepting the notion "I don't approve of your use of my software, but I
respect your right to use, study, redistribute, and modify free software" is
an implicit aspect of the free software philosophy.

------
decasteve
I am running 12.10 and disabled this right away in the privacy settings.

Why not have it opt in instead of the ninja mode opt out? Explicitly prompt
the user to enable this when first using Dash but disable by default.

~~~
bitcartel
Did you also remove the Unity - Amazon webapp integration?

------
DanBC
There are two problems with the Ubuntu search box.

1) Not being very clear to your users that the search box is now global and
will send information out of the local machine

2) Amazon search sucks.

I haven't used recent versions of Ubuntu, but linking a good distro with the
disaster that is Amazon search is not something appealing to me. I don't think
it's going to improve my experience on Ubuntu. I strongly feel it's going to
make my search experience really sucky.

Note that I am ad-tolerant, and I don't really care about information getting
sent off to other servers (so long as I'm told about it before hand) so
Canonical have a bit of work to do to persuade me that the new experience is
not as awful as Amazon search is on the website.

PS: Apologies to any Amazoners here, but come on, you know the search is
terrible, right?

------
cparrino
For context on what the Ubuntu Dash actually does and how it's evolving -
please see [http://blog.canonical.com/2012/12/07/searching-in-the-
dash-i...](http://blog.canonical.com/2012/12/07/searching-in-the-dash-in-
ubuntu-13-04/)

------
loucal
People really use Unity? I might be rolling my eyes a bit at Canonical for
this decision, but seriously who would even want to use Unity, they can do
what they want with it as far as I'm concerned.

We can't have it both ways, for software to be free, Canonical has to be
'allowed' to do this. The community is now very aware of what is going on, and
that is good. We can make our own decisions as informed users. Uninformed
users have always been at a disadvantage, that will never change. Case closed
to me, lets not turn this into an episode of the 'Real Housewives of the GNU'
it really shouldn't be as dramatic as this comment war would have you believe.

------
Surio
_snip_

Even in arguments around copyright law (like this recently concluded debate...
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4882364>) the general consensus seems to
flow around comments such as "... was not trying to reignite the Great
Internet Copyright Argument for the millionth time, and instead was making a
point about what was politically actionable today"

On similar lines, why not acknowledge the reality of running a viable,
commercial venture around FOSS by tapping viable revenue models?

A few others have written some very good points that I really enjoyed reading.
Here they are (in no particular order of preference):

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4887261>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4887132>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4887365>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4887294> (I really hope that comment was
rhetorical rather than being literal)

that makes the point of why the situation is much more nuanced for someone
like Canonical. And if Linux adoption has to succeed big time, we need the
Canonicals and Mints (with their warts and all) that give the general public a
viable alternative. Mandriva Linux was facing bankruptcy a few years ago, if I
am not mistaken.

 _EDIT_ : For the opt-in vs opt-out discussions:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4864783>

 _The difference is that - for a chunk of people - this functionality isn't
crap. It's actually useful. It's out of the way for people who don't care.
It's there for people who do. I've seen folk go "that's so cool" when the
amazon stuff came up. This stuff is much closer to the adds folk get in Google
search. It's often relevant to what they're doing at the time._ (anecdata,
sure. happens to match mine ;-) )

------
antidoh
What distro would you recommend take the place of Ubuntu, as a recommended for
newbs distro?

I mean a distro that you would feel comfortable recommending to a stranger
that you will not be able to help install or support the distro, as well as
the more traditional "lemme help you with that."

As a subset of that, what apt based distro would you recommend for that niche?

Is plain Debian really something that people feel comfortable recommending to
non-supported strangers? Something that you would not be embarrassed about if
they looked you up and told you what happened?

~~~
Surio
I hope that my reading of your question as a rhetorical one than a literal one
is correct?

Because your entire comment is one big reason I have been rooting for
Canonical from day one. I have been on Linux on and off since slackware 1.0,
Redhat 5 (5.0 (Hurricane)/5.1 (Manhattan)) all the way to SuSE 7.0 and not one
time was I able to get someone ( _anyone_ ) to adopt it completely -- despite
all my handholding and regular support! Finally resorted to recommending
Cygwin as an alternative, and I was still called upon to help with _"things"_
;-)

The first/only time I managed to get a successful switch and retain, was when
I recommended Ubuntu.

~~~
antidoh
I meant it literally.

------
meaty
I'm a little surprised at how accepting people are here relating to the Amazon
feature in Ubuntu. I would assume that there are a lot of critical thinkers
here as comp sci people tend to have that mentality. Possibly not!

The usual excuses are "we can turn it off etc" or just shrug it off and carry
on.

Have you thought long term? If you don't make a stand with this feature, one
will eventually be added which can't be turned off or is far more invasive.

~~~
antidoh
Indeed.

If spyware is a continuum from onerous to innocuous, then at the moment
Canonical's string sending/sharing is somewhere near the innocuous end of the
line. But it's still within the continuum.

By excusing it as innocuous and (for now) flippable, we shorten the line.

And then shorten the line again for the next thing that finds itself happily
closer to the innocuous end of the line.

And again.

------
Osiris
Taking a political angle on it: Won't the free software market decide winners
and losers?

In other words, there are hundreds of Linux distributions. Choose a different
one. If you really like it fork it and rebuild it without support for that
feature.

Isn't the point of free software that you have the inherent right to do
whatever you want to the software to make it do what you want (or not do what
you don't)?

~~~
TallGuyShort
You're exactly right - and his article is explicitly encouraging this
behaviour. He's not calling for any additional action than for people to
create, recommend and use distributions that don't do this, and to make others
aware of the potentially harmful effects of Ubuntu's decision.

------
drcube
I came back to Ubuntu when I got a System 76 laptop earlier this year with it
preinstalled. I was actually impressed. It was pretty good, with some tiling
features I liked and lots of keyboard shortcuts. But the prospects of 12.10
spyware made me dump it for Slackware 14, which came out around the same time.

And I never looked back, because man, Slackware is great. Install that
instead.

------
olgeni
What's with this "distro" stuff... Can't we just boot into Emacs and call it a
day?

------
stinos
>> when he searched for a string in the files of his Windows system, it sent a
packet to some server

anyone has a source for this? Was this built into windows? (It's not in mine,
or it's not active)

~~~
bcoates
Windows XP search assistant* has a database of file types it uses for
filtering and to determine which files are worth searching into. It also has a
small misfeature where it updates this database every time you search. It
doesn't send anything to Microsoft about what you're searching for, it's just
an overly persistent auto-update mechanism.

The usual suspects freaked out about this, of course.

* The little dog that makes intermittent scratching noises when you accidentally leave explorer open, slowly driving you mad

~~~
stinos
ah the dog. One of the first things to get rid of in XP :]

------
shabble
Whilst his point is clearly that Ubuntu should be punished (by users switching
to alternative distros), it would have been nice to provide or link to some
detail about how to disable this behaviour, for those who can't or won't
reinstall.

Also, 'virtual book burning', really? These snide little terms detract from
his core (and important) message, and come across as just petty. I think
there's probably an Internet Law that you can safely ignore anything by people
who use a $ symbol in the word 'Microsoft'.

~~~
antidoh
Book burning: Amazon turned off access to people's Kindle copies of 1984, that
they had purchased from Amazon.

When I buy a book at the store it stays bought, and the store is not going to
break in to my apartment and take that book back. Giving me my money back
would not make up for it in the slightest. If there's a dispute with the
publisher or copyright inheritors, that's Amazon's problem post-sale.

If they can do this in a quasi-legitimate situation ("We're going to get sued!
Fuck the customers!"), then they could do it at the behest of a government or
investor, or maniacal CEO.

When I buy a DRM-free book from O'Reilly or Packt, it stays bought.

Yes, book burning may be an inflammatory phrase, but I think it's apt.

------
iamtherockstar
My sister home schools two kids, cooks three squares a day, and doesn't care
if someone knows she googled for "bread pudding recipe." They have an old,
aging computer, and when I gave an Ubuntu CD to her husband, they were _so_
incredibly grateful.

I see this feature being excellent for her, because she has a bunch of
documents on her computer that contain her recipes, and then maybe she'll see
a cookbook she might want to buy. Maybe she'll be looking for the days
curriculum, and see a book that might help her youngest figure out her
multiplication tables.

These are all relatively impractical use cases for the nerds of Hacker News.
Ubuntu will still serve their needs, but Canonical wants to "cross the chasm"
and have ordinary muggles using Ubuntu. Those people will find all of these
features "valuable" and don't actually _want_ to turn them off.

~~~
bad_user
This is such bullshit. There is a big difference between _googling_ and
searching your own files, while the anecdote you give probably accounts for
only 1% of that computer's usage or even less. Reading this opinion I even
pictured a stock-photo with family members gathered around a laptop, stupidly
laughing at a photo of " _bread pudding_ ".

Your sister could be searching within her own files for strings like " _last
year debt_ ", " _ass ventura crack detective_ ", " _bondage_ ", "dvdrip" and "
_office keygen_ ".

I'm sure your sister doesn't do that, but other people do. And searches can
express and hint to your deepest desires/taboos and things that might lead one
to think of illegal activities.

My non-technical wife asked me one day, during a funny conversation about sex
gadgets, if people at Google can see what she's typing and I taught her how to
use incognito mode. At some point I also made her aware that Facebook sends
and publishes her lat/lon coordinates when typing a message from her phone.
She understood the dangers of online activity and took steps to protect
herself, without me even trying too hard to explain, but this required some
amount of education which is out of reach for most normal people who either
don't have a technical friend that understands such issues, or that technical
friend thinks it isn't a problem, such as yourself.

------
jfreak53
I agree, the Linux community as a whole has never stood for these malfeasons
ever!! I say we stand up, I use Ubuntu on ALL my PC's home and work, so we're
talking 15 to 20 PC's that I might have to move over to another Distro here
soon. This is not the first time Ubuntu has tried these "Windowz" practices on
it's users, but this needs to be the last! The first was taking away our
choice in the first release of Unity, it was sooooo much a pain in the but to
get back to default Gnome that most people didn't try.

Mint allowed it's user's to do so from the get go, so that means it was
possible but Ubuntu made the choice for us instead of allowing configuration
choices, that's what Linux is all about, choices! Ubuntu has been trying to
take our choices away for a long, long time.

We as a Linux community first and foremost need to stand up and let the Linux
community as a whole know we will not stand for this. Ubuntu is the first
doing this, but if we let them get away with it then companies like Amazon
might go to other Distro's and try the same thing. If a small distro see's an
easy way to make money and people don't care, or don't show they care, they
might do it.

With no place to run Linux becomes "Windowz"! We need to let them know we are
not standing for this before it gets out of hand and happens all over the
place.

I personally haven't used Unity since day one on any of my 20 PC's, I hate it.
So I have never been in the position to be used by Canonical to pad their
pockets in this search thing. I don't ever even suggest people to use Unity
since it's such a pain in the butt! But other people will be affected by this
more than likely. My simple solution is don't use Unity ha ha but that's not a
solution, that's a band aid.

If we let Canonical get away with it without screaming they will just continue
as long as Amazon funnels cash into their caufers! If they loose user base
then we win and Linux as a whole wins since they are the big distro on the
block.

~~~
rlpb
> Ubuntu has been trying to take our choices away for a long, long time.

How has it taken any of your choices away? All of Debian is available in
Ubuntu, and Debian is all about choice. You can manipulate your systems as you
please. You can even roll your own installation CD exactly how you want it.

Canonical even supports Xubuntu, Kubuntu, Lubuntu etc., all of which have
taken a different set of choices and all of which are released at the same
time as Ubuntu itself.

How is any of this about taking choices away?

~~~
Surio
Sigh.... you mean well. But you'll never win this battle/war of words...
Someone summed this whole thing on another earlier thread on.... (wait for
it......) Ubuntu, a few days ago...

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4864591>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4864615>

And the argument continues.....

