
EFF blasts Microsoft over Windows 10 privacy concerns - denzil_correa
http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/22/12582622/eff-microsoft-windows-10-privacy-concerns
======
Someone1234
This is a bad re-host of EFF's original editorial found here:

[https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/08/windows-10-microsoft-b...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/08/windows-10-microsoft-
blatantly-disregards-user-choice-and-privacy-deep-dive)

I'd just suggest people read that instead, The Verge article doesn't really
contribute anything.

~~~
Sir_Cmpwn
Discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12305598](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12305598)

------
jasonkostempski
I personally hope MS keeps going down the user-hostile path. It's causing
people I wouldn't have expected to care to seek alternatives. The only way I'd
ever consider using Windows for my own computing again is if MS went crazy and
open-sourced Windows, Visual Studio and Office.

~~~
ropeladder
It convinced me to switch. I've been on Windows since forever and was excited
for Windows 10, but the privacy (and auto update) issues convinced me to dual
boot with Linux Mint, which I now use for everything but the occasional game.
I have a few small gripes, but overall it works well (bluetooth drivers
actually work much better).

I can kind of see MS's perspective, in that everyone else is doing all kinds
of tracking and auto-updating on all their platforms. But for me it really
felt like I was losing control of my computer in an unacceptable way.

~~~
WayneBro
I spent the requisite minute to turn off all of the settings after a clean
install and then promptly forgot about it. Haven't had a problem since.

It's the same thing I have to do on every other OS...there's no OS that I can
install and then NOT have to configure in some way.

~~~
Sylos
1) That's a logical fallacy. Just because every OS needs configuration,
doesn't mean that it's ok for one OS to suddenly need a lot more configuration
for no reason, let alone for the reason of making it as hard as possible to
get the OS into a privacy-friendly state.

2) These settings have been resetted for many users in the past, especially
after bigger upgrades, so you not having problems is not a terribly great
metric. I don't have proper statistics either, but they would be very much
appropriate here.

3) You cannot actually turn all telemetry off, at least not in any official
way.

~~~
WayneBro
1) No problem because the new configs aren't there for no reason.

2) Every OS has bugs. You won't get away from that by switching.

3) I often see this fact quoted but nobody ever points out how it has actually
ever caused a problem for them other than their sense of ownership being
offended.

You can switch for whatever reasons you want though. Are you actually a
Windows user who is considering a switch?

~~~
Sylos
1) I didn't say that they are there for no reason, rather that there is no
reason why there can't be a simple switch which turns everything off in an
easily accessible way, or heck even having everything off by default. And no,
Microsoft needs telemetry is not a reason when we're talking about user-
friendliness/respect.

2) No, but you can get away from malicious defaults. Believe it or not, but
there's OSs out there where the defaults are an actual recommendation from
actual people. And again, same fallacy. Just because every OS has bugs,
doesn't mean that it's ok for one OS to suddenly have more of them for no
reason, or in this case more severe bugs, as with user-respecting defaults
only the most hardcore Microsoft-fanboys would complain that their computer
suddenly stopped sending telemetry to Microsoft.

3) Because we don't know the extent of the damage that this does. We don't
know what is being sent, what is being stored, how long it's being stored.
Could be that even the most privacy-friendly setting can still report you to
the NSA and get you on some list. Could be that people have already
disappeared, because they were on such a list at the NSA, without anyone
knowing about it. The same stuff was going on for a good while at the Stasi
before people noticed, and the Stasi was a bad joke in comparison to the NSA.

> You can switch for whatever reasons you want though. Are you actually a
> Windows user who is considering a switch?

No, I already switched with the Windows 10 + new ToS launch in expectation of
something like this going down, although I also just got extremely lucky, as
it wasn't my only reason at the time. This actually going down, though,
certainly has cemented that decision. Why do you ask?

~~~
WayneBro
> Could be that people have already disappeared... NSA... Stasi...

Uhmm, OK. I don't think that switching to a different OS is going to do
anything to stop the NSA, but I sincerely wish you good fortune in that
endeavor. Please make sure that you comb over every line of code that you run
on your system, because that's the only way you're going to be safe.

Given the type of concerns that you stated I had a hard time imagining that
you ever used Windows. That's why I asked.

Anyway, here are my other responses:

1) Sure there is a reason. It's a really bad design to have one switch that
disables a set of completely unrelated features.

2) You say they're being malicious, but you have zero proof. Until such time
as you have some proof, this argument holds no weight whatsoever.

3) Exactly. You don't know.

------
drzaiusapelord
Has anyone in MS's C-levels or even PR addressed any of this? Its incredible
how much arrogant radio silence there is on the issue from them. That's on top
of radio silence on all their recent patches from the past couple years,
constantly breaking stuff in enterprise. Or the Win10 update fiasco.

I think Nadella's style is just really arrogant and anti-consumer. It seemed
everyone was happy there was an alternative to the Gates/Ballmer way of doing
things, but he just seems as much, if not moreso, out of touch than they are.
I would never never considered a juggernaut like MS going down anytime soon,
but MS has always had a strong emphasis on customer satisfaction, especially
for business. Nadella has somehow managed to piss of enterprise and consumers
with a lot of hard handed tactics. I definitely could see a lot of
organizations flirting with OSX and Linux to make a migration. Especially now
that so many things can be cloud-ified and that IE6/7/8 requirements are
pretty much long gone for most, even in slow-moving enterprise.

~~~
GrumpyYoungMan
>Nadella has somehow managed to piss of enterprise and consumers with a lot of
hard handed tactics.

Satya Nadella is the CEO of Microsoft.

Terry Myerson is the Executive VP in charge of the Windows division at
Microsoft and is the one calling the shots with respect to Windows.

I don't know why people persist in thinking that CEOs are directly responsible
for every decision a company makes, particularly at huge companies.

~~~
Sylos
Because in this case, Nadella became CEO and with that, you could feel a clear
change in strategy at Microsoft, more towards cloud services and such, which
fits right in with the direction that Windows 10 is headed.

From what I can find online, Myerson was put into his position in July 2013,
Nadella into his in February 2014, so it's entirely possible that it was
actually Myerson doing these things on his own and it just happened to collide
with Nadella's promotion, but I would also assume that a Steve Ballmer would
have told Myerson off by now, at the very least for the malware-like upgrade
strategy, whereas it seems like Nadella is entirely ok with it, heck from how
much the man has said to it, you could assume he doesn't even know that it's
happening.

------
danlindley
Windows 10 is what finally prompted me to install a Linux OS, and I'm so glad
I made the change. Additional benefits I have noticed are that my productivity
has increased considerably, and I feel I am learning much more about the
fundamentals of my system.

------
aRationalMoose
If it wasn't for my surface Pro, I wouldn't even touch windows with a 10 foot
stick.

~~~
oceanswave
Use the recently leaked security policy that lets you install other OSes on
your Surface pro and install Ubuntu Touch

~~~
tzs
You don't need to use the recently leaked security policy to do that. Surface
Pro lets you install whatever you want.

It was Surface RT that prevented installation of non-signed operating systems.

