Ubuntu 16.04 Will Not Send Local Searches Over the Web By Default

jones_supa writes: Canonical introduced Amazon Product Results as part of Ubuntu 12.10, which meant that local searches performed by a user in Dash were also sent online. This made many Ubuntu users spill their coffee and got criticism from EFF and FSF as well. The so called "Shopping Lens" had to be manually disabled if that kind of search behavior was not desired. Finally after years, Canonical is reacting to the negative feedback and respecting users' privacy, so that Ubuntu 16.04 (the next Long Term Support release) won't send local searches over the web by default. The Amazon search feature is still available for those who explicitly want to use it.

Comments

Really Canonical?

[scunc]

What happened? Is it not cool now that Windows is doing it too?

Re:Really Canonical?

[DrXym]

Most likely they're not making as much money as they thought and so they're turning it off.

Re:Really Canonical?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, let's be honest... They had a disagreement with Amazon on payment for promotion, and this is their way of sticking it to Amazon. That's much more likely.

Re:Really Canonical?

[Anonymous Coward]

So they listen to their users, but it's still not good enough?
People like you are never happy.

Re:Really Canonical?

[beastofburdon]

Likely because people who use Linux know how to turn it off. Hard to make money off of it if nobody leaves it on.

Re:Really Canonical?

[iampiti]

For once Windows was behind on something respect to Linux :)
I all seriousness, now if Microsoft would stop the insanity and return Windows to being just an OS instead an OS, spying and advertisement device I'd consider upgrading from Win 7.

Re:Really Canonical?

[SeaFox]

What happened? Is it not cool now that Windows is doing it too?

Probably sick of losing users to Mint -- as though the it has nothing to do with Unity itself.

Too late, assholes

[Anonymous Coward]

Canonical will never regain my trust. The mere fact that they were capable of sending users' private data to their business partners means Ubuntu is dead for me.

Re:Too late, assholes

[umafuckit]

Canonical will never regain my trust. The mere fact that they were capable of sending users' private data to their business partners means Ubuntu is dead for me.

I'd understand claiming there was a breach of trust if they did this on the sly, but they didn't: it was common knowledge, easy to switch off, and only occurred if you used Unity. I fail to see what the problem is.

Re:Too late, assholes

[allo]

The default was the problem.

I can't be true

[ISoldat53]

Canonical reacted to user feedback? That must be a first.

Re:I can't be true

[Prien715]

Canonical reacted to user feedback? That must be a first.

*Checks Gnome 3*

Nope, hell hasn't frozen over. Still not listening.

Re: I can't be true

[Anonymous Coward]

Get over it. systemd won and syslog and stderr lost.

Re: I can't be true

[beastofburdon]

Gnome 3 is the worst user interface I have ever seen. In fact it is the only one worse than Metro. If I was forced to use it at my job I would quit.

Re: I can't be true

[Burz]

Get over it. systemd won and syslog and stderr lost.

Actually, this can't be emphasized enough. Systemd is one of the few architectural initiatives emanating from Red Hat's ken that actually improves the operation of desktop systems. There was SO much broken power management in Linux before Upstart and then systemd came along it was like a never-ending joke (which users felt was being played on _them_). As a proponent of desktop PCs (not just Linux-based) I see improvements from systemd all over the system.

In many ways, Canonical is trying to pull the Linux desktop in the direction of OS X. That is not a bad thing as long as they understand that both Apple and MS have a lot of unexpressed rules about how to build and promote a consumer platform -- I think Canonical gets it and the rest absolutely do not. Their early move to ensure variations with alternate default DEs used different names was more important that many here probably realize. Their attention to hardware testing and certification was another thing they got (mostly) right. Assembling an SDK to attract new app developers was also a first-class move.

Canonical's big mistake? Exactly what the OP refers to: Over-commercializing to the point where privacy seems compromised. I'm glad they finally recognized this error. Where they could improve is to remove the *dependence* on local search... OS X never removed the old means of finding apps, which is an important avenue for users to visually discover what is available on a system. Ubuntu needs a hierarchical launch menu back, but the reason they're floundering here is probably because they never duplicated OS X's system of app bundles -- would be awesome if they did.

Re: I can't be true

[beastofburdon]

I will agree with you on KDE. It is by far my favorite interface.
What I like the lest about Gnome 3 is how they made it extremely hard to access many of the basic settings. For example, the last time I gave it a chance I was trying to play music on my laptop while I went to sleep(It's hard for me to sleep without music in the background). In order to keep the screen from glowing in my face I shut the lid and the music immediately stopped. I thought, oh I'll just tell it to not go into sleep mode when I shut the lid... There was no way to alter this setting inside the GUI at all. I searched with google for over an hour to find a way to change it, but nothing worked, not even editing files directly. I finally said fuck it and installed KDE. 10 minutes later(slow ass connection) I was happily listening to music while I drifted off to sleep without the glow of the monitor to disturb me.
This is not the only reason that I hate it, but it was the last straw for me. If you can't have basic options in an easy to access manner I will not use your interface.

Re:I can't be true

[malditaenvidia]

But OBONGO linux is free as in free beer.

Re:I can't be true

[allo]

Checks Mir. Checks SystemD. No.

Re: I can't be true

[beastofburdon]

Because I demand that my computer do what I tell it to. Also the reason I only use Windows for games.

Good on 'em.

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome back, old friend. I'm glad they've changed their stance. Not happy it ever was their stance, but I'm glad they've changed it none the less. Keep up the good work Canonical!

Re:Is Ubuntu still a thing?

[truck_soccer]

Nope, since you stopped using Ubuntu it ceased being. This happens every time you stop liking something. We all thought you were aware of your powers....

Follow the money

[fishwallop]

The likeliest explanation is that Amazon is no longer paying Canonical enough money for this to be default behavior.

Re:Follow the money

[Parker Lewis]

Unity 8 was announced by Mark with privacy enabled by default, several months ago. And the reason was Snowden scandal, not money.

Unity 8 was expected to be the DE in Ubuntu 16.04, but it was delayed. But, at least, the promise to keep the privacy was not delayed.

hadn't thought it through in the first place

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously Canonical, didn't you have a meeting on this with the classic PRO vs CON list? Was it inconceivable that some would not like being tracked, even anonymously(if true) and a large portion of that population would be the geeks who you NEED? People, like geeks, who know what GNU/Linux is, why it is used and spread that far and wide and were using Ubuntu and promoting it if not developing for it. Pissing those people off and causing them to move to Debian for example was not a good idea.

Good to see 16.04 LTS will disable this next year but you really screwed the pooch as they say on this one.

Anonymous "I don't think that means what you think

[raydias]

Most people who use Linux know that Anonymous collection of data isn't all that anonymous To quote Princess Bride "I don't think that means what you think that means"

Never even noticed it did this

[khelms]

I avoid Unity like the plague. If they want to default to providing a "smartphone" interface on my has-a-keyboard-and-mouse, doesn't-have-a-touchscreen computer, there are plenty of alternatives like XFCE, Mate, Cinnamon, etc.

Re:Never even noticed it did this

[Burz]

Unity only incorporates a couple mobile UI elements... The rest of the changes are riffing off of OS X and I think they do a pretty good job. The ample keyboard shortcuts (which are listed when you log in) are very PC and more specifically very Mac-like (Macs were never about chaining people to pointer inputs). The menus are similarly Mac-like, not like Android or iOS at all.

A mistake they made with Unity was cutting the user off from being able to hierarchically discover the available programs and utilities. OS X supplies this naturally in the filesystem, but the Linux paradigm had no elegant way to mesh a "start menu" with an OS X style task bar.

Re:Anonymous "I don't think that means what you th

[fnj]

To quote Princess Bride "I don't think that means what you think that means"

Or, if one is offended by misquotes: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

Re:Is Ubuntu still a thing?

[Blaskowicz]

Debian and Ubuntu are what, half of desktop Linux use?

Ubuntu has many editions that differ by the desktop they run, out of the box. Thus no need to set up a theme, configuration etc.

- Unity
- KDE
- Xfce
- LXDE
- Gnome 3
- Mate

Then there's Mint :
- Mint Cinnamon
- Mint Mate
- Mint Xfce
- Mint KDE

Then there's lesser known stuff out there.

I don't understand. It's like saying you don't like anchovies, so you won't eat pizza, while staring at a list of 10 anchovy-less pizzas.

Re:Is Ubuntu still a thing?

[Blaskowicz]

Some people have an iMac and only run the web browser on it.

I think Unity is fine for the same limited kind of use.
It's literally a left-side launcher for Firefox and Libre Office, and a bar for clock and wifi and shit.

They just moved the functionality

[PvtVoid]

It's been integrated into systemd.

Re:Wondering

[beastofburdon]

No, they still have flash player in the repositories and you can opt to install it during the OS install. Also they provide some closed source drivers.
RMS is one of my heroes, but he is too extreme on a few things.

Re:Open source a flawed business model

[WaffleMonster]

In the end, people and companies just don't want to pay for anything if they can.

Companies will beg you to take their money if it supports something they care about. Having nobody to call when SHTF scares everyone from the bean counters to the IT trenches. This is why RedHat makes bank.

As a result, open source companies need to find other income streams and everybody tries to "opt-out" of that if they can.

If your new business model involves whoring out your integrity who is going to want to do business with you?

This is a stretch but...

[ytene]

... when Mark Shuttleworth formed Canonical, one of the strongest claims they made was that ubuntu would always be free. I *do* appreciate that Canonical's activation of the spyware feature was publicised and only relevent to users of the Dash in the Unity desktop, and also aware that it's a bit of a leap of faith to suggest that 12.10 and onwards were anything other than free, but the fact remained that Canonical started to take kickbacks from Amazon - payment - for data generated by ubuntu users. In other words, ubuntu users were doing stuff that resulted in Canonical getting paid. This doesn't - quite - meet up to "free"... Like the parent post to which you responded, my reaction to the announcement was to continue to run on 12.04 LTS for a bit longer than expected, then make the switch to Mint, initially [and currently] on the ubuntu-derived Mint edition, but with testing currently underway to complete a migration to LMDE 2.0. But from my perspective the key point was that my decision was to literally and completely walk away from ubuntu/Canonical. I didn't agree with the ethics of their decision and the *only* mechanism I had to voice my opinion was to drop their product like a hot potato, which I did. I had been a user of ubuntu since 5.04, Hoary Hedgehog. I got to ubuntu via Mandrake/Mandriva, which in turn I got to after getting annoyed with Red Hat. Once bitten, twice shy. Perhaps the unique perspective here is that users of Linux are, by definition, very much aware of the impacts of acts like this from Canonical. I dare say that there are many GNU/Linux users out there today [well, I'm one] who once used Windows but got so disenfranchised at the machinations and underhand practices of Microsoft that they decided to walk. In any scenario where it becomes clear that a party is acting in an underhand or dishonourable way, the single, simplest response we have in our power is to stop using any product by such an un-trusted source. ~10 years ago I gave up on Microsoft because they were blatantly not trustworthy. 4 years ago I gave up on Canonical/ubuntu for the same reason. I can't say for certain whether Mint will continue to be honourable, but if they slip, I'll move on. Eventually [I hope] enough of us will do that such that companies realise that they "can't get away with it" and will treat their users with respect. Today companies are so big that no amount of end-user action, short of "walk", will bring about a change. Even a non-profit has to be relevant.

Re:This is a stretch but...

[umafuckit]

Don't get me wrong, I can see why people (especially here) don't like the data selling. I certainly uninstalled all the lens stuff even though I don't use Unity. However, I also see that there are salaries that need paying and this is one way of doing it. With a lot of web-based services, such as Facebook, if you want to opt out of the data collection you must also opt out of the service. With Ubuntu you can choose to keep the service but ditch the data collection. Seems pretty benign to me compared to all the other BS that's going on.

Re:This is a stretch but...

[Slashdot Junky]

I'd like to see a move away from the free model started across the industry. People may not balk at paying again if "every" service and product cost again. The change certainly would need to be an coordinated movement among competitors since the jumping ship from the X that now costs to the X that is still free would be a threat.

Re:This is a stretch but...

[ytene]

I think that's quite reasonable. I do use notionally "free" technologies - but I also donate to those projects as and where I can - i.e. I tend to use and enjoy wikipdia quite a bit, so last week I donated £50. I try and cover all the major FLOSS projects and communities that I use. Here's an interesting thing though - if I add up what I've spent on proprietary software [ I have 7 licensed copies of Win 7/64 Ultimate on various machines, 2 copies of MS Office 2013 Pro Plus, Adobe Photoshop, Lightroom and Elements, plus a raft of odd little commercial packages such as PavTube] and then compare the total cost of that spend [averaged out over the years of ownership] with what I spend on FLOSS contributions, I still struggle to keep my FLOSS spend up to what I spend on proprietary software. Not because I am in any way reluctant to make the contributions - on the contrary, I happen to think it's my duty to put my money where my mouth is - but because it's remarkable just how much I've ended up spending on commercial software. Now, I appreciate that I'm not an average user, but I wonder if a concerted move back to "non-free" might actually be too much of a culture shock? Not strictly related [sorry], I was thinking about Microsoft's switch to the "free" model for Windows 10. There's sort-of speculation that if you're a PC manufacturer like Dell or Lenovo or such, you pay under $15 a set for a Windows License. So let's say, for the sake of debate, that W10 retail value would be $20 per seat on average. For Microsoft to give that away for free, they seem to be saying that they reckon they can get equivalent value out of the average user over the lifetime ownership of the OS - basically through their spyware and monitoring of user activities... That's something I find quite disturbing - not that MS are doing this [well, OK, yes, that too] but the amount of revenue it generates. If people are willing to pay that much for *activity data*, precisely what are they getting in return? Just to finish with a thought on your paid-for model. How about "freemium"? [OK, isn't that what Canonical tried?] How about products where you get a core set of functional services but pay a little bit more for higher performance or extra functionality? Do you think that would be economically viable? Also, if we did move away from this "free to use" model in which our activities were recorded, harvested and sold... If we started to pay companies for software again, do you think they would be honest enough to remove the spyware and keep it permanently out? Or is this a drug that's too addictive for them?

Re:This is a stretch but...

[Bathroom Humor]

I think it's even more silly when the facts are taken into account.
Canonical wasn't selling data, they gained no income by collecting search information. They WERE given a small commission from sales if the user accessed the Amazon website by clicking on an item in the Dash, and even then ONLY if the user proceeded to buy that product. At this point, Amazon already KNOWS you're on their site, they can directly collect data on that person. They no longer need Canonicals' data.
Plus, using the files or applications lens was available by default, if the idea of pressing a button in the privacy settings seemed too tedious.

On top of that, every query that went to a remote web server was sent through Canonical first. The identifying data was encrypted and every query was sent, not just complete searches. That would mean that Canonicals' server would continuously be getting bombarded with random strings of queries from random IP's that they weren't trying to track for any monetary gain. Then, every server that the query goes to afterward gets hit with the same jamble of letters, all from Canonical. If Amazon could make sense of that mess and track down which person was looking for which item then I would applaud them.
Canonical didn't care what product or item the user clicked on, either. They only cared about which scope they used, which was used to make their search algorithm more accurate. Manual client-side adjustments to what scopes are available are possible as well. They are trying to supply a service, and whether or not the user enjoyed it, trying to call it "spyware" seems pretty asinine. I didn't fully enjoy the Dash for other reasons, but this debacle was blown out of proportions.

This is too little, too late.

[Turmoyl]

My company already migrated the workstations from Ubuntu to a different distro back when Canonical did this. Between their absolutely horrible initial Pulse implementation, the absolutely craptastic Unity interface being rammed down our throats, and then the totally sneaky way they brought in the Dash searches, we had had enough.

Re:This is too little, too late.

[nnull]

I had the same feelings, but it's still not a bad distribution and I still recommend people to install it, either Xubuntu or Kubuntu. That installer is a breeze for anyone.

Re:Classic lesson to be learned

[Locke2005]

"The product is free"... that's pretty much Google's business model, isn't it? Nobody seems to have a problem with that. Why shouldn't Linux distros get in on the fun?

Re:Is Ubuntu still a thing?

[nnull]

What alternative distributions have the "Just freaking works" on my hardware without having to spend all day trying to figure out why it's not working?

I'm an Arch user, but Ubuntu just seems to have things right most of the time, with release cycles, security updates, development. So they make a few mistakes, but they're willing to correct them and move on.

Re:About time

[nnull]

Yay spoilers, now I don't have to go see the movie.

Editors? Are you there?

[danomac]

Finally after years, Canonical is reacting to the negative feedback and respecting users' privacy, so that Ubuntu 16.04 (the next Long Term Support release) won't send local searches over the web by default.

My brain actually froze when I reached the quoted sentence above. After years what now? I normally don't respond to editing but this was a pretty bad one.

Maybe

Finally, after years of negative feedback, Canonical will start respecting users' privacy by making sure that Ubuntu 16.04 (the next Long Term Support release) won't send local searches over the web by default.

That's probably not perfect either but it's a hell of a lot easier to read.

Re:Editors? Are you there?

[4partee]

Grammar nicely done! Now, here is the embedded message. After years of tightening the thumbscrews until blood shoots out of user's ears, nose and eyes, they loosen the screws a little.

Re:Is Ubuntu still a thing?

[jandrese]

Fedora? Although it has most of the same problems as Ubuntu (systemd, unity, etc...) so that's maybe not a huge win.