Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft To Enhance User Privacy Controls In Upcoming Windows 10 Update (hothardware.com)
MojoKid writes: When Microsoft first launched Windows 10, it was generally well-received but also came saddled with a number of privacy concerns. It has taken quite a while for Microsoft to respond to these concerns in a meaningful way, but the company is finally proving that it's taking things seriously by detailing some enhanced privacy features coming to a future Windows 10 build. Microsoft is launching what it calls a (web-based) privacy dashboard, which lets you configure anything and everything about information that might be sent to back to the mothership. You can turn all tracking off, or pick and choose, if certain criteria don't concern you too much, like location or health activity, for example. Also, for fresh installs, you'll be given more specific privacy options so that you can feel confident from the get-go about the information you're sending Redmond's way. If you do decide to send any information Microsoft's way, the company promises that it won't use your information for the sake of targeted advertising.
If I'm using a web based console to change my local OS privacy settings, I'm guessing I'm telling some server that's already collecting the info just not to use the info it's already collecting.
1. Transgress 100 meters
2. Say you're sorry
3. Backtrack 75 meters.
4. Profit from more analytics gold than you know what to do with.
This is the same way horrific laws are passed. First they propose something completely absurd, then "compromise" with something slightly less absurd.
Eat shit Microsoft.
From TFS: "When Microsoft first launched Windows 10, it was generally well-received"
By whom? I don't recall much in the way of rave reviews except from paid promotors. I do recall quite a few people saying they'll stay on Windows 7, thank you.
I "upgraded" to Win10 because I was about to click on something when the "psst! Hey bud, wanna upgrade?" window appeared. It started upgrading and I was afraid to stop it.
My opinions? The uptime is less than a week. It reboots whenever it wants without asking. Working on something, lunchtime, close the laptop, come back an hour later? Oh hey, fucking machine rebooted. Not to mention some of these updates take a good 20 minutes after the reboot to finally come up.
The spying pisses me off. I disable most of it, but after every "upgrade" they turn it all back on.
And it's flakey. With Win8.1 this laptop worked fine for months on end, only rebooting when I told it to. With Win10 after 4-5 days I'll open my laptop to find it won't wake up and I have to power cycle it.
IMHO, any OS that reboots without asking is a POS nobody should support. Microsoft doesn't know what I'm doing when the laptop is closed, how the hell do they feel entitled to reboot my machine without asking?
You're right in that the headline text is filled with lies (typical of the corporate tech press and their corporate repeater friends like /.) and things like this should all be opt-in by default. But without software freedom, even those changes would be necessary but insufficient to ensure user's privacy because there's no way to check to make sure the software actually behaves in accordance with the settings.
Microsoft's record shows this to be the case. The GNU Project's surveillance section of the Microsoft malware page does a good job of collecting stories about how this has already failed Windows users who thought they had tweaked the settings in just the right way to get Windows 10 to not "phone home" or report details of what happened outside the machine. These settings failed to do that job because the software was designed to fail in this way.
Much to the apparent chagrin of moderators in the recent Microsoft thread about letting Windows 10 users opt-out of automatic updates who marked down posts about software freedom, the real answer remains the same here—no software freedom means no real control over one's computer and that includes no privacy for the user. Network dumps reveal some of what the software does but not all; it's very easy for programmers to encrypt data they want to send somewhere and/or delay sending data in an attempt to not show up when the system's network output is being watched.
Microsoft's promises (which boil down to "Trust us this time! Really!") must be interpreted in the context of taking the word of a liar whose secret software should now be trusted. That makes no sense to do, and the same logic applies to all non-free/user-subjugating software. No matter how much technical skill you have you have to assume proprietary software is doing what you don't want it to do because you don't have the permission to check out what it's actually doing, change it to make it obey you, or help your community by sharing copies of improved software.
Digital Citizen
Remember when everyone was complaining about Microsoft's security issues? Microsoft actually did an admirable job cleaning up that leaky ship.
This is true. And while I have no evidence to support it, I suspect that the whole telemetry stuff is meant to give them information about how the system behaves in various situations for engineering purposes, not ads. This impression is based in part on the fairly decent level of privacy in hotmail/outlook.com compared to other free mail providers like gmail or yahoo where they milk your inbox to tweak ads.
Firefox has the same kind of telemetry features. Chrome too. And pretty much everything else. But when it comes from Microsoft people freak out first, ask questions later.
This being said, once they started to push hard to have people use "Microsoft accounts" instead of local accounts to login on Windows it became obvious that something was changing so maybe they are truly a bunch of fuckers nowadays.
lucm, indeed.