/prog/ - canonical: worst privacy offender

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:08

http://benjaminkerensa.com/2012/08/23/canonical-privacy-policy-for-zeitgeist-is-insufficient

so basically ubuntu/canonical is run by the secret service.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:16

Look. This shit is for niggers.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:26

Why can't someone make a hip, modern UNIX without being evil?

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:32

Benjamin Kerensa: Master of run-on sentence

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:48

>>4
If you can't write, don't run a blog.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:51

>>3
Um excuse me but zeitgeist is NOT EVIL as explained in this ubuntu funded blog post http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/08/is-zeitgeist-spying-on-you

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:59

>>6
The only thing Zeitgeist crawls for itself is the Gtk.RecentManager.
In a fresh install of Ubuntu only one thing uses Zeitgeist: the Dash.
I use KDE and Bash, so I'm all good.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 17:12

>>7
Gross and gross. The fact that you use an ubuntu derivative, too, is gross.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 17:24

Running Xubuntu 12.04. No sign of Zeitgeist.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 17:26

They actually called it Zeitgeist?

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 17:38

>>3
www.pcbsd.org

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 17:47

Running OpenVMS 7.3. No sign of ZitGhost.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 18:20

>>6
Joey Sneddon
jew.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 21:34

Man up and just use Debian already. Better than Ubuntu and without all the crap. What's not to like?

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 21:36

Man up and just use FreeBSD already. Better than Ubuntu and without all the crap. What's not to like?

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 21:48

>>15
Package management signing?

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 22:14

>>16
pkgsrc

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 23:30

>>17
How does the patch review process compare with Debian's? How many people get to review a patch before it is accepted? How large/active is the security team?

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 23:49

>>18
I have no idea, but at least they managed to not break OpenSSL.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-27 0:56

>>18
FreeBSD devs are actually competent.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-29 14:01

>>20
Yes, but is the development and packaging process secure?

Name: Anonymous 2013-08-31 17:51

That slut will take it.

Name: Anonymous 2013-08-31 19:22

The usual, as usual. Sixth installment, for the posting of giant and tiny Touhou characters or anything similarly fitting the theme/interests here.

canonical: worst privacy offender

1 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:08

2 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:16

3 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:26

4 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:32

5 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:48

6 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:51

7 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 16:59

8 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 17:12

9 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 17:24

10 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 17:26

11 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 17:38

12 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 17:47

13 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 18:20

14 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 21:34

15 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 21:36

16 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 21:48

17 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 22:14

18 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 23:30

19 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-26 23:49

20 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-27 0:56

21 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-29 14:01

22 Name: Anonymous 2013-08-31 17:51

23 Name: Anonymous 2013-08-31 19:22