> Reminder: Docker Desktop is not free software (it's not even source available) and has embedded spyware that uploads a ton of sensitive info from your system without consent when it crashes.
This is a straw man argument, just in case anyone cares. The "reminder" is that Docker isn't free and not "even" Open Source. I think Docker has produced Open Source code, however. As most of us get that Docker is nowadays NOT Open Source, the argument falls to "reminding us" that it "uploads a ton of sensitive info" "without consent". Whatever.
Docker has personal info on everyone who uses Docker and uses their online services. Phone numbers. Email addresses. Passwords for various Docker websites. People love this because they are Docker customers or long time users. They don't care because most of these customers/users are DOING BUSINESS. Sure, Docker runs third party analytics on their site and pixel trackers in their emails. Big deal. They are in business to make money. They aren't used by everyone (read the public), and most people that run it (assuming it didn't uninstall itself), run it on their work computer. What info is on these machines that Docker would risk their shareholder value to "steal" or "divulge"? Not much, is the answer.
To be clear, that last part of the straw man isn't a reminder, it's a claim. Further evidence of straw man shenanigans is present here in replying to "source?" by saying "the binary". Of course data would come out of a binary, but which binary are you referring to? The Docker binary, which runs containers and crashed, or the binary that handles the crash of the other binary? Or maybe it's the installer binary that crashed? Mine did. Twice.
All that said, all you people who just shout "privacy, privacy, grumble, grumble, large company, grumble" are a pain in the ass. If you care about privacy, limit what software you use, put stuff that you worry about on another machine and keep your damn data off it. Privacy advocacy isn't worrying about your privacy, it's understanding how the public, at large, looses access to understanding about where they should share their data. Just telling people to worry about privacy isn't helping, and probably does more harm than good.
What evidence do you have that it sends this information before you approve it in the crash report? What kind of sensitive information are you referring to?
sneak|4 years ago
kordlessagain|4 years ago
This is a straw man argument, just in case anyone cares. The "reminder" is that Docker isn't free and not "even" Open Source. I think Docker has produced Open Source code, however. As most of us get that Docker is nowadays NOT Open Source, the argument falls to "reminding us" that it "uploads a ton of sensitive info" "without consent". Whatever.
Docker has personal info on everyone who uses Docker and uses their online services. Phone numbers. Email addresses. Passwords for various Docker websites. People love this because they are Docker customers or long time users. They don't care because most of these customers/users are DOING BUSINESS. Sure, Docker runs third party analytics on their site and pixel trackers in their emails. Big deal. They are in business to make money. They aren't used by everyone (read the public), and most people that run it (assuming it didn't uninstall itself), run it on their work computer. What info is on these machines that Docker would risk their shareholder value to "steal" or "divulge"? Not much, is the answer.
To be clear, that last part of the straw man isn't a reminder, it's a claim. Further evidence of straw man shenanigans is present here in replying to "source?" by saying "the binary". Of course data would come out of a binary, but which binary are you referring to? The Docker binary, which runs containers and crashed, or the binary that handles the crash of the other binary? Or maybe it's the installer binary that crashed? Mine did. Twice.
All that said, all you people who just shout "privacy, privacy, grumble, grumble, large company, grumble" are a pain in the ass. If you care about privacy, limit what software you use, put stuff that you worry about on another machine and keep your damn data off it. Privacy advocacy isn't worrying about your privacy, it's understanding how the public, at large, looses access to understanding about where they should share their data. Just telling people to worry about privacy isn't helping, and probably does more harm than good.
acdha|4 years ago