Lots of open source software uses opt-out telemetry.

Sure, I also want it to stop, but there are so many doing it.

> but there are so many doing it.

Really? That's a weak argument if ever I heard one.

Perhaps it's time to take a stand and say "no more!"

What's to stop them adding in something else later that "accidentally" grabs IP addresses, and sends them "accidentally" to their third party analytics company who doesn't give a shit about your privacy. That company then takes their other data, joins it all together and adds to the picture of you that you never asked them to create!

When you open this door, there is no closing it.

The argument comes down to this (for me, at least): You got the software to this point without telemetry. Why do you need it now? Is the application all of a sudden unusable?

Edit: I forgot! They already take your IP address but my point still stands!

I disable telemetry whenever I can. But the major vendors already use it everywhere (Firefox, vscode, the rust installer, just a few examples) - I've disabled it in all of those, but most don't, and we don't always pay attention to apps that add this as a "feature".

Correction: rustup (rust installer) did collect telemetry but it seems to be removed now. https://github.com/rust-lang/rustup/issues/341 The reputation may stick, as we know :) No worries now.

audacity have done a text book piss off the community on going commercial.

They have done everything wrong.

banning use of the for under 13s not a good move IMHO.

They have a load of money and want to know how audacity is used?

How about just ask?

I mentioned this in the last thread here, but due to COPPA, generally it is illegal for businesses operating in the US to collect data on children under 13, even if you ask (there are exceptions but usually you need to prove that you have the parents' permission). They are doing what is required by the law, and in fact it was probably already illegal for children under 13 to use the product in ways that could generate personal data. So nothing has really changed, it seems they are only explaining what the situation already was.

If they hadn't started collecting data, the age of their users would continue to be irrelevant.

It still is irrelevant, if you use it offline, or you opt out of the analytics. Yes, an adult will probably have to set it up that way for them, but this has always been the case with any internet-enabled computer: it falls on the parents (or the school, childcare service, etc) to set up parental controls and oversee the child's online activity.

I think their approach is pretty sane - I don't know if it started out that way, but 'opt in only' seems like the defaults we want. But like parental responsibility, that's aside from the main point.

The fact that they are collecting this data now subjects them to COPPA requirements, thus the restriction to people over 13. If they hadn't started collecting data, they would not have had to comply with that restriction.

That seems to not really be relevant, if you want to have a data-driven development process, then you have to, you know, collect data. If you said they should just use email or github issues or something, and have people submit their feedback manually, those have the same deal, and they still would have to comply with COPPA regarding that data.

Yes, that is true - they would have to comply regarding the data collection. However, they would not need to impose limitations on the usage of application itself, only on the tools/platform used to submit the data.

> Companies have existed for centuries without needing constant telemetry

And if you're fine with software from the 1700s, you're welcome to use that, but if you want UX improvements to Audacity, there's only so much that can be done without telemetry.

Quantitative (ie telemetry) data gives us the what, not the why.

Qualitative (usability testing and other observation methods up to and including ethnography) can give us the why (users seem to do what we didn't expect).

Modern UX design can make use of both modes of user research such that they support each other. I.e discover the what via quant and understand it better via qual, to land at a solution.

Or discover both why and what via qual, and then determine severity (how many users get stuck in a given way) via quant.

But of course, there needs to be explicit consent such that trust is not breached, no matter how inconsequential the data collected is considered to be. The decision belongs to users.

Apparently there wasn't consent.

Edit: Ideally, should anonymised usage data in OSS projects be public? Such that we can see the data and design decisions made based on it? Perhaps this would generate more of the trust that was desired here.

Companies like Apple and digital research were producing great UI/UX in the 80s, well before widespread internet usage made telemetry a viable option for companies.

(I mean the 1980s, just to stave off any attempts to send me back in time to observe computing in the 18th century).

Apple OS pre OS-X, and Windows 3.1/95, used to crash all the time. A big part of the improvements in crashes (talking to people in the companies) is automatic submission of errors.

Also, Apple was selling Apple IIs for the modern equivalent of $5,000. I'm sure Audacity could achieve some great in-person UI studies is people were willing to pay that kind of money.

doesn't take $5000 to open a survey monkey account.

I don't understand this argument. "Apple did good UX without telemetry in the 80s, so you should be able to do good UX without telemetry now, Muse".

Like, what do people think they want the telemetry for? Are they planning to sell the treasure trove that is "how many people clicked on the 'select audio sink' button" to the highest bidder?

You can tell them "do it without telemetry" all you want, but in the end it's just not going to be as good as if they had feedback.

not any more, they've blown all their good will

I'm pretty certain Ardour and Reaper don't have any telemetry, and they have UX a million times better. Audacity can be muuuuch better with having to stoop to telemetry.

So is the UX unusable right now?

Edit: >but if you want UX improvements to Audacity

You insinuated that the only way to improve the UX (your comments insinuates that it needs improving) is to use telemetry

Who said that?

> Who said that?

Whoever wrote: > > > but if you want UX improvements to Audacity, there's only so much that can be done without telemetry.

Oh look, seems to have been some guy called "stavros". Anyone you know?

I feel like UX improvements would be best driven by user feedback, not inferred from telemetry.

Durex get by without knowing exactly how their products are used. Product improvement is not one to one with privacy abuse.