It's "of course" for you and me, but not for the vast majority if end users. Also, there's no reason this can't be done anonymously, even as a policy from the vendor that IPs are not logged.
> Businesses aren't interested in collecting usage metrics for their software for non-nefarious reasons
Absolutely some businesses have good intentions; also some have bad intentions and some have intentions that they think are non-nefarious but about which their customers disagree. A few thoughts:
* Many of these businesses are secretive about this behavior; if it's all ok and for the good, what are they hiding? Why don't they announce it to every customer when they start using the product?
* The collection of usage metrics goes way beyond what is needed, with many vendors collecting everything they can get their hands on.
* The bad actors damage everyone's reputations; consumers have no way to distinguish good guys from bad. If this was properly regulated, consumers might trust everyone more. The good guys should be pushing for regulation.
> Businesses shouldn't have a profit motive
I don't recall a criticism of profit, but maybe I overlooked it.
The whole thing has an air of 'locksmiths - do they know too much about how we keep our doors closed?!'
* Auto-updates to software with a high need for security patches are not important enough to ping a server, which (of course!) exposes your IP.
* Businesses aren't interested in collecting usage metrics for their software for non-nefarious reasons. Collection of metrics is one of the most amazing advances in software design in the last 20 years, after all.
* Businesses shouldn't have a profit motive: Ghostery found a way to both provide a service and make money off of the people who track others. Seems reasonable to me.
Cynicism is misplaced, here. Annoyance at blowing up a non-issue to the front page of HN is appropriate, though.