Microsoft Discussion, split from [picking up an Oculus Rift..?]

[Christoph.Krn]

I don't have anything against using Windows, I just find it awkward to administrate with the missing package manager and no command line debug output, etc.

Maybe this will help you:

• How to use Group Policy to remotely install software in Windows Server 2008 and in Windows Server 2003
• eventvwr
• Windows Event Log in PowerShell - Part II

However, note that Microsoft has recently been actively adding/backporting (extremely) far-reaching data collection to various versions of Windows, and note that Microsoft can, and has recently shown to be willing to, override your privacy decisions.

 

[TrashyMG]

However, note that Microsoft has recently been actively adding/backporting (extremely) far-reaching data collection to various versions of Windows, and note that Microsoft can, and has recently shown to be willing to, override your privacy decisions.

And that alone should be a reason never to use a Microsoft product.

 

[SNESFAN]

Using, and in turn learning Microsoft products, got me my job that has afforded me a pretty decent life. And had I not chosen that path, I would be stuck looking for a Linux admin job which appear to be in comparison much smaller demand. Statistics collection seems completely meaningless in comparison to its direct effect on my life.

I instead have chosen to learn and use both depending on my needs, instead of shunning one because of some inconsequential idea.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[TrashyMG]

Using, and in turn learning Microsoft products, got me my job that has afforded me a pretty decent life. And had I not chosen that path, I would be stuck looking for a Linux admin job which appear to be in comparison much smaller demand. Statistics collection seems completely meaningless in comparison to its direct effect on my life.

I instead have chosen to learn and use both depending on my needs, instead of shunning one because of some inconsequential idea.

Please I've spent half my life embracing Microsoft products and often use reluctantly at work. Where that company is heading isn't good for anyone except Microsoft.

 

[SNESFAN]

Differences of opinions, your company might be serving only the Microsoft God, but there are others that use a wider range of OS's. We use what best fits and offers the best support. But the end result is lots of our special function servers are Linux, most of our enterprise services are Windows and basically all of our clients. It's just a ratio, and the ratio favors more techs in Microsoft products.

Either way, our company benefits directly from what it has to offer, Microsoft co-benefits financially. On the home market it's subjective and preference I think. Majority of home uses could be satisfied by either OS, some can't be as easily.

So to say, because of a single point, you should never use their products sounds a bit crazy.

I don't think any of this talk should belong in this thread, I'm just going along with the conversation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[TrashyMG]

Actually the company I work for and almost all of the semiconductor industry is heavily entrenched in the Unix/Linux world. Most people with a Windows only background tend to be at a severe disadvantage when hired in.

So to say, because of a single point, you should never use their products sounds a bit crazy.

No I gave a singular good point, there are most likely a good slew of other points as well. it's a bit concerning that Microsoft can change user agreements without your express permission to do so and then data mine when they please.

 

[SNESFAN]

additional reasons are additional reasons, but you said "that alone should be reason" and I think looking at it considering only that one factor is a bit crazy, I really feel people should be looking at it in deeper levels, considering multiple points etc.

The strength of the argument, and specifically what I responded to, boils down to only how heavily you value your privacy over your convenience of doing things that require other actions to do and in some situations capability of even doing it.

I view it at the same level of any big brother argument, example, The whole terrorism and NSA. There is a scale in which having big brother controlling every aspect of your life would make you more secure. Some want less or none, but others want more security. (do not take away from this I'm comparing Microsoft to the NSA, it's just the concept I'm referencing)

 

[Askarus]

In my opinion both is valid.
I really hate how MS and Government and many others are tracking me (see my thread how to restore a bit of privacy)

The other side is: I have a Steam account and spent about 1500€ for the most recent high end gaming Laptop.
I don't care how much Steam and Microsoft know about my Gaming behavior. There a re not mach games I want to play (the laptop is a waste of money) but I don't want to limit myself only because of MS.

What really makes me angry is that people at University are so closed minded when it comes to software.
Why do I have to spend lots of money for MS Office or other MS Software (I don't).
Some really don't see that there's a World outside of Microsoft. They won't even download a free LibreOffice if I ask them to do.
Or at least upload stuff as PDF and not as pptx or docx.

And what makes me even more angry:
If something is not compatible with Apple software: OK, let's fix it on the MS side
If something is not compatible with Linux software: Your fault. Why use Linux?

 

[SNESFAN]

What is your guys' stance on ad supported media and services? If the product is free as in beer, is it more acceptable to have them? If those were collecting metadata, does that cross the line? If it is a paid version of the same, do ads or collecting data become less acceptable?

The way I'm looking at it, but in the end, don't care at all about the privacy invasion either way, is their metadata is helping predict usage patterns to help bug fix and optimize experiences.

Statically less chosen file menu options lower on list by default as a simple example.
Demographic info to best serve browsing habits as a more intrusive example.
Another might be "what does this person do after doing something else" so a future version might include a shortcut to that action.
Doing one thing a specific way produced an unexpected result that was left unreported as a bug.
These are the kind of metadata I appreciate is collected actually. Selling that data to ad companies, if that's what they're doing as an absolute worse case. What's the actual harm there other than the feeling of being violated? The ad companies are trying to be more effective in getting you a better, or more specific product in your hands. What is the perceived damages to you?

 

[rSl]

for me linux saved a lot of work and money.

i started using linux exclusivly in 2002 when i had
a 3d-rendering job to do for a car-design, which crashed
constantly under win and "just worked" ok with linux.
i could sleep nicely and knew the rendering would be
there the next morning. this was so cool, so i never
looked at win again.

the other value of linux for me, even more important, is
that one can look at the sources and alter it if one likes to.
with a bit of shellmagic i could solve all my computer-problems
i had in the last years.

and i like to be in control of my system, not another
company getting my metadata and deciding for me.
plus i really like the linux communities and the freedom
it gives me and my systems.
i personally never would use a closedsource os/program again, this
includes the apple os too, of course.

especially when it comes to communicate privately over the
internet, opensource is the *only* secure way to go.
crypto must be open, or one just can't trust it.
(pro tip: also don't use the hardware random number generator of your
computer for generating keys, it's probably bugged too

but i agree, that anyone should use what he/she want's to
use. this is called: freedom of choice.

 

[Askarus]

What is your guys' stance on ad supported media and services? If the product is free as in beer, is it more acceptable to have them? If those were collecting metadata, does that cross the line? If it is a paid version of the same, do ads or collecting data become less acceptable?

The way I'm looking at it, but in the end, don't care at all about the privacy invasion either way, is their metadata is helping predict usage patterns to help bug fix and optimize experiences.

Statically less chosen file menu options lower on list by default as a simple example.
Demographic info to best serve browsing habits as a more intrusive example.
Another might be "what does this person do after doing something else" so a future version might include a shortcut to that action.
Doing one thing a specific way produced an unexpected result that was left unreported as a bug.
These are the kind of metadata I appreciate is collected actually. Selling that data to ad companies, if that's what they're doing as an absolute worse case. What's the actual harm there other than the feeling of being violated? The ad companies are trying to be more effective in getting you a better, or more specific product in your hands. What is the perceived damages to you?

I don't mind for Platform where it doesn't really matter (like Steam). I don't see my games as a crucial part of my life no one my know.
Even if Amazon does suggestions what might interest me is ok for me as long as it stays on Amazon.

I have problems with:
- Everything that's hidden
- OS collecting Data
- Sites on Internet are tracking me
- Government tracking me (can end really bad as they can do what they want if they change the law)

-> Things that are more. More than gaming. More than shopping behavior. More than internal research.
When government and others can see through my whole life and I can't control it.

 

[pmprog]

They won't even download a free LibreOffice if I ask them to do.

Way back, our company installed OpenOffice (well before LibreOffice was a thing), unfortunately, we had a really hard time integrating it with our system (for automated documents). The side effect is that our Infrastructure guy won't even contemplate LibreOffice based on that.

What's the actual harm there other than the feeling of being violated? The ad companies are trying to be more effective in getting you a better, or more specific product in your hands. What is the perceived damages to you?

It's not so much the adverts that bother me (I adblock anyway), but if you consider they build the profile of you - where you live, when you were born, if you're married, have kids etc. Then they get breached, you could probably build a fake identity with that information. And as Askarus has mentioned, if the government requests it, and then start to change the laws they'll have a place to just "look you up". Especially if you're elected leaders have a changing face

 

[SNESFAN]

It's not so much the adverts that bother me (I adblock anyway), but if you consider they build the profile of you - where you live, when you were born, if you're married, have kids etc. Then they get breached, you could probably build a fake identity with that information. And as Askarus has mentioned, if the government requests it, and then start to change the laws they'll have a place to just "look you up". Especially if you're elected leaders have a changing face

Ok, so the possibly of identity fraud, and the government looking up more details on you as an individual than they already have.

For the identity fraud, I think you have a good point. But I truly feel we need a better way of digital identification, one that is impervious to fraud. It would need to be some form of biometric I'm assuming. But if someone solves that problem, it will solve a major issue that doesn't only exist because of leaked metadata, but is increased substantially because of it.

So yea, potential risk there for sure.

Government tracking you is the other concern. I speak from an American perspective, and only reference things our government does that is public knowledge. I also work for a government agency and have most of my adult life, nothing too sensitive, but gives me a unique perspective I think.

The government already has all the info they would ever need to aggregate info on you through a large amount of means either through stuff you have to supply them, or already collect through other means to profile you as an individual. Spending habits through non cash transactions. Your interests would be the only thing they would need that they don't already have. If they were collecting it, and what's that really worth to anyone not trying to sell you something?

The digital age and all its connivence has made people less anonymous and more track able either through info supplied or ease of data aggravation (spelling?) in fact attempting to remain more anonymous makes you more suspicious than those that just ignore it I think.

I don't believe for one second that the government is out to get you, or really cares about anything you do, as long as what your doing is legal by the rules set by society. While excluding situations like nazi parties and other insanity, there is no real threat to your wellbeing on if such a profile was ever gotten. And if such a extreme situation were to arrise, do you think for one moment that such a group wouldn't just get your info anyway regardless of legal policy in place? I'm sure with the access they already have to infrastructure they could have more info than could force through policies. Hell, they could just take over companies with that data to fuel their war and oppression if we're talking about worse case scenarios.

Being afraid of the little stuff that actually does limited stuff, that could be used for evil if evil existed is like being afraid of steak knives because someone could stab you with it. Where if someone wanted to hurt you, they'd probably just shoot you. See what I'm saying? Government power if it wanted to be an evil superpower would be so much more monstrous than we give it credit for. I mean, look at North Korea...

My wife is super anti NSA and big brother as well, so we have these conversations often. She thinks I'm being naive, I think she is both overshooting the actual threat and underestimating the bad that could be. I think her views that align with most anti big brother arguments are representing of most arguments that would be presented and over the years I've yet to hear anything that would make me think we ever have anything to worry about with this.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Klumpen]

Please I've spent half my life embracing Microsoft products and often use reluctantly at work. Where that company is heading isn't good for anyone except Microsoft.

...and government agencies.

 

[rSl]

i think it is a verry big step from knowing most of your
personal data like place of birth, address, workplace etc.
and knowing your interests.
the former somehow gives a picture of your body and
physical surrounding and the later gives insight
to your brain and thoughts.

the thing governments are trying right now is to know
your thinking, what you do next, even before you know it.

beacause of this they need all the bigdata and machine-
learning systems to get an insight of that, on a worldide
scale. something like an oracle-machine.

this makes humans predictable and because of this it is
superpowerfull and at the same time superevil.

at least imho the human being should not be computed,
because this destroys the last bits of freedom, creativity
and makes real change impossible.

 

[WizardStan]

Klumpen, I have now gotten very confused by your posts on two separate occasions, wondering what the List of commercial video games with available source code has to do with the topic, before realizing, again, that it is actually just your signature.
That is all, just wanted to point that out in case anyone else got confused. Nobody? Just me then? Ok. Carry on.

 

[Yoyobuae]

Being afraid of the little stuff that actually does limited stuff, that could be used for evil if evil existed is like being afraid of steak knives because someone could stab you with it.

Don't think anyone would let a complete stranger into their house, nevermind letting them get hold of the steak knife. One's house is a safe place, only people one knows and trusts are allowed in. Something similar could be said about one's computer systems.

 

[Askarus]

I also fear what will come.
One step that doesn't hurt too much. One more. One more.
One little bit more control.
Until citizens and customers can't stop total control any more.

 

[SNESFAN]

I also fear what will come.
One step that doesn't hurt too much. One more. One more.
One little bit more control.
Until citizens and customers can't stop total control any more.

this is the one that I hear referenced the most. But if you break down pretty much any policy into it's granular parts, and it could be viewed as a means to an evil intent.

Take something objectively good like I don't know... seatbelt laws

take from it, government influence in your safety, then spin it to say, well the government now has an "in" on what you do in your own private space.
Next they would create another law that says you can't do anything dangerous.
Then they could say any thing potentially harmful from others is now illegal.
Now you have no means to defend yourself from oppressive governments.

Seatbelt laws creates a stepping stone towards oppressive governments.
Seatbelt laws just protects you from being retarded.

Anti-monopoly laws

take from it, government influence in the private sector, governing the way you do buisness.
Next any significantly large organization must be chopped in pieces to prevent influence on society.
Nex ban any group of organizers that could change public opinion.
Hense stopping any uppity militias from posing any real threat against the government.

Anti-monopoly laws creates a stepping stone towards oppressive governments
Anti-monopoly laws prevent large organizations from fucking you as a consumer once the market is cornered.

want me to come up with some other tinfoil hat ideas? I can do more, it's kinda fun.

Point being, there is a specific "crazy switch" as I'd like to call it, where you can say... wait, that's not right. And to say, well they could do xyz... doing x might be fine, and y might be controverial but still fine. But you fight at z. z is the point in which you say... no f*ing way. In the above examples. Z would be not doing anything dangerous in the seat belt law example, and banning groups of organizers in the monopoly one. Those are very clear "crazy switches" if you ask me. But the starting idea in each is what is required to do good.

 

[SNESFAN]

Don't think anyone would let a complete stranger into their house, nevermind letting them get hold of the steak knife. One's house is a safe place, only people one knows and trusts are allowed in. Something similar could be said about one's computer systems.

You would probably let them in if they shot you which was part of what I said and the basis of why I said it.

Concerning over an inconsequential when the real danger would be at a much larger scale vs the fear of the minor detail. Not letting them into getting the knife where if they wanted to hurt you, they would have shot you despite you not letting them in.

Back into computers, your safe space on the computer would be meaningless if they did like a China level monitoring and censorship which if their intents were evil would end up probably. Large scale problem vs small scale fear.

I have a problem with censorship, I have little to no problem with monitoring. The actions taken are only when terrorism is involved from my understanding. If any illegal activity was what they would take actions, I would have more of a problem with it, and if it was anything the government doesn't want you talking about, it becomes something I'm actively against.

There is a scale of oppression to benefit, and the ratio I would agree is different to everyone. The ratio is what is important though in a democracy as that is what makes policy.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk