Comment 90 for bug 402767

Il 10/08/2009 20:45, Jono Bacon ha scritto:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I am sorry to hear about the problems that are occurring around this
> topic. I am conscious to see how we can drive towards a solution that
> can satisfy as many of the technical and policy issues that are being
> cited in this bug report.

Jono: are you also referring to the google custom search, in general,
since that is in the default firefox home page since hardy, or are you
*specifically* talking about multisearch? It seems to me, in all
honesty, that all users talking here are powerusers, hence they just
want a comfortable alternative to the cse search box in the default home
page. Instead, it seems to me obvious that the two searches are the
same. The problem is which search is pushed to users.

> Many points have been raised throughout this
> conversation and while there is clearly passion in the air, I appreciate
> the constructive feedback that has been raised here. I would just ask
> that we focus our passion on solutions as opposed to tension.
>

I tried to be constructive on the issue for a very long time, but when I
was the only one asking questions, I was completely ignored. Only when
the FUD started spreading, and conspiracy theories came around, and many
people started asking questions and complaining, I saw some shy reply.
So I understood the message. You wanted to be silent on the issue as
long as possible. My mother has been using your google custom search for
several months until I realised the fact and then passed by my home.
This is just because I trusted hardy as the best linux distribution of
its times. This led me to tension, do you see why or is it entirely
normal for you that the start page looks like googe but it's not google?

Now I want to try to be constructive, again, but honestly I feel like
something is very wrong with the way questions are being addressed.

Can you just reply to one question: "why users have not been informed
since hardy, that is, why there is no short sentence and link to longer
explanation about what a CSE is, in the default start page?".

> I can assure you all there is no conspiracy, no cabal, no secret
> handshakes.

I can assure you that I believe there is no conspiracy until now. I
believe that it was more comfortable for you to start gathering data
without informing the users, because you didn't want to risk that users
opted out. Can you provide a different explanation?

What I ask for is a new "principle" in ubuntu, that is, commit to
respect of users privacy. That is, I don't want to wake up tomorrow and
discovered that all the commands I type in my shell are sent to
canonical for anonymous stats. I want to be sure that "evil" things like
using a CSE in the default start page without warning users will not be
done in the future.

I want to avoid running a firewall on MY system to protect ME from MY
OWN applications. This is what people does on windows, it's laughable
and concerning. I want to be able to trust ubuntu.

> The Canonical that has been a primary sponsor of the Ubuntu
> project is little different today as it was at the beginning of the
> project in terms of how it prioritizes and works with the community.
> While I am not expecting you to take my word for it, I would simply ask
> you to look at the history of Canonical's engagement with the Ubuntu
> project.

By looking back at this history, this is the first time I had any
concerns about my privacy with any free operating system I used. So
would you like to restore your reputation? I can tell you how. Just put
an explanation about the CSE, publish information on what is the
configuration of the CSE itself (because you can include and exclude
sites at your will). Ask google to publish a link to the read-only
configuration in your search page. And commit to "not be evil" in the
future. I'll be happy to show a statement about this commitment to other
people, and to point out that privacy is not an implicit value of free
software, but needs to be explicitly checked each time.

Vincenzo