Review: New Windows 10 version still can't beat Windows 7

There's a difference between giving information willingly for whatever reasons necessary and it being taken without the user's informed consent because most people running Windows 10 right this second - and by most I mean 75 million or more people, seriously - have no idea what's actually going on after they installed Windows 10 whether it was forced/pushed on them or they did it manually.

It's that informed aspect that causes more trouble than it should, but people are stupid, and nothing is going to change that. Need proof that people are stupid?

Donald Trump running for President of the United States insulting every race, color, and creed that crosses his path every time he opens his mouth including disabled people too and he's still leading in the polls? I mean it's bad enough we have to tolerate a boneheaded buffoon like Ben Carson - my god, every time I catch him on any news or political show I am compelled to listen to him for like 2 seconds just to know it's really happening and then I can't change the channel fast enough - but Trump, running, in the lead, it's almost enough to make one commit suicide I swear.

Yeah, stupid people, can't live with 'em, can't kill 'em, I don't know what the hell to do anymore but apparently Microsoft figured out a way to make 'em useful. :D
 
Tiberian said:
There's a difference between giving information willingly for whatever reasons necessary and it being taken without the user's informed consent because most people running Windows 10 right this second - and by most I mean 75 million or more people, seriously - have no idea what's actually going on after they installed Windows 10 whether it was forced/pushed on them or they did it manually.

It's that informed aspect that causes more trouble than it should, but people are stupid, and nothing is going to change that. Need proof that people are stupid?

Donald Trump running for President of the United States insulting every race, color, and creed that crosses his path every time he opens his mouth including disabled people too and he's still leading in the polls? I mean it's bad enough we have to tolerate a boneheaded buffoon like Ben Carson - my god, every time I catch him on any news or political show I am compelled to listen to him for like 2 seconds just to know it's really happening and then I can't change the channel fast enough - but Trump, running, in the lead, it's almost enough to make one commit suicide I swear.

Yeah, stupid people, can't live with 'em, can't kill 'em, I don't know what the hell to do anymore but apparently Microsoft figured out a way to make 'em useful. :D
Click to expand...

Preach it, brother! I couldn't agree more. The willful ignorance and flat out stupidity that saturates modern society is truly infuriating. It's like humanity is the "boiling frog", slowly being cooked to death, only we KNOW what's coming. But, the majority of the population either denies it or doesn't give a shit. The feeling I get from most people is this: Microsoft, Google, or pretty much any other corporation at this point are spying on everything we do? Oh anyone who's concerned about that is a tinfoil hat wearing crackpot, we just need to give in, let it happen and be good little sheeple. Fuck that.
 
Reus said:
The feeling I get from most people is this: Microsoft, Google, or pretty much any other corporation at this point are spying on everything we do? Oh anyone who's concerned about that is a tinfoil hat wearing crackpot, we just need to give in, let it happen and be good little sheeple. Fuck that.
Click to expand...

I never heard of spying before that came with documentation as to how it works or that it even is occurring. I'm not saying this situation is perfect or ideal. But we now have more devices on the planet than people connected in real time to a global network. How does such an apparatus NOT reduce privacy but its very nature?

All this stuff happened to make out lives better and overall to this point I think that's the case. But there's never been a widely deployed technology that didn't have negative side effects.
 
heatlesssun said:
I never heard of spying before that came with documentation as to how it works or that it even is occurring. I'm not saying this situation is perfect or ideal. But we now have more devices on the planet than people connected in real time to a global network. How does such an apparatus NOT reduce privacy but its very nature?

All this stuff happened to make out lives better and overall to this point I think that's the case. But there's never been a widely deployed technology that didn't have negative side effects.
Click to expand...

Agree, but, like you have said, it really would have been nice to be given the option to opt out completely with a simple button.
 
heatlesssun said:
All this stuff happened to make out lives better and overall to this point I think that's the case. But there's never been a widely deployed technology that didn't have negative side effects.
Click to expand...

There's a fine line between what can be done to make our lives better and doing things that people in general would not actually want. Mass surveillance 24/7 is fronted from the idea that "It's better if <whatever organization or government> watches over the population 24/7 in any and all situations because you as an individual don't have the resources to do such a thing so we know what's best and we can monitor everything to protect you."

The problem there is that government isn't supposed to protect people. It's supposed to serve them as they require and want, given people's opinions but the real issue is that people in general don't give a flying fuck about things that actually are important and instead prefer to live their narrow profile lives of doing the same things daily and having their routine and they'll only stand up and raise hell when something interrupts their routine. Find someone that makes the stupid claim "I don't have anything to hide..." and then visit them after their identity has been stolen, their bank accounts or savings or stock holdings wiped out, their homes foreclosed, their vehicles repossessed, or something equally damaging with respect to information they realize after the fact was indeed something they would really have preferred to remain hidden. I assure you, nobody that's ever found themselves in that situation will go back to the same points of view they had prior to their lives being turned upside down because of what happened to them.

Hence the reason that mass surveillance overall isn't something that really gets people overall to move on and stand up against. You get a minority position that realizes what's going on and has the gumption to stand up and say "You know, this shit ain't right and it needs to stop." What do you get from the overall population when that happens? You get people in general responding with "Oh sit down and shut up, you idiot, you're bothering me with all that useless ranting bullshit..." or something to that effect.

It's not the government's job to make our lives better. It's not the role of police or law enforcement to "protect and serve" either - serve, yes, protect, no. My protection, my life, is my responsibility in any situations and at all times just as yours is to you and others are to themselves. If people are expecting cops and law enforcement to protect them, well, they have even bigger problems but they can't apparently grasp that concept: law enforcement is by definition a body designed to enforce laws, nothing more, nothing less.

Government is by definition a body designed to govern, not rule, not make laws that give them abilities that the general population doesn't have and never will have access to, and so on. Governments are going way way too far these days and the situation is getting worse. I constantly mention that TED Talk with Glenn Greenwald about why privacy matters because it really DOES matter, far far more than the general population of non-caring narrow profile "I don't care just leave me out of it" people would ever dare to consider.

The problem comes from so many of those narrow profile going through life with blinders on people not taking a stance on something like privacy - in any and all manners whatsoever - which in the long run comes back to bite ME in the ass when I end up losing rights because the majority of the stupid people have simply tossed said right(s) away without a care in the world.

Make no mistake: I don't give a shit if someone else has nothing to hide but they always do have something to hide they're just too stupid to care - need proof? How many members of this forum use their real birth names as their member name aside from the founder of [H], Kyle Bennett and maybe a handful of others? - what I give a shit about is the fact that if enough of those stupid people get together and become a majority (sadly, they already do, to the tune of probably 95% of the US) then their dismissal of said right(s) becomes a problem for those of us in the minority (seriously) because we're losing rights we'd rather not actually lose.

So yeah, privacy matters, in everything.
 
Tiberian said:
There's a fine line between what can be done to make our lives better and doing things that people in general would not actually want. Mass surveillance 24/7 is fronted from the idea that "It's better if <whatever organization or government> watches over the population 24/7 in any and all situations because you as an individual don't have the resources to do such a thing so we know what's best and we can monitor everything to protect you."
Click to expand...

How many people now carry a tracking device with them everywhere they go now? And not only do it voluntarily but pay for the privilege in the form of a phone bill?
 
heatlesssun said:
How many people now carry a tracking device with them everywhere they go now? And not only do it voluntarily but pay for the privilege in the form of a phone bill?
Click to expand...

And that's my choice to carry that tracking device in my pocket and I can stop all that data if I so desire.

I have no choice in Windows 10 sending data to Microsoft. Regardless of what that data is for, the user to not have a choice is wrong and Microsoft needs to get off their high horse and make it completely optional. A huge percentage of people will most certainly leave it on so giving those who care about an off switch should mean very little to MS.

Microsoft made it very easy for me to decide to fully ditch Windows for Linux for good thanks to Windows 8/8.1 and now 10. So I thank them for that.
 
Vermillion said:
I have no choice in Windows 10 sending data to Microsoft.
Click to expand...

Yes you do. There are around two dozen options to control what is sent based on features desired. There's even control of what's sent in telemetry but the basic cannot be turned off. That includes software and hardware configuration information and basic crash data from Microsoft's documentation which no personal information or personally identifiable data stored.

So these are the facts as I understand them and there's nothing from any reliable source to dispute them. We are talking about one setting here that can't readily be disabled by the average user out of two dozen that can.

If people want on off switch for this one setting then I think it helps to be SPECIFIC about what is going on here and not hyping everything so much where simple facts are getting lost like the fact that there's a lot more control than none already there.
 
heatlesssun said:
Yes you do. There are around two dozen options to control what is sent based on features desired. There's even control of what's sent in telemetry but the basic cannot be turned off. That includes software and hardware configuration information and basic crash data from Microsoft's documentation which no personal information or personally identifiable data stored.

So these are the facts as I understand them and there's nothing from any reliable source to dispute them. We are talking about one setting here that can't readily be disabled by the average user out of two dozen that can.

If people want on off switch for this one setting then I think it helps to be SPECIFIC about what is going on here and not hyping everything so much where simple facts are getting lost like the fact that there's a lot more control than none already there.
Click to expand...

OK, I poorly worded but I thought the context of my post was pretty much to the point. My smartphone I can kill all transmissions if I so desire (with the exception of cell tower pings) but you can't do that with Windows 10.

I have SOME choice in Windows 10 sending data. I can disable the bloat that is Cortana and other worthless bloat from MS that I have no desire to use. However, in a world of data breaches every day why would I trust MS about what data is being sent to them when we can't see what is being transmitted? We're supposed to trust the almighty Microsoft because it says so in a document? Uh...no and that goes for any company.

That's why people are asking for an on/off switch. I'm sorry but I don't want my Windows installation talking to MS at ALL unless I give it permission to . That's my prerogative. It's my PC. Not theirs.

Want to know how much data my Arch Linux install sends out right now without permission? That would be none which is exactly what Windows should be doing.
 
heatlesssun said:
Yes you do. There are around two dozen options to control what is sent based on features desired. There's even control of what's sent in telemetry but the basic cannot be turned off. That includes software and hardware configuration information and basic crash data from Microsoft's documentation which no personal information or personally identifiable data stored.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand or are just refusing to.

The "options" that Microsoft provides for you to "control" what information is sent is IGNORED. They are DUDS. It even goes so far as to throw errors in the event log that look legit...and behind the scenes, the OS is sending information, ignoring your choices. Ever done a Wireshark? You might want to try it one day on a Windows 10 OS device.

heatlesssun said:
If people want on off switch for this one setting then I think it helps to be SPECIFIC about what is going on here and not hyping everything so much where simple facts are getting lost like the fact that there's a lot more control than none already there.
Click to expand...

This is so easy, which defies reason that you're missing the point. We want a switch to turn off the reporting, completely, and have the OS respect that choice. If you say there's a lot more control than none, why isn't MS putting in that simple switch, and instead resorting to malware tactics by purposely ignoring the choices you set for privacy???
 
I don't think Windows 10 is an operating system in full surveillance mode.

Windows 10 seems to border on the creepy by default, along the lines of behavior seen most frequently with ad networks and Google. It's the sort of creepy most people tune out, a small number find helpful, and a small number find troubling. And like ad networks and Google, if you know how to do it, these things can be minimized, turned off, or blocked. It's a trend I don't like though. On the web, it's a trend that is being fought.

On the web, I can give a few examples of what I don't like. Most unhelpful is when I have went to an online store, searched for and bought something I only needed one of, and now the ad networks are advertising to me the thing I already bought. It's also annoying when I look up something for someone else (or just for reference) that I had no interest in and now the ad networks are advertising it to me. The creepy factor is when I search Amazon for something, decide I want to make a decision later, then go to other sites but find the ads haven't left my Amazon shopping experience.

As far as I can tell, any part of Windows 10 that could be described as being like the experience above can be turned off. It seems ridiculous that there are so many places to go, (including to a Bing page) to turn it off, but this is the sort of thing Microsoft is known for, and I can't point to anyone doing it "right".

Some of this is new and some of this is old for Microsoft. When activation, Windows Error Reporting (WER), and Customer Experience Improvement Program (CEIP) came along, there were accusations of Microsoft spying and sending data back to Redmond. So far, I believe activation and WER have been proven mostly innocuous. I think some of what's in Windows 10 is an extension of CEIP.

What I am missing from the debates is why so much hatred to those who want privacy or options? Is it not the case that anything that could prompt Microsoft to improve Windows is good for all? There is a concept of the principle of least privilege as a generally accepted good thing to work towards. Why can't there be a principle of least personal information or principle of most privacy? The idea would be that for a given desired service, only the least amount of information should be gathered and maintained for the least amount of time to provide the service (last I looked, many search engines keep information for around a year). A corollary would be that if you do not want a service, you should not be forced to use it.

The other missing piece is why so much hatred when someone proclaims this is the last straw and they're moving to Linux? If you're a dedicated Windows user, is this not akin to a kid taking his ball and leaving a playground where balls are plentiful? Can we not wish them luck, realizing they will have their own set of problems to deal with and welcome back anyone who found the grass was not conclusively greener, just a different shade? Maybe I need to pull the flower from my head and quit humming kumbaya here or whatever. Maybe we can't all just get along.
 
The thing about documenting something is you can't document everything. So then it becomes a matter of what is and what is not being documented. Even if you could document everything, there is a trade-off between completeness and readability. Then there's what I've read so far from Microsoft. Everything I've read so far seems vague and to lack precision. There are many points where I'd read a part and wonder what they mean by something. I don't think these are problems specific to Microsoft but rather with the type of documents they're producing that are surely going through their Legal and PR departments. And then some will not be satisfied with any amount of information provided, no matter how much.

Also, there is plenty of information to be had about international spy agencies (spying is documented too). That documentation exists. It's just general and does not go into detail about the specific internal workings or activities of the agencies. It may even be disinformation in the case of spying.
 
Last edited:
ajm786 said:
I don't think you understand or are just refusing to.

The "options" that Microsoft provides for you to "control" what information is sent is IGNORED. They are DUDS. It even goes so far as to throw errors in the event log that look legit...and behind the scenes, the OS is sending information, ignoring your choices. Ever done a Wireshark? You might want to try it one day on a Windows 10 OS device.



This is so easy, which defies reason that you're missing the point. We want a switch to turn off the reporting, completely, and have the OS respect that choice. If you say there's a lot more control than none, why isn't MS putting in that simple switch, and instead resorting to malware tactics by purposely ignoring the choices you set for privacy???
Click to expand...

I would very much like to see proof of this. The closest thing I can find is this article I read awhile back on ars: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/even-when-told-not-to-windows-10-just-cant-stop-talking-to-microsoft/

Most of this is windows downloading data from Microsoft which, while annoying, isn't necessarily an invasion of privacy (unless you consider your IP address private).

The more troubling section is when ars says that encrypted telemetry data is sent to MS even with telemetry disabled with group policy. "We disabled telemetry on our test machine using group policies."

I like ars alot, but the problem with their logic is that by Microsoft's own admission telemetry cannot be turned off via group policy on the home or pro versions. So they haven't turned off anything. Meaning they're probably on the basic setting which, as Microsoft describes, does not send personal info.

Anyway the other part of the article mentions requests to a CDN which is creepy when it's not mentioned by MS. But I haven't seen any source talk about what this is.

Don't get me wrong I think Microsoft has to be open about this stuff. And I'll fight for that knowledge. I just don't think they're being intentionally wanton about personally identifiable info (yet).
 
Last edited:
ajm786 said:
I don't think you understand or are just refusing to.

The "options" that Microsoft provides for you to "control" what information is sent is IGNORED. They are DUDS. It even goes so far as to throw errors in the event log that look legit...and behind the scenes, the OS is sending information, ignoring your choices. Ever done a Wireshark? You might want to try it one day on a Windows 10 OS device.
Click to expand...

This has been said plenty of times and it started out with some Czech guy that made all kinds of accusations like web cams doing secret recordings and an Ars Technica article that showed encrypted traffic beginning sent but the basic telemetry was still on and there was no proof that the settings weren't being honored.

This is a serious accusation and yes, there's the burden of proof on the accuser here because what this means is that Microsoft put in two dozen switches to control this and is flat out lying. For what purpose? To minimize everyone's data at the risk of being caught in a flat out huge lie?
 
Russell, is that you?

you sound just like him.... a co worker that thinks MS can do no wrong....
 
heatlesssun said:
This has been said plenty of times and it started out with some Czech guy that made all kinds of accusations like web cams doing secret recordings and an Ars Technica article that showed encrypted traffic beginning sent but the basic telemetry was still on and there was no proof that the settings weren't being honored.

This is a serious accusation and yes, there's the burden of proof on the accuser here because what this means is that Microsoft put in two dozen switches to control this and is flat out lying. For what purpose? To minimize everyone's data at the risk of being caught in a flat out huge lie?
Click to expand...
There is evidence that data is being sent out when the author did all he could to ensure all settings were set to minimize data exfiltration from his system. This is suspicious. The data being sent is also encrypted, so unless Microsoft is willing or is doing something wrong, there is no telling what the data contains.

So this leads me to state that unless you clarify the circumstances under which you are making this claim, then the statement "there's the burden of proof on the accuser here" is meaningless. I am no lawyer, but even in a court of law, there are circumstances where the burden of proof is not on the accuser. In many cases, circumstantial evidence is enough. A case just needs to be made, and irrefutable proof is not needed. If it is the case that in a court of law, the burden of proof is not always on the accuser, then this is certainly true for the court of public opinion.

I don't want to be this guy, but it could also be said that Microsoft is making the claim that they allow you to turn off all but basic telemetry. Can it therefore be said that this is also a serious claim under which the burden of proof to make such a claim is on Microsoft (especially when Windows clearly still talks back to Microsoft)?

It seems you want to end discussion with your "burden of proof" comment, and it doesn't do that.
 
heatlesssun said:
What am saying is documented here: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/mt577208(v=vs.85).aspx#BKMK_MoreUTC
Click to expand...

Microsoft can say whatever they like. That's like the NSA saying they don't spy on Americans. Turns out they are spying on EVERYONE, American or not.

Bottom line is that this is a PC. PC means Personal Computer. I don't mind the OS having telemetry built in, as long as we are given the option to disable it completely if we don't want it. That simple. Instead, Microsoft resorts to behavior that is known colloquially as malware. :rolleyes:
 
ajm786 said:
Microsoft can say whatever they like. That's like the NSA saying they don't spy on Americans. Turns out they are spying on EVERYONE, American or not.
Click to expand...

And so then how does one rationally discuss this? That's why this has pretty much become a non-issue, like it generally does. Yes there are legitimate concerns and complaints and then it spirals down into conspiracy land and at that point most people just tune it out.

If by using Windows 10 people end up getting information comprised or thrown in prison then we were warned. I think that's really all that's left to say about this issue anymore.
 
heatlesssun said:
And so then how does one rationally discuss this? That's why this has pretty much become a non-issue, like it generally does. Yes there are legitimate concerns and complaints and then it spirals down into conspiracy land and at that point most people just tune it out.
Click to expand...

We keep having this discussion. That's probably the only way MS is going to change. They are treating this topic like they did with the whole Windows 8 debacle, by trying to ram things that THEY thought how our computing experience should be. See how that all turned out.

And I fully disagree that this is a non-issue. It's far from it. Because MS waffling and not being forthcoming, I currently know of no single enterprise customer that is switching to Windows 10, because there is no guarantee that their data is safe.
 
ajm786 said:
We keep having this discussion. That's probably the only way MS is going to change. They are treating this topic like they did with the whole Windows 8 debacle, by trying to ram things that THEY thought how our computing experience should be. See how that all turned out.
Click to expand...

In a world full of devices connected 24x7 to countless services and sharing personal data there's no way that this issue is as concerning to most people as some would lead others to believe. It's simply not possible. That's not an excuse but just being real about it. The world isn't moving away from this stuff, on the contrary it can't seem to get enough.

Whatever mistakes Microsoft is making the one mistake they aren't making is that most people want less leverage of personal data.
 
heatlesssun said:
In a world full of devices connected 24x7 to countless services and sharing personal data there's no way that this issue is as concerning to most people as some would lead others to believe. It's simply not possible. That's not an excuse but just being real about it. The world isn't moving away from this stuff, on the contrary it can't seem to get enough.

Whatever mistakes Microsoft is making the one mistake they aren't making is that most people want less leverage of personal data.
Click to expand...

It sounds like a child who wants to eat ice cream and candy bars for dinner.


edit: which is an applicable comparison to the ways many people behave in our society in general.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top