In which we discuss the opt-in/opt-out telemetry straw poll

[jakfrost (Stephen Snow)]

Hello @mattdm ,
Just wondering if the responses could be weighted like voting? And wondering if that would even be useful?

[mattdm (Matthew Miller)]

@jakfrost

Just wondering if the responses could be weighted like voting? And wondering if that would even be useful?

Weighted in what way?

[jakfrost (Stephen Snow)]

Value of preferences, so “on a scale of 0-10, how do you rate this suggestion? 0 Being least favourable, 10 being most favourable.”

[mattdm (Matthew Miller)]

Oh, I understand! Range voting, like we use in the election. Unfortunately, Discourse doesn’t (currently, at least) implement such a poll type.

[jakfrost (Stephen Snow)]

Yes, that is unfortunate.

[be0 (Be)]

@mattdm

Please note that this is a “straw poll ”, to get a better sense of sentiment, not a referendum or official vote. FESCo is an elected group, and it’s their responsibility to make decisions like this. And, in any case, a web forum poll is far from scientific approach.

I think a poll is a better way to gauge consensus than endless circular discussions though.

[dalto]

Buried opt-in is a pretty strange option I think. Seems like an everyone loses scenario.

That basically means we are going to develop and implement a telemetry system but not make it particularly easy for you to enable it.

[paradoxguitarist (Brian Monroe)]

@dalto

That basically means we are going to develop and implement a telemetry system but not make it particularly easy for you to enable it.

lol I agree, but technically I wouldn’t uninstall fedora over it.

[dalto]

@paradoxguitarist

lol I agree, but technically I wouldn’t uninstall fedora over it.

I mean, yeah, I would be fine with that option too. It just seems like a waste of time to even implement it at that point.

[trailingslash]

@paradoxguitarist

lol I agree, but technically I wouldn’t uninstall fedora over it.

why not? there are other good distros without telemetry

(half joke)

[mattdm (Matthew Miller)]

@dalto

I mean, yeah, I would be fine with that option too. It just seems like a waste of time to even implement it at that point.

Like “buried opt-out”, that option is really there for completeness in the list, which I think helps make it all more clear, even if some of the options are silly.

Arguably, we already have “buried opt-in” tools — fpaste, inxi, sos (just off the top of my head).

[ittechnodrone (NB)]

@mattdm

Explicit opt-out: It is just like the explicit opt-in, but the checkbox is checked by default. Notably, the feature is not enabled until a user explicitly sees this choice and continues without opting opt.

This description is NOT ACCURATE! A user could very easily not see the choice, they could just see the next button and click it. This is the kind of thing I talked about earlier that you asked me about. Notice how the phrasing “until a user explicitly sees this choice and continues” isn’t in the description for Explicit Opt In? You are blurring the line to bias a perspective (by appearance, may not be intentional- updated: Matt pointed to the post the phrasing came from and it wasn’t his or a clear proponents wording. It is still inaccurate and is a positive bias to the option). I propose the wording be changed to “consent isn’t assumed until the user is presented with this choice and activates a button to continue” (what actually happens).

[sampsonf (Sampson Fung)]

This can be useful during development and test phase of the implementation details.

[hankuoffroad (hank)]

Before I cast a vote, what type of data will be in scope? I’m not up to date with all related discussions because they are overwhelming to me.

[dalto]

@hankuoffroad

Before I cast a vote, what type of data will be in scope?

It hasn’t been fully determined but this post describes the proposal author’s expectations:

What data will be collected, exactly? — a breakout topic for the F40 Change Request on Privacy-preserving telemetry for Fedora Workstation

Here is my full list of what metrics we might want to propose to collect in the future. But this list is just brainstorming. I am NOT yet proposing to actually collect any of these data points, and I would expect we’d never actually implement collection of most of them. It’s just to give you an idea of what sort of data might want to collect. The list is a little raw because it’s just a brainstorming document from two years ago. More likely, what we actually wind up collecting will be determin…

[hankuoffroad (hank)]

Thanks for helping me get grasp of the situation.

I think it is fair to categorize the types of data, on which users choose to opt in explicitly.

• User behavior, preference: it is mostly what goes into corporate Big Data warehouse. Debatable and spurious if we collect this type of data.
• Failure or fault detection: could be useful for development and QA
• User experience-related data: for UX/UI design, we can justify it.

So, if we allow selective opt-in for clearly categorized data, we could mitigate pushback little bit.

[trailingslash]

@mattdm why the UNOFFICIAL poll about OPT-OUT metrics proposal not also pinned? I think it’s much more accurately reflects the original telemetry proposal.

Also why not link 2 polles in the “main” thread?

[mattdm (Matthew Miller)]

@trailingslash

@mattdm why the UNOFFICIAL poll about OPT-OUT metrics proposal not also pinned? I think it’s much more accurately reflects the original telemetry proposal.

To me, this more nuanced poll effectively supplants that one.

Also, I know the wording mine probably isn’t perfect, but I think it may have confused some people. The percentage of people who voted in that one that they’d be okay with “OPT-OUT (on by default)” seems high, compared to the numbers here for both opt-out options added together.

And finally, while I agree (after careful parsing!) that that does better represent the initial proposal, I think the proposers might actually be convinced to try the “explicit choice” option, which wasn’t in original consideration at all, so I think it’s basically obsolete.

Does that make sense? I’m willing to be convinced otherwise!

[mattdm (Matthew Miller)]

@trailingslash

Also why not link 2 polles in the “main” thread?

I’ve added this one, at least, to Opt-in / Opt-Out? A breakout topic for the F40 Change Request on Privacy-preserving telemetry for Fedora Workstation — I think that makes more sense than the main thread.

[trailingslash]

@mattdm

Also, I know the wording mine probably isn’t perfect, but I think it may have confused some people. The percentage of people who voted in that one that they’d be okay with “OPT-OUT (on by default)” seems high, compared to the numbers here for both opt-out options added together.

I think this “Straw poll” is more confusing to parse, it also has many options and you can vote for multiple entries, so interpret its results is much harder.

On the other hand we have “Unofficial poll” - simple, direct, to the point poll. IMO “Unofficial poll” should be the main poll.

@mattdm

And finally, while I agree (after careful parsing!) that that does better represent the initial proposal, I think the proposers might actually be convinced to try the “explicit choice” option, which wasn’t in original consideration at all, so I think it’s basically obsolete.

Well, they might be convinced or not, no one knows. I guess this is a hypothetical question.
The most important part - what is the current status of telemetry proposal? Which is: opt-out (enabled by dafault) telemetry or no telemetry.

Until they not convinced “Unofficial poll” should be the main poll that clearly represent the initial proposal.