OSS Moq Quietly Collects Data: An OSS Dev's Reaction?
-
It seems quite likely that the OSS Dev of Moq was attempting to finally get a little payback for all the (unrecognized & unpaid) work completed. Popular open source project Moq criticized for quietly collecting data[^] If you read the article you will hear the outrage of all the users of the FREE library. "oh, it's so terrible that the OSS Dev OWNER added something to his code that does this." I admit, I wouldn't like discovering that this was added either, but it is the prerogative of the OWNER. But the outrage seems much off-kilter. You see, once the OSS dev tries to get any value out of what s/he has done then all the users turn against them. All because the users feel entitled now. It makes sense that 99.9% of people will agree with the outrage against the Moq OSS dev because 99.9% of the people are using the library free and want all the benefits without any skin in the game. X|
-
It seems quite likely that the OSS Dev of Moq was attempting to finally get a little payback for all the (unrecognized & unpaid) work completed. Popular open source project Moq criticized for quietly collecting data[^] If you read the article you will hear the outrage of all the users of the FREE library. "oh, it's so terrible that the OSS Dev OWNER added something to his code that does this." I admit, I wouldn't like discovering that this was added either, but it is the prerogative of the OWNER. But the outrage seems much off-kilter. You see, once the OSS dev tries to get any value out of what s/he has done then all the users turn against them. All because the users feel entitled now. It makes sense that 99.9% of people will agree with the outrage against the Moq OSS dev because 99.9% of the people are using the library free and want all the benefits without any skin in the game. X|
So because you're not paying for it, the developer is entitled to run whatever code they want on any computer that uses it, are they? :doh: I understand the frustration; if you release an OSS project, and then see lots of large multi-million dollar companies using it for free, without bothering to sponsor the project, I would imagine it's quite galling. Even more so if they start demanding support and/or fixes in the same way they would from a commercial tool vendor. But that doesn't mean you get to exfiltrate personal data from the computers of every dev using your library - in direct contravention of GDPR at the very least - to send to your closed-source C&C server for whatever purpose you see fit. His initial tone-deaf responses to any and all criticism also didn't help the situation. Basically, "I gave you a free pint of beer" does NOT imply, "... therefore, I get to break into your house and make a list of all of your DVDs for 'reasons'." :suss:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined" - Homer
-
So because you're not paying for it, the developer is entitled to run whatever code they want on any computer that uses it, are they? :doh: I understand the frustration; if you release an OSS project, and then see lots of large multi-million dollar companies using it for free, without bothering to sponsor the project, I would imagine it's quite galling. Even more so if they start demanding support and/or fixes in the same way they would from a commercial tool vendor. But that doesn't mean you get to exfiltrate personal data from the computers of every dev using your library - in direct contravention of GDPR at the very least - to send to your closed-source C&C server for whatever purpose you see fit. His initial tone-deaf responses to any and all criticism also didn't help the situation. Basically, "I gave you a free pint of beer" does NOT imply, "... therefore, I get to break into your house and make a list of all of your DVDs for 'reasons'." :suss:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
I agree with you, except maybe the free "pint of beer" isn't the analogy we need here. Let's Change The Analogy :) I think OSS may be more like giving away a FREE Trojan Horse (that you expect to be nice) and then when the Trojan Horse ends up being nasty, then we all complain. :rolleyes: And, I absolutely agree with you that exfiltrating data is evil. I don't want that from software on my computer either. But, what about Windows? They seem to be gathering tons of user data all the time because Win10 / 11 is basically free. All the other companies too. But they're BigCorps so we (have to ) overlook it. Also, I run Ubuntu 22.04.2 LTS desktop. Of course my laptop has Windows 10 on it too so...
-
It seems quite likely that the OSS Dev of Moq was attempting to finally get a little payback for all the (unrecognized & unpaid) work completed. Popular open source project Moq criticized for quietly collecting data[^] If you read the article you will hear the outrage of all the users of the FREE library. "oh, it's so terrible that the OSS Dev OWNER added something to his code that does this." I admit, I wouldn't like discovering that this was added either, but it is the prerogative of the OWNER. But the outrage seems much off-kilter. You see, once the OSS dev tries to get any value out of what s/he has done then all the users turn against them. All because the users feel entitled now. It makes sense that 99.9% of people will agree with the outrage against the Moq OSS dev because 99.9% of the people are using the library free and want all the benefits without any skin in the game. X|
I don't think the outrage is off-kilter in the slightest. They were not told data would be collected from them so they are under no obligation what so ever to tolerate that nonsense. If the author wanted compensation then they should not have provided the software for free. Since they DID provide it for free that does NOT entitle them to collect any data from their users or to do anything else without their prior consent. 99.9% of those users did not expect there to be strings attached and I can not believe you consider that to be acceptable.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
