[alkonaut]

I usually just download and install the latest driver with regular intervals. I don't choose to install/use GeForce Experience, and now that it requires login I certainly won't.

Why would I want to use this Exprience thing anyway? It's crapware, right?

As for telemetry - as long as software only sends reasonable things (feature usage etc) and uses reasonable bandwidth, I'm completely fine. I honestly don't even mind if programs do it without asking and I think all apps should have feature statistics telemetry to be able to cut (or make more discoverable) features no one uses.

[dsissitka]

> Why would I want to use this Exprience thing anyway? It's crapware, right?

I use it for NVIDIA Share. It's my understanding that GPU-based alternatives can't compete because NVIDIA won't give them access to NVFBC and NVIFR. The creator of RivaTuner goes into more detail here:

http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4687310&postcount=61

http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=5294898&postcount=5

[alkonaut]

Is the share function that much better than the built in win10 one? I quite like that one but the video quality is so-so.

Might just try experience 2.x which is still around. I don't mind telemetry I do mind s mandatory Facebook login...

[shostack]

The problem is you'll never fully know what info they collect and send, and who might have access to it.

It is equivalent to installing spyware.

[alkonaut]

If a program isn't evil, then it does only things that shouldn't require permission. Example: include the OS version and RAM amount in the http request to the upgrade server that is done on every startup.

Any info ever collected by no-permissions-asked telemetry must be such that it doesn't matter who has the information or what they do with it. If it isn't information of that kind then of course a program should ask permission. But that in my view isn't "telemetry" then. If it collects anything even remotely user-identifying or personal then it's in my definition not telemetry and should never be done without permission (if at all).

If a program really is malicious, then it doesn't matter if it asks for permission because why would that wouldn't respect the users wish anyway?

My argument wasn't pro/against telemetry, it was that asking permission doesn't change anything. Permission isn't what tells malicious programs from others. A benign program doesn't do things that needs permission to begin with.

[nitrogen]

One problem is that several seemingly innocuous pieces of data can be combined to create a unique ID. See the Panopticlick for an example.

[alkonaut]

Yeah, if someone e.g. gets my complete hw fingerprint, I'm identifiable. But it's no worse than I'm already uniquely id'd by visiting pretty much any website today. I don't like it, but I also don't see a point in being outraged when my music player does it but not when my favorite website does it.

[EasyTiger_]

You seem very willing to just dish your data over to everyone - can I install some software on your computer, too?

[alkonaut]

Well if you make a piece of useful software I'll install it (I'd rather install it myself).

I'm not very generous with my data at all - but I'd rather trust my firewall to protect my data, than a dialog that asks me if I'm OK with sharing it. That was my point.

[voltagex_]

Is anyone going to packet capture it and find out?