[cromka]

> Telemetry and spyware differ only in the way collected data is used.

No, they first and foremost differ in the kind of data is collected. Spying is not spying if you anonymously collect information about how frequently a feature/future/option is used only.

[ptx]

What if you repeatedly fail to anonymize the information and also collect user-entered data like command line arguments?

https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/issues/6145

[cromka]

Well, you make my point. What you linked to is definitely not telemetry.

[ptx]

So is your point that what Microsoft is doing is in fact spyware and not technically "telemetry", since what I linked to is what they are actually doing? In that case, to avoid confusion, we should stop referring to it as telemetry.

[cromka]

Yes, agreed. In that example, that was spyware, but calling "telemetry" spyware by default is wrong.

[marcosdumay]

> What you linked to is definitely not telemetry.

So, the OP was correct in calling it just spyware?

Why do people jump into defending corporations that repeatedly abuse their customers when they do unknowable hidden actions?

[cromka]

We're not defending any company here, don't twist my words. I am saying "telemetry" is not spyware, if it actually serves its purpose. Companies abusing "telemetry" to extract more information than they should is a different story.

[sangnoir]

I disagree - they are correct because once collected, the data is fed into a blackbox, and a user has no way of knowing if the data collected is - by your definition - spyware or telemetry. The beat way to treat this Schrodinger's telemetry, is to assume it's spyware.

[CamperBob2]

Would it be OK if the NSA required it? No? Well, it's not OK for your OS vendor to require it, either.

And the illusion that it will always be possible to disable telemetry is just that, an illusion.