[bayindirh]

First, fingerprinting & correlation is real, and it's easier than ever because of the identifiers tools collect, and correlating is cheap because we have tons of GPUs for cheap now.

On the other hand, I personally don't like a pair of eyes looking over my shoulder, physical or digital.

People don't understand or don't want to understand that digital telemetry is not different from somebody looking over your shoulder, taking notes, and making "Mhm..." sounds.

When done without consent, both are equally invading personal space, and I don't want my personal space to be invaded like that, as a person on HN, who understands what telemetry is.

[stavros]

Why don't you consent?

[bayindirh]

Part social contract, part the knowledge of what I can do with that data.

You know, somebody coming to your cubicle and taking something without asking is rude, in some cases unethical, even damaging. It's the same thing with computers. No application/website ever should be able to collect information about me without my consent. It's called a "personal computer".

If the application needs telemetry from me, they can ask (not tell we're doing this, but ask), and start the moment I consent. The moment I withdraw my consent all telemetry and data collection should stop. Moreover, I shall be able to see all the telemetry data in its full glory to make my own assessment of what's collected and how.

If you don't know, Go tried this, even with an arguable provable way of anonymization, people roared back, and the decision is changed to "opt-in".

For some applications, I explicitly consent to telemetry because a) They ask, b) They show what they collect and do with it, and c) I do respect and trust them because of the previous encounters I had with them.

The moment they break this social contract, they lose telemetry, and in most cases me as a user.

...and I have nothing to hide.

[bravetraveler]

Child: "I'll be able to run so fast with those light-up shoes"

Parent: "You bet, champ." <buys shoes>

Child: <Same speed, but happy>

Or a perhaps more familiar metaphor: rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic.

Telemetry can absolutely be useful. It can also be a toil fountain. To your point, how they behave/use this matters.

[bayindirh]

I mean, non-consensual telemetry is just recording what you do via your camera all day long, but with light off, without telling you. Replace the camera with any app you use.

Are you comfortable and happy now?

Of course it can be useful & good, but letting people know about what you are doing and asking before doing it is even better, no?

Do the telemetry collectors have something to hide, so they do it covertly or without consent?

[bravetraveler]

+1 - I'm one of the few people who actually reads the source code before I build/use software :)

I won't say I've read all of it, of course: the distribution does a lot of work for me [with earned trust]. I'll risk Fedora over BigCo whims any day.

[solemnlyswear]

> The moment I withdraw my consent all telemetry and data collection should stop.

You can do that by simply going into about:preferences#privacy and unchecking "Allow Firefox to send technical and interaction data to Mozilla"

> I shall be able to see all the telemetry data in its full glory to make my own assessment of what's collected and how.

That's all available in about:telemetry

Firefox is open source and so is the set of telemetry it collects, the schemas are published openly on the web. Every request to add new telemetry is reviewed in a public bugzilla ticket. It's not a mass of dark surveillance capturing unknown information, it's all done in the open in public.