The Manjaro Linux team are asking for testers for their new data collection tool called "Manjaro Data Donor", which they plan to have as opt-out and not opt-in.
As expected, they are catching some comments from users not particularly happy about their plan to have it hooked up as something you have to opt out of due to privacy concerns. Telemetry is often a bad word to a lot of people, but the reality is that when done correctly it can be truly essential for projects to know where to focus.
Manjaro developer Roman Gilg said in the announcement that currently they use Matomo, which is pinged via the Network Manager but it's unreliable for various reasons. So they created Manjaro Data Donor (MDD) which gives more information and should be more reliable overall, and they actually have full control over it.
Currently they just want Manjaro users to test it and give feedback, but eventually it will be hooked up as a systemd service:
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.In the next few days we’ll do some more testing and if results are positive, I plan on installing it on all Manjaro systems and adding a systemd service to submit the data automatically.
As a reminder: Right now you have to install MDD manually and there is no systemd service yet.
With this systemd service later in place, sending the hardware data with MDD will be opt-out because I believe, if you do opt-in, the data you gather will be so heavily skewed you can just leave it be.
Let me know what you think. I know telemetry is a contentious subject, but we need at least some data about how Manjaro is being used by so many people around the world in order to show that the project has a future and also to plan for that future.
You seem very agitated about this for some reason. Might want to take some distance from this.Sounded like a joke-y riposte to dpanter's over the top suggestion, to me! Tone is so hard on the internet.
ElectricPrism Nov 7
In my country real organ donorship is opt-out and that's right approach as wellWhich country is that? Sounds like human rights violation to me.
I can't believe he made a false equivilancy and compared the gathering of some machine statistics to the state butchering people alive.
This is a topic where being ignorant and opting-in have serious reprecussions.
There is a difference between the date on a death certificate, and the reality. And strictly speaking from a cold truth & surgical perspective -- the organs are optimal for successful use when they are not harvested post-death.
With that in mind take for example this recent news article from just 3 weeks ago
Natasha Miller says she was getting ready to do her job preserving donated organs for transplantation when the nurses wheeled the donor into the operating room.
She quickly realized something wasn’t right. Though the donor had been declared dead, he seemed to her very much alive.
“He was moving around — kind of thrashing. Like, moving, thrashing around on the bed,” Miller told NPR in an interview. “And then when we went over there, you could see he had tears coming down. He was crying visibly.”
The donor’s condition alarmed everyone in the operating room at Baptist Health hospital in Richmond, Ky., including the two doctors, who refused to participate in the organ retrieval, she says.
https://npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2024/10/16/nx-s1-5113976/organ-transplantion-mistake-brain-dead-surgery-still-alive
Denial is a powerful drug. Truth is sobering. If anyone thinks opting in is still a good idea after considering the facts -- best of luck.
In my country [...] and that's right approach as well
Also, could we just not do the "My country is better than you & your country thing" -- if you have to do the "Go My Team" thing, stick to the Platform Wars, or Software or something else that is not divisive if you would kindly.
Hang on a minute. So if I understand correctly, your comment is in opposition to opt-out organ donation, which you characterize as the state butchering living people. But--what state?! Your example is a private hospital ("Baptist Health hospital"), in a place with opt-in organ donation. In the United States, notorious for utterly unethical private health care. It's not clear from the article that the guy was even an organ donor!In my country real organ donorship is opt-out and that's right approach as wellWhich country is that? Sounds like human rights violation to me.
I can't believe he made a false equivilancy and compared the gathering of some machine statistics to the state butchering people alive.
This is a topic where being ignorant and opting-in have serious reprecussions.
There is a difference between the date on a death certificate, and the reality. And strictly speaking from a cold truth & surgical perspective -- the organs are optimal for successful use when they are not harvested post-death.
With that in mind take for example this recent news article from just 3 weeks ago
Natasha Miller says she was getting ready to do her job preserving donated organs for transplantation when the nurses wheeled the donor into the operating room.
She quickly realized something wasn’t right. Though the donor had been declared dead, he seemed to her very much alive.
“He was moving around — kind of thrashing. Like, moving, thrashing around on the bed,” Miller told NPR in an interview. “And then when we went over there, you could see he had tears coming down. He was crying visibly.”
The donor’s condition alarmed everyone in the operating room at Baptist Health hospital in Richmond, Ky., including the two doctors, who refused to participate in the organ retrieval, she says.
https://npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2024/10/16/nx-s1-5113976/organ-transplantion-mistake-brain-dead-surgery-still-alive
Denial is a powerful drug. Truth is sobering. If anyone thinks opting in is still a good idea after considering the facts -- best of luck.
In my country [...] and that's right approach as well
Also, could we just not do the "My country is better than you & your country thing" -- if you have to do the "Go My Team" thing, stick to the Platform Wars, or Software or something else that is not divisive if you would kindly.
So this strikes me as an example supporting exactly the opposite. It shows that it is indeed the state, not the private sector, that should be doing health care. And what your example says to me is, opt-in organ donation is going to tend to result in a shortage of organs, and lead to scrambles to grab whatever organs become available without paying much attention to safeguards. If organ donation is opt-out, so that most patients are organ donors, there will be no such shortage and more care can be taken.
And finally, it drives home for me that the "my country is better than you & your country" is awfully tempting when "your country" is the United States, self-proclaimed indispensable nation, greatest country in the world etc.
I think this is fine if they give you an undismissable prompt telling you they're going to do it and letting you opt out.This is basically what I wanted to say as well, except the detail I'd add is showing a sample of what data will be sent.
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me