That's not what I was suggesting; I'm suggesting that message be popped up at some kind of "first run" point, or maybe when turning the feature on (assuming it were changed to opt-in). Obviously popping it up every time would be a useless annoyance.
What notice would that be? Is there anywhere in the OS where the user is informed of the Dash's behavior?I think Canonical provides sufficient notice as it stands.
Do I have to explain my point yet again? I *expect* a web browser to send data over the web. When I use a web browser, I use it with that reality in mind. When you open a terminal and type a command, do you *expect* your console session to be sent to a remote web server over unencrypted http? Would you be unpleasantly surprised to find out that it was? (No, before you attack that point as a strawman, I'm not saying that Ubuntu's terminal does that. It's a hypothetical comparison).In any case, your suggested warning applies to everything we do on the web. Should Firefox display that warning everytime a link is clicked or form data posted? Honestly, the only difference I see here is that Canonical is trying to make a buck leveraging data that's gonna be there regardless.
You're proving my point. If you want to keep something private, you don't expose it on the net. But to do that you have to know when you are potentially exposing it to the net. I don't think there's any reason for you not to use smart scopes / dash search /etc. if you're comfortable with your data and IP being saved. But other people may have a reason, and they ought to know that it's happening. That's been my point all along.I don't think it's "sad". The net wasn't built with privacy in mind. I don't find what Canonical is doing with scopes to be a new or additional threat to my privacy. I'm not concerned about keeping my machine IP address private. If I want to keep something private, I don't expose it on the net, or only provide it to sources I decide have a stake in protecting that data.
Bookmarks