Mac Soup - Kagi advice please
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: figures...
Next: Lovefilm online viewing
From: J. J. Lodder on 29 Dec 2009 05:06 Mike Dee <mikedee(a)emteedee.invalid> wrote: > nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote: > > > Mike Dee <mikedee(a)emteedee.invalid> wrote: > > > >> nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote: > >> > >> > MacSoup is fully functional without registration. > >> > All registration does is activate the spyware feature. > >> > You can try it at your ease. > >> > >> "Activate the _spyware_ feature"? Care to flesh this out a > >> little, or did you mean to type "de-activate" here instead? > > > > Activate. > > > > Registered copies of MacSoup > > broadcast the system version you are using > > (and hence info about the kind of your mac) to the world. > > Unregistered copies merely say you use MacSoup, > > which is unobjectionable, > > OK, thanks for that, Jan. At least I can understand now what you meant > (the difference between registered and unregistered User Agent headers > in MacSoup posts). > > But I do think the word "spyware" to describe this is not correct. A > "spyware" is a software that'll "phone home" personal details, usually > profiling data gathered without consent and sent to the manufacturer of > that software. A registered MacSoup gives a more completed User Agent > header but AFAIK it does not "phone home" nor divulge personal details > except about the agent delivering the message (MacSoup via such and > such a Mac and its OS). I think that definition is too limited. You think a spy stealing atomc secrets for example isn't a spy if he publishes them instead of sneaking away? > Can't this header be turned off in MacSoup? No. > I can understand the > shareware author of MacSoup wanting to have an "unregistered" header in > there as a "guilt thing". It has long since lost any utility it may have had. The supply of do-gooding idiots with raised fingers has run out. > But not being able to turn off the User Agent > message if you've registered MacSoup and don't want the User Agent > broadcast, would be something of an annoyance IMO. Stefan Haller has a somewhat dictatorial mindset. Almost no aspect of MacSoup's behaviour is under user control, Jan - Even the freeware > MT-NewsWatcher has this as an optional header.
From: Dr Geoff Hone on 17 Jan 2010 05:36 And just to add to this thread, how about the Windo$e machine where WinZip starts with a message like: *You are on day 274 of your 30 day free trial* When I was part of a small software development team, we built in a 60-day drop dead function. Send in the feedback form - duly completed - from the distribution disk, and we sent back the unlock code. This was on free distribution software, and we put this function in to get the user feedback. This worked well, picked up several bugs quite early, and pointed up what the users really wanted as added features.
From: J. J. Lodder on 17 Jan 2010 05:38 Sn!pe <snipe(a)spambin.fsnet.co.uk> wrote: > J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > A pity, I had begun to like the day count. > > > > Now I'll never reach the 10.000 days, > > > > > > What is supposed to happen after 10,000 days of keeping this shareware > > > unregistered? > > > > A celebration, > > > > Jan > > ? Figure it out for yourself, Jan
From: Rowland McDonnell on 17 Jan 2010 20:00 J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: [snip] > > I object to Websites gathering the information at all. It would to my > > mind be totally unobjectionable if ALL such information were fully > > published. > > > > By which I do mean all of it. > > You mean everybody should be able to google your IP > and get a complete list of all the sites you have visited? Everyone should be able to get that information on *everyone*. Everyone - all of us - omnes. I'm an anarchist - of course I'm in favour of *FULL* disclosure of all information. Why? Because privacy is dead: there seems to be no way to prevent `the institutions' getting pretty much any info on *us* that they like. You should read more dystopian SF - that way, you'd understand that my suggestion is the only sane and civilised solution to the problem of institutional oppression that we're facing. The genie cannot be put back into the bottle, Pandora's box has been opened, there is no going back: we cannot have privacy any more. Okay, so tear down all the walls - *ALL* of them. > I'm afraid you have a complete disagreement here > with the entire rest of the world, That claim is so obviously lunatic I don't know what to say in response. <sigh> Aside from: there're roughly 6.5 x 10^9 people in the world. Very obviously, not all of them share your opinions. Some of them share my opinions - equally obviously. And - yep, obvious again - most of them have opinions that are neither yours nor mine. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: J. J. Lodder on 18 Jan 2010 05:54
Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > > > J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > [snip] > > > > I object to Websites gathering the information at all. It would to my > > > mind be totally unobjectionable if ALL such information were fully > > > published. > > > > > > By which I do mean all of it. > > > > You mean everybody should be able to google your IP > > and get a complete list of all the sites you have visited? > > Everyone should be able to get that information on *everyone*. Including the Chinese government? Mr Google and Ms Clinton seems to disagree, Jan |