• DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    They’re just going to do a classical boil-the-frog operation:

    • Step 1: Make it opt-in and present it as the new cool thing.
    • Step 2: Make it opt-out, and if the users opts out, show a scary warning about how the cool thing won’t work anymore.
    • Step 3: Silently opt-in, and hide the opt-out option deeply in a settings menu.
    • Step 4: Silently opt-in, remove opt-out, but it still works with a registry hack. Microsoft apologists will still thinks it’s cool because “just use this simple registry hack bro”.
    • Step 5: Remove opt-out alltogether, and silently opt-in everyone who had previously opted out.
    • Step 6: Enjoy their boiled frog!
  • Mereo@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 month ago

    They will just enable it by default later when the heat passes. They always do. You no longer own Windows.

    • lectricleopard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Never did. It’s just more and more obvious with each new “feature” that it’s built for monetization, not for user functionality.

      • Mereo@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        In the '90s and early 2000s, Microsoft’s business model was the classic one of selling products to customers. Today, it’s all about the cloud, advertising, and AI, where the product is the user.

  • x0x7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 month ago

    They use dark patterns and cryptic dialog boxes to get old people to opt in.

    • Agent641@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Are you certain you don’t want to enhance your Microsoft experience?

      ^YES, I CRAVE A LIMITED ESPERIENCE^

      NO, GIVE ME THE BEST THING

  • Geyser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    “The ability to disable the…feature during the setup process…” does not mean opt in, that means opt out.

    Knowing windows setup, you need to click customize during the setup process and then go through several setup pages before you’re presented this option (or have to dig into additional/advanced settings to find it).

    Most people won’t do this, won’t know how to do this, or will receive the pc with the initial setup complete and won’t know if this is on or off.

    • Norgur@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      And even if you find it, it will have an idiotic and obscure name, like “advanced history experience” or something absolutely nondescript

      • teft@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Also when you try to disable it they will use all sorts of dark pattern pop ups to dissuade you from disabling it.

      • MudMan@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        The exact wording, which, again, is in the article you didn’t bother to read before posting, is “Quickly find things you’ve seen with Recall. Recall helps you find things you’ve seen on your PC when you allow Windows to save snapshots of your screen every few seconds”.

        Seriously, I don’t even like the feature. I will absolutely turn it off, just like I did Timeline, and I expect it’ll be gone in the next version, just like Timeline was.

        But I did look at the stupid article before posting. So there’s that.

        • Norgur@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          So, are we done berating everybody passive-aggressively with just a sprinkle of condescension? Because maybe, just maybe, I was making a remark about the general practice of Microsoft to hide stuff behind nondescript bullshit names (especially in non-English versions where the English bullshit name gets translated literally most of the time, which yields even more nondescript results).

          Maybe, just maybe, you chose the wrong comments to act up on “PeOpLe NoT rEaDiNg ThE aRtIcLe” when all that was posted about was inconsequential stuff about the precise clicks needed to turn a feature off that’s not even in the respective menus yet. So this is not someone talking bullshit because they misunderstood the headline about a murder case or something.

          All that was said was about practices Microsoft has abused into oblivion: Hiding stuff behind obscure menus and hiding stuff behind obscure names. The comments made were a persiflage of exactly that.

          Maybe, just maybe, the precise placement and wording in a menu that doesn’t even exist yet is a topic inconsequential enough that people will not read the tenth article about the general subject (Copilot becoming “opt-in”) to make sure they wouldn’t miss this super irrelevant point to the story. A point which you guessed from screenshots that haven’t reached production yet (even if they are likely to go into production as shown, it can still change), so your condescending attitude is based on wobbly grounds.

          There are tons of articles where people post absolutely wrong and quite absurd stuff because they didn’t read the article. Some of them even matter (politics, world events). So let’s criticize people when they don’t read through actually important articles before posting, and agree that it’s okay to not read the exact article posted on unimportant sidenote stuff if one knows about the thing in general. Because if I’d be only allowed to comment on the article posted itself, I wouldn’t need Lemmy, I could just comment on the site that posted the article in the first place.

          Besides: You did notice that you commented on two different people, yes? Because you sure sounded like you didn’t read the usernames before commenting and thought you always replied to the same guy.

          • MudMan@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            That is a very long rant to agree with me in that you care enough to rant about this online but not enough to read past the headline.

            So no, I have no intention to shut off the condescension, there is nothing passive about my aggression and people absolutely don’t read the article regardless of how important they feel the issue is. Yesterday this was all about the most important threat to the security of the average cosnumer, now it’s “unimportant sidenote stuff”. Somebody should have told MS how unimportant it is, could have saved the devs the crunch to fix it by the time it ships in 10 days.

            For the record, you’re right about how hard it is to find things sometimes in localized versions of OSs. That’s true of all of them, though, and I blame the fact that we’re all stuck here speaking the haegemonic language and reading about tech only in English while local journalists struggle to stay relevant, so we learn all the brand names and settings in English despite the software itself being available in localized versions. But that’s a whole other conversation.

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              This is still a huge threat, because their “mitigations” are a joke. The only possible way this can be an acceptable feature is if it is built from the ground up with security as the primary concern. You can’t “tack on” security at the end and get a secure product.

              If security was in any way a consideration, there is no path to shipping anything where the database is unencrypted at any point. Not in an insider build. Not as a tech demo. Nothing.

              • MudMan@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                I mean, no, that’s dogmatic weirdness. The feature is secure if the feature that is live is secure. Software isn’t magic, it doesn’t have karma, it works the way it works.

                Now, this is as secure as whatever they ship, but even assuming it’s ironclad it’s still a bad feature. You do not need an automatic screengrabber to remember what you did yesterday. Every piece of work software you may need to reopen has a recent files list, Windows has a file search function, browsers have a history. You have a brain. You don’t lose track of so much stuff that you need to be recording your entire activity just in case. This is a bad gimmick that covers no use case, just like Timeline was. And because it’s a bad useless feature the logical thing is to turn it off and forget about it, which is why everybody seems to have memory holed that Timeline ever existed.

                You guys really don’t need to get weird about it for it to be a bad idea, but since they’re railroaded into shipping it, at least it’s better to ship it with proper encryption and authorization features. Still turn it off, though.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      not to mention they are known to re enable telemetry on systems after updates.

      i doubt this will be any different.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Remember when making a Microsoft cloud account was optional during Windows installs, and it was trivia to skip/opt out?

      Pepperidge Farm remembers.

      They are 100% going to do the same thing here.

      • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Even without all the invasion of privacy implications, I’m skeptical it would even work. Source: 20 years of “Windows is checking for a solution to the problem” that has never worked even once.

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      There is a screenshot of the opt-in screen in the article. There is no default, just two buttons to say yes or no.

      I swear, outrage should only be allowed based on the amount of work one is willing to put in before expressing it. If you don’t do the reading, you don’t get to be publicly angry. It’d save us all so much trouble.

      For the record, the feature was always optional, as per the original announcement. Presumably the change is it is now part of the setup flow where it was going to be a settings toggle instead.

      Which is, incidentally, how this used to work the first time Windows had this feature, back when it was called “Timeline” in Windows 10.

      • Ibuthyr@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        The problem with MS is how they change these things in the future. It may be a clear choice now, but they will find a way to make it easier to “accidentally” opt in, or they’ll simply change it to an opt-out. They’ve been doing this sort of bullshit for quite some time now.

        • MudMan@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          They really haven’t. Their onboarding flow has included this exact type of forced option for advertising data, location data and bug reports for what now? A decade, give or take? They have a very specific design language for these.

          Plus, and I keep reminding people of this and they keep forgetting, they already made this feature once. It was on Windows 10, it was called Timeline, everybody turned it off and they never did much to change that, instead just adding a less intrusive offline version of it and ultimately removing it by the launch of 11 until… well, now.

          What I don’t understand is why you guys are so set on this specific list of grievances. You don’t need to dismiss the improvements they are making. They are improvements and they are a good thing.

          If you are set on rooting for or against OSs (and why would you, stop it, that’s weird) you can instead just point out that… well, the feature itself is still garbage. Even with a default opt out, even assuming it’s fully secure. It just covers no valid use case, unless you’re starring in Memento II. It remains a security vulnerability because social engineering and shared computers are a thing. It is exactly as dumb and useless as Timeline was, and there’s a reason nobody remembers that happened. The lack of AI search really, really isn’t why that failed.

          You don’t need to come across as a paranoid conspiracy theorist making up slippery slopes to keep criticising this about the things they are actually fixing. There are plenty of valid issues with it at a fundamental design level they are not changing. Being so wildly speculative about the eeeeevil corporate MS lying to us just makes the criticisms sound less valid when the actual thing they are doing is still pretty useless at best, and most likely really bad.

          • Ibuthyr@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Look, I use Microsoft products. I have since PC-DOS became MS-DOS. You are plain wrong. Just look at the whole fiasco where MS is practically forcing users to tie their windows license to an account. It used to be easy to circumvent, nowadays it’s hidden like Waldo. They constantly do this shit. Stop shilling for corporations.

            • MudMan@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              It is amazing to live in a world where pointing out that a feature is a trainwreck is “shilling for corporations”.

              That’s the part I just don’t get. Why you guys need people to be in denial or toeing a certain line, facts be damned. It’s not enough to be critical, people have to be critical at all times, of all things in the exact way everybody else is.

              The account crap is not a valid counterexample. Windows 11 (Home, at least) was always explicitly presented as requiring an account. The methods to install without it were always an usupported workaround. It does suck that they went the Apple path and traded up-front price for data mining, I would absolutely prefer the alternative on principle, even if I was already logging in on Win10 for work reasons. If there was a natively compatible Windows alternative without this requirement I’d default to that. My Windows installs have most of the related features disabled, where I can do that. I just recently got to a place where I can disable OneDrive now and I am incredibly happy about it, since we’re talking about it.

              But it’s not a slippery slope, it’s them gradually closing the unsupported loophole that was keeping some people from flipping out about it as it becomes clearer that vas majority of user are, in fact, logging in with a MS account.

              This is a datamining feature that is immediately unpopular and they are actively backtracking on it. There is clear precedent for this exact same functionality and it didn’t go that way. That’s not shilling, that’s just how reality worked last time this happened. Literally this. The same feature implemented in a very similar way.

              Again, there is plenty of legitimate stuff to complain about here. A lot of it is terrible even after the changes to opt-in and security. You don’t need to make up a fictional future scenario where they un-fix the stuff they are fixing. You can dislike the fixed version for actual, good reasons without having to sound like a weird online cultist.

  • the_doktor@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 month ago

    …says the company that wanted to destroy every bit of your privacy. I don’t care what they “promise”, don’t listen to them.

    Microsoft is finished. Install Linux.

  • Sensitivezombie@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    No one is going to opt-in to having screenshots taken of their activities on the OS. If no one opts-in then it will hinder Microsoft’s original plan of collection such data for copilot. Along comes the new marketing language to soften the approach and they still collect data.

    • x0x7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      No one would opt-in to having all of their personal files sent to the cloud. But Windows managed to get my father using OneDrive even though he had no idea what it was. He was absolutely pissed when I told him. Somehow that wasn’t enough to get off of windows completely though.

  • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Ok, let’s assume (for the sake of argument) that everything is on the up-and-up, and Microsoft will behave in a completely equitable and user-friendly way with regard to this feature going forward. Where does that leave us?

    There is a spyware feature built into Windows 11. It is off by default, but a malware that wants to capture this kind of information doesn’t have to install anything, and it doesn’t have to run any background processes that might get caught by a system monitor or blocked by application whitelisting. All it has to do is turn this built-in feature on, and then exfiltrate the data later.

    Setting this off by default doesn’t remove the security issue.

    • sugartits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Ok, let’s assume (for the sake of argument) that everything is on the up-and-up, and Microsoft will behave in a completely equitable and user-friendly way with regard to this feature going forward

      This is so fantastical that there’s no point in even having the hypothetical discussion about it.

    • towerful@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Browser history was implemented before companies massively abused privacy.
      It was an honest feature for users.
      We also learned a lot about security regarding password/credential extraction from browsers.

      Windows Recall might be an honest feature. It might be super secure and really useful.
      But Microsoft doesn’t have the trust to pull this off