Posted by
Herbie-4 on
URL: http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/ImageJ-2-0-0-rc-11-released-tp5009074p5009102.html
Good day Mark,
and thanks for your message!
On 11.08.14 18:51, Mark Hiner wrote:
> Hi Herbie,
>
> If user data is gathered/transmitted by IJ-2, I shall, if possible,
> comment out this portion of code. An OFF-option is insufficient.
>
> Can you explain why an OFF option is insufficient..?
It can _easily_ be manipulated.
We are dealing with Open Source and who can prevent someone to compile
and distribute an IJ-2 version where the options are just reversed. This
is one possible scenario.
In fact you can always distribute manipulated IJ-2 versions but the
described method is extremely easy to realize...
> Anyway, like everything in the ImageJ-2 framework, usage uploads come
> from a Service
> <
https://github.com/scijava/scijava-common/blob/master/src/main/java/org/scijava/service/Service.java>
> plugin providing the indicated functionality - in this case, the
> UsageUploadService
> <
https://github.com/imagej/imagej-usage/blob/master/src/main/java/net/imagej/usage/UsageUploadService.java>.
Are you sure users check the exact sever?
Here in Germany we are presently confronted with sophisticated SPAM
(with attachments) from highjacked official servers (Courts, State
administrations etc.)
> All services can be overridden by creating another implementation with a
> higher priority - for usage statistics, you can use the default
> implementation <
>
https://github.com/imagej/imagej-usage/blob/master/src/main/java/net/imagej/usage/DefaultUsageUploadService.java>
> as a guide. You could even distribute your disabled usage service on an
> update site <
http://fiji.sc/How_to_set_up_and_populate_an_update_site>,
> to share with other users.
One should do that in general.
An individual code change means the last resort (for me).
> this is an unacceptable reason for gathering user data and I fear
> there is no honest reason at all to do so.
>
> I personally do not write grants, but I am funded by them (along with
> the rest of my coworkers). It is not enough to say "hey we're going to
> make the next generation ImageJ framework... thanks for the money bye!"
> We need the ability to measure and report our successes and failures,
> and use that information to guide future funding and development priorities.
I've been 40 years in science and research and I had never to provide
comparable information and if somebody had asked me to, I had refused
the request or the project.
How comes that Wayne was funded?
Why not use the number of members on the IJ-list?
It gives an estimate about a factor of 2...5 below the real number of
IJ-users.
> Please consider that some level of usage statistics for Fiji have been
> collected for nearly 5 years already <
http://imagej.net/Fiji_Usage>.
> These latest changes are just more granular, allowing us to track
> individual plugins and update site use.
This is one of many reasons that I don't use Fiji.
> >Storing user data is a no no!
>
> Agreed completely. I would not call what we are tracking "user data." We
> are tracking "plugin data", and we are really just tracking plugin use
> counts for a given environment.
Oh well, the kind of computers, software, or whatever I use, is my
private affair.
> So, I don't understand how honesty comes into the picture... perhaps you
> could explain your feelings here? How do you think this data could be
> misused?
I wrote with respect to gathering user data:
"there is no honest reason at all to do so"
The reason for this is that my data (including my computer platform, the
software I use etc.) is private, except I decide to make it available
for someone or a group.
Collecting information from my personal computer isn't honest.
If others do it is no reason to do it too.
> Thanks for the response,
> Mark
Thank you for asking and have a good day
Herbie
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Herbie <
[hidden email]
> <mailto:
[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
> Sorry Mark,
>
> but
>
>
> > This data will certainly be used to strengthen future
> > funding requests to continue the support of Fiji/ImageJ and its
> > collaborations.
>
> this is an unacceptable reason for gathering user data and I fear
> there is no honest reason at all to do so.
>
> > "keeping these statistics anonymous"
>
> Well, I'm convinced that you and your co-workers will but...
>
> Storing user data is a no no!
> Some members of the ImageJ-2 Team are criticizing Google an other
> data collecting organizations since long and now...
>
> If user data is gathered/transmitted by IJ-2, I shall, if possible,
> comment out this portion of code. An OFF-option is insufficient.
>
> Just my opinion because you were asking for further comments
>
> Herbie
>
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::__::::::
>
> On 11.08.14 16:11, Mark Hiner wrote:
>
> Hi Gabriel,
>
> specially about the "etc." mentioned in that page (?!).
>
>
> I wrote this section and left it vague at the time because
> Curtis Rueden
> was in the process of refining the database schema and setting
> up exactly
> what was tracked. I realize that I should certainly not have
> used vague
> language when discussing user privacy though, and apologize for
> that!
>
> The release wiki page is updated to specify exactly what metadata is
> stored: country, java version, language, operating system, time
> zone,
> update site.
>
> I think the collection of usage data should be made an OPT
> IN option and
>
> so be set OFF by default.
>
> This was a tough decision for us. We certainly don't want anyone
> to feel
> uncomfortable using ImageJ. But we are committed to keeping these
> statistics anonymous, and this is extremely important
> information for an
> open source project. This data will certainly be used to
> strengthen future
> funding requests to continue the support of Fiji/ImageJ and its
> collaborations.
>
> So we decided to make it opt out to get as realistic a view of
> usage as we
> can, while still allowing anyone who is uncomfortable to disable
> this
> functionality.
>
> Of course, any further discussion or objections to this feature are
> welcome... I, personally, would like to better understand any
> specific
> concerns people may have.
>
> Thanks for the feedback,
> Mark
>
> On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Gabriel Landini
> <
[hidden email] <mailto:
[hidden email]>>
> wrote:
>
> On Friday 08 Aug 2014 16:47:33 you wrote:
>
> Today the ImageJ team is proud to announce a new public
> release candidate
> for ImageJ2: version 2.0.0-rc-11.
>
>
> Great to hear the IJ2 has reached rc11.
>
> Looking at the New Features page, I think the collection of
> usage data
> should
> be made an OPT IN option and so be set OFF by default.
>
> Users might like to exercise some privacy by not being
> tracked, specially
> about the "etc." mentioned in that page (?!).
>
> Cheers
>
> Gabriel
>
> --
> ImageJ mailing list:
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.__html> <
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html>
>
>
> --
> ImageJ mailing list:
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.__html> <
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html>
>
>
> --
> ImageJ mailing list:
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.__html> <
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html>
>
>
--
ImageJ mailing list:
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html