http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/ImageJ-2-0-0-rc-11-released-tp5009074p5009110.html
In order to win and retain users of Image2, you have to earn their confidence. Spying on them and arguing with them are not ways to do that. The features of the program have to be designed to meet their needs, not yours. One of the many beauties of ImageJ is the it does not come with strings attached. No cost. No usage restrictions. No bizarre copyleft. And certainly no spying.
>>
>> 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
>
> I agree completely but do not see that as an argument against this
> functionality. In the scenario you describe, a user needs to choose to
> download some malicious code - correct? But there is already the window for
> that by nature of having a plugin mechanism in ImageJ.
>
>> Are you sure users check the exact sever?
>
> I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you mean...
>
>> How comes that Wayne was funded?
>
> I know nothing about the details of ImageJ 1.x funding. Info about ImageJ2
> funding is on the wiki <
http://imagej.net/ImageJ2#Funding>, but I apologize
> if I conflated the issue by mentioning our funding. To be clear, this is a
> framework that automatically is useful for any plugin developer - not just
> the ImageJ2 team. I was using the ImageJ2 grant as an example to illustrate
> that funding is a non-trivial area where it is useful to be able to report
> usage statistics like those we are gathering... so there was genuine
> purpose behind our actions.
>
>> Why not use the number of members on the IJ-list?
>
> Answered this question in my response to Gabriel's last message - numbers
> like this aren't really granular enough to be meaningful to plugin
> developers. Also, these numbers are important for considering future
> development - e.g. if a plugin hasn't been used in over 2 years, should we
> really put time and effort into converting it to a new format? IJ
> subscriber data just can't inform a decision like that....
>
>> Oh well, the kind of computers, software, or whatever I use, is my private
> affair.
>
> If you download an application or plugin from a server, it seems reasonable
> to expect that there would be some record of that event: "there exists a
> person who downloaded an application from this server." The usage
> statistics being uploaded are no more detailed than this, saying "there
> exists a person who ran this plugin 10 times using Java 7 on Windows". To
> me, that seems less personal than sending an e-mail to this list.
>
> I do believe that the information "Herbie ran plugin X" is your private
> affair, as is "A person ran plugin X on dataset_243.tif". But the
> information "someone ran plugin X" does not seem like it's violating
> anyone's privacy to me. If you feel differently, please help me to
> understand why.
>
> If you will indulge a metaphor, from my point of view, our usage statistics
> are like having data that says "A person wore a t-shirt and glasses on
> August 11th." That data is meaningless unless you are curious about t-shirt
> and glasses annual trends - and even then, you have no way to trace back
> the actions of a specific individual.
>
> I believe a violation of privacy would be "Mark Hiner is wearing a t-shirt
> and glasses on August 11th" - and we will not transmit or store that data.
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
>
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Herbie <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> 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>
> --
> ImageJ mailing list:
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html