Windows 10 sends your PC data 5500 times to Microsoft and Non-Private IPs

[stconquest]

23 minutes ago, Ex14 said:

who knows? 
 

They are collecting data, but what data exactly is unknown.

I just cant stand the extreme tinfoil hat theories/negativism surrounding MS.

It's not beneficial to us in the long run.

Prove how it will do harm.

 

*talk about a theory. 

[Ex14]

Just now, stconquest said:

Prove how it will do harm.

 

*talk about a theory. 

I don't mean the privacy concerns (for some) but rather the whole negativity about MS. 
 

Microsoft has been doing alot of cool stuff (Windows 10) and have tried to do things differently('Original Xbox One plans) Right now people are just riding on the "its cool to hate on MS" bandwagon with the media not really helping. I mean, OSX does data collection too, do you see Apple getting flack for it? Google does it alot too. But for some reason Microsoft takes the burnt of it, so much so that It prevents people from upgrading to Windows 10 a solid OS. Technology has to move forward. being all negative and staying on older software is going to be a hindrance.

[stconquest]

9 minutes ago, Ex14 said:

I don't mean the privacy concerns (for some) but rather the whole negativity about MS. 
 

Microsoft has been doing alot of cool stuff (Windows 10) and have tried to do things differently('Original Xbox One plans) Right now people are just riding on the "its cool to hate on MS" bandwagon with the media not really helping. I mean, OSX does data collection too, do you see Apple getting flack for it? Google does it alot too. But for some reason Microsoft takes the burnt of it, so much so that It prevents people from upgrading to Windows 10 a solid OS. Technology has to move forward. being all negative and staying on older software is going to be a hindrance.

Again, what is the consequence of investigating MS?  How does it do harm? 

 

Until DX12 becomes the standard, why do I need to move to Win10?  What is the point?  My system runs great, my games run great? 

 

Ultimately:  Why do you care so much about a company that give zero "cares" about you?  Is MS in trouble or something?  Do they have financial problems?

 

I have old MS Sidewinder Gamepads.  After WinXP, MS dropped support for them so I could not use them anymore.  Yeah, they deeply care so much about the customers.  I still have those controllers.  They collect dust since I can't throw anything out. 

 

Maybe you should train yourself to avoid these types of threads.  Perhaps start a MS fan club or something. 

[Ex14]

1 minute ago, stconquest said:

Again, what is the consequence of investigating MS?  How does it do harm? 

 

Until DX12 becomes the standard, why do I need to move to Win10?  What is the point?  My system runs great, my games run great? 

 

Ultimately:  Why do you care so much about a company that give zero "cares" about you?  Is MS in trouble or something?  Do they have financial problems?

 

I have old MS Sidewinder Gamepads.  After WinXP, MS dropped support for them so I could not use them anymore.  Yeah, they deeply care so much about the customers.  I still have those controllers.  They collect dust since I can't throw anything out. 

 

Maybe you should train yourself to avoid these types of threads.  Perhaps start a MS fan club or something. 

I never said that we shouldn't investigate MS. What i'm saying is we should put the same amount of scrutiny ACROSS the entire board. Why only judge ONE company?
 

So if everyone thought like you would DX12 become a standard worth supporting? Who would upgrade to windows 10?

Ultimately, I don't "care" about MS only I care about technology as a whole. And also I can't stand how people are so biased (not just in technology) Its the main reason why the world's in its sad current state. People unwilling to be emphatic to one another and so on.

Maybe you should train yourself to show more empathy? Perhaps start here 

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

1 hour ago, zMeul said:

by himself or by the mods?

Or maybe because MS' lawyers forced him?  Or handed him a big wad of cash to remove it?

Now there's a conspiracy theory ...

 

-----

 

6 hours ago, dragosudeki said:

All data connections should be encrypted in my opinion. regardless of whatever data is supplied. I'm starting to wonder if your truly an advocate of complete privacy when you tell them to leave it unencrypted. 

I also have to disagree with your "innocent until proven guilty" reasoning. Your reasoning pretty much also claims that people who want to keep their privacy are also suspicious, since you are technically now doing stuff in secret. Also, just because they are quiet doesn't make them more/less innocent. Acting slowly is sometimes the best way to ensure you are not misinterpreted. Pretty sure they'll do something eventually...

 

You have a point there, it would indeed be better if all data were encrypted. 

However deep down I somehow do have a different feeling about this.  I can't really explain it.

Personal info or anything that could identify you needs to be encrypted, there's no doubt about that.  Everyone (except the NSA, GCHQ and the majority of politicians) will probably agree on that. 

But encrypting something that can't be traced back to anyone or give away any personal info?  Somehow that sounds like a waste of energy and processing power to me, especially if you factor in how many PCs will be doing that.

As a result I can't stop wondering if they encrypted that because they don't want people to find out what info exactly is being sent.  Their "no comment" whenever they're asked about it doesn't do anything to set my mind at ease either.

 

 

 

As for the innocent until proven guilty part, I think I didn't explain myself enough. When I said "doing stuff in secret", I wasn't talking about hiding something for privacy reasons.  I was talking about :

 

- quietly downloading several GB without telling the PC's owner.  A lot of people hit their data cap because of this, resulting in extra costs.

 

- releasing updates with false descriptions. 

Spoiler

KB3035583, pictured above, doesn't "resolve issues in Windows" at all, instead it installs GWX, the Win10 nagware that becomes more and more obtrusive.  If anything, I'd call that causing an issue in Windows.

Sure, you could look it up in the knowledgebase, but they know that barely anyone actually does that.  And even then it's not telling the truth.

The knowledgebase article says "This update installs the Get Windows 10 app, which helps users understand their Windows 10 upgrade options and device readiness."

Nowhere does it say it'll show a pop-up every time you boot your PC, or practically forces you to upgrade (at some point giving only the options "install now" or "install later").

 

KB2952664 is another nice example of doing secretive stuff, or rather outright lying. 

"This update helps Microsoft make improvements to the current operating system in order to ease the upgrade experience to the latest version of Windows"

In fact it installed the Win10 telemetry in Win7.

 

- noticing that lots of people hide a certain update instead of installing it (the aforementioned KB3035583 or KB2952664 for instance), then quietly releasing a slightly changed version to stop it from being hidden. 

They didn't do this just once either, as of december 15th there have been 7 (!) iterations of 3035583

 

- quietly upgrading a whole bunch of PCs without even giving their owners a say in it (and I know they said that was by accident, but there have been way too many such "accidents" to be a coincidence.  To quote Barnacules : "They just did it and got called out on it")

 

 

[zMeul]

59 minutes ago, Ex14 said:

It's not beneficial to us

the thing that bothers me is that there is no option to stop it

 

this is the difference between consent and getting raped

this is exactly the same thing as opening the mail of a 3rd party - in US, it's a federal offense 

[Ex14]

27 minutes ago, zMeul said:

the thing that bothers me is that there is no option to stop it

 

this is the difference between consent and getting raped

this is exactly the same thing as opening the mail of a 3rd party - in US, it's a federal offense 

Theres an option to stop it tho.... Though we know it doesn't fully stop some data being sent back to MS. 

I guess the main issue is that we don't know what exactly is being transmitted back. In this regard, I think MS should come out and just tell us EXACTLY what is being sent back (tho i doubt those tinfoil peeps will actually believe it if they ever do)

[zMeul]

Just now, Ex14 said:

Theres an option to stop it tho.... Though we know it doesn't fully stop some data being sent back to MS. 

I guess the main issue is that we don't know what exactly is being transmitted back. In this regard, I think MS should come out and just tell us EXACTLY what is being sent back (tho i doubt those tinfoil peeps will actually believe it if they ever do)

what it sends? everything, it's a keylogger for god's sake

[Ex14]

3 minutes ago, zMeul said:

what it sends? everything, it's a keylogger for god's sake

...You're just proving what i mean.
 

The keylogger can be turned off and is to be used by microsoft for "improving typing speech dictation and what not"

Whats the main issue here? the key logger? (which can be turned off) or the fact that some data still gets transmitted back when the privacy settings are all switched to not give ms and info?

[zMeul]

Just now, Ex14 said:

...You're just proving what i mean.
 

The keylogger can be turned off and is to be used by microsoft for "improving typing speech dictation and what not"

Whats the main issue here? the key logger? (which can be turned off) or the fact that some data still gets transmitted back when the privacy settings are all switched to not give ms and info?

turned off, can you actually prove it or I should just take MS' word on it, or better yet .. ZDNet's 

 

and there's the "telemetry" bullcrap that they pushed to W7 owners too

[Ex14]

Just now, zMeul said:

turned off, can you actually prove it or I should just take MS' word on it, or better yet .. ZDNet's 

 

and there's the "telemetry" bullcrap that they pushed to W7 owners too

Then I would also like to ask you if you can prove that its STILL being keylogged when turned off or should i take the tinfoil hat guys word for it?

As of right now there is SOME data still being transmitted back to MS. Thats all we know (hence why i said MS should just come out and say what exactly they're collecting)

And truth in told the larger problem is as i mentioned previously, the negativity around MS and hence the distrust. Tbh theres no point in continuing this discussion. All I can see is that you guys want to stick to what YOU want to believe in, and thats fine by me, I'm not going to try and change your mind in this matter.

However in this particular case (the forbes article) lets be honest and say that the "testing" is flawed and at this point of time more of a FUD than anything else.

[LAwLz]

7 hours ago, Ex14 said:

I never said that we shouldn't investigate MS. What i'm saying is we should put the same amount of scrutiny ACROSS the entire board. Why only judge ONE company?

You are willfully ignorant. Google has been getting this kind of crap for a decade or more now. You might not have known or cared about it, but overall Microsoft are not even close to have gotten as much shit as Google regarding privacy in total.

 

Apple don't get this amount of crap because they allow the users to fully turn it off. They even tell you during the install "do you want to turn this off". 

 

The only bias I can see is from the people defending Microsoft.

[Trixanity]

Regarding the keylogger thing: if you use a smartphone, you're basically using a keylogger already. 

 

I do believe Microsoft would be better off if they made a clear and concise statement on the extent of their data collection and provided better, easier and more extensive means of turning it off. They'll still get a lot of data since I'd guess at least 75% of users don't give a fuck. 

[Delicieuxz]

 

16 hours ago, Captain Chaos said:

That brings me on to another point.  Why bother encrypting the data when it's so innocent and non-identifiable?  Because they care about our privacy?  If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.  If the data is indeed non-identifiable, there is no need for encryption. 

The data Microsoft collects is not non-identifiable, it's fully identifiable. It was said by MS somewhere around the time of the release of W10 that the data is associated with an "anonymous" ID. That's not the same thing as the data being non-identifiable, but means that if your name is Henry, then MS probably just sees ID 314254ab or something. But that ID directly associates with your particular system. It's no more anonymous that your posting on this forum is anonymous to the forum administrators.

 

Calling it non-identifiable was a bit of conniving PR, and it was only meant in the same manner that a MS tech who might look at any given data doesn't have a picture and your personal name in front of them, but instead an ID created by MS - which associates directly with specific systems, which belong to specific people.

 

MS data collection is no more anonymous than any online account created. And people should not be calling it non-identifiable, or anonymous, because it isn't either of those things. Calling it those things just sounded pleasing, and dissuading of public concerns, so it's what MS said. Only from the narrowest, and non-effective point of view is it non-identifiable: It's non-identifiable until anyone cares to identify it.

 

Microsoft's willingness to deceive its users on this matter is a source of distrust of MS, and a reason to question other things which MS says concerning itself, its services, its conduct, and its attempted assurances to its customers.

[Delicieuxz]

9 hours ago, Ex14 said:

who knows? 
 

They are collecting data, but what data exactly is unknown.

I just cant stand the extreme tinfoil hat theories/negativism surrounding MS.

It's not beneficial to us in the long run.

It's more attitudes like the one you've expressed above which will do people harm in the long run.

[Delicieuxz]

8 hours ago, Ex14 said:

And truth in told the larger problem is as i mentioned previously, the negativity around MS and hence the distrust.

Um, about 1 year ago, MS was found to have snooped in an Outlook user's email to build a case against them. There was public outcry, and in response MS said that they wouldn't even go into a person's email again.

 

Then Windows 10 came out, and it has collection of contents of people's emails as a policy. So MS didn't only go back on their word, their promise, but actually made a promise to do the opposite of their earlier promise.

 

And MS has claimed that Windows data collection is anonymous, but elsewhere Microsoft says that data is associated with an " anonymous device ID " - and therefore none of it is anonymous, not any more than any account you make online is anonymous - they all immediately trace to a specific device, which belongs to a specific person. So Microsoft connived people when they claimed that data is non-identifiable.

 

Microsoft isn't trust-worthy because they straight-forwardly lie, and act in certain ways while saying other things publicly - and not because people talk about it after they do the things that makes them not trust-worthy.

 

The idea of allowing anyone to arbitrarily and unilaterally decide what lengths to go to with your own information, and what to do with your own information is sheer, unbridled stupidity to begin with. There is no justified rationalization for being an air-head who blindly believes allowing a corporation discretionless access to your data is OK because... nice thoughts? MS already promised that they're collecting information, and they already lied in collecting Outlook data when they promised just a year ago they would not access people's emails again, and they lied when they told the public the data collected was anonymous when it is as fundamentally non-anonymous as anything else that's transmitted across networks.

 

Believing that MS isn't doing anything disagreeable is like believing that a convicted pedophile who has previously molested your children isn't going to molest your children if you let them babysit them, when they've outright told you that they're going to molest your children as a policy. And the people who think it's tin-foil hattery are, simply put, big morons, who have already been proven wrong from the outset, by MS's privacy statement guaranteeing that MS will indeed collect and use the content of emails according to their sole discretion, when they had just before promised they wouldn't enter a person's email again.

 

And the kicker in all of it is that there wasn't required to be an instance of proving for those calling tin-foil hattery to be daft and wrong, because the very premise of allowing a corporation, whose primary motivator is profit for investors and board of directors (some of whom are likely highly sociopathic / psychopathic), and secondly, profit for its CEO, who is paid based on their performance to MS investors and board of directors, to snoop on your data and use it according to their discretion is stupidity, and creating leverage against every end-user, and lowering the security of the end-user.

 

These nut-cases apparently believe that MS and all who work at it possess the judgement God, and that every one of them is their benevolent grandfather, and that all their morals are identical to each end-user's morals. Why they've chosen MS to receive this depiction in their brains, when MS has a history of being particularly ruthless, deceptive, and disregarding of its end-users' concerns, who knows? Like I said, the positions of these people are logically senseless, and already proven through recent and ongoing MS history to be entirely invalid and incorrect.

 

 

 

 

Why do you mention the truth when you don't know it to be able to talk about it? Your post is just a blind and naive assumption - which gives people all the more reason to distrust Windows defenders, because they clearly speak without knowing the subject they're talking about, and they present their opinions as if they know something when all their speaking from is sentiment and a desire to wilfully shut out consideration of things beyond that sentiment of their. They're dopes.

[Ex14]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

You are willfully ignorant. Google has been getting this kind of crap for a decade or more now. You might not have known or cared about it, but overall Microsoft are not even close to have gotten as much shit as Google regarding privacy in total.

 

Apple don't get this amount of crap because they allow the users to fully turn it off. They even tell you during the install "do you want to turn this off". 

 

The only bias I can see is from the people defending Microsoft.

So you take Apples word for it then? Thats not bias?

Google has gotten it before yes That i agree (whole gmail thing). but nowadays? not so much. The general sentiment on the ground i get is people have just accepted it and moved on to the next big thing, microsoft and their shiny new OS. I don't hear much about android and i can bet you that things phoning home more times than the number of times ET has been watched.

I'm not "defending" them at all. I've said They DO collect data. But on this particular case (the forbes article) I think we can put it to rest as more or less flawed.

40 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

It's more attitudes like the one you've expressed above which will do people harm in the long run.

Really I disagree I think its your kind of attitude (my way or the highway) thats detrimental to the world in general. I accept that people have different PoVs. Anyway how i feel about people in general is another story, but for this one case its flawed and we really shouldn't be spreading more FUD around.

To point out my stance on the matter

• Yes Some (Telemetry what ms claims) data is being sent back
• Yes I'm taking MS word for it, I trust them to a certain degree, and they have yet to shown otherwise. This is a personal thing if you guys have beef with them then so be it.
• The forbes article has several flaws, as such we shouldn't really be spreading this around. (unless one of you can pull out some facts supporting the original post/disprove what the ZDNet article said.
• yes I'm pretty much naive. I would like to believe theres SOME good in the matter (companies and people alike)

 

Say what you want about me and where i stand, but the bolded point is what I'm hitting on, Not the privacy concern in general. 

Unless one of you can show that I think I'm done with this thread. WE're not going to change our minds about this privacy issue and neither did i have any intention of doing so. 

[Delicieuxz]

18 minutes ago, Ex14 said:

 

Really I disagree I think its your kind of attitude (my way or the highway) thats detrimental to the world in general.

This isn't a 'my way / your way', issue. It's an issue based on logic, substantiated history, and technical reality. The things I've said are not "my way", they're reality of what has occurred. That you're interpreting it as feelings means that you aren't considering any of the details that make for truth one way or another in the matter, and are just experiencing sentiments, and reacting with your own. Fuzzy feelings towards an abuser or a potential abuser (in MS' case, with a history of abuse and dishonesty) don't protect you from abuse.

[Delicieuxz]

The tin-foil hattery-calling people in this matter are working from the wilful non-consideration of what has already happened, and of what is presently being claimed by MS, as well as the lack of logic in the base situation in trusting any company the way they're trusting MS. Truth is the inter-connecting of all considerations, substantiation what is. Those who call tin-foil hattery have made a decision to not consider what are the considerations of this matter, and therefore there is no truth in their presentations, only sentiment.

 

We are not discussing equal opinions: One side is floating in fluffy feelings, (maybe because it's too much work for their brains to actually consider - maybe they're deficient in dopamine, which is what enables a brain's work capability), while another group of people is actually taking into account the details and acknowledging unresolved problems with it.

 

When you defer judgement over yourself, your data, to another, you lose some control and safety, and become, to some quantifiable measurement, subservient, and a slave to whoever you deferred judgement over yourself to. People who've done this cannot make the argument "I've got nothing to hide", because that's no longer for them to decide - and the motivating factor in making that decision will no longer involve that person's preferred outcome, but the preferred outcome of the person they're deferred judgement over themselves to - which, in the case of a corporation like MS, include profit-driven shareholders and board of directors (which likely contains psychopaths), law enforcement (which is one of the top 10 professions most populated by psychopaths), CEO and execs (CEO being the profession most-populated by psychopaths, and execs often being psychopaths), and governments (with public servant being another of the top 10 professions most populated by psychopaths).

 

Psychpaths are emotionally-impulsive, mentally-polarized, domination-driven, pathologically-lying, and self-benefit seeking.

[linuxfan66]

This isn't a 'my way / your way', issue. It's an issue based on logic, substantiated history, and technical reality. The things I've said are not "my way", they're reality of what has occurred. That you're interpreting it as feelings means that you aren't considering any of the details that make for truth one way or another in the matter, and are just experiencing sentiments, and reacting with your own. Fuzzy feelings towards an abuser or a potential abuser (in MS' case, with a history of abuse and dishonesty) don't protect you from abuse.

 

The tin-foil hattery-calling people are working from the wilful non-consideration of what has already happened, and of what is presently being claimed by MS, as well as the lack of logic in the base situation in trusting any company the way they're trusting MS. Truth is the inter-connecting of all considerations, substantiation what is. Those who call tin-foil hattery have made a decision to not consider what are the considerations of this matter, and therefore there is no truth in their presentations, only sentiment.

 

We are not discussing equal opinions, but one side is floating in fluffy feelings, (maybe because it's too much work for their brains to actually consider - maybe they're deficient in dopamine, which is what enables a brain's work capability), while another group of people is actually taking into account the details as seeing the problems with it.

 

When you defer judgement over yourself, your data, to another, you become, to some quantifiable measurement, subservient, and a slave to them.

Did you just compare mere data collection to DOMESTIC ABUSE?

Please pick as less sketchy comparison please. These are not threat comparable when it comes to affect on people.

[Delicieuxz]

18 minutes ago, linuxfan66 said:

Did you just compare mere data collection to DOMESTIC ABUSE?

Please pick as less sketchy comparison please. These are not threat comparable when it comes to affect on people.

What I actually compared is the trustability that one person or company will or won't engage in a behaviour that is particular to their identity and self-spoken commitment, to the trustability that another person or company will or won't engage in a behaviour that is particular to their identity and self-spoken commitment.

 

Also, they are equally a threat of occurring in either case. A threat is equal to a threat in being a threat. The discussion is about there being a threat is an issue. Your notion is actually suggesting that, because you don't consider the consequences of a threat  as being severe to your person, that you're therefore disregarding the actual existence of a threat. And I think that logically invalidates your input into the discussion, as it also does others who are similarly operating out of their sentiments.

 

As I said, a lot of people who are offering opinions regarding this matter are simply floating on sentiments, while wilfully not considering the details involved, and therefore their presentations are not based in truth.

[Tieox]

I wonder if in time we will see either a mass migration to Linux or Apple if MS continues down this route, and support for Windows 7 and 8.1 fades away?

[Delicieuxz]

14 minutes ago, Kierax said:

I wonder if in time we will see either a mass migration to Linux or Apple if MS continues down this route, and support for Windows 7 and 8.1 fades away?

As bad as Ballmer was, I think Satya Nadella could be worse, and think that Windows' direction under Nadella shows a notable shift in direction away from concern and regard for the customer, and more a focus on Windows being leverage MS has against its customers.

[linuxfan66]

25 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

What I actually compared is the trustability that one person or company will or won't engage in a behaviour that is particular to their identity and self-spoken commitment, to the trustability that another person or company will or won't engage in a behaviour that is particular to their identity and self-spoken commitment.

 

Also, they are equally a threat of occurring in either case. A threat is equal to a threat in being a threat. The discussion is about there being a threat is an issue. Your notion is actually suggesting that, because you don't consider the consequences of a threat  as being severe to your person, that you're therefore disregarding the actual existence of a threat. And I think that logically invalidates your input into the discussion, as it also does others who are similarly operating out of their sentiments.

 

As I said, a lot of people who are offering opinions regarding this matter are simply floating on sentiments, while wilfully not considering the details involved, and therefore their presentations are not based in truth.

microsoft has could misuse data for marketing purposes would not make psychologically or physically have the same nasty results a domestic abuse. 

A valid comparison is violation of social contract of not revealing information that you were asked not to.

 

to be fair i will compare  a hacker stealing nude pics to indirect rape because of the violation of rights to ones body.

[Tieox]

Just now, Delicieuxz said:

As bad as Ballmer was, I think Satya Nadella could be worse, and think that Windows' direction under Nadella shows a notable shift in direction away from concern and regard for the customer, and more a focus on Windows being leverage MS has against its customers.

In which case I can see this ending badly for them, what with the rise of SteamOS as well....