Author Topic: What the hell is OpenCandy? (Read 384317 times)

Renegade · « **Reply #425 on:** April 10, 2011, 07:15 AM »

I personally think they should hire Renegade in some capacity. He's done more to build a convincing case for OC (despite the fact I personally don't like how OC implements itself) than some of the official communiqués ever did. He also speaks to the concerns of developers and software geeks. And, being a developer himself, on their level.

Hey DrApps! Maybe you folks should consider hiring this guy in some capacity?

Seriously.

-40hz (April 09, 2011, 12:48 PM)

Stranger things have happened~!

J-Mac · « **Reply #426 on:** April 10, 2011, 10:46 AM »

I personally think they should hire Renegade in some capacity. He's done more to build a convincing case for OC (despite the fact I personally don't like how OC implements itself) than some of the official communiqués ever did. He also speaks to the concerns of developers and software geeks. And, being a developer himself, on their level.

Hey DrApps! Maybe you folks should consider hiring this guy in some capacity?

Seriously.

-40hz (April 09, 2011, 12:48 PM)

Stranger things have happened~!
-Renegade (April 10, 2011, 07:15 AM)

After seeing your comments over on Gizmo's blog I don’t think it strange at all!

Jim

40hz · « **Reply #427 on:** April 10, 2011, 11:27 AM »

Looks like all the objections have been raised, and at least discussed, even if they haven't been addressed.

But at the end of the day, OC is standing firm on how it operates and how they want to conduct business despite those objections.

So now that we've arrived at an apparent impasse regarding OC, maybe it's time we start wrapping this discussion up?

Renegade · « **Reply #428 on:** April 10, 2011, 12:08 PM »

After seeing your comments over on Gizmo's blog I don’t think it strange at all!
-J-Mac (April 10, 2011, 10:46 AM)

Well, one of my posts was deleted. I just noticed. Sent MidnightCowboy a PM to see if it's ok to repost. I don't think he likes me.

UPDATE: It's been undeleted. Maybe he does like me~!

40hz · « **Reply #429 on:** April 10, 2011, 02:13 PM »

After seeing your comments over on Gizmo's blog I don’t think it strange at all!
-J-Mac (April 10, 2011, 10:46 AM)

Well, one of my posts was deleted. I just noticed. Sent MidnightCowboy a PM to see if it's ok to repost. I don't think he likes me.

UPDATE: It's been undeleted. Maybe he does like me~!

-Renegade (April 10, 2011, 12:08 PM)

@Ryan- I'm an editor over there. I suspect your post was most likely taken down by accident, or because it contained a weblink to someplace that returned a WOT rating of orange.

If a moderator took it down for what they felt was a violation of the forum rules (or if it contained a 'red' WOT rated link) it wouldn't have been put back up later.

FWIW, I don't think anybody (or hardly anybody at least) over at Gizmo's dislikes you personally. It's just you've put yourself in a challenging position by endorsing a product many TSA members have major concerns about. So, as unofficial apologist for OC, you're bound to get some heat. But for the most part, the responses to your posts seem to be generally positive and echo much of what's been said here: people don't like the way OC works, and they're suspicious of the reassurances OC is giving that they will "do no evil" down the road.

Note: Gizmo's is also not DoCo. They have considerably less tolerance than Mouser has for hyperbole, outrageous analogies, put-ons, snarky comments and wandering too much around a topic. They prefer posts that are like a shot of vodka - short and to the point.

Makes us appreciate Mouser's way of doing things more than ever, doesn't it?

movrshakr · « **Reply #430 on:** April 10, 2011, 02:28 PM »

Does it install ANYTHING (part of itself or whatever it is "offering" or anything else) without user choice to deny?

Does it send ANY info "home to mama" [I add now "or ANYWHERE"] without a user choice to deny same.

Is user option to NOT do either of the above presented clearly and obviously BEFORE it is done?
-movrshakr (April 09, 2011, 01:37 PM)

What are the answers to these questions? And they are yes or no questions. They are simple and direct. And the answers immediately solve the riddle of whether OpenCandy is acceptable or not. I get the feeling no one wants to answer them truthfully.

40hz · « **Reply #431 on:** April 10, 2011, 02:49 PM »

Does it install ANYTHING (part of itself or whatever it is "offering" or anything else) without user choice to deny?

Does it send ANY info "home to mama" [I add now "or ANYWHERE"] without a user choice to deny same.

Is user option to NOT do either of the above presented clearly and obviously BEFORE it is done?
-movrshakr (April 09, 2011, 01:37 PM)

What are the answers to these questions? And they are yes or no questions. They are simple and direct. And the answers immediately solve the riddle of whether OpenCandy is acceptable or not. I get the feeling no one wants to answer them truthfully.
-movrshakr (April 10, 2011, 02:28 PM)

@movrshakr - I think we've pretty much been over all of this several times by now. And we all have a pretty good idea of how OC actually works. In the end, it comes down to an individual's choice as to whether or not they can accept OC's view of things and live with how it operates. Apparently many people can, even after they've read the debates and warnings.

To me, the only simple and direct answer is: if in doubt - don't install.

I've instituted a personal moratorium on using anything that ships with OC. That's a bummer because some of my favorite software now does, so I'll have to identify replacement titles come upgrade time.

But the interesting thing (to me) is that about half my friends have no problems with anything OC is doing and think I'm overreacting.

If most people stop installing OC partnered software, OC will become history in short order. If most people don't care, OC will probably wind up being a part of almost every piece of software out there after a few years.

Only time will tell what the public really thinks about OC. $:-\$

movrshakr · « **Reply #432 on:** April 10, 2011, 02:53 PM »

All those words, and no answer to the questions I posed. Only three words required... pick one (truthful answer) from each line (they align with my 3 questions):
1. yes no
2. yes no
3. yes no

J-Mac · « **Reply #433 on:** April 10, 2011, 03:05 PM »

If most people stop installing OC partnered software, OC will become history in short order. If most people don't care, OC will probably wind up being a part of almost every piece of software out there after a few years.

Only time will tell what the public really thinks about OC. $:-\$

-40hz (April 10, 2011, 02:49 PM)

Actually, if OC can manage to get itself inserted in enough widely used, popular software titles, it won't matter; many users now shunning it will start ignoring it rather than give up their most used/useful programs. My opinion anyway.

Jim

40hz · « **Reply #434 on:** April 10, 2011, 03:08 PM »

All those words, and no answer to the questions I posed. Only three words required... pick one (truthful answer) from each line (they align with my 3 questions):
1. yes no
2. yes no
3. yes no
-movrshakr (April 10, 2011, 02:53 PM)

Cancel my initial response. Wraith808 answered it better.

See his post below.

wraith808 · « **Reply #435 on:** April 10, 2011, 03:09 PM »

All those words, and no answer to the questions I posed. Only three words required... pick one (truthful answer) from each line (they align with my 3 questions):
1. yes no
2. yes no
3. yes no
-movrshakr (April 10, 2011, 02:53 PM)

I think no one wants to go over this again. If you look through the thread, it will tell you, and have the complete explanation of what it does.

40hz · « **Reply #436 on:** April 10, 2011, 03:14 PM »

If most people stop installing OC partnered software, OC will become history in short order. If most people don't care, OC will probably wind up being a part of almost every piece of software out there after a few years.

Only time will tell what the public really thinks about OC. $:-\$

-40hz (April 10, 2011, 02:49 PM)

Actually, if OC can manage to get itself inserted in enough widely used, popular software titles, it won't matter; many users now shunning it will start ignoring it rather than give up their most used/useful programs. My opinion anyway.

Jim
-J-Mac (April 10, 2011, 03:05 PM)

You're probably right. Which is why I'd like to see OC be stopped right now.

But I'm not hopeful...

Many people I've talked to who have the technical smarts to understand what this debate's about don't seem much to care.

If that's the feeling of the general public, then OC is here to stay.

J-Mac · « **Reply #437 on:** April 10, 2011, 03:16 PM »

Oh no - does that mean I am going to see that creepy-looking avatar of Dr. Apps smiling back at me even more then?!

Thanks!

Jim

40hz · « **Reply #438 on:** April 10, 2011, 03:23 PM »

Oh no - does that mean I am going to see that creepy-looking avatar of Dr. Apps smiling back at me even more then?!

Thanks!

Jim
-J-Mac (April 10, 2011, 03:16 PM)

It is a creepy avatar isn't it?

(Thx. I thought it was just me.)

wraith808 · « **Reply #439 on:** April 10, 2011, 03:35 PM »

Oh no - does that mean I am going to see that creepy-looking avatar of Dr. Apps smiling back at me even more then?!

Thanks!

Jim
-J-Mac (April 10, 2011, 03:16 PM)

It is a creepy avatar isn't it?

(Thx. I thought it was just me.)

-40hz (April 10, 2011, 03:23 PM)

I wonder was it specifically crafted for him- and if he really looks that way...

movrshakr · « **Reply #440 on:** April 10, 2011, 03:46 PM »

I guess I'll just bid adieu. It is clear I am very out of sync with some of the general thinking here...in that I cannot see how anyone would conclude that this "method" has any coat of acceptability whatsoever.

I say that because, to me, if anything is being done (installed or info sent to wherever) before the user has a chance to prevent it, that unquestionably (in my opinion) constitutes unacceptable behavior.

cmpm · « **Reply #441 on:** April 10, 2011, 03:51 PM »

After seeing your comments over on Gizmo's blog I don’t think it strange at all!
-J-Mac (April 10, 2011, 10:46 AM)

Well, one of my posts was deleted. I just noticed. Sent MidnightCowboy a PM to see if it's ok to repost. I don't think he likes me.

UPDATE: It's been undeleted. Maybe he does like me~!

-Renegade (April 10, 2011, 12:08 PM)

@Ryan- I'm an editor over there. I suspect your post was most likely taken down by accident, or because it contained a weblink to someplace that returned a WOT rating of orange.

If a moderator took it down for what they felt was a violation of the forum rules (or if it contained a 'red' WOT rated link) it wouldn't have been put back up later.

FWIW, I don't think anybody (or hardly anybody at least) over at Gizmo's dislikes you personally. It's just you've put yourself in a challenging position by endorsing a product many TSA members have major concerns about. So, as unofficial apologist for OC, you're bound to get some heat. But for the most part, the responses to your posts seem to be generally positive and echo much of what's been said here: people don't like the way OC works, and they're suspicious of the reassurances OC is giving that they will "do no evil" down the road.

-40hz (April 10, 2011, 02:13 PM)

Edited your post to point out that I think Renegade has the same concerns.
Such as-

they're suspicious of the reassurances OC is giving that they will "do no evil" down the road.

He's done more investigating OC than anyone on this thread so far I think.

cmpm · « **Reply #442 on:** April 10, 2011, 03:58 PM »

I guess I'll just bid adieu. It is clear I am very out of sync with some of the general thinking here...in that I cannot see how anyone would conclude that this "method" has any coat of acceptability whatsoever.

I say that because, to me, if anything is being done (installed or info sent to wherever) before the user has a chance to prevent it, that unquestionably (in my opinion) constitutes unacceptable behavior.
-movrshakr (April 10, 2011, 03:46 PM)

That is overreacting imo.
There is no "general thinking here" here on this subject as well as many subjects.

movrshakr · « **Reply #443 on:** April 10, 2011, 04:15 PM »

That is overreacting imo.
There is no "general thinking here" here on this subject as well as many subjects.
-cmpm (April 10, 2011, 03:58 PM)

I said "...out of sync with SOME of the general thinking here."

"That is overreacting imo."
Clearly, you have no problem with someone, without your permission, installing software on your machine, or sending off data about you or your machine--as does OpenCandy.

I do have a problem with that--a BIG problem with that.

You are OpenCandy's dream come true.

wraith808 · « **Reply #444 on:** April 10, 2011, 04:20 PM »

That is overreacting imo.
There is no "general thinking here" here on this subject as well as many subjects.
-cmpm (April 10, 2011, 03:58 PM)
I said "...SOME on the general thinking here."

"That is overreacting imo."
Clearly, you have no problem with someone, without your permission, installing software on your machine, or sending off data about you or your machine--as does OpenCandy.

I do have a problem with that--a BIG problem with that.

You are OpenCandy's dream come true.

-movrshakr (April 10, 2011, 04:15 PM)

Actually, he's one of the negative posters. The cool thing about DC is the fact that we don't agree on everything, but we have a community built on our differences as well as our similarities. That's how many of our greatest discussions come about. If all of us were the same, then what would be the use of debate or conversation, and where would new perspectives come in. And none of the software on DC as far as I know use any sort of ad mechanism in them- for better or worse, they depend on donations.

And the overreaction would be the leaving the forums just because a few people here like OC, rather than overreacting to OC. But to each his own.

cmpm · « **Reply #445 on:** April 10, 2011, 04:25 PM »

You are OpenCandy's dream come true.

No, not even close.

You nor anyone here can read minds.
Nor have you read this thread apparently....
Which is fine, like no problem, jump right in.

I said "...out of sync with SOME of the general thinking here."

A contradiction in terms, imo, but say what you want to.
I'd appreciate no back-handed insults, thanks.
I'm not OC's dream come true...that's just wrong to even think it.
Even about a developer who is using OC.

cmpm · « **Reply #446 on:** April 10, 2011, 04:30 PM »

the overreaction would be the leaving the forums just because a few people here like OC

Thanks wraith808 for clarifying that for me.

That is what I meant more then "the general thinking here" thing.
Which I don't know where that could have come from in this thread.
But there it is. An opinion I suppose....

40hz · « **Reply #447 on:** April 10, 2011, 04:39 PM »

I guess I'll just bid adieu. It is clear I am very out of sync with some of the general thinking here...in that I cannot see how anyone would conclude that this "method" has any coat of acceptability whatsoever.

I say that because, to me, if anything is being done (installed or info sent to wherever) before the user has a chance to prevent it, that unquestionably (in my opinion) constitutes unacceptable behavior.
-movrshakr (April 10, 2011, 03:46 PM)

No need to walk away. But you might want to tone it down just a bit. We're all friends here. Even when we're arguing over something and sound like we're a bunch of 5-year olds.

I think if you read the entire thread you'll discover that the "general thinking" (such as it is) has not been in agreement with OC's arguments. If anything there are two camps that are in complete disagreement over OC in this thread.

Renegade · « **Reply #448 on:** April 10, 2011, 09:22 PM »

Clearly, you have no problem with someone, without your permission, installing software on your machine, or sending off data about you or your machine--as does OpenCandy.
-movrshakr (April 10, 2011, 04:15 PM)

This is the kind of thing that I've been trying to debunk.

I've looked into what OC is doing and checked the data. It's not doing that. Here's a post I did that shows what is happening: Opening Up OpenCandy. That walks through a low-level look at the installer, the network traffic, and the information in that network traffic.

One thing I did not point out in there, is that the network traffic is NOT encrypted. So it's wide open to see! Now, if you were trying to do naughty things, wouldn't you try to hide?

If it were doing naughty things, I wouldn't have started using it.

I am not out to change opinions on the topic. Like I've said before, that's simply stupid.

What I have been trying to do is to set straight some facts.

Well, I did go off on a tangent about language usage and red herrings. But that's kind of a nit-picky issue.

J-Mac · « **Reply #449 on:** April 10, 2011, 10:36 PM »

I guess I'll just bid adieu. It is clear I am very out of sync with some of the general thinking here...in that I cannot see how anyone would conclude that this "method" has any coat of acceptability whatsoever.

I say that because, to me, if anything is being done (installed or info sent to wherever) before the user has a chance to prevent it, that unquestionably (in my opinion) constitutes unacceptable behavior.
-movrshakr (April 10, 2011, 03:46 PM)

I agree to an extent; just not as passionately as you. Mainly though I just want to keep Renegade from getting cranked back up... see if we can save him from destroying his keyboard in this thread!

Jim