Audacity Is Spying On You Now

[Ar_e_en]

6 hours ago, Dark Pulse said:

Checked mine and I'm still on 2.3.3 from 2019, so apparently I should be more than fine.

 

So now it's a good question as to which fork will win out, because otherwise I'd say the best version to download would be the one before the acquisition.

 

I downgraded mine to 2.3.3 as well. I also set up an exception in my package manager to never update the program.

 

6 hours ago, Dark Pulse said:

Got a little clever with my comment on his video. Hopefully it's obvious without being too obvious?

 

If not, check the first letter of each sentence.

 

Let's see how long until he notices and deletes it in a huff.

 

Took me a little while to find the message. It's great! I wonder if anyone else has made some secret messages in the comments, maybe something with some subtext?

 

3 hours ago, Artman2004 said:

Is LMMS a viable alternative?

 

That's more of a music workstation than an all-purpose audio editing workstation, I don't think that it will be a good replacement. I have used it - it's alright, but it does have some issues (example from my experience with an older version - it can import midi files, but can't export them). I think it's FOSS without any odd EULA-type nonsense, but I haven't checked, I sure hope it's fine.

:P

[Ar_e_en]

1 minute ago, Dark Pulse said:

UPDATE:

 

 

Hopefully my comment doesn't wind up deleted from this guy. I THINK he gets what I'm doing, but it's entirely possible it flew over his head.

 

Of course, if it did, my comment will likely stand if he thinks it's just a normal praise post.

 

Damn it Glip! You fool! Don't give the game away!

[Kurogachii]

What a shame, but to be fair Microsoft and Apple are ^probably already selling your information anyways, is it okay? HELL NO, but that's the reality of things, everyone wants a piece of the "Sell users data" pie! 

 

[The BMFG]

SomeOrdinaryGamers/Mutahar has made a video on this topic if any of you want to check this out

 

[Azuris]

6 minutes ago, Kurogachii said:

What a shame, but to be fair Microsoft and Apple are ^probably already selling your information anyways, is it okay? HELL NO, but that's the reality of things, everyone wants a piece of the "Sell users data" pie! 

 

It depends for what a Company is using the Data and how they make their Money.

The Clients of Microsoft and Apple are we, they Charge us, but we aren't the Clients Alphabet (Google), they aren't charging us for their Services.

(And yes, it is not black and white here)

 

Lastly i was thingking about why User Interfaces get more and more stupid.

"Power Users" know how to shut down much of Data Collecors and so Companies are getting only the Data of Causals, analyzing their Behaviour... Changing the UI to their Needs... worsening everything for Desktop Users like me :D ...

[TheMagicMushroomMan]

Free spyware? Now I can be just like James Bond!!

[Nevander]

This is just sad to hear. I love Audacity because it's free, lightweight and doesn't (or didn't) take a lot to run and use. You literally just use it.

 

It's a good thing it can be forked so the bad versions can be cast aside. I haven't upgraded my version since maybe 2015 or so. No need to do so since everything I need it for already exists.

 

I do wonder though, why the hell does a program like Audacity even need access to personal information or telemetry. It's a goddamn audio editor for crying out loud.

[Wavy]

34 minutes ago, Nevander said:

I do wonder though, why the hell does a program like Audacity even need access to personal information or telemetry. It's a goddamn audio editor for crying out loud.

Welcome to the modern world where big companies can take over projects and add dubious and malicious features into them.

 

It sucks, really.

[Roebloz]

6 hours ago, TheMightyHeracross said:

[insert cheap GZDoom telemetry joke here]

"We will communicate to our team your game experiences, IP adresses, and amount of Cacodemons hugged to improve our service and being able to run lilith.pk3."

(Sorry @Graf Zahl I had to for this one)

 

Anyway on a more serious note, this isn't that big of a problem since after all, the program is open source so the only ones getting affected by it is schools no longer being able to use it legally (Although I can remember my old school promoting YouTube to MP3, so they may not care at all)

[Biodegradable]

I'm really stoked to see some forks are already in development. I just hope they'll be more accessible to the layman at some point. Right now, the couple I've looked at that Mark and Wavy linked back on page one of the thread just give you a heap of files and I don't know what to do with them and there's no installer or executable.

[Blzut3]

12 minutes ago, Roebloz said:

Anyway on a more serious note, this isn't that big of a problem since after all, the program is open source so the only ones getting affected by it is schools no longer being able to use it legally (Although I can remember my old school promoting YouTube to MP3, so they may not care at all)

Even this may be an over reaction since they say in their official response you can still use the product offline and not be bound by the policy.  Not sure what the process to get to "offline mode" is though.

[Wavy]

9 minutes ago, Biodegradable said:

Right now, the couple I've looked at that Mark and Wavy linked back on page one of the thread just give you a heap of files and I don't know what to do with them and there's no installer or executable.

That's because the repos we linked are purely source code. If I can compile cookiengineer's fork or Audacium, I'm happy to share it.

[lokbustam257]

ah, this sucks, I just want to install it now. Which older version of Audacity that doesn't have all those spyware in it?

[Biodegradable]

Just now, lokbustam257 said:

Which older version of Audacity that doesn't have all those spyware in it?

 

Anything older than Version 3.

[lokbustam257]

1 minute ago, Biodegradable said:

 

Anything older than Version 3.

3.0.3?

[Biodegradable]

1 minute ago, lokbustam257 said:

3.0.3?

 

No, you'll want older than that. Get away from Version 3.

[lokbustam257]

1 minute ago, Biodegradable said:

 

No, you'll want older than that. Get away from Version 3.

ok then thanks

[Wadmodder Shalton]

Free & Open-Source Software = No Money. Every open-source program opposes monetary, yet that hasn't stopped others from doing it, take the infamous PDFCreator for example, they bundled crapware to mess your system so that they get their money.

 

We should petition the Free Software Foundation to ban all adware, spyware & potentially unwanted programs from the GPL license once & for all, and encourage them to release GPL version 4 that prohibits all adware, spyware & potentially unwanted programs and restrictions what the Privacy Policies & End-User License Agreements can provide based off the regulations that the possible GPLv4 permits.

 

We should also petition the Audacity developers MuseGroup to revert the privacy policy back to the previous iteration, and drop all this adware, spyware & potentially unwanted programs nonsense.

[omx32x]

7 minutes ago, Wadmodder Shalton said:

Free & Open-Source Software = No Money. Every open-source program opposes monetary, yet that hasn't stopped others from doing it, take the infamous PDFCreator for example, they bundled crapware to mess your system so that they get their money.

 

We should petition the Free Software Foundation to ban all adware, spyware & potentially unwanted programs from the GPL license once & for all, and encourage them to release GPL version 4 that prohibits all adware, spyware & potentially unwanted programs and restrictions what the Privacy Policies & End-User License Agreements can provide based off the regulations that the possible GPLv4 permits.

 

We should also petition the Audacity developers MuseGroup to revert the privacy policy back to the previous iteration, and drop all this adware, spyware & potentially unwanted programs nonsense.

i was watching a richard stallman interview recentely and he said something that i agree with

"free and open software are not thee same thing" you can totally make money with open source hell this entire site is dedicated to a open source game that you have to buy open source only gives you the freedom to do whatever you want with it but free software on the other hand is not only open source but also 100% free of charge so while i agree with what you are saying here i disagree with the notion that both free software and open source software opposes monetary gains

[Wavy]

If anyone wants a Windows build of Audacity without telemetry, here's a link to a compiled build of Audacium:

https://github.com/SartoxOnlyGNU/audacium/releases

Edited July 6, 2021 by Wavy

[TheMightyHeracross]

2 hours ago, Wadmodder Shalton said:

Free & Open-Source Software = No Money. Every open-source program opposes monetary, yet that hasn't stopped others from doing it, take the infamous PDFCreator for example, they bundled crapware to mess your system so that they get their money.

 

We should petition the Free Software Foundation to ban all adware, spyware & potentially unwanted programs from the GPL license once & for all, and encourage them to release GPL version 4 that prohibits all adware, spyware & potentially unwanted programs and restrictions what the Privacy Policies & End-User License Agreements can provide based off the regulations that the possible GPLv4 permits.

 

We should also petition the Audacity developers MuseGroup to revert the privacy policy back to the previous iteration, and drop all this adware, spyware & potentially unwanted programs nonsense.

 

Man, this must be the first and only guy on the Internet who thinks RMS doesn't go far enough!

 

Dude, there really is no need to have a breakdown over this. Again: you can just use the community version with the bullshit removed. Yet another, even more complicated GPL license is the last thing we need. Software licenses are meant to control the users' rights to copy, distribute, change, and use the software, not what the software does. So this proposal is completely outside of the scope of any software license in the first place.

 

1 hour ago, omalefico32x said:

i was watching a richard stallman interview recentely and he said something that i agree with

"free and open software are not thee same thing" you can totally make money with open source hell this entire site is dedicated to a open source game that you have to buy open source only gives you the freedom to do whatever you want with it but free software on the other hand is not only open source but also 100% free of charge so while i agree with what you are saying here i disagree with the notion that both free software and open source software opposes monetary gains

 

This and what Shalton said are both wrong. As GNU people would be... quite eager to explain to you, this is RMS's definition of "free software":

Quote

The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).

The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).

The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

 

"Free" is referring to rights ("freedom"), not money. And when RMS is complaining about "open-source" as opposed to "free software" he's talking about people who see FOSS as a pragmatic approach to software and not a philosophical movement and an issue of societal freedom like he does. This is why his license forces all derivative software to share the same license- the way he sees it, he's "enforcing" these software "freedoms".

 

No part of "free software" actually forbids you from selling it- just look at commercial GZDoom indie games.

 

12 minutes ago, Wavy said:

If anyone wants a build of Audacity without telemetry, here's a link to a compiled build of Audacium:

https://github.com/SartoxOnlyGNU/audacium/releases

There we go! Crisis averted! That was easy.

[TheMagicMushroomMan]

2 hours ago, Wadmodder Shalton said:

We should also petition the Audacity developers MuseGroup to revert the privacy policy back to the previous iteration, and drop all this adware, spyware & potentially unwanted programs nonsense.

Do you think they added this bullshit because people wanted it? If not, why do you think they would care that (surprise) people don't want it? As others are saying, people will just use a fork, so it's already a win-win situation for the developers from their point of view. Users who are aware of the spyware will use a fork. Users who aren't aware of the spyware get to have their information collected and sent to Russian hackers who will use the data to build implantable nuclear bombs for the Chinese or whatever. MuseGroup didn't do this shit out of good morality, they did it for good money.

[printz]

DRM attempts on GPL and GPL-like free software are the pettiest. Same with anything which is common for proprietary apps but applied to GPL stuff. It's petty because developers know they can be easily circumvented by users by them redistributing a sanitized build, and original developers can do too little about it, so what they end up doing is obfuscating it to make the reworking as annoying as possible, while still keeping it legally open source (no extreme obfuscation allowed for GPL if it ends up looking like machine code).

 

How do popular apps like GIMP, Inkscape, Blender and such thrive anyway? Aren't they maintained by, how I said it, nebulous communities, foundations and consortia? Not by specific profit-oriented companies. Couldn't Audacity (or however they'll call it) also develop like them?

[Dark Pulse]

Another update:

 

My post is still going strong... but that reply (and a few others) have been mysteriously vaporized.

 

What a fucking tool that guy is.

 

But on the flip side, he has no idea, so hey. Mission accomplished. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[omx32x]

5 hours ago, Dark Pulse said:

Another update:

 

My post is still going strong... but that reply (and a few others) have been mysteriously vaporized.

 

What a fucking tool that guy is.

 

But on the flip side, he has no idea, so hey. Mission accomplished. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

yea ive been keeping an eye on the comment section and the guy is removing a lot of comments from it

[mrthejoshmon]

"If the product is free, you're the product"

 

 

[Maes]

23 hours ago, printz said:

How do popular apps like GIMP, Inkscape, Blender and such thrive anyway? Aren't they maintained by, how I said it, nebulous communities, foundations and consortia? Not by specific profit-oriented companies. Couldn't Audacity (or however they'll call it) also develop like them?

 

You know, I asked this question a long time ago to a certain person, and he pretty much told me "STFU and install the adware". Hard to conceal vested interests, huh?

[NoXion]

1 hour ago, mrthejoshmon said:

"If the product is free, you're the product"

 

That phrase applies to shit like Facebook, but I can give a false name and block Audacity from accessing the internet while still enjoying its functionality where it matters. Seems like a poor business model to me.

[Dragonfly]

Thanks for the heads up; guess I'll stick to 2.4.2 or whatever version it was I have installed. 

[TheMightyHeracross]

3 hours ago, mrthejoshmon said:

"If the product is free, you're the product"

 

 

 

This phrase doesn't really apply to a community-run open source project. Of course, in this case the issue is that the project has just been acquired by some shitty company so that's right out the window.