They are entitled to ABSOLUTELY NOTHING beyond, if it is commercial software, my payment.

I want them to know

What the fuck happened to just TELLING THEM!? Oh, that's right, they didn't want to listen because they'd rather take complete control of your machine, forcing you into what they want, and monetising every last aspect of "your" life, all the while hiding behind the excuse of "the data says" to do what they want.

The amount of pro-spyware comments here is, quite frankly, excruciatingly abhorrent. So many comments here smell strongly of corporate propaganda, since they also always repeat the same tired talking points --- and it makes me wonder how much shillage MS does. Or how many others think that because MS is big and "successful", they should emulate the increasingly abusive behaviour that it (and to be fair, the rest of Big Tech) engages in.

The makers of an app are entitled to no more information about me and my use of it than I allow them to have. I think that it's reasonable to argue whether my allowance of sharing should be opt-in or opt-out, but I don't think that there is much scope for argument about whether I should be able to block the sharing of information if I choose explicitly to do so.

(One could argue that, as long as everything is disclosed up front, then the makers of an app have the right to demand whatever they want, and I have the right to accept their demands or else not to use their software. This is surely true in one sense; but, in another sense, it's exactly what the notion of "contract of adhesion" is meant to describe, and in many other contexts it's recognised as not a good thing.)

To the argument that the makers of app can use telemetry information to make their app better, I would say that that is doubtless true; but I would argue that is also true that I, and not they, have the right to decide where the boundary lies between my desire for privacy and their desire to improve their app. For example, perhaps—even likely—browser makers could make their browsers better if they knew exactly what sites I visited, but, if I found my browser reporting my history information back to Mozilla, then I would not say "ah well, as long as it makes for a better browser."

Malware is more broad, and includes things that don't send any information back, like viruses.

Telemetry is spyware with a marketing department.

This issue seems to fully explain the issue with the telemetry: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/5331

The biggest takeaway to me here (besides the explanation of the telemetry levels) is that the processes in question are cmd, powershell, bash, etc, and not what you are running in them. Even if you have enhanced telemetry enabled it wouldn't bubble up what you're running underneath the console process as a process name.

you keep on living in your town where the people don't have fingerprints or names, and the shoes leave no tracks. I'll be over here getting things done, because doing good work is far more important than avoiding being seen.

If you feel like a bunch of developers getting info about how many times the world clicks on a button hurts you personally, then don't install it. Calling it a privacy issue it taking it too far.

Every time I rebuild my laptop it has these “mysterious” slowdown periods that force me to dig through the metrics to see what is the culprit.

About 80% of the time it’s telemetry.

The worst one is actually the Intel driver installer which has telemetry that is so far beyond obnoxious that it’s an embarrassment to every so-called “engineer” involved.

Shame.

Shame.

You are running an operating system made by Microsoft, they could monitor how often you click your mouse just like every website on the planet at this point but dont. Boolean telemetry on feature use is somehow the end of the world? Get out.